Walker, Ron's Run Re-route....

Binder · Feb 21, 2011

zukkev said:
It's all common sense...pull far enough forward to get your group thru. Sometimes that means walking a hundred yards or so, oh well...

Or better yet stay in your rig. No need to get out and look at each pebble.:;

zukkev · Feb 21, 2011

Binder said:
Or better yet stay in your rig. No need to get out and look at each pebble.:;

:haha::haha:
"But I wanna see, I wanna see!!!!!!!" :redneck:
If folks are making said obstacle prettty quickly, then yeah---just move on...some folks like to take pics too, can't blame 'em, but if it looks like it's gonna be awhile--I'll try and pull far enough forward to get the group thru said obstacle, then head down to help get them thru.

Money Mark · Feb 21, 2011

zukkev said:
It's all common sense...

This seems to be a running theme with some folks. Who here thinks common sense will prevail?:corn: How does one aquire common sense? And why is it that if common sense was common sense, that one would have to use the term "common sense" to describe it to others? Wouldn't that, the solution to a problem, just be common sense with others too?

This trail is doomed.........common sense tells me that. Common sense also tells me that most folks don't have it.

Binder · Feb 21, 2011

Money Mark said:
This seems to be a running theme with s

Code:

ome folks. Who here thinks common sense will prevail?

Mark made a funny!:haha::haha:

Money Mark · Feb 21, 2011

Here's how far we've come in this thead alone:

1. Logs don't work as a blockade and are BARELY a temporary solution; NOT worth the efforts of volunteer's.

2. The term "common sense" and it's application by other ORV users is NOT a solution to a problem.

Ty. · Feb 21, 2011

Binder said:
So here's a question for everyone. What do YOU think is the problem here? Is it because this section of trail is too hard and everyone takes too long to get past? Is the problem simply that people won't stay on the trail? Is the problem simply that the DNR collectively is a bunch of poopy pants'?
Discuss so maybe we can come up with a viable solution.
.

The real problem, in the big picture, is a lack of trails. We need more trails, and more areas to wheel. You can't put a quarter of the wheelers in the state on a few miles of trail, and not see problems, or back ups.

As far as a "right now solution" in the spirit of this thread, I don't have one.

Money Mark · Feb 21, 2011

crash said:
HELL YA!!!!

You're still web wheeling Mike.

Try offering some guidance and a solution to the probem. :; Say Hell Ya! to being an effective leader.

Binder · Feb 21, 2011

Ty. said:
The real problem, in the big picture, is a lack of trails. We need more trails, and more areas to wheel. You can't put a quarter of the wheelers in the state on a few miles of trail, and not see problems, or back ups.

As far as a "right now solution" in the spirit of this thread, I don't have one.

What you say I think is accurate but for this specific spot I don't think that's really it. More people on a given trail doesn't force anyone to take a bypass. Maybe some people taking too long to pass a obstacle would explain it better?
Really, who's bypassing? If the rig bypassing were the only rig on the trail would they then drive the obstacle and not take the bypass? If they're capable of driving it then why the need for the bypass?.......

Binder · Feb 21, 2011

Money Mark said:
Here's how far we've come in this thead alone:

1. Logs don't work as a blockade and are BARELY a temporary solution; NOT worth the efforts of volunteer's.

I don't agree nor do many others so I don't think we can say we've learned this.
It's your opinion.:awesomework:

Binder · Feb 21, 2011

Here's another question for everyone. Say your driving down a trail and in the middle of nowhere see a virgin gap in the trees where possibly could be made a new spur trail. Do you just "turn right Clyde" and take it? If yes why? If no why not?
:corn:

Duck Dodgers · Feb 21, 2011

Binder said:
Here's another question for everyone. Say your driving down a trail and in the middle of nowhere see a virgin gap in the trees where possibly could be made a new spur trail. Do you just "turn right Clyde" and take it? If yes why? If no why not?
:corn:

No, there would be no reason to do so if the current route is not permanently impassable. The whole deal for me, personally, wheeling allows me to get back up in the woods, ie; Naches. To shoot off and make another route is counterproductive to why I am there. To be in some decent environment and not have to look at something that looks like site prep on one of my jobs.

crash2 · Feb 21, 2011

Money Mark said:
You're still web wheeling Mike.

Try offering some guidance and a solution to the probem. :; Say Hell Ya! to being an effective leader.

This thread is going in so many directions I am not going to take a stand right now and offer much of anything--has nothing to do with being educational or an effective leader.

We need another thread that has some specifics to it if you want some good quality insight not only from me but from others who have posted in this thread.

So pick a single idea or rick and lets get to discussing it without any bullshit....

zukkev · Feb 21, 2011

Money Mark said:
This trail is doomed.........common sense tells me that.

In the case of common sense, I was talking about pulling far enough forward to get your group thru an obstacle...
If common sense tells you this trail is doomed, then why wouldn't every trail in every ORV area in Wa be doomed? :corn:

boardbysled · Feb 21, 2011

I think Jakobs solution is a pretty good one. What I see happening is that rigs that can't make it, can take the bypass instead of getting the strap. Thus, speeding up the process of getting rigs through there.

Its the BMP at this time.:;

zukkev · Feb 21, 2011

boardbysled said:
I think Jakobs solution is a pretty good one. What I see happening is that rigs that can't make it, can take the bypass instead of getting the strap. Thus, speeding up the process of getting rigs through there.

Its the BMP at this time.:;

And I'll agree that IF this is to happen, it is a good solution (albeit temp...I think ty said it best, ultimately we need more areas/miles!)...But it still needs to get ok'd. Not to mention that if it is a go, that section of bypass would require hardening so that it doesn't deteriorate to another hard line..... Elyse is aware of the area in question, and is tentatively on board, and plans to go up and assess the spot...but the weather isn't conduscent at this time (snow)...

Money Mark · Feb 21, 2011

zukkev said:
If common sense tells you this trail is doomed, then why wouldn't every trail in every ORV area in Wa be doomed? :corn:

I think you know the answer to this.

Money Mark · Feb 21, 2011

Binder said:
It's your opinion.:awesomework:

Saying it's my opinion, and not yours, doesn't make it any less true.

Money Mark · Feb 21, 2011

crash said:
We need another thread....

Done.:awesomework:

Money Mark · Feb 21, 2011

Here: http://www.nw-wheelers.com/forum/showthread.php?t=59674 is where the non-BS version of this thread will continue. Where ideas will be discussed.

Feel free to close/lock this thread mods.:awesomework:I think we're done here.

pokey · Feb 21, 2011

Money Mark said:
Here: http://www.nw-wheelers.com/forum/showthread.php?t=59674 is where the non-BS version of this thread will continue. Where ideas will be discussed.

Feel free to close/lock this thread mods.:awesomework:I think we're done here.

Why ? because you said so :haha: Last time I checked Mark you weren't on the rule making committee :eeek: Its done when Crash ,Crista or I decide so but thanks for your input it will be taken into advisement and appropriately filed :awesomework