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

[Binder]

Who said tank traps were against DNR policy? (I'm looking for a citeable source, not a DNR person's word.)

I ask, because I haven't heard this, not that we use them very often anymore due to other reasons.

It was information given at the DNR volunteer training I took for Reiter. We were told it's because the DNR had been sued for somone driving into a tank trap and got hurt.I don't know if it's written policy or not. As with any internal policy it just depends on if they want to self enforce or not.

 

[Travis1]

It was information given at the DNR volunteer training I took for Reiter. We were told it's because the DNR had been sued for somone driving into a tank trap and got hurt.I don't know if it's written policy or not. As with any internal policy it just depends on if they want to self enforce or not.

I remember the DNR getting sued right after the 12/07 rain storm, wasn't a tank trap in that case though, it was a new tank-trap-like feature created by nature. I wonder if it's the same incident that got them thinking.

We have had talks about features like tank traps or tank trap like features being a liability for quads and dirtbikes since that incident; same types of talks to open back up temporary closed trail for safety reasons. Our response has been, it's a clear line of site, you can see it, if you are riding responsibility in the first place, or it's in a spot that is completely off trail to begin with, and again was made very visible. Crater, followed by large berm of dirt and debris.

I know of more issues with those killer blue gates.

 

[Binder]

I remember the DNR getting sued right after the 12/07 rain storm, wasn't a tank trap in that case though, it was a new feature created by nature. I wonder if it's the same incident that got them thinking.
I know of more issues with those killer blue gates.

Either way it's a man made obstacle and a potential liability. Building with non natural materials (steel gate) probably more so..

 

[Travis1]

Either way it's a man made obstacle and a potential liability. Building with non natural materials (steel gate) probably more so..

Yeah, but those gates stick around. Seems the riders that hit them weren't supposed to be on the road, let alone going as fast as they were.

Same argument made for man made "obstacles" in the woods, in locations where motorized vehicles aren't supposed to be in the first place; especially when they are clearly visible from a distance.

Having our hands tied in off-trail abatement techniques is something I push back on.

 

[madhatter]

after reading this i see you are facing similar problems in the north. i have been told many times that i cant use man made materials to block bypasses. i cant even use cable to bundle logs together in fear of it being tangled in wheels. i end up buildig log walls even though they dont last. ihave found that exta larged stumps on their side and slightly burried seems to work ok. but i have found nothing that is permanent.

 

[Money Mark]

If the wheelers need a go around then tell them to use a winch.

I'm still not seeing the big deal here.

Now I feel as if you're just being stubborn. You read this post........

The problem is you have two major groups to contend with.

Those that have worked (especially in a leadership role) with the government and understand their rules for how "their" land is managed, as well as the politics involved.

And those that haven't. Those that haven't keep wanting to apply common sense to the situation, and then arguing about how common sense should prevail.

.......yet you still insist common sense will prevail.

Unlike you Rick.....I do see the big deal here.

 

[Binder]

Now I feel as if you're just being stubborn. You read this post........
.......yet you still insist common sense will prevail.
Unlike you Rick.....I do see the big deal here.

First I never said anything about common sense here but really Mark I'm not getting something here. Could you attempt to explain it to me/ us in simple terms so even commoners like myself can understand?

 

[Bill]

I don't see the big deal. It is after all a trail and this stuff happens. In this situation I like to use a statement coined by the MN DNR official that ran the park in northern MN..." an acceptable level of impact"
a 10' wide trail through the woods is not going to destroy the planet

 

[Money Mark]

It's not that it hasn't been explained, it's that you're so skeptical that you won't "listen". Really, it's ok if you don't understand. You are not someone that I have, or ever, will be able to get through to. I accept that.

First I never said anything about common sense here but really Mark I'm not getting something here. Could you attempt to explain it to me/ us in simple terms so even commoners like myself can understand?

 

[boardbysled]

1) If the section has deteriorated to the point that the difficulty of it no longer matches the difficulty of the rest of the trail, I would consider filling the obstacle in some.

This is not the answer, especially this trail, that was designed to be a "harder trail, with optional go arounds" for If an obsticle is "too hard," a bypass should be created around it, not modify the obsticle.

2) Cutting that log and leaving a go around, but would need to take a good look at the terrain to see if that go-around would just turn in to the same thing as it's trying to avoid.

This is what needs to be done. It is totally suitable to a bypass. If I were on the wetside, it would have already been done. I also believe that if Jakob's wheeler wasn't in pieces, it would have already been done also.

It would take maybe 30 minutes for two guys with a winch and chainsaw to fix this entire problem. Not by temporarly blocking off the bypass, but creating a sustainable bypass.

Who said tank traps were against DNR policy? (I'm looking for a citeable source, not a DNR person's word.)

I ask, because I haven't heard this, not that we use them very often anymore due to other reasons.

Tank traps are no longer used. They create a man-made hazard that DNR has gotten sued over before. The new way to block roads and etc. is to use natural debris from around the area. DNR Lands is using old growth stumps and slash to block off roads now. They pile then into a 15ft+ high pile at the head of the roads.

 

[Binder]

It's not that it hasn't been explained, it's that you're so skeptical that you won't "listen". Really, it's ok if you don't understand. You are not someone that I have, or ever, will be able to get through to. I accept that.

OK then.:awesomework:
I'll try to spell out what I think I understand out of all of this.
History- Many different user groups and categories within each group. Everyone has a different idea of what a given trail should be like and they're all right. Bikes/ quads don't want big holes and rocks, logs, etc in the trail because it's hard for them to transverse. "Hard core" wheelers want the trail to be torn to **** and make it more of a challenge while more stockish wheelers want to say that they drove the hard core trail without pulling a cable or their just too lazy to do so. Try to maintain a trail to a standard and EVERYONE screams "trail paving!!!".
This trail- is open to everyone. This reroute is due to a small wash that the DNR didn't want us to repair. Supposedly when this reroute started the bikes and quads were to have access to the old route so we could make a short section of trail appealing to wheelers. An attempt was made to make optional lines in the reroute so "hard core" and "stockers" could both enjoy the trail. The reroute is unfinished at this time but it seems that a small section has eroded to a point where "stockers" need to winch even on the easy line. The DNR (or someone) installed signage and a tank trap to keep the bikes/ quads from using the original trail route so now they have to try and get past the reroute. Due to the erosion bikes-quads-stockers have made a small go around which is now actually three different routes including the intended two built into the trail. Lesson here is you're NEVER going to be able to accommodate everyone on a single trail.
The DNR has preplanned that this trail will be temporarily closed if it gets eroded too much before we get a chance to finish the trail. Rather than have it temporarily closed a user has suggested to do some maintenance and to temporarily block the new bypass which would keep the bikes and quads out while requiring the stockers to use a winch.
Some users want to leave the bypass as is which may or may not result in temporary closure of the trail. Some users are concerned that using volunteer effort to temporarily block this new bypass may not be the best use of volunteer labor.

For this specific spot I don't see a big deal with blocking the bypass or leaving it as is and maybe have a closure.
In the big picture however I do see an issue with users creating bypasses in a designated ORV park. One little bypass here is OK then clearly another one over there will be OK too. Wait three lines isn't enough because another category of a user group still has to put effort into getting through the trail so they just make another bypass.
If this kind of **** continues Walker will soon look like Reiter and probably be closed as well.

That's the real issue and we should do everything we can to keep it from happening even if it's closing the same bypass several times.


:corn:

 

[Bill]

I am all for trail use rotation to give nature some time to heal herself to keep the greenies happy....just need more trails for when one is out of order

 

[Ty.]

I don't see the big deal. It is after all a trail and this stuff happens. In this situation I like to use a statement coined by the MN DNR official that ran the park in northern MN..." an acceptable level of impact"
a 10' wide trail through the woods is not going to destroy the planet

Our best solution. ^^
.
.
.

DNR Lands is using old growth stumps and slash to block off roads now. They pile then into a 15ft+ high pile at the head of the roads.

Pre-wheelin' bon fire.:stirpot:

 

[boardbysled]

Pre-wheelin' bon fire.:stirpot:

Too much dirt, doesn't burn well. Would require more diesel that I am willing to use for a bon fire.:redneck:

 

[Money Mark]

Binder has "the pulse" of wheelers.:awesomework:

 

[boardbysled]

I am all for trail use rotation to give nature some time to heal herself to keep the greenies happy....just need more trails for when one is out of order

This would be the ultimate goal for Walker. Have X amount of total trail mileage, but be able to close and cycle through trails when one needs repaired or maintained.

But for that, we would need a bit of funding, of which we have none now.

The problem at Walker now is that if you shut down one trail, you shut down the whole loop system.

 

[Bill]

Too much dirt, doesn't burn well. Would require more diesel that I am willing to use for a bon fire.:redneck:

pile a few big mud tires on them then pour a bunch of oil and gas and they burn fine :stirpot:

 

[japerry]

Geeze.. More and more bitching, I hear the same thing over and over again.

What I find interesting is how I've 'lost' credibility? and yet I'm the only one who offered up a sustainable option... essentially creating a way around the rock similar to what happens further up the trail (the egg anyone?)

Rig gets fixed tomorrow. I'm going to fix this problem friday. If anyone else has time friday, PM me and lets get it done.

PS. Jacob I can't wait until you're back. We got so much done last summer :awesomework:

 

[MTBlazer89]

I was of the volunteers that went up to attempt to block off the bypass. We weren't really up there wheeling. We actually went up with the intent of working as long as needed then a couple guys were gonna wheel afterward. We spent most of the day working.

No the logs probably aren't a permanent solution, but it was what we had available. We did use a winch and used the biggest logs we could, and made an effort to position them between stumps so they could not easily be pushed out of the way. They were constructed as well as could be with 4 guys and no equipment other than shovels and axes. We built one at the bottom, top and on the side where people have been crossing over halfway.

I agree that a sign will go a long way by just making the point known that the gully is "not a trail" Most honest people will avoid it at that point just because it is posted. Right now everybody could just play the "I didn't know" card. Some very large rocks would be ideal, but getting the rocks up the trail isn't going to be easy, and as mentioned will simply be viewed as an obstacle by people.

Bottom line is the DNR said at the meeting that the "bypass" needed to be blocked or the trail would probably be closed. If it's temporary then it's temporary, but an effort was made to keep the trail open.

I wheel Walker at least once a month and run that trail every time. IMHO in its current condition if you can't make it up the logs at the top then you also won't make it up the bypass at the bottom. It is very torn up and there is a decent sized ledge of logs in the mud at the bottom of the "bypass". I can drive the log pile at the top with a little throttle, but I can tell you from just being up there during the work party the hole at the bottom of the bypass is probably a harder obstacle especially for the lesser built rigs. A guy in our club drove the log pile at the top in an open/open TJ on 35" MT's a couple weekends ago. IMO it isn't really that bad. 1 locker and decent tires should get you up it. I know it will continue to get harder as it gets dug out, but some smaller crush rocks spread out below the pile could slow that down as the ground starts to harden up.

 

[Binder]

Bottom line is the DNR said at the meeting that the "bypass" needed to be blocked or the trail would probably be closed. If it's temporary then it's temporary, but an effort was made to keep the trail open.

What I find interesting is how I've 'lost' credibility? Rig gets fixed tomorrow. I'm going to fix this problem friday. If anyone else has time friday, PM me and lets get it done.

And knowing this Jacob intends to just ignore the rest of us and do what he wants possibly closing the trail.
It's STUPID **** like this that gets you to loose your credibility. Pull your head out man!!