RidingAgain

Nice video! "I'm good!"

And for those who have... Thank you... Thank you very much.

Yeh!

Here's your related sound effect, ATXZ...

Hot Springs, Arkansas... Santos, Florida Kingdom Trails, Vermont Bentonville, Arkansas

Having identified a few important considerations regarding two mtb organizations here in Austin... What, moving forward, would the perfect mtb scenario/environment for local mtbers look like? We've heard lots of thoughts regarding what's happening in other cities — especially Bentonville — that have some sort of definite mtb development plan in place and being executed... How, if at all, should/does this kind of development thinking relate to the local mtb environment?

And a happy new year to you also.

Folks... Although there seems to be two people participating on this thread that think comments written on this thread are... "...BS..." and "...cheap..."... Please know that others, along with myself, are certainly appreciative of your giving your honest feedback to the topic.

For me... These following words written by throet should not be viewed as being cheap... "Agree. This is a conversation that needed to happen and it appears to have resulted in a number of people committing to ARR membership. I hope together we can figure out a way to reach the many more who I believe reside outside of this forum but still enjoy our trails. As HB stated earlier, if you are riding free trails in Greater Austin, you should feel a commitment to support this group with a minimum of $39 per year, and more if you can afford." Neither should these following words written by cxagent... "To throet's posts (not quoted here because only a small part is my area) - ARR is promoting mountain biking and mountain biking education anywhere and everywhere possible. But those are other peoples' areas. Trails are my area. My goal for ARR trails is to have mountain biking trails (natural surface, mostly single track) in as many places and areas as possible. We need trails for all ages and abilities including beginner to very advanced. The trails need to be mapped and signed so riders can find them, ride appropriate trails for their skills, and navigate to where they want to go. Not all trails are appropriate for all riders. The trails need to be "sanctioned" by the land owner / land manager so that mountain bikers are not stuck building trails and then forced off of those trails as more numerous / powerful / vocal groups decide they want those trails so the mountain bikers need to be banned. Have you heard there is a regular push to ban mountain bikers from Walnut Creek? Barton Creek? Just about every trail I know of? The relationship we have built with the land owner / land manager is the only thing that keeps us from being banned. Some people have an opinion of mountain bikers that is along the lines of the Banditos motorcycle gang. And to build a good reputation for mountain bikers, we need to educate riders how to deal with other trail users and especially how to deal with the trail feature they don't like. (see my post about Pace Bend tree cutting.) Recent events you might not have heard about - LCRA opened 4 new LCRA parks to mtb. One of them - Pedernales River Nature Park - is so short and flat it can only be considered a beginner trail such a long drive from Austin that I don't predict much use. The other three (McKinney Roughs, Grelle and Shaffer Bend) have HUGE potential. Currently, they are jeep and horse trails that allow MTB. But we are discussing where / how / when to build MTB specific trails. I predict these may be as big a draw as Pace Bend. But each trail will take a long time and lot of effort to change into a destination type trail. After over 5 years of constant nagging, I finally got approval from the City for ARR to maintain the main trail in Barton Creek. OK, we can only do trail work outside of nesting season, but we can at least do trail work 6 months out of the year. Until we got this approval I have to call the City about each and every problem. Then let them figure out they could not find or handle it. Then 2 to 6 months later - go fix the problem myself. ARR got approval to replace the trails at Walnut Creek that were destroyed by the big sidewalk ( I hate to call it an "Urban Trail"). Powerline Flow Trail, Ski Hill Flow Trail, etc. were the result. We had to close the old trails that were conflicting with the big side walk so we tried to make trails that were more fun than the old trails. We built a Kid's Trail in Guerrero Park. It has been temporarily closed by neighborhood complaints. But PARD has said they want to and will work with us to open it again. That may take a while. Governments move s l o w l y. ARR is currently building a new trail in Country Club Creek Greenbelt (see Chardog's post about a work day and my correction). It will be about 4 miles of 'Walnut level' trail that can be ridden to/from by somebody living near downtown or doing an urban ride. Planning has started for a trail along Williamson Creek across all of south Austin. When completed, it will connect Oak Hill in the west to Onion Creek in the east. It will also connect to the "Big Loop" that is planned and being built around all of north Austin but does not (yet) cross the river. This will never be a technical trail. The terrain just is not there. But there may be some technical spots. And it will connect to the Violet Crown Trail which connects the Greenbelt, which connects to ... everything. Speaking of South Austin - ARR is working on getting large sections of the SATN recognized. It will take a while. Did I mention that governments move slowly??? Edited to add - I can't believe I typed all of this and forgot the biggest one - https://austinmountainbiking.com/index.php?/topic/234-new-bcp-public-access-land-management-plan-released/& I won't spend the time typing all ARR does to maintain and keep open the existing sanctioned trails. Let's just say that is a full time job by itself. And much of that effort is working with Land Managers to solve their problems so MTB is recognized as a legitimate and desirable trail user. Anybody seen the Main Creek Crossing or Tar Branch Crossing at Walnut Creek? Yes I rode them before the erosion ditched were filled and I ride them afterwards. But those erosion ditches were problems the land manager needed fixed and did not have a way to fix them. ARR stepped in and solved those problems. So the next time the 'off-leash dog people' complained about the mountain bikers - the land manager defended us. I have not heard they complained again. 😉" But then... That's me. It seems from your own words that you don't think much of the written words of people. Which is unfortunate.

My opening comment on this thread was... "Just considering these two membership organizations and wondered how folks out there in Austin mtb land viewed both?" And in a response to a comment by Seth, I explained (see below) in more detail what my thinking was regarding starting this thread.... "Hey Seth... I had a long talk with cxagent about many things Austin mtb related and one of the matters we spoke about was trail building and how mtb riders may look at it these days. Based on what I'm seeing/understanding, ARR may be viewed in one way, and FR512 (and other mtb initiatives) in another way. This can be a good thing for both, or not so good for one... In terms of support (personnel and monetary)... Which both rely on. Although the two organizations may work together on certain things, what I'm seeing is that FR512 seems to be promoting something that comes across as more current/hip/exciting/fun in the mtb world than ARR, which could be somewhat detrimental to ARR. And yet... It seems that ARR is taking care of the foundational necessities that allow mtbing in Austin to be maintained, and grown, on a wider more general public level. Now the two are different organizations with different missions/objectives (apart from the general thought of developing the sport of mountain biking), but in a small community, this kind of situation can often lead to one syphoning off support for the other... Which can then lead to the demise of the one from losing support. In my view, it should be of concern to the Austin mtb community that ARR's website isn't up and running. But I've seen no one talk about it here, except you bringing up in your above comment. In our phone conversation, I told cxagent that I would be willing to help ARR in whatever way I could. To do this, one of the needs I have is to gain a clear/proper understanding of how the local mtb community views all things to do with mtbing in Austin. I started this thread to help me, and possibly others who are also interested, come to a better understanding regarding this particular aspect of the local mtb community. In my experience, initiatives are started in communities with a view to meeting certain identified needs. Which is wonderful. But sometimes as things progress, some already established undertakings can be impacted (often, negatively) by these new efforts. And in the excitment and forward push of the new initiative, this impact is lost in all the related activity. Which is not to say that it was intended... It's just something that can happen. And I'm trying to understand how the initiaves of FR512 — and any other new mtb initiatives — has/will impact ARR." Many comments made on this thread by riders participating on this website, I think — and it seems others think — could be very helpful to both understanding how the two organizations efforts/missions impact each other and impact the wider mtb and even broader general trail users/public community. But for these views to truly be productive they need to be distilled and related to the needs of the wider Austin mtb community. As throet said in his above comment... "I hope together we can figure out a way to reach the many more who I believe reside outside of this forum but still enjoy our trails."

BTW... Sad to see your immaturity popping its ugly head up again in your above comment. Lots of good productive speaking on this thread... But you think to call it BS. Unfortunately, it seems your vanity knows no end.

Not something you need to concern your immature mind with, ATXZ.

LOL... Nice... Proactive, I like that. I'll see if I can swing by today. And I'm always up for working on trails... Just not on Sunday.

Now... Where do we go from here?

LOL... You're funny.

SOLD — 1... Excellent condition preowned Shimano SH-M076 riding shoes for sale... Takes cleats.... Size UK 44 / US 9.5. Light but strong, with great fit... $35 OBO. 2... ProGrip riding gloves... New... Size X-Small / Youth Large... $10 3... Excellent Condition Specialized Enduro Riding Shorts... Size 36... $25 4... SixSixOne riding gloves... New... Size Lrg (need to check if youth or adult)... $10

Read comments under video too... Some useful stuff in between the static.

Is there a trail that you can ride to this Bowl section, or do you need to use roads?

LOL... Given my history on these threads... Expected something like that. When we going to ride again?

Regarding Seth's above comment... After 20+ years of participating in, and studying online forum participation, I'm very aware of what can take place on threads... And as such did not for a second think that this one could/would not take the all-to-common turn into contention. But addressing this possibility right at the very outset could/would have in itself been seen as creating a spark to start a fire. It's a kind of damned if you do, damned if you don't scenario. Really... Most anything you say in an online thread OP can be the source of contention. But it's just par for the course these days, and something that needs to be expected and dealt with if necessary, and in a timely manner, if and when it raises its head. It's kind of representative of human society on a whole... Very quick to contend over any little thing. That's why I enjoy riding my bike... I only need to contend with the trail in front of me. And the trail doesn't have a mind, will, or emotion that's subject to whims. Character, yes. Which changes with the weather, wear and tear, and even my own current disposition. But mostly, these character variances are enjoyable to me. Except for when its really wet. Like today. Seth said... "...you did kinda pick the opposite ends of the mtb discipline spectrum to create a comparison thread about." It came out of a part of my conversation with cxagent... Just as I stated early in this thread. Seth said... "...and then again you did also kind of set the court for contention by reiterating a couple times that there definitely seemed to be a "line in the sand" and different types of belonging riders and missions for each club." In research, it is common to identify lines of thought, especially if directly related to the purpose of the research, and use these lines of thoughts to guide the progress of the research. Seth said... "I see you dude! clever, subtle, but im not fooled." I'm not a dummy. And I certainly know how to address certain types of matters with a specific purpose in mind. But I don't think I was trying to fool anyone. When conducting research, you need to find a balance between not being involved, but also being involved. And where the purpose of this thread is concerned... I think there has been very useful information shared that can be helpful to both organizations.

The above long comment from cxagent (two comments above), for me, is wonderful to read about... And should be made known to the mtb (and wider trail using on a whole) community. This is the type of information that can be used to produce very powerful, influential reader content in newsletters/magazines, and social media.

And I've just highlighted the three above comments as examples of what can be mined throughout all the comments given on this thread... Mined for the purpose of obtaining raw material that can be used to identify related needs, that can then be properly addressed in context to progressive development of related organizations, as pertains to the missions of these organizations.

Very helpful insight.

Very helpful insight.

Very helpful insight.