BCGB requires reservations now?!?!?!

[TheX]

6 minutes ago, Andrzej said:

I spoke with a park ranger at the spyglass entrance yesterday. He said the reservations are only for the main entrances to keep crowds low at those access points. They do not check reservation stubs once you enter the Greenbelt. If you enter before 1030 or at any other entrance not listed you do not need a reservation. He said ride all day and enjoy the trails, just respect people’s space. 

This makes a LOT more sense.

[June Bug]

1 hour ago, mack_turtle said:

yup, I don't need to hear any more of the Alex Jones tinfoil hat conspiracy theory nonsense. 

It's straight up Qanon crazy.

[RidingAgain]

1 hour ago, Andrzej said:

I spoke with a park ranger at the spyglass entrance yesterday. He said the reservations are only for the main entrances to keep crowds low at those access points. They do not check reservation stubs once you enter the Greenbelt. If you enter before 1030 or at any other entrance not listed you do not need a reservation. He said ride all day and enjoy the trails, just respect people’s space. 

How wonderful clarity is.

[El Gringo]

13 hours ago, ATXZJ said:

How did this thread devolve to fake shitty politics ?

I have a suggestion for anyone concerned about trail access in Austin................

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Move 

Those of us who actually build trails and work for access applaud such a constructive approach. Guess it's time for ARR to pack up shop.

[RidingAgain]

5 hours ago, TAF said:

Along with RA, I have JMR set to ignore. 

Little men always try to bolster themselves in whatever way they can.

[RidingAgain]

5 hours ago, June Bug said:

Note: Austin will continue to sprawl with no proportional increase in public space/open space/parks, so user demand for these resources will only increase. My sense is that the City of Austin has not developed a master management plan to address these issues and is using more of an ad hoc approach, but I hope I'm wrong. 

I have no quarrel with a reservation system. There's a damn pandemic going on and city resources are stretched thin.  Every call to the city to deal with drunkenness, injury due to poor choices, fights, ODs, whatever bad thing is happening on BCGB just puts more stress on that system, so limiting access seems to be a sane response.  

Also, if the reservation systems means a better user experience FOR YOU when you ARE on the trails, win win, right?

  

Timely reminder!

Regarding the first part...

Sure sounds like the need to become more informed about the use of "...public space/open space/parks..." is also growing with the growth of "...user demand for these resources...".

I wonder... What are the various ways this can be effectively carried out.

Regarding the second aspect...

LOL... 

Here I am... How's that for a "...timely reminder...".

 

[RidingAgain]

19 hours ago, TheX said:

Yep, humans are flawed.

Tee hee.

"...Hello... Hello... Hey you... Kettle..."...

Edited August 14, 2020 by RidingAgain

[mack_turtle]

none of this would be a problem if Austin had adequate park space for people to spread out, but ... *Kermit the Frog drinking tea photo*

[CBaron]

2 minutes ago, mack_turtle said:

none of this would be a problem if Austin had adequate park space for people to spread out, but ... *Kermit the Frog drinking tea photo*

Oh there is plenty of green space....they just won't open it up for many types of public (non-passive) use.  BCP...

-CJB

[TheX]

8 minutes ago, mack_turtle said:

*Kermit the Frog drinking tea photo*

Appropriate for so many circumstances.

[mack_turtle]

8 minutes ago, CBaron said:

Oh there is plenty of green space....they just won't open it up for many types of public (non-passive) use.  BCP...

-CJB

that's what I meant. "green" and "park" are not the same thing.

[ATXZJ]

42 minutes ago, El Gringo said:

Those of us who actually build trails and work for access applaud such a constructive approach. Guess it's time for ARR to pack up shop.

That's not my point. 

Real estate is king in austin proper and every square inch is either in the process of or will be developed at some point, including flood zones. As mentioned above, COA doesn't seem to have any plan in sight of how to maintain a balance of public vs private usage. I've lived in public and private land states with closed and open travel. As a member of a public land rights group we watched many of the iconic moab trails get sold off by SITLA for the almighty dollar. Don't think for a second it wont happen in ATX. IMHO, money and efforts are better spent outside the city limits.

I have no problem with what they're doing at BCGB

Edited August 14, 2020 by ATXZJ

[TheX]

25 minutes ago, ATXZJ said:

I have no problem with what they're doing at BCGB

The fact that they're regulating the flow through certain entry points is fine. It sounds like the trails are actually still open for use so no reason to complain. I don't start my rides after 10:30 this time of year anyway.

[RidingAgain]

28 minutes ago, ATXZJ said:

That's not my point. 

Real estate is king in austin proper and every square inch is either in the process of or will be developed at some point, including flood zones. As mentioned above, COA doesn't seem to have any plan in sight of how to maintain a balance of public vs private usage. I've lived in public and private land states with closed and open travel. As a member of a public land rights group we watched many of the iconic moab trails get sold off by SITLA for the almighty dollar. Don't think for a second it wont happen in ATX. IMHO, money and efforts are better spent outside the city limits.

I have no problem with what they're doing at BCGB

When I was working on a real estate project in Vero Beach, FL... The developers were able to buy land in other places so that they could get the right to use the land that was a part of the property but was designated as some kind of protected natural environment (it was along the coast).

As you said... Money can usually buy what's needed.

Another way that developers go, is if some kind of artifacts are found while excavating the property, which usually means the project gets shut down for these artifacts to be investigated... If they can, the developer will just go in and bulldoze the entire area with dirt brought in from somewhere else... Covering up everything under many feet of dirt. Seen it happen... Even at the expense of tearing down protected trees and having to pay multiple fines.

Most commercial land developers are insatiable folk who are pretty much driven by $$$ profits.

[Albert]

I just cleaned all the political crap out of this thread and put JMR on moderator preview.  Please keep politics (and Alex Jones' garbage) off this forum.

Thank you.

[El Gringo]

1 hour ago, ATXZJ said:

That's not my point.

Ah. I apologize for misunderstanding your point and trail shaming you🙂

[ATXZJ]

1 minute ago, El Gringo said:

Ah. I apologize for misunderstanding your point and trail shaming you🙂

No worries  👍

[AntonioGG]

59 minutes ago, RidingAgain said:

When I was working on a real estate project in Vero Beach, FL... The developers were able to buy land in other places so that they could get the right to use the land that was a part of the property but was designated as some kind of protected natural environment (it was along the coast).
 

CoA/BCP do that here.  They sell BCP tracts for development along roads and use the money to buy more preserve land, but none of that is available for us to ride on.  100% agreement with everyone that says we do not have enough recreational park land for the population growth and the volume of use.  Our parks are getting loved to death.  I got a chance to see something like this in Bangalore.  It's park with some ancient trees and at some point I'm sure a huge variety of wildlife, but it's obviously been over-used/under-maintained and it just looks sad now.

[The Tip]

The problem with discounting something as a crazy "conspiracy theory" is that sometimes they turn out to be true. I rarely say, "that's crazy and I'm shutting my mind to that idea." I'll nod my head and say, "interesting." You don't have to embrace a theory, but you shouldn't say that it's impossible either. There has been a lot of "impossible" stuff happen through history.

So until there is irrefutable evidence to disprove a theory (I'm looking at you Flat Earthers!) I won't call anyone crazy. But I won't sign up for their website either!

[AntonioGG]

5 minutes ago, The Tip said:

The problem with discounting something as a crazy "conspiracy theory" is that sometimes they turn out to be true. I rarely say, "that's crazy and I'm shutting my mind to that idea." I'll nod my head and say, "interesting." You don't have to embrace a theory, but you shouldn't say that it's impossible either. There has been a lot of "impossible" stuff happen through history.

So until there is irrefutable evidence to disprove a theory (I'm looking at you Flat Earthers!) I won't call anyone crazy. But I won't sign up for their website either!

Hopefully don't proliferate that conspiracy theory until you've done research for yourself, consider the sources, etc.  Basically follow Carl Sagan's advice I posted in another thread.  Don't be that crazy uncle/cousin on Facebook!

[RidingAgain]

1 hour ago, The Tip said:

The problem with discounting something as a crazy "conspiracy theory" is that sometimes they turn out to be true. I rarely say, "that's crazy and I'm shutting my mind to that idea." I'll nod my head and say, "interesting." You don't have to embrace a theory, but you shouldn't say that it's impossible either. There has been a lot of "impossible" stuff happen through history.

So until there is irrefutable evidence to disprove a theory (I'm looking at you Flat Earthers!) I won't call anyone crazy. But I won't sign up for their website either!

You just never know.

[June Bug]

6 hours ago, mack_turtle said:

none of this would be a problem if Austin had adequate park space for people to spread out, but ... *Kermit the Frog drinking tea photo*

Also Kermit: "It's not easy being green." 

  

4 hours ago, AntonioGG said:

 Our parks are getting loved to death. 

This. I see throttling back access as a way to address this. 

Edited August 14, 2020 by June Bug

[Barry]

34 minutes ago, RidingAgain said:

You just never know.

Nah. Sometimes you know. 

[crazyt]

12 hours ago, June Bug said:

Note: Austin will continue to sprawl with no proportional increase in public space/open space/parks, so user demand for these resources will only increase. My sense is that the City of Austin has not developed a master management plan to address these issues and is using more of an ad hoc approach, but I hope I'm wrong.

  

Timely reminder!

It doesnt have to be true. There is quite a bit of city owned greenbelt land with no trails. They can legitimize rogue trails as well.  For example the austin parks foundation had a call out for people to help build trail in the north cat mountain greenbelt. 

[ATXZJ]

13 minutes ago, crazyt said:

For example the austin parks foundation had a call out for people to help build trail in the north cat mountain greenbelt. 

How serious is this? It'd be bad ass to see it happen. In my experience, money talks and COA has the scratch.

I'd love to see ATX get it's shit together like other cities when it comes to trails&green space. but in reality it really doesn't need to. The cities / states that are going all in for trail access seem to be doing so because they have to. Austin is in a league of its own where we are bulging at the seams with viable transplants looking to make ATX their new home. On one side of the coin, it is a  total mess but on the other side my property value keeps going up when I thought I'd topped out. Our plan is to ride the tide and bail in two years and head to greener pastures.

There's ebb & flow with every city. Prior to this we lived in a state that had a negative net migration and was on a collision course with implosion. I'll take this any day.