Pace Bend Trail Sanitizing

[cxagent]

Does anybody remember a sign at City Park that pointed to the ~8 foot climb/jump at the east end of the parking lot? That sign said something like - "If you can't climb this, you will not enjoy this trail". That sign has been gone for years now. But even when it was there, people who were bound to get in trouble tried to ride that trail. And they got hurt. Repeatedly. And there were calls to close the trail because it was "too dangerous". So why is it "too dangerous" for some and "a walk in the park" for others? How do you warn people who might get in trouble? Maybe a sign??? A sign that was torn down years ago because it was "not appropriate". Hmm, I thought it was clear and to the point so that people might actually read it and pay attention.

That sign was replaced by a PARD sign not far from that same spot. Has anybody read it? It is only about 10 lines of text. Can anybody tell me what that sign says? Even ONE line of what that sign says???? How effective is that sign? It might be "appropriate" but I would say it is not effective.

How about the signs on the Gates of Mordor? Anybody remember those those signs? They were short and to the point. I could go on about similar signs near Everwet and how they "disappear" and "don't appear to be effective".

And don't forget that there are only certain places signs of ANY sort will be allowed. Kind of like alternate lines. Great where they can be placed but not a universal solution. Using City Park as an example again - there is not a single bypass that is recognized. And most existing bypasses are supposed / planned to be closed.

Edited December 19, 2018 by cxagent

[cxagent]

Since signs don't seem to be the answer, maybe posting on the internet so people will have some idea of what to expect - 

PARD posting - http://www.austintexas.gov/sites/default/files/files/Parks/Planning_and_Development/Description_of_Emma_Long_Motorcycle_and_Mountain_Biking_Trail.pdf

Austin Bike posting - http://www.austinbike.com/index.php/austin/6-citypark

Trailforks posting - https://www.trailforks.com/trails/emma-long-mx-park/

I bet MTBProject and others have similar warnings.

You can't please everyone no matter how hard you try or what you do. Somebody will bitch and complain if you gave them a $100 bill. As long as it is just talk or posting on the net - fine. That is their opinion. When they starting cutting trees - I start ranting. And I don't just complain and not do anything about it. 😉

Edited December 19, 2018 by cxagent
Added link

[ATXZJ]

What kind of pussy, skilless , piece of shit of a rider do you have to be to sanitize PB?

Insane

[RidingAgain]

41 minutes ago, cxagent said:

Point #1...

"Signs at the parking lot and on the trail are being done. If you happen to have seen what is done on the LCRA signage project (McKinney Roughs, Grelle, and Shaffer Bend) we have been putting green / blue / black trail ratings per the IMBA guidelines. If you have been to Muleshoe in the past year, you might have noticed that those same signs point to two new "Bypass or B-line" that we have created so the entire main loop can be rated green. We need to get back to finish the other three but other issues have taken priority. NOTE - we have not closed or sanitized the five technical spots on the main loop - only created longer/slower bypasses. If you can ride the technical spots you have a speed advantage. If you take the bypass it is easier but takes more time. I think that is a win - win for everybody. Lower skills have a rideable route. Higher skills have a speed advantage. Hopefully nobody feels like they have to screw up the "other line"."

Point #2...

"Also note that not every trail or feature CAN have a bypass. Sometimes the terrain just does not allow it. Sometimes the land owner/manager will not allow it. Some people should stay off trails they don't like or can't handle. But those same people are the ones that claim that the trail has to be "cleared" so they can push their baby stroller on it. Yes - I got that exact complaint on the BCGB."

Point #3...

"Part of the reason the tree cutting gets to me is the number of times I have been told I am "ruining trails" or "building wheel chair ramps". And when there is a technical trail feature some asshat screws it up."

Point #4...

"Entitled people appear to me to be the problem. ENTITLED people. The solution I see is INFORMED/EDUCATED people. That is the reason I am positing this. I hope that people on this and other boards can help educate people."

 

Point #1... Wonderful. Requires more work and upkeep, but it's just what's needed. And thank you for doing this. But hopefully riders won't look at it as a "...speed advantage..." deal, as this might cause people to try and sanitize the "...speed advantage..." route to allow them to gain that "...speed advantage...". For me it should be seen as just another way to ride the trail.

Point #2... I'm not so much in agreement with this as all trail sections can have a bypass, albeit a bypass that might be really long and go way around a section. For instance, many years ago I spoke on MOJO about the Root Drop at Walnut Creek, that it needed a bypass. And it can be done. But up to when I last rode there, it hasn't. You ride down a nice wide trail with a little beginner-level technical to it, with no indication of the single short difficult feature that's ahead, and then have to dismount and negotiate a section what is even somewhat difficult to walk with a bike. And to add to it, you have other riders who can ride it coming through and getting upset that they have you in their way. Signage at the entrance to that trail section that points out what's ahead and how to avoid it but continue riding trail that gets you to pretty much the same section on the other side of the river would be great.

As for the baby stroller person. One day when I was riding Brushy and came to the big drop that enters the concrete trail, there were like five little kids playing on it, running up and down the hill. And their mothers were just standing on the concrete trail having a discussion about knows what, but not paying attention to the fact that a rider could come over the crest and run straight into thses kids. So I went over and addressed it with them, in a very polite manner, and at first they were like I was bothering them. Then when they realized I wasn't going away they called their kids away from the trail. No doubt people can be foolish in tehir ignorance.

Point #3... You will always have someone who knows better telling you how things should be done. It's par for the course. And sometimes one or two of those people will think they need to take matters into their own hands.

Point #4... Unfortunately, "...entitled people..." are usually "...INFORMED/EDUCATED..." somewhat moreso than unentitled people. But many think that being entitled gives them the right to operate outside of how the information/education suggests they conduct themselves. And this is being seen in all aspects of our daily social environment. Every weekday I drive through a school zone... And every time I encounter drivers who feel they don't need to stay within the speed limit rules. And because of this I have twice witnessed kids almost being hit by cars being driven by people who pay no attention to the rules/law. And some of these people are folks who look very well informed/educated. What to do? The best we can, and not get roped into their poor conduct by becoming offended by them. That's all we can do.

 

[RidingAgain]

1 hour ago, cxagent said:

Does anybody remember a sign at City Park...

 

I think City Park is a bit of an enigma as it has the dirtbike/bird aspect to it. For me, it's a trail that's meant to be difficult that might have some easy sections connecting the difficult sections/features. I've never ridden there because I don't think it's a trail I would enjoy riding, and given its history and particular character, I don't think I should make an issue of it not being what I should be able to enjoy riding. But other riders may think they should be able to... And how do you deal with that?

Some of these people may live close to City Park and feel that this entitles them to have the trail built in a way that allows them to ride it how they want to ride it. They might think, "Why should I have to get in my car and drive 30 minutes to another park to ride when I have this park right next to me."

And maybe they have a point.

So what's the solution?

Bickering?

Contention?

Bullying?

Given the above, eventually the powers that be will step in and make one sweeping move that they think puts an end to all of the above. And often that's not so good for one or all parties involved.

Unfortunately... What's needed is good 'ol proper community. But that seems to be a dying art.

Edited December 19, 2018 by RidingAgain

[TheX]

22 minutes ago, ATXZJ said:

What kind of pussy, skilless , piece of shit of a rider do you have to be to sanitize PB?

Insane

Nobody should be doing this at all. There are people that spend a LOT of time and effort to manage/perform upkeep and they should be the ones doing it if it's decided that it's needed. If the trail is too tough, go somewhere else.

 

 

[RidingAgain]

1 hour ago, cxagent said:

Since signs don't seem to be the answer, maybe posting on the internet so people will have some idea of what to expect - 

PARD posting - http://www.austintexas.gov/sites/default/files/files/Parks/Planning_and_Development/Description_of_Emma_Long_Motorcycle_and_Mountain_Biking_Trail.pdf

Austin Bike posting - http://www.austinbike.com/index.php/austin/6-citypark

Trailforks posting - https://www.trailforks.com/trails/emma-long-mx-park/

I bet MTBProject and others have similar warnings.

You can't please everyone no matter how hard you try or what you do. Somebody will bitch and complain if you gave them a $100 bill. As long as it is just talk or posting on the net - fine. That is their opinion. When they starting cutting trees - I start ranting. And I don't just complain and not do anything about it. 😉

 

 

All useful in getting the word out... But far more is needed.

Many years ago the very first marketing book that I read was titled "Bottom Up Marketing", by Al Ries and Jack Trout. I was still in my late teens, but what I read has infuenced my thinking ever since. And then I read another book they authored... Titled "Positioning"... And that made things even more clear.

What the authors were saying in the first book is that marketing efforts have to start where the target customer is at the time of marketing to them. The 'ol go to their side of the road in order to walk them across to your side of the road thinking. Now this might seems obvious, but perhaps you'd be surprised at how many folks with heady marketing degrees in high marketing jobs there are that don't have a clear understanding of how this is achieved... Which brings us to what the authors spoke about in their "Positioning" book... You need to redefine the market in the eyes of the target customer, and in doing so, develop an aspect of their market view for yourself. In other words, you need to build a position — a valid-and-valuable-to-the-customer (in their view, not your view) position — within the target customers view of the market.

And this isn't just applicable to businesses and their products and service... This is applicable to even the smallest interactions we have with all people on a daily basis.

Applied to the matter being discussed here, the effort needs to begin with answering the following questions...

1... What is in the minds of the people who use the trails in Austin?

2... What is the "position" that the trail builders — specifically mtb trailbuilders — need to establish within the view of related trail users?

3... What is required to positively connect 1 and 2 above, by actively developing this "position" so that it works to do just that, in the view of these trail users?

 

Edited December 19, 2018 by RidingAgain

[Kyle]

One nice thing about city park is that it presents a nearly insurmountable sanitization challenge.  If you ride out there a single time and decide to come back for more, then you're almost certainly not the kind of rider that would do dumb sanitization.  

There are still contentious changes made to the trail, but it keeps the true idiots away.

[Ridenfool]

On 12/19/2018 at 8:15 AM, RidingAgain said:

Do you break traffic laws, Riddenfool?
 

Actually no, I don't.

Most of what people have been led to believe are "traffic laws" aren't, in actuality, laws at all. Specifically things like speeding, no DL, running a stop sign, etc. where there is no injured party.

I have successfully demonstrated this is indeed true, in court, more than once. The only way to be fined for these offenses is to allow the prosecutor to bring the case against you with you also being the injured party. AKA, "The State of Texas," which is a body politic that is inclusive of the citizens, AND, most importantly, is NOT a legal person with standing in a court of law. Yet, the rules of court allow a case to move forward if nobody objects to this oversight that a legal fiction that includes the defendant is claiming an injury, essentially, against themselves. Welcome to Wonderland.

It's weird, it's fun, and it is wacky, but, this is how the revenue stream is designed to work. Nothing in the statutes exists to support these bogus "laws" that we've all been conditioned  (no "punishment clauses") to believe in. I won't mention other fictions we've been conditioned to believe in as intelligent people can work that out on their own and everybody else is happier if it isn't brought to their attention.

As for the rest of your diatribe, well, you are good at producing diatribe. I think you mean well, but in most cases your posts rub me the wrong way. I generally ignore them, but thought it might be fun to toss this out there as troll bait and see what happens. Thanks for your response.

Edited December 21, 2018 by Ridenfool

[Anita Handle]

59 minutes ago, RidingAgain said:

Some of these people may live close to City Park and feel that this entitles them to have the trail built in a way that allows them to ride it how they want to ride it. They might think, "Why should I have to get in my car and drive 30 minutes to another park to ride when I have this park right next to me."

And maybe they have a point.

 

No. They most certainly do not have a point. Your proximity to a park or trail does not entitle you to design the park or trail for your preferences. You are not entitled to go and edit it to your wishes. You are entitled to show up and volunteer. To organize. To offer input during public comment periods.

The fact that there was already an easier option at PB yet someone still made a permanent change to the trail negates the argument that I think you're trying to make. 

But arguing over what someone should be entitled to is already a failed discussion. Use it as it is. Enjoy the trail as it is. Raise your skill level or avoid the trail. Or show up when work is being done and negotiate over how things should look.

[TheX]

24 minutes ago, Anita Handle said:

 Use it as it is. Enjoy the trail as it is. Raise your skill level or avoid the trail. 

^^^^ This ^^^^

[RidingAgain]

1 hour ago, Ridenfool said:

Point #1... "Actually no, I don't."

Point #2... "As for the rest of your diatribe, well, you are good at producing diatribe. I think you mean well, but in most cases your posts rub me the wrong way. I generally ignore them, but thought it might be fun to toss this out there as troll bait and see what happens. Thanks for your response."

 

LOL...

On point #1... You're the man.

On point #2... Bite me.

[RidingAgain]

38 minutes ago, Anita Handle said:

No. They most certainly do not have a point. Your proximity to a park or trail does not entitle you to design the park or trail for your preferences. You are not entitled to go and edit it to your wishes. You are entitled to show up and volunteer. To organize. To offer input during public comment periods.

The fact that there was already an easier option at PB yet someone still made a permanent change to the trail negates the argument that I think you're trying to make. 

But arguing over what someone should be entitled to is already a failed discussion. Use it as it is. Enjoy the trail as it is. Raise your skill level or avoid the trail. Or show up when work is being done and negotiate over how things should look.

 

In a perfect world... But we don't live in a perfect world.

 

[AustinBike]

2 hours ago, cxagent said:

Since signs don't seem to be the answer, maybe posting on the internet so people will have some idea of what to expect - 

PARD posting - http://www.austintexas.gov/sites/default/files/files/Parks/Planning_and_Development/Description_of_Emma_Long_Motorcycle_and_Mountain_Biking_Trail.pdf

Austin Bike posting - http://www.austinbike.com/index.php/austin/6-citypark

Trailforks posting - https://www.trailforks.com/trails/emma-long-mx-park/

I bet MTBProject and others have similar warnings.

You can't please everyone no matter how hard you try or what you do. Somebody will bitch and complain if you gave them a $100 bill. As long as it is just talk or posting on the net - fine. That is their opinion. When they starting cutting trees - I start ranting. And I don't just complain and not do anything about it. 😉

I would not trust that AustinBike guy, he doesn't know what he is talking about.

 

On an unrelated topic I was discussing City Park with someone last night at the R&I. I have done the math and I believe I have somewhere north of 1000 laps on that trail. I have been riding it for almost 20 years, and many times did multiple laps. And, to this day, I am still careful, because it is a dangerous place. Walnut Creek sees more injuries because people are not paying attention, there is lots of traffic (including non-bike), and it is a 2-way path. But more people probably get hurt at CP while focusing on exactly what they are doing.

[cxagent]

1 hour ago, RidingAgain said:

Point #2... I'm not so much in agreement with this as all trail sections can have a bypass, albeit a bypass that might be really long and go way around a section. For instance, many years ago I spoke on MOJO about the Root Drop at Walnut Creek, that it needed a bypass. And it can be done. But up to when I last rode there, it hasn't. You ride down a nice wide trail with a little beginner-level technical to it, with no indication of the single short difficult feature that's ahead, and then have to dismount and negotiate a section what is even somewhat difficult to walk with a bike. And to add to it, you have other riders who can ride it coming through and getting upset that they have you in their way. Signage at the entrance to that trail section that points out what's ahead and how to avoid it but continue riding trail that gets you to pretty much the same section on the other side of the river would be great.

Since you want to use the Root Drop at Walnut as an example, you should have a little history to go with it. First, the Root Drop has been "fixed" repeatedly. Many people have tried to correct the erosion problem by armoring or otherwise reinforcing what remains of the fall line trail there. The next time the creek floods, all that work is gone. Being a fall line trail in the outside corner of a flood prone creek means to me - that trail will never be corrected. The only "correction" would be to close and move that section of trail. People piss and moan about closing any trail. And you should hear some of the bikers, hikers and dog walkers SCREAMING about us F'ing up their park.

Second, The land manager for Walnut Creek has said there will be ZERO net new trail. You want a bypass - what are you going to close to offset the increase in trail? We have worked within that direction when we lost the trails that are now side walk. We have added more fun trails (Power Line Flow, Ski Hill Flow, etc) in exchange for closing trails the land manager wanted closed like the old Power Line and Ski Hill trails. We worked a miracle (IMHO) to reconnect Inner Log Loops so it was not a dead end back to the side walk. The only way that happened was because the Land Manager and Forestry recognized what we had done for them so they were willing to work with us for solutions. I am not willing to poison those relations by building a bypass that is not authorized.

Want a sign that warns people what is ahead? It is in the works. Should have been done already. But silly me I prioritized paying work (LCRA) and keeping trails open (BCP) ahead of marking a trail that most people know and avoid or ride intentionally. I have to admit, I also prioritized building new trail as soon as we got authorization so that authorization didn't get yanked (Williamson Creek, Country Club Creek, Guerrero Park, etc etc. etc.) I take the blame for not having that sign installed already. If only I was independently wealthy and didn't have to earn a living.

Many people, like my wife, gladly ride a trail that suits their ability and walk the portions that are too difficult. As long as she / they ride more than they walk they are OK with it. I guess you are in the minority that thinks they should be able to ride everything on a trail or the trail needs to change. Oh, wait, were you at Pace Bend recently??!??!

[Anita Handle]

2 minutes ago, cxagent said:

 Oh, wait, were you at Pace Bend recently??!??!

DUDE IS SOFA KING BUSTED.

[cxagent]

3 minutes ago, AustinBike said:

I would not trust that AustinBike guy, he doesn't know what he is talking about.

I call BS on that. Even PARD used some of what Austin Bike said on their web site. But they changed it just enough to not get sued for copyright infringement. 

Oh, wait. I copied that from the AB site and modified it because PARD said they needed something to indicate the trail was not beginner friendly.

[cxagent]

1 hour ago, RidingAgain said:

All useful in getting the word out... But far more is needed.

Many years ago the very first marketing book that I read was titled "Bottom Up Marketing", by Al Ries and Jack Trout. I was still in my late teens, but what I read has infuenced my thinking ever since. And then I read another book they authored... Titled "Positioning"... And that made things even more clear.

What the authors were saying in the first book is that marketing efforts have to start where the target customer is at the time of marketing to them. The 'ol go to their side of the road in order to walk them across to your side of the road thinking. Now this might seems obvious, but perhaps you'd be surprised at how many folks with heady marketing degrees in high marketing jobs there are that don't have a clear understanding of how this is achieved... Which brings us to what the authors spoke about in their "Positioning" book... You need to redefine the market in the eyes of the target customer, and in doing so, develop an aspect of their market view for yourself. In other words, you need to build a position — a valid-and-valuable-to-the-customer (in their view, not your view) position — within the target customers view of the market.

And this isn't just applicable to businesses and their products and service... This is applicable to even the smallest interactions we have with all people on a daily basis.

Applied to the matter being discussed here, the effort needs to begin with answering the following questions...

1... What is in the minds of the people who use the trails in Austin?

2... What is the "position" that the trail builders — specifically mtb trailbuilders — need to establish within the view of related trail users?

3... What is required to positively connect 1 and 2 above, by actively developing this "position" so that it works to do just that, in the view of these trail users?

 

I am listening. Show me what needs to be done.

I take all good ideas and try to move them forward. Just be warned I don't make decision on a lot of things. The land manager does. I can only request / recommend. And I do a lot of that.

[TheX]

17 minutes ago, AustinBike said:

I would not trust that AustinBike guy, he doesn't know what he is talking about.

Lol, I go to you for info first.

[AustinBike]

11 minutes ago, cxagent said:

I call BS on that. Even PARD used some of what Austin Bike said on their web site. But they changed it just enough to not get sued for copyright infringement. 

Oh, wait. I copied that from the AB site and modified it because PARD said they needed something to indicate the trail was not beginner friendly.

The legal department at AB World Headquarters is so understaffed that we don't worry about suing people for copyright infringement. We are focused on root removal lawsuits.

[TheX]

4 minutes ago, AustinBike said:

The legal department at AB World Headquarters is so understaffed that we don't worry about suing people for copyright infringement. We are focused on root removal lawsuits.

Do you have an "anti panties in a bunch" clause?

[RidingAgain]

1 hour ago, cxagent said:

Since you want to use the Root Drop at Walnut as an example, you should have a little history to go with it. First, the Root Drop has been "fixed" repeatedly. Many people have tried to correct the erosion problem by armoring or otherwise reinforcing what remains of the fall line trail there. The next time the creek floods, all that work is gone. Being a fall line trail in the outside corner of a flood prone creek means to me - that trail will never be corrected. The only "correction" would be to close and move that section of trail. People piss and moan about closing any trail. And you should hear some of the bikers, hikers and dog walkers SCREAMING about us F'ing up their park.

Second, The land manager for Walnut Creek has said there will be ZERO net new trail. You want a bypass - what are you going to close to offset the increase in trail? We have worked within that direction when we lost the trails that are now side walk. We have added more fun trails (Power Line Flow, Ski Hill Flow, etc) in exchange for closing trails the land manager wanted closed like the old Power Line and Ski Hill trails. We worked a miracle (IMHO) to reconnect Inner Log Loops so it was not a dead end back to the side walk. The only way that happened was because the Land Manager and Forestry recognized what we had done for them so they were willing to work with us for solutions. I am not willing to poison those relations by building a bypass that is not authorized.

Want a sign that warns people what is ahead? It is in the works. Should have been done already. But silly me I prioritized paying work (LCRA) and keeping trails open (BCP) ahead of marking a trail that most people know and avoid or ride intentionally. I have to admit, I also prioritized building new trail as soon as we got authorization so that authorization didn't get yanked (Williamson Creek, Country Club Creek, Guerrero Park, etc etc. etc.) I take the blame for not having that sign installed already. If only I was independently wealthy and didn't have to earn a living.

Many people, like my wife, gladly ride a trail that suits their ability and walk the portions that are too difficult. As long as she / they ride more than they walk they are OK with it. I guess you are in the minority that thinks they should be able to ride everything on a trail or the trail needs to change. Oh, wait, were you at Pace Bend recently??!??!

 

 

cxagent... I have no complaints about Walnut Creek... And I've said that on many occasions. And when I've come out on work days I just follow orders.

My speaking on Root Drop was simply as a referance/example regarding a type of feature/section that could use an alternate route. I didn't say it needs to be done now. And I first said this on mojo some 8 years ago. Now we're stuck with it as is, until we're not. Things change. And I certainly understand that there are always challenges re. building trail... Some section moreso than others. But again, I simply referenced it as an example of a feature/section of trail that I think could have used/can use an alternated route. Just as has been done at Pace Bend, Mule Shoe, etc..

And absolutely keep things good with the land managers... It's how things work.

Regarding signage... No man is an island... Sure sounds like you need help, which should be one of the priorities dealt with in moving forward.

As for this assinine statement... "I guess you are in the minority that thinks they should be able to ride everything on a trail or the trail needs to change"

I understand you're upset... But no, I don't think in the way you've foolishly suggested above that I might.

And as for the last time I was at Pace Bend... It was some months ago when there was the race day... As a volunteer out on the course.

Hope that helps you.

Edited December 19, 2018 by RidingAgain

[RidingAgain]

1 hour ago, Anita Handle said:

DUDE IS SOFA KING BUSTED.

All caps...

You must be another loudmouth.

[RidingAgain]

1 hour ago, cxagent said:

I am listening. Show me what needs to be done.

I take all good ideas and try to move them forward. Just be warned I don't make decision on a lot of things. The land manager does. I can only request / recommend. And I do a lot of that.

 

If you're serious, let's meet. Eat the hay and leave the sticks.

[TheX]

Root drop has an alternative, and I use it. I walk my bike down. did it yesterday. Of course I had to walk up the first climb on Windy. It was pure mud and water running down the rocks from somewhere.