Late BreakingTrail News

[gopherhockey]

This in from Tim Wegner:

Dale Gundberg and I met with the land managers from Three Rivers Parks Monday March 31st. Our goal was to start a dialogue about HotSpots as well as begin talking with them about building sustainable trails in the parks that they manage. Dale and I did a powerpoint presentation that lasted about 30 minutes. Questions were asked throughout our presentation about costs, resources, and techniques. The meeting lasted for about 2 hours.

The results of the meeting were astounding! They want to send 5-6 people to the Trail Care School in June, Dale and I will be asked to present to the executive committee for Three Rivers Parks and eventually to the Parks Commissioners.

We have been given provisionary approval to build new sustainable trails in 3 of the parks. We will also be expected to reclaim abandoned trails as well as advise with construction of trails for other park user groups.

The three parks that we will work in are:
Lake Rebecca
Elm Creek
Murphy-Hanrehan –the goals here will be to route around where the endangered bird nests and to keep the trail open throughout the normal biking season!

This is a goal that we have been working towards for years. I realize that we may not turn any dirt in to trails this year but we have made a major step forward. Now more than ever it is important that we grow in numbers and train people to build sustainable trails.


Tim Wegner
IMBA Representative
Southern Minnesota

[Kingbozo]

Fantastic!!!! Any chance of getting a look at that Power Point presentation?

[seberly]

Excellent work. THANKS!!!!

se

[TrailDale]

Tim Wegner (MN State IMBA rep-south) met with 3RPD again on Monday the 21st to tour the existing trails at Murphey, and the parks administrator is in favor of setting aside a 200-acre section for the exclusive development of new singletrack mountain bike trails. IMBA consultants would be hired, and work would start in 2004. Things could change, but that's the direction we're headed for now.

Thats 200 acres!
Lebanon Hills trails are on 80 acres and contain 5 miles.
You do the math.
Building this much trail could extend into 2005!

Nice work Tim - you sweet-talking devil!

[timbrbacn]

:banana: :banana: :banana:

That would be amazing!!! I grew up near there, it is near and dear to my heart!!! I would think the potential there is tremendous...

Sean

[Nita]

It would be cool if this park could start off with more than 10 miles of track next year (am I unrealist and greedy). I would love to help with this!

[Trevize1138]

I will most certainly be helping with this trail. In talking to John last night it sounds like the 10 mile main loop will be primarily beginner/intermediate and then a ton of expert loops will spin off that.

In terms of expanding the sport of mountain biking, this is great news. Really there aren't many places that absolute beginners can go to get a taste of why mountain biking is fun without feeling intimidated. The river bottoms are the best bet usually for that, but it's about the only place, and it still has some log rolls, sand pits and other sticky spots that beginner mountain bikers just don't like.

I'd donate as much time as I was allowed to beating out a main loop for this trail just to get it rideable ASAP! =)

[gopherhockey]

We're still in the "hoping" stages to get approval for trail at Murphy. Three Rivers is great to work with - they had a super representation at the IMBA Hot Spots trail school the last 2 days and helped us construct an initial 400 foot singletrack area at Murphy as a test. I know the people at Three Rivers are working and hoping to get more trail approved - but it may take a while and will have to go through proper channels. Lets keep our fingers crossed that the momentum gained the last few days turns into some more sweet trail out there and in other Three Rivers parks.

And let me tell you, these people are all super individuals. They were enthused and worked real hard out there on the trails... I for one am looking forward to any chance we can get to work with this group.

Three bananas for the Three Rivers people!!!

:banana: :banana: :banana:

[SickBoy]

this "400 foot test trail" - will it be open to riding when the rest of the park is open? (August)

[gopherhockey]

The one problem with the test trail we built was that it was only half the distance that it needed to be to fully bypass a section or road (the road that leads from the parking lot to the mountain bike trail that I guess people circle around for a while) - we only had approval to build half even though we flagged the full route. We're hoping Three Rivers gives approval to open that section, plus more eventually. As it is now you will see it when heading back toward the parking lot on your left - if you ride it, you'll hit a dead end and have to turn around. Still might be worth it though ;)

I'm guessing that by the time riding actually starts there it will be open. Whether or not there is more, lets all cross our fingers!

[gopherhockey]

I updated the Murphy-Hanrehan trail review to show some of the photos taken of the "trial" singletrack that was built as part of the IMBA Hot Spots on June 2-3 2003 by the volunteers attending the first trail building school.

Compare these photos with the rest on the same page....

[Tailwind]

I'd like to go on record as being against any trail work that changes the nature of the Murphy-Hanrehan trails. This is by far the best mountain biking workout in the area, despite being open for only a short season. I've been biking Murphy for over 10 years now, and its always the highlight of my riding summer to get on the trail. I think MORC needs to understand that there is more to biking than single track, and a balance of opporunity throughout the trails in the area should be their goal, not exclusively single track and 'beginner-friendly trails'. If you don't love Murpy the way it is, well, just ride somewhere else and leave it to those of us who do - if you ride long enough, you'll grow to enjoy Murphy.

[Nita]

I'm new to this area and rode Murphy last fall when it was open and noted that it was mostly 'fireroad' that is about 5 miles in length. How would putting single track in Murphy affect the fireroads? I would assume those roads must stay intact for vehicles they use in the Park and nothing would change that style of riding.

[Tailwind]

Nita,
The proposed trail changes are advertised as 'improvements' similar to those implemented at Lebanon Hills. In that case, the main trail system was closed in favor of the single track trails. I assume the same thing would happen at Murphy. The trail is not actually fire road, but follows a winter ski trail. The likely outcome would be a full closure of those trails to bicycles.
I like single track, but I also like fast rides through the woods (an adrenalin junkie, as someone else put it), and trails that make me suffer. In the case of Lebanon, I am a member of the group of disappointed riders that lost one of my favorite training trails, and I certainly don't want that experience repeated at Murphy-Hanrehan.

[Trevize1138]

This is an issue that's been brought up before about other trails like Lebannon Hills.

Bottom line: in its current form, the Murphey trail is not sustainable on its own and expensive for the park system to maintain. The current trail will not remain for riding by the time Murphey is done by us hard-working MORC trail dudes because of this.

Another thing this comes down to is accepting that this is Minnesota and that's a big reason why trails like Murphey and Old Lebanon aren't sustainable. No mountains here, just glacier-cut rolling hills and trees. Makes for great, tight, log-climbing, rock-hopping, tree-hugging singletrack but doesn't make for good, long decents like they have out West. That is, not unless you want to help push gravel up the hills at Murphey and Lebannon with a bullzoder all the time.

Personally, I loved Murphey immediately when I first rode it. Fast, thrilling and a great workout on that main climb. But, the love affair lasted maybe a season or two. After that it got pretty boring. In more than one sense, this trail is NOT sustainable in its current form.

I'd also like to say that I'm all in favor of more singletrack and fewer fireroad/x-country ski trails being passed off as mountain biking trails. I think of mountain biking as very distinctive from road biking, and Murphey in its current form isn't different enough from a hilly road ride for my tastes. Sure, it's rougher an not paved, but there's not much technical challenge to it.

Besides, as much as I empathise with the sentiments that some people still like this kind of riding, you *are* very much in the minority. If Lebannon is any indication, when you convert a park from fall-line fireroads to singletrack, its popularity explodes.

[Trevize1138]

I love riding fast, too, and I think the big plan at Murphey is to have a main loop that facilitates this. If you want Murphey to have more of the kind of riding you like, then you might want to consider joining us for trail work. I've given input on how I'd like the trail to be done here and there and the trail bosses are always appreciative and accomodating of that.

And, who says singletrack has to be slow? Or, for that matter, who says there won't be some major hill climbs out there after the rework? I happen to think I get a *better* workout at Lebannon than I ever used to. In the past about the only place I was getting a "workout" was on that last, big huge hill before the bombing downhill. Plus, the trail was only 2.2 miles long!

Now, I'm getting a full-body workout (legs AND arms now because of multitude of log rolls) riding all the loops and I only have to do 2 or 3 laps because each lap is 7.5 miles!

Originally posted by Tailwind
Nita,
The proposed trail changes are advertised as 'improvements' similar to those implemented at Lebanon Hills. In that case, the main trail system was closed in favor of the single track trails. I assume the same thing would happen at Murphy. The trail is not actually fire road, but follows a winter ski trail. The likely outcome would be a full closure of those trails to bicycles.
I like single track, but I also like fast rides through the woods (an adrenalin junkie, as someone else put it), and trails that make me suffer. In the case of Lebanon, I am a member of the group of disappointed riders that lost one of my favorite training trails, and I certainly don't want that experience repeated at Murphy-Hanrehan.

[Tailwind]

Herein lies the problem. Some folks like single track. Some folks like fast rollers.
The right solution - lets have them both.
The MORC approach - lets have only single track.
I can't see how anyone can be bored with Murphy the way it is. I've done countless laps out there and never been bored - its simply a trail that I will never master - it will always test my level of fitness or meet my need for speed - those are two reasons why I like it.
I think MORC should concentrate on opening new venues, not eliminating existing ones because they don't meet the MORC concept of trail riding.
Your post makes two points I have difficulty with:
One - you find the single track at Lebanon meets your needs, therefore I should too. I say variety is the spice of life - let's not let a special flavor disappear.
As a 'hard-working member' of a self-proclaimed trail advocacy group I think you need to consider representing the cycling community as a whole, not just as representing MORC members. I think MORC needs to understand that despite all their hard work, the results are not universally appreciated.
Two - Lebanon is now more popular than before.
Well, McDonalds is the most poular restaurant in America - shall we close the rest?

[Trevize1138]

Originally posted by Tailwind

One - you find the single track at Lebanon meets your needs, therefore I should too. I say variety is the spice of life - let's not let a special flavor disappear.
As a 'hard-working member' of a self-proclaimed trail advocacy group I think you need to consider representing the cycling community as a whole, not just as representing MORC members. I think MORC needs to understand that despite all their hard work, the results are not universally appreciated.
Two - Lebanon is now more popular than before.
Well, McDonalds is the most poular restaurant in America - shall we close the rest?

Say what you want about Lebanon, but leave McDonalds out of it! :crazy:

I'm not saying you can't have variety, either. In fact, I'm trying to say to you that you can have your fast rolling and eat it too! The main *problem* with Murphey right now is the expense involved in maintaining the trail. Especially in this age of rampant budget cuts, that could mean losing the trail entirely unless groups like MORC do something about it.

I've voiced my own concern about not wanting the trails in the area to be nothing but miles and miles of X and XX loops like at Lebannon. I'd love nothing more than miles and miles of fast, rolling, windy singletrack, and I think that's what's planned at Murphey. You could still go fast, you could still climb big hills, and as an added bonus the park isn't spending tens of thousands of dollars a year to push gravel around for you to enjoy it.

As I see it, when done right, the only thing you could LOSE at Murphey is wide trail. Again, if you want more input on how this trail is built, help out with trail work!

I think you need to consider for a moment that, one way or another, the trail at Murphey as-is will be gone strictly because of expense and the wear-and-tear it causes to the habitat out there. It was costing Dakota Co. a lot of $ per year to maintain the old Lebannon, and from what I could tell the trail got more beaten up and less fun every year. I can't imagine how much is spent keeping Murphey's gravel in place, and if you think local governemnts looking to balance their budgets this year aren't eyeing up that kind of thing for the axe you're fooling yourself.

[BrightYellow]

Ummm... Ralph, did you read this part?

Bottom line: in its current form, the Murphey trail is not sustainable on its own and expensive for the park system to maintain.

I know for a fact that 3 Rivers is hurting for money and if the trail isn't changed to something more maintainable, then there will be NO trail there. The trails around the cities aren't changing for lack of use, they are changing because the city, county or park district can't afford to keep them open the way they are.

Hey, I like the rollers too, but if it is a choice between no trails or some kick ass singletrack, well you don't have to ask me twice...

[The Bull]

I hear both issues. The problem I have is that single track does not always meet the needs of less experienced riders. I was just talking with my wife about riding (whom has been riding and racing longer than me) and she quite frankly missed the old Lebanon because the single track does not excite her. She like the wider trails and more open design. Unfortunately the new trails that are being designed is actually pushing my wife away from mountain biking and that does not seem fair.

As for the sustainability issue, I compare this to the CAMBA trails. I am from that area and for the last 10+ years they have managed their wide open trails. Why does it work for them and not here?

Lastly, I really enjoy a mix of trails. I take Monticello as a perfect example. They have a mix of open fast trails and single track. This is the best possible option in my opinion. This all or nothing mentality with single track does not work for everyone.

[Trevize1138]

Originally posted by The Bull

As for the sustainability issue, I compare this to the CAMBA trails. I am from that area and for the last 10+ years they have managed their wide open trails. Why does it work for them and not here?


I'm sure it can't hurt to have thousands of mountain bikers from all over the country stop by one a year for a huge festival an pump money into the place so they can afford to push gravel around.

I highly doubt, if it's like Murphey or Old Lebanon, that the CAMBA trails are *naturally* sustainable the same way that New Lebannon is.

[SickBoy]

OK guys let's establish one thing here.

Murphy is not "going away". It probably will get closed to bikes if the $$$ to keep the ski trails from eroding isn't there. It will always be a ski trail, though. As a nordic skier, I am thoroughly opposed to any reclaiming project to eliminate the existing trail. Period. Sacrifice biking, that trail is way better for skiing anyway.

Yes, I like the style of trails at Lebanon and would like to see more of it. I think Murphy has a lot of potential for those type of trails. I would like to see the existing trail keep the same kind of policy as well (August-October) but if it has to be closed to bikes, it has to be closed to bikes.

I'm sorry but as a somewhat-outsider on the Murphy thing I have to say that you cannot just arbitrarily go around and permanently close every multi-use trail because biking on it contributes to erosion. You guys have got to see the bigger picture here. It's a ski trail. that was what it was designed as.

[gopherhockey]

Originally posted by The Bull
I hear both issues. The problem I have is that single track does not always meet the needs of less experienced riders. I was just talking with my wife about riding (whom has been riding and racing longer than me) and she quite frankly missed the old Lebanon because the single track does not excite her. She like the wider trails and more open design. Unfortunately the new trails that are being designed is actually pushing my wife away from mountain biking and that does not seem fair.


THis is odd, because I see more and more new riders every day at Lebanon learning on the trails and growing in their love and experience of the sport. In fact my wife is a great example of this... no, singletrack isn't something that should push new riders away - and I think Lebanon is a great training ground for new riders... hundreds I've met would agree.

If singletrack doesn't work, there are lots of places to ride like river bottoms (the flat side) or trails along the river/paved trails. I know many that have done a lot of that kind of riding first then move on to singletrack.

No, we could build thousands of miles of singletrack and we'll still always have plenty of learning trails.

I'd say if a trail seems difficult, don't ride it - move on to a different place. There are many other great rides in the area - places like Lebanon don't have to be *the* place for everyone.

Murphy, the way it is now, is not a learning place IMHO.

I want to do everything to help people learn and grow in the sport.. and so does MORC/IMBA etc. If there is a singletrack you cannot ride, let me know and I'll come out and do a group ride with you to see whats going on and why it seems so difficult.

Please - don't get turned off by one or two trails you may have ridden that seem difficult or no fun. There is LOTS to select from in our area!

[gopherhockey]

Originally posted by SickBoy


I'm sorry but as a somewhat-outsider on the Murphy thing I have to say that you cannot just arbitrarily go around and permanently close every multi-use trail because biking on it contributes to erosion. You guys have got to see the bigger picture here. It's a ski trail. that was what it was designed as.

YOu have to remember that close means close in the summer. Even at Lebanon some of the trails we close in the summer become ski trails in the winter.

We have to be careful with the word "close" here - it doesn't always mean completely go away. The land managers know there is a need for skiiers. In fact even at Lebanon we work with ski groups to be sure we keep that "fun" factor in the trails when we do re-routes etc.

Everyone is happy at Leb - the same can apply elsewhere...

[SickBoy]

Yeah, I know about the "close in the summer" thing and I was hoping that was what was being meant by "close" in this case.

I have not skied at Lebanon but I ski quite a bit at Murphy when it's open. (Needs really good snow cover to be open) Honestly, as it is, it's a way better trail to ski on than to bike on. I would not be disappointed to see the existing trail permanently closed to biking. Particularly if a singletrack alternative was built.

Maybe MORC should reevaluate the ratio of X and XX style trail to intermediate style trail and maybe focus on adding more of the open, fast, up and down intermediate trails at places like Lebanon. With the XX loop now, there's quite a bit of more difficult singletrack out there and not a lot of easier stuff. If they want easier stuff, I say build it. They can ride it and I'll keep ripping off laps on the X and XX loops.

[gopherhockey]

Originally posted by SickBoy

Maybe MORC should reevaluate the ratio of X and XX style trail to intermediate style trail and maybe focus on adding more of the open, fast, up and down intermediate trails at places like Lebanon. With the XX loop now, there's quite a bit of more difficult singletrack out there and not a lot of easier stuff. If they want easier stuff, I say build it. They can ride it and I'll keep ripping off laps on the X and XX loops.

You have this exactly right! We did spend a lot of time on X and XX stuff lately, but the next 2 major projects at Lebanon that will virtually finish off that park for trails are 2 very nice long winding intermediate trails. I think this will bring back the fun factor for those that are new and beginning.. and give us all more to ride at the same time.

Even I get bored of log piles.... ugggg.. logs, logs, logs. I sometimes miss doing multiple laps around Lebanon the way I used to before the XX opened up.

There is definitely more to do out there. And your point is exactly right - we need to evaluate the types we're putting in. The more feedback we get from everyone on this the better.

Very good post.

[GearDaddy]

Originally posted by The Bull
I hear both issues. The problem I have is that single track does not always meet the needs of less experienced riders. I was just talking with my wife about riding (whom has been riding and racing longer than me) and she quite frankly missed the old Lebanon because the single track does not excite her. She like the wider trails and more open design. Unfortunately the new trails that are being designed is actually pushing my wife away from mountain biking and that does not seem fair.

As for the sustainability issue, I compare this to the CAMBA trails. I am from that area and for the last 10+ years they have managed their wide open trails. Why does it work for them and not here?

Lastly, I really enjoy a mix of trails. I take Monticello as a perfect example. They have a mix of open fast trails and single track. This is the best possible option in my opinion. This all or nothing mentality with single track does not work for everyone.

I sympathize with the idea of having a variety of trails too. The comparison of Murphy to CAMBA is a good one, as I think Murphy is the local trail most like CAMBA's Rock Lake Trail. It's fast (near 35 mph on the one downhill), fun, and a tremendous aerobic workout. But it definitely has sustainability problems. It is different than Rock Lake in that it is more sandy and it gets a lot more traffic. Fifteen years ago Murphy used to be one of the most popular places to ride, and it got ridden to hell, which everybody payed the price in its eventual closure. I wish we could keep it as is without much effort, but that doesn't seem likely.

I was just riding CAMBA on July 4th weekend, and I encountered some Chicago-ites on the new Telemark singletrack. Even riding hard on this trail you can still only average near 7 or 8 mph, and it wasn't the fast flowing trail that they were used to. About, 2 hours later I encountered them again on the Esker Trail. They were kind of lost and seriously bonked. Fortunately, CAMBA does have great variety to please all, and that's a good thing (these guys just chose the wrong trail that day). But I think the CAMBA trail system has the advantage of being so large that it spreads the usage out and allows the trails to recover.

The bottom line has to be about the health of the trail though. I've seen Rock Lake degrade over the years, and they are in fact planning reroutes of that trail due to erosion issues. Some people made similar complaints about how MORC changed Battle Creek too, and again there were serious issues with the trail health. I like variety too, but IMHO MORC is moving in a very positive direction in building more sustainable trails here.

[gopherhockey]

This is some good discussion. My blood always gets going when I read these types of discussions.

The same thing always happens in my mind though - and I know much of this has already been discussed.

First... Murphy in current condition - BORING. If you like it, thats cool though. However, this isn't often a matter of who likes what - so lets move on.

Next - MORC's "style". People blame MORC for wrecking the trails, yet we get hundreds if not thousands more riders each week. Hmmm... something doesn't add up. Must be doing something right.

If you had the kind of traffic you have now at Lebanon over at Murphy, it would take one season and 3 Rivers would close it to biking for good. There goes your fun - doesn't matter much what MORC does now, does it? Its too late... Now all you have to turn to and ride are fully sustainable trails - like Lebanon and other areas. It isnt' MORC that closes them - we don't advocate closing of parks to bikers. Land managers and owners dictate this. If 3-RIvers is tired of spending their $ to maintain the trails, they are free to close them for good. We don't want that.

MORC's way is the IMBA way. THis is the International Mountain Biking group - not a local club that just wants to have it their way. We learn and follow the way this has been applied all over the world.. and it works! You cannot debate it, you simply just cannot. I'd bet any amount of money on the better way to build and maintain trails, and what keeps biking open to the public and land managers happy. If you doubt that, you just haven't experienced it enough. Nuff said on that. (sorry if that comes off rather harsh)

Now - even I will tell you that I enjoy riding trails that don't always follow IMBA standards to the "t" (shhh.. don't tell Tim Wegner that!!!) Hillside is a good example. The Farm... even the X loop at Lebanon wasn't necessarily built to strict IMBA standards (thus, its has the most mudd after a rain) We'll always have the "other" style of trails around... we just want to build more of the kind that land managers want as well. These are trails that wouldn't be there at all if we don't work to put them in. Trail to ride is better than no trail to ride.

Add to all this the guys that show up to do the volunteer trail work. Many are MORC members, some are not. All of them want to have some "say" in how the trails are built. Those that sit on the sidelines and complain will never have their way. Those that join, come to meetings, show up at trail work etc. will soon have more things go their way. Often times we're sitting there on the trail with a huge pile of rocks and someone will ask one of us "how do you want this to be built" and we'll just say "however you want it..." - then you see eyes light up, rocks start flying all over the place and soon you have a real kick butt section of trail that everyone loves to ride!

I've seen it time and time again this year. Someone voices an opinion against what we're doing. (which I totally am honored to see - believe me!!) THey discuss it online here, then we talk them into a trail work day or two. They show up, then a week later their whole outlook has changed. It doesn't mean they change what they like to ride... it just means they see first hand why trails build the "IMBA" way are trails that last forever... these are the trails you can ride all year round (not just 3 months in the fall) - these are trails that you can ride hours after a rainfall. These are trails people aren't being carried away on stretchers due to fast downhill eroded trails.

I want people to keep discussing this though! I have strong opinons (as do others) but you need to keep voicing those concerns. If what we say just doesn't make sense or add up, I'd invite you out for a ride or some trail work so we can discuss it...

Nothing would be worse than to lose someone because they felt outnumbered in opinion here... again, I'm always impressed when people speak up!

Bottom line is that we all need to do whats best for the entire mountain biking community. Is MORC always perfect? Of course not... but they (we) are certainly trying! If someone is unhappy, we're not going to ignore you... I think there are many that have a very wrong opinion about MORC. It isn't just this club that goes off and does its own thing regardless.. it should be you, me, everyone!

We all should be MORC - not just a select few that have the drive to get things done. Each person out there with a passion for mountain biking should be a member and should have their say.

[Tailwind]

Just because a trail requires maintenance is no reason to close it.
Just because its the IMBA way doesn't mean it is the only way.
Just because you're bored doesn't mean I am (although you must be a way better rider than I am!)
There is a need for all kinds of trails. Some require more maintenance than others. We (bikers) and MORC should be pushing for the resources to keep awesome trails like Murphy available to riders - not looking for low-dollar replacements that don't provide a like experience.
John Lundell writes "I'd say if a trail seems difficult, don't ride it - move on to a different place. There are many other great rides in the area - places like Lebanon don't have to be *the* place for everyone. "

Which is very similar to my point - If you don't like Murphy the way it is - don't try to change it - go somewhere else!
It is the ONLY ride of its kind around, and single-track mania is going to ruin it.

[gopherhockey]

Originally posted by Tailwind
Just because a trail requires maintenance is no reason to close it.

You are telling this to the wrong people. Tell the land owners and managers. And maybe pay the maintenance fee while you are at it....

This comment holds no merit, sorry...

Youre' one about the IMBA way being not the only way does... slightly. IMBA too learns as they go. Too bad there aren't any other organizations or people out there willing to prove there is a better way though... untilt hey do, the IMBA way is currently the only way that is getting things done correctly and working to better our sport.

About my thinking Murphy is boring - I already admitted that others might like it the way it is, but that isn't the issue. It isn't a matter at this point in time of who likes what, its a matter of trails or no trails. And if it isn't (yet) it will be.... If you like it the way it is and don't like the IMBA way of fixing things, please feel free to come up with a way to sustain the trail the way it is and not have the parks keep paying for maintenance. I'd be interested in this solution - as long as it doesn't include pavement.

[BrightYellow]

Yeah, I know about the "close in the summer" thing and I was hoping that was what was being meant by "close" in this case.

Yeah, I don't ski, but I think it would totally suck if any of the parks were closing down ski trails to build mtb trails. That's not right.

From what I hear, the skiers are pretty vocal and well organized. The parks are not going to shut down ski trails in favor of mt. bike trails. Especially since the skiers are willing to pay and volunteer to keep their trails open.

I think we can see all over the cities that nordic ski trails do NOT make good mtb trails. Hey, they make fun, fast, open, dangerous trails, but they don't make sustainable, easily maintainable trails.

Look at Murphy, Battle Creek, Lebanon... they all started out as ski trails that were opened to mt. bikers. The first year they were great, the second year they were okay, the third year they were hauling in loads of class 5 and the maintainence and costs just went up from there.

[gopherhockey]

Originally posted by Tailwind

It is the ONLY ride of its kind around, and single-track mania is going to ruin it.

Once again you don't get the whole point though! When a land manager comes to us and says they can't continue paying to keep up the trails and can we do something to help out... what do you suggest we do?

Tell them they are good the way they are and shut up?

Tell them to just go ahead and close em' and we're not willing to help them help us keep biking in that area?

I don't get it. You need to give more feedback than just being upset that trails are being changed into singletrack....

[Tailwind]

How much money do they need?
Lets go get it.

[BrightYellow]

We (bikers) and MORC should be pushing for the resources to keep awesome trails like Murphy available to riders - not looking for low-dollar replacements that don't provide a like experience.

I would much rather use our resources to build more trail in the cities than use it to keep one trail open. I mean, if we can save thousands a year on one trail... how many more trails could we get?

I'm hoping that Harmon Park has some nice flowing single-track that can get people moving. Sounds like it's going to be sweet!

Volunteer and get involved with the design of Murphy and get your opinions heard. See if you can talk them into keeping or building trail that meets your needs.

"I wish we got better free stuff... "

[Trevize1138]

Originally posted by Tailwind

Which is very similar to my point - If you don't like Murphy the way it is - don't try to change it - go somewhere else!
It is the ONLY ride of its kind around, and single-track mania is going to ruin it.

You're missing our point entirely:

MORC IS NOT ADVOCATING TAKING MURPHY AWAY!

Sorry to shout, but you don't seem to be getting that. 3 Rivers Parks are the ones making the funding decisions. YOU tell them to spend more money maintaining their trails and see how much luck you have.

"Hey, I know Pawlenty forced you to cut your budget severely and you probably have to all take pay cuts as a result, but could you take another pay cut so I could ride your mountain bike trail?"

Yeah, good luck with that ...

As is, with NO MORC INVOLVEMENT the Murphy trail is in grave danger of being closed to mountain biking forever. Given this circumstance, do you really think we have a choice? Or, do you wanna pony up several thousand dollars as your share of the normal trail maintenance costs?

[gopherhockey]

I want to add one more comment about Murphy.

I was in the parking lot at Lebanon one day putting MORC flyers on vehicles. One guy stopped me and grabbed the flyer and said "you guys are the ones that have wrecked Lebanon!"

I explained the whole deal with Dakota County, people getting hurt, lawyers walking the trails, etc. and he was a little more open to the idea.

All the while he was upset, however, I couldn't help notice he was still a regular at Lebanon. For wrecking the trails, it sure looked like they were still good enough to keep him coming back. I have since seen him out there almost every time I am, and I'm out there at least every other day.

He then told me he rides Murphy in the off-season when it is closed. He told me that he would tell 3-rivers to "stay off the trails with their trucks, then tell me to stay off with my bike"

If all of you that like to ride Murphy the way it is were to be like that, you have to admit how bad that would be for the entire mountain biking community. All it takes is one or two bad seeds to ruin it for everyone - regardless of singletrack or gravel roads.

I hope everyone that has strong opinons about Murphy are at least following the opening and closings of the trail.

[Trevize1138]

Originally posted by Tailwind
How much money do they need?
Lets go get it.

No, you go get it. I won't pay a dime to keep Murphy the way it is.

;)

[Tailwind]

Actually, I should expand on this a little.
I am a Three Rivers Parks Patron (multiple passes for the family vehicles)
I'm on their mailing lists.
I haven't yet seen any notification that Three Rivers can't continue to maintain the Murhpy-Hanrehan trail as it is.
However, if there is a financial issue, I want to know about it, and I want to see it discussed in a public forum. And I want the opportunity to do something to save a trail I enjoy so much.
If there is a potential trail closure issue, the cycling community has two choices as I see it.
Find some way to eliminate the burden (close the offending trail)
or find some way to bear the burden (use fees, donations, etc.)
All I see from my vantage is that MORC is quietly proposing closing the trail.
Replacing the existing trail with single track closes the existing trail - right? So its gone anyway.

[gopherhockey]

Originally posted by Tailwind

Replacing the existing trail with single track closes the existing trail - right? So its gone anyway.

For biking, yes.

If you feel this strong about it, then by all means go ahead and start organizing a group and get it done! MORC is the only one actually doing anything. To the rest of the complainers out there (and again I respect your opinions even if I don't agree) I say put up or shut up.

If you don't want to help MORC or want to join and maybe help us see it your way, then start a new group.. or get your fellow patrons together and try make a difference.

I'd say your chances are slim since it has taken a long time and a lot of trust to get in with 3-rivers... we are working off the reputation we have from Dakota County and many many years of experience and the ability to put action to our words.

I'd be honored to see another group of mountain bikers in town make a difference on our trails. Until that time, I'm putting my effort into many new miles of singletrack at Murphy!!! And that is the plan currently underway...

Like it or not, it comes down to those that take the time and effort to get organized and get out there in the dirt and make a difference. You seem like you have opinions.. so get out there and do the same. Who knows, maybe you'll save the trail the way you like it. Be prepared to get a group of trail volunteers to help with whatever you are proposing, however.. or to get your fellow patrons to start donating a TON to 3-rivers. (above and beyond a measly park pass..)

I might also mention you would be bucking a world-wide trend that has helped keep mountain bikers on trails that they might not otherwise... MORC and IMBA are not alone, there are hundreds of other groups out there making a difference the same exact way. Its the majority of mountain bikers world-wide... doesn't mean you have to like it, of course... but just so you know this isnt' just MORC, and perhaps not even just IMBA. This is momentum created by your fellow bikers that happen to like singletrack and don't care to go out and maintain eroded trails every week.

[Trevize1138]

I agree.

If you really want to keep Murphy the way it is, get organized and get some people together who agree with you. I highly doubt you'll be successful, but it's all up to you.

As for MORC helping you there, you're barking up the wrong tree.

And, again, the decision to close the current trail to bikers is ALL up to Three Rivers. Maybe if you got your way Murphy would have both: 20 miles of MORC singletrack *and* the original trail.

However, as is it's most likely that MORC will build the singletrack and then Three Rivers will decide to close the old trail to bikes.

[GearDaddy]

Originally posted by BrightYellow
I would much rather use our resources to build more trail in the cities than use it to keep one trail open. I mean, if we can save thousands a year on one trail... how many more trails could we get?

I'm hoping that Harmon Park has some nice flowing single-track that can get people moving. Sounds like it's going to be sweet!

Volunteer and get involved with the design of Murphy and get your opinions heard. See if you can talk them into keeping or building trail that meets your needs.

"I wish we got better free stuff... "

YES! (Hammer hitting proverbial nail on head).

In the last 15 years I've witnessed Mountain Biking in the Twin Cities take 2 steps backwards, and then 2 steps forwards. Back in the day we had the run of nearly any trail, e.g. Murphy, Lebanon Hills (all of their trails), Battle Creek (Winthrop and Century Avenue), Sunfish Lake (Lake Elmo), Afton State Park, William O'Brian State Park, just to name a few. These were all closed off for various issues. Then some of the ski areas like Afton, Buck, and Hyland introduced some new trails. Finally, MORC has saved some trails from closure, built new trails, and is expanding further to go beyond where we started - and with better quality trails too.

I like the focus on building more trails, and less on building teeters and log rides and other stunts. More trails means more variety and more alternatives for the general MTB population, and in turn less incentive for riders to poach existing trails because they feel squeezed by lack of choices.

So, if Murphy just needs some Band-aids, then lets just do that and then move on to building those new trails. Unfortunately, Murphy needs more than Band-aids, and thus there seems to be some real issues with the viability of the trail as is. Worst case scenario is that we cannot maintain the trail or we lose it.

[Trevize1138]

doh ... dupe post. Ignore.

[Trevize1138]

Originally posted by GearDaddy

I like the focus on building more trails, and less on building teeters and log rides and other stunts. More trails means more variety and more alternatives for the general MTB population, and in turn less incentive for riders to poach existing trails because they feel squeezed by lack of choices.

I'm with you, bud!

The XX and X loops are all fine and good, but I look forward to the day when you've got 20 miles of fast, flowing, fruious singletrack with minimal logs. Fill up with water, hit the trail and spend the next hour and a half burning your legs up averaging 13-15 mph zipping through the woods. Throw in some 20-25 mph fast, windy downhills followed by long, torturous uphills ... Yeah, baby! =)

Stupid wedding ... I wanna build this trail! :banana:

P.S. if my fiancee's reading ... just kidding, dear! ;)

[Tailwind]

Originally posted by Trevize1138
I agree.

As for MORC helping you there, you're barking up the wrong tree.


There's one strike against MORC - MORC only has one agenda, and saving Murphy is not on it. So why does MORC ask for my money if they don't want to support my kind of trail?

And as far as Dakota County saving $70k per year on trail maintanance so that other trails can be opened - where are these other trails going to be?

[Trevize1138]

Originally posted by Tailwind
There's one strike against MORC - MORC only has one agenda, and saving Murphy is not on it. So why does MORC ask for my money if they don't want to support my kind of trail?

And as far as Dakota County saving $70k per year on trail maintanance so that other trails can be opened - where are these other trails going to be?

If you only knew the POWER of the MORC side! Obi Wan never told you what *really* happened to Lebanon ...

:crazy:

We've given you numerous reasons why "Saving Murphy" isn't feasible, you don't seem to want to hear that, though, so it's no use continuing to say it. If you don't want to contribute to what MORC is doing that's your right, but it also means you get less credit when you complain about how the trails are built. Too bad for you.

Your second question about "where are these other trails going to be?" also shows that you're not actually reading our posts. I won't bother to repeat what's already been said, I just direct you down the page and actually *read* what we've posted.

[The Bull]

I am with Chris and Bud!!!!!

[gopherhockey]

Originally posted by Tailwind
There's one strike against MORC - MORC only has one agenda, and saving Murphy is not on it. So why does MORC ask for my money if they don't want to support my kind of trail?

Maybe MORC isn't for everyone. :cryin: If you feel you can't donate then show up, vote, make your case.. then don't join. Just don't expect the support of the largest advocacy group in town (the state), and don't complain when MORC does things that you don't approve of (or at least don't expect much sympathy from those that do support MORC and have paid their dues and come out and sweat with us in the dirt to make a difference).

People aren't going to listen (at least as much) if you aren't even a member, or don't show up for trail work.... I'm sure you have to understand that at least.


And as far as Dakota County saving $70k per year on trail maintanance so that other trails can be opened - where are these other trails going to be?

I'm sorry if this is what you got out of it... I didn't mean they were building other trails. They were doing a "master plan" and mountain bikers were not a part of it .. originally.. until a few MORC members stepped in and saved our trails.

I'm sure you have heard of the recent budget cuts for the parks. This is what is happening - they lose funding and HAVE to chose something that won't get done. We're still a very small group (and by reading these posts, obviously all don't work totally together) so we're easily ignored. Hikers and horse riders will often get their say first...

BTW: the 70k figure being used here was a number we heard at one time that Dakota was spending on trails to fight erosion. I'm not exactly sure what timeframe this involved and to what extent this reached in the parks. I'm sure more accurate info can be obtained by contacting our trail steward, Dale Gundberg.

[The Bull]

That is to say that I am with Chris and Bud on the trail types!! Build trial and not obstacles.

[Trevize1138]

Originally posted by The Bull
That is to say that I am with Chris and Bud on the trail types!! Build trial and not obstacles.

HOOAH!

:)

There are bikers who would love nothing more than a 20 mile XXXXXXXXXXXX loop, though. And, if enough people really want a trail like that, I'm sure there would be nothing stopping them from building it under the direction of the MORC heads. That, alone is a great example of the diversity of our group.

Now, if another faction wanted wide, gravel x-country ski trails to bike on, I'd recommend investigating how to make that kind of trail sustainable and maybe you'd get yoru wish.

[BrightYellow]

The people doing the work are the people who get to make the decisions. It must be that the volunteers that got things rolling wanted some technical singletrack. Hey, more power to them!

They volunteered thier time to get the trust of the county. They volunteered their time to build the trail. They organized trail work days. They did everything. They should get what they want.

If somebody else wants a different type of trail, well you know what it takes. There are parks, trails, potential trails that need Trail Stewards. If you want something different; easier, harder, longer, flater, go get 'em!

[gopherhockey]

Originally posted by Trevize1138
That, alone is a great example of the diversity of our group.


Well said.

For those that don't yet know, and although it may not be as visible now, the plans are actually to build a really great balance of trails around the area. Lebanon is just the first large example of what can be done, and we're not actually done yet with that right "balance" of trail types there.

Many trails become a series of stacked loops. You can start to see that now in the way Lebanon circles back into itself back in the XX loop. This is a common trail technique where you build a nice flowing main loop (great for learning, or just kicking back for a nice longer distance ride..) Off the main loop you usually find more advanced trails. Toward the trailhead you will find more beginner trails.

This is why I was so taken by the person posting that singletrack isn't for learning. It is really set up to be exactly that if done right.

Granted we don't always get things the way we want them WHEN we want them. Lebanon has been difficult because we have to work around hiking trails, as well as listen to the skiiers and things like keeping trails open and available to maintenance equipment where necessary. (things most probably never consider)

Harmon is a great example of how this will work. The initial trail being worked on is that open flowing section. From there, lots of possibilities!

Then we do different things from park to park. Harmon will be more open and flowing by design. Lebanon is more of a mix (and currently a lot of expert stuff). Another potential trail over in Inver Grove will be built on steeper hills and be tighter and perhaps more technical.

So, you can see we don't *just* build one kind of singletrack, and not just one kind of park "experience".

The beauty of MORC is that you CAN have it the way you want it if you give of your time and efforts. (ok, most of us can) If you know of a great area near you that could benefit by some great mountain bike trails - we can make it happen as a group when we work together! Your effort can be just pointing out a new area to ride all the way to becoming a Trail Steward and actually do the land management relations and select trail types. If you want to come out and help, then your vision can help combine with the visions of your fellow riders and before you know it there is a trail you can ride that has your name on it!

That ownership feeling is like nothing else. Just riding trails built by others... well.. thats what most people do. I've been told not everyone will join in and help out. However, once you do you will find the whole mountain biking experience opens up into something even greater. I know, it happened to me and I've seen it happen to others.

(sounds like an infomercial about now, doesn't it?)

I just want all those of you reading our arguments to know that we do have good reason behind what is done. There is a method to the madness. If you don't agree, there are ways to get involved. If you want to help, by all means join us at any level. Soon you will find yourself with a bunch of new riding buddies if not people you would call new friends...

Maybe MORC doesn't make everyone happy - but I'd say it is working for the vast VAST majority, and it will continue to do so with the help of everyone reading these posts and riding the trails.... it hits home every time I'm on the XX loop at Lebanon and start to hear the "whoooos" and "yeeeehaaaawwwws" off in the distance. Comments from riders like "did I tell you how much fun I'm haiving right now?" on down to statements like "this is the F#$(* best F)#*($ trail I have ever F#)($* ridden on..."

:banana: :banana: :banana:

[socrates]

Originally posted by Tailwind
There's one strike against MORC - MORC only has one agenda, and saving Murphy is not on it. So why does MORC ask for my money if they don't want to support my kind of trail?

And as far as Dakota County saving $70k per year on trail maintanance so that other trails can be opened - where are these other trails going to be?

Trailwind,

I can only tell you from personal experience MORC is only doing what it must to keep trails open to Mtn Biker's...without the trust of the land managers you'd see big "NO BIKES" signs at every trail....and unfortunately it takes time to grow the # of trails...I witnessed this back in MI 10 years ago and Northeast OH over the past 3.

I would also argue that you should get more involved with MORC and provide input from within.

[Trevize1138]

Just had to add that with all this talk about trails ... I'm pumped to go ride!!!!

But it looks like friggin' rain ... and my parents are in town ... and I've got a show to do tonight ... and ... and ...

... my life sucks :(

[Tim Wegner]

What a tremendous discussion. I agree that Lebanon is not for everyone but to say that we don't have a fair mix is wrong. We have about 7.7 miles of trail. .9 miles is beginner, 2.7 miles are expert or higher and that leaves 4.1 miles as intermedicate level.

As for Murphy going away as a mountain biking destination, that is what we are attempting to prevent. 3RPD has acknowledged that they have some serious problems with their natural surface trails. MORC and IMBA are trying to help prevent the natural surface trails from becoming closed. If that means we build sustainable trails that do not erode, wash dirt down in to the lakes and ponds than that is what we will do. I apologize to no one for this goal.

I committ in excess of 500 hours each year to gaining access to new areas as well as meeting with park managers to propose ways to improve their existing system. I get a bit upset when I then read someone criticizing our efforts that I know hasn't put one penny or donated one hour to supporting his sport, I just blow that person off because anyone can talk, the true enthusists get involved and digs in the dirt. supports financially or meets with people to make a difference.

Our goal at Murphy is to not remake the ski trails. We may be looking at an entire different portion of the park. If that happens then yes--the trails will be single track and yes they will be built to sustainable standards. You must also understand that the parks are under strong guidelines to limit development to less than 20% of the total acreage. So a lot more single track can be built 24" wide rather than 12' wide and help the parks keep under the 20% rule.

Tailwind--I am sorry you do not like the trails we build. If you want different and you can do it in a sustainable manner then come and teach me and help yourself get what you want rather than criticizing the people that do want to improve the sport that they love!

Discussion is great--I am glad that there are people that are excited about riding the type of trails that we are building at Harmon. If anyone has specifics about Harmon trail they need to speak up soon. I am flagging this weekend, GPS will be done next week and trail work will begin in July or August. Right now the trail is planned to be an open flowing multiuse trail. We will have good sight lines, lots of rollers and about 5 miles when we are done. Yes, this trail will be built with sustainablity as the focal point!

As Mark and Lora from the IMBA crew will tell you "if you build the trail plannning every move on how you will manage water, the trail will last forever."
Thanks--Looking forward to additional comments from everyone. Oh and John, we will revisit your trail steward position after your comment about not building to IMBA standards.:confused:

[Tailwind]

Before we all run off to hit the trails this weekend - Thanks for the conversation, and ride hard.
I still stand by my sentiment that MORC has left many riders unrepresented - MORC claims to represent the entire cycling community, yet many on this forum are quite forceful in repressing any other view points than 'sustainable singletrack is the only way' and 'I don't like it so it has no merit'. I'm not trying to hammer on anyone's effort or comittment - I'm just pointing out that what's there now has value and when its gone, its gone. If you're idea of fun is limited to 12-15mph averages and a fast downhill only sees 25mph, then surely the single tracks will make you happy. For others, it just isn't enough.
Murphy is the only place for me and I tell you, in 10+ years, it hasn't degraded - so obviously it is sustainable with the current level of effort.
I just want to remind everyone that there ARE others out there who have different tastes.
And if anyone ever determines how much trail maintanance at Murphy really costs, let me know - I am very interested.
Maybe someday all trail managers will see pavement as the only option, and you'll then be in my shoes.

[Trevize1138]

Heh ... yeah, well, Tailwind...

You're wrong.

:)

[SickBoy]

Tailwind,

The trails in the Chequamegon area funded by the two events every year that draw a grand total of over 20,000 paying participants, family members, support crew, spectators, etc.

They can afford to pay to maintain these wide ski trails, logging roads, etc.

MORC CANNOT!! You're trying to make something out of nothing here.

So unless you want to become an involuntary roadie, I suggest you either start working with us, or start your own organization. Name it RWCSS. Riders Who Can't Stand Singletrack. See how many members you get.

[Jake]

I haven't missed many Tuesdays since I started with the Lebanon Hills Crew three seasons ago. Someone said, "MORC only focuses on Lebanon"....that's not MORC...it's the people who care about Lebanon. I've worked at River Bottoms, Murphy, Terrace Oaks, Harmon...yes, I'm with MORC, but I'd do it even if there was no MORC...it's just that MORC coordinates and makes things happen. Do I like other trails? You bet!

I enjoy the rolling speed of the MN River Bottoms. Thanks to Dennis Porter and Gary Schoquist from Quality Bicycle Products (and MORC board member) for their efforts and those of others who have been able, through their advocacy, to keep this trail open, maintained and soon expanded. Especially Don Youngdahl, one of our original dirtbike/mountain bike advocates, who has probably put in more maintenance hours than anyone, unbeknown to most (who is that guy that cleans up after the big storms?).

We enjoy Levis Trow Mounds in Wisconsin and thanks to Steve Meurett and his crew for maintaining and expanding those trails.

I find The Farm a real challenge. Some of it still scares the hell out of me, but I'm always glad to have tested my skills. A huge thanks to Ben Kennick and the Farm Crew for maintaining a trail that has for years, had the cloud of future road construction hanging overhead. Best wishes on your new endeavor...wherever it is..

And, what's that place up north?...Elk River? The one BLAST built and maintains. Great ride. Thanks, Bob Mueller and crew.

Murphy is a great workout. The downhills are fast. The climbs get your heart rate up. Regardless of the inherent erosion problems of ski trails, they're still a blast to ride. Don't think for a minute that people don't like this teeth jarring ride. About all of us do....it's mountain biking.

We've worked beside the guys who maintain this trail and we understand.... Only they know the extent of maintenance the current trails require. Yes, the trails seem as good as they were 10 years ago and that's only because of the Murphy maintenance crew....without them, the trails would have been close to bikes a long time ago. Thanks, guys.

I led a crew there last Tuesday night. These guys (and wormen) from Three Rivers Parks are excited about the new single track they helped design and cut during the IMBA Hot Spots visit. When you ride Murphy next month, you'll have a chance to ride their new trail....if all goes well, there's a good possibility that in the near future, Murphy will be open for a full bike season...not necessarily the same Murphy, maybe a new Murphy....a good time to get involved if you want to have imput on new trails.

I guess the point is - most of us enjoy mountain biking, but don't have a clue what it takes to maintain and keep a trail open. I know, because I didn't. I would ride wet trails, slogging through the mud. I never considered that someone might have to repair the damage I was doing. I was at Lebanon today when the downpour stopped and people headed out to ride. Been there...

We'll be moving to Idaho next month and we'll miss the trails here and the many friends we made on the trails, in the parking lots and on the trail crews.

We're all mountain bikers. We like different types of trails and we like the same kinds of trails. Each of us should take the initiative to get involved to assure that the types of trails we like are in the plan. If we like straight down, maybe there's an alternative sustainable trail we could help design.

Great riding and working with you all.
Jan Lee
Dirt Boss 2

[EmL34]

Hey, I've been out working on the trails, and I am a member in both MORC and IMBA. I was even out working on Murphy this week.

I think MORC is great despite the fact they don't build exactly what I want. I'm with tail wind on trail type - I used to love the brutal climbs at Murphy and the fast descents. Then for some unknown reason the land managers at Murphy got a great deal on gravel and started dumping it everywhere. I went from riding the trail 20 days a month in the fall to once a year, just to see if it still sucked.

I never really ever saw the logic that made them do that to the trail - and I never saw the logic that made them do it at Lebanon, either. I rode both places heavily in the pre-morc days and never witnessed erosion or wear that dictated the liberal use of gravel. Then again, I am not a land manager, so maybe I don't know what to look for. What I can say is that, as a biker, the gravel seemed to come out of nowhere in response to a problem that never existed.

That being said, MORC has certainly addressed that problem, despite the fact it has seemed to mean compromising the types of trails that can exist. If that is the best we can do, them I am more than willing to be a part of the solution. 'Pretty damn good' is pretty damn good enough.

On the other hand, if it is possible to have input on trail design from within and if there are options, I want to be a part of that, too. Short of the trail work days I've done where I have been able to take part in decision-making on a minor scale, I have not seen the opportunity to play in the grand design phase. That's probably due to the fact that I haven't paid attention. If you can let me know when this happens or happened, I'd try to pay attention.

:zzz:

[ryno lite]

I too am a rider who isn't as comfortable with all the obstacles on the XX loop but I still am a member of MORC and have actually been one of the people helping to build these dreaded obstacles. I have learned to love the new trail and work on my skills on it all the time. I also love the easier trails (less obstacles, not less physical exersion) that are faster and MORC is and will be building more of these!

Like many of us here, I like variety too and MORC is working on this! If you want more and more variety, please come out and help! The more volunteers and members we get, the quicker we will acheive this vision of a wide variety of trails in a wide variety of locations all around the Twin Cities!

I also worry about the environment and Tim brings up good points. It isn't just about paying for the gravel to keep the existing trail at Murph open as is, there are environmental issues here. As Tim said, all that gravel is washing into the wetlands in that park damaging them, also the season is shortened due to the nesting of a rare bird. The existing trail even if we could afford it is causing damage in many ways we don't even realize as we fly by on our bikes. Hopefully with new trail building techniques pioneered by IMBA we can make a better ride for the biking community, save money for the park system and most importantly help protect our diminishing wild areas!

[martini]

Originally posted by Tailwind

I still stand by my sentiment that MORC has left many riders unrepresented - MORC claims to represent the entire cycling community, yet many on this forum are quite forceful in repressing any other view points than 'sustainable singletrack is the only way' and 'I don't like it so it has no merit'. I just want to remind everyone that there ARE others out there who have different tastes.


No one has stated that MORC represents the cycling community as a whole. This is obviously impossible. I've tried to attend as many trail work nights as I could, and you know what I saw? Mountain bikers that ran the gamut. I'm of the old school variety. Been riding 15 years and like flowing, fast single track. Others I've worked with have been riding 5 years and are 'freeriders', liking the type of trail that XX is(I am getting to like it too) and then there's the racer type who like smooth, wide, fast, non-technical stuff. MORC really does count among its members a nice varety of bike riders. It really is a shame that you haven't been able to discerne this from the discussion. I would have expected you too.

If you're idea of fun is limited to 12-15mph averages and a fast downhill only sees 25mph, then surely the single tracks will make you happy. For others, it just isn't enough. Get on a road bike and go to the Mississippi River Bluffs down by Red Wing and Winona if you want that kinda speed!

Murphy is the only place for me and I tell you, in 10+ years, it hasn't degraded - so obviously it is sustainable with the current level of effort.

Hell yes it's changed! EVERY trail changes yearly if not monthly. Surface changes, lines change, ruts get deeper from use, and Murphy has certainly seen its share of change. I've NEVER found anything remotely challenging or interesting at Murphy. I do my yearly ride there to remind myself why I like riding singletrack so much. Speed is not everything in a ride my freind. In my time there, I've noticed ruts widening and deepening, wet spots getting bigger and deeper, forcing riders around, creating new trails that needn't be there with properly designed MOUNTAIN BIKE trails(lest we forget that this system is a SKI TRAIL). Corners have gone to sh!t and the climbs get less manageable. The addisiton of the gravel only accentuated this problem. Gravel is NOT the way to prevent erosion.

And if anyone ever determines how much trail maintanance at Murphy really costs, let me know - I am very interested.

Call up the park system and ask. Since its a government function, and this information is not a security risk, they can give it to you. Of course, they may have to do some research into it, so your answer won't be immediate, but they'll get it to you. Garunteed it's over the $70k that Dakota Cnty spent on Lebanon!


Maybe someday all trail managers will see pavement as the only option, and you'll then be in my shoes.

That's what MORC is here for dear sir!

BTW, what IS your beef with a nice flowing single track? We never did manage to get that out of you. While we're on it, what is it about Murphy that you find appealing?

[gopherhockey]

Originally posted by Tailwind

I just want to remind everyone that there ARE others out there who have different tastes.

Tailwind - let me also say how much I actually do appreciate your being vocal about what you enjoy. Yes, there are a lot of guys and gals online here that have been out there and know a lot first hand about all this stuff. These people (myself included) will come out and rant right along with the best of them when topics like this show up on the forums.

This doesn't mean your thoughts and comments aren't worthy of being said (good, bad, right wrong etc.) There are many that do not agree or wish to try show you a few different aspects to what you are thinking and saying. No doubt there are some that agree with you but might be hesitating to post it. You just happened to have the "you know whats" to post about it. Kudos for sticking up for your beliefs and for being open and honest about what you enjoy in your biking experience.

It doesn't mean we (I) won't continue to try convince you to change your mind though... I can bring you away from the dark side... ;)

I wish MORC could satisfy each and every person out there. I wish each and every person would bend over backwards to become a part of MORC and let MORC become a part of them. I know this cannot and will not happen.... but, we'll keep trying. Every time I'm out on the trail working with the sweat, bugs, humidity.. or sometimes even frost... I'm not just thinking of myself. Every time I put in a log or remove a low hanging branch I think of all my fellow trail workers, morc members, and mountain bikers in general. (while all along paying attention to the trail and what our actions will cause). This is the heart of a trail worker... not "how can I build this for me and only me, screw the rest of the community and nature.."

I'm happy to be a part of this group whether we all get along and agree or not. It is a great thing that we do... it is not only fun, but its good for us.... as is maybe some heated discussion from time to time! It keeps us honest and keeps us thinking.

If I have it my way, in 5 years there will be a trail and a park for each and every rider out there. Everyone will have MORC jerseys and socks, will say "hi, how ya doin' bro" to each other in the parking lot and ride their hearts out in one of the best collections of metro trails in the country.

I hope you will be there with us all along the way. (even if you really ticked me off at times today hehe) Thanks for posting. Your comments brought out some remarks from others that were also very well thought out.... all you guys that posted here have made my weekend.

I'm proud to call myself a fellow Minnesota mountain biker to you all.... :cheesy:

[Don Youngdahl]

Originally posted by EmL34
. I rode both places heavily in the pre-morc days and never witnessed erosion or wear that dictated the liberal use of gravel. Then again, I am not a land manager, so maybe I don't know what to look for.

You've identified the problem all of us have at one time or another in assesing the impact of our use. It doesn't look bad to us, and in fact that rut may add a neat little challenge, but to a land manager, it's damage, and little ruts develop into big ruts, and pretty soon the trail needs to be repaired, either for environmental reasons, or for ski trail maintenance reasons.

Don Youngdahl

[Don Youngdahl]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Tailwind
[B]There's one strike against MORC - MORC only has one agenda, and saving Murphy is not on it.

MORC's lack of interest in saving erosive fall-line trails is not due only to the general preference for single track trails. It is because MORC leadership is intelligent enough to understand that heavily used fall-line trails in Minnesota soils are simply unsustainable and prohibitively expensive to maintain. Period.

I don't know anybody in MORC that wants to close ski trails just because they have fast downhills & tough climbs. All those old great downhill places that we remember had comparitively light use. Greatly increased use and mother nature (water runs downhill, you know) has taken it's toll, and now it's time to face reality.

Don Youngdahl

[SickBoy]

Let me also add that, as a rider who rides in excess of 2500 miles a year on the road, (and could be considered a roadie by most people's definitions) I have no idea why you think trails like the beginner and intermediate loops at Lebanon can be thrown into the "singletrack is too hard" bucket.

Yeah, they're 11 feet narrower and require you to turn your bike a little tighter. If you don't like that.... I can suggest several crushed limestone trails in Minnesota that don't have erosion problems that would suit you. But consider yourself warned, watch out for Burleys.

[KleinCrazy]

OK my turn to reply,

Tailwind,

I still stand by my sentiment that MORC has left many riders unrepresented

You have this statement reversed. It should read. Many riders have left MORC unrepresented.

MORC is a volunteer, member represented organization. We are not elected by the riding public, we are not appointed by the government.

If people do not join, they get no input. MORC is only able to follow the ideas and direction which it's members voice.


If you're idea of fun is limited to 12-15mph averages and a fast downhill only sees 25mph, then surely the single tracks will make you happy. For others, it just isn't enough.


I have addressed this issue before but will do so again. The geographical terrain found inn the twin cities metro area does not allow for sustainable trails ( without huge outlays of money) that will support 25+ MPH downhills. We do not have the elevation necessary to build the grade required to achive these type of speeds in a sustainable manner.


Murphy is the only place for me and I tell you, in 10+ years, it hasn't degraded - so obviously it is sustainable with the current level of effort.

I lived for 3 years 3 houses in from the stopsign on Burnsville Parkway behind the park. In that time I observed on a yearly basis almost 10 dumptrucks full of Gravel deposited on the trails, Backhoes and Skidloaders working for 3-7 days to move dirt around on the trail to attempt to fix erosion problems

I have also helped in the extraction by both ambulance and helicopter of 3 injured riders due to getting railroaded by ruts in the big downhill.

I can find the name of the Land Manager for Muphy if you would like so that you can ask how much all of this costs the park system every year.

I have a daily, first hand knowledge of how water, riders, and erosion have effected this trail over a period of three years.

I will conclude with a final point.

All work being done at any park in the Metro Area is by the request of the Parks. They are asking MORC for the Manpower and the Skills to design and build the trails for which they do not have the money to do on thier own. If it was not for MORC, the descission of the Parks would have been closure.

The Trailbuilding and designwork done by MORC is a reflection of its membership, If you would liek to change or have input on that direction, please consider becoming a member. As the Largest and most respected Natural Surface Trail Advocacy Group in the State, our voice carries a lot of weight, by becoming a member yours would become a part of that voice.

Thank you for the wonderful discusion everyone and for keeping it civil.

James

[Don Youngdahl]

Don't have time to look up the posts and quote the exact comments, but there were opinions expressed that there were no fast downhill/uphill places left beside Murphy, and that we need relatively easy, open trails.

You can find relatively flat and easy X-C ski trails to ride at both Lake Elmo Regional Park in Washington County, and at Three River's Elm Creek Park near Osseo.

As for hills, the X-C ski trails at Battle Creek are open for riding as well as the single track. The basic loop is about 5 K, and I defy anyone to ride a few hard laps of that course and say they haven't had a good workout and some fast downhill challenges.

Don Youngdahl

[TrailPatrol]

Yeah, it's a few hours away, but there is always Lutsen. It'a almost all downhill, 'cept for the lift lines.:D

Ride safe,
:banana:
Hans

[Tailwind]

I think some have misundertood my posts. Someone said: "Tailwind--I am sorry you do not like the trails we build"
That's not the point - I do like some of the trails that have been built. I looove single track. But that's not all I like.
The point is: I like Murphy the way it is. It is a totally different kind of trail than the others in the area, and I'd like to see it stay that way.
Regarding getting involved, isn't posting here the first step?
I ride Murphy (often) and I haven't seen any signposts indicating any consideration of trail changes.
I am on the Three Rivers Park District mailing list - I haven't received any communication from them that any trail changes are being considered.
Before making changes to such an important biking asset as the Murphy trail, I believe every effort should be made to inform as many participants in the sport as possible, and every attempt made to understand the needs and wants of the trail users.
To summarize:
I like Murphy.
So do at least some other bikers.
Are trail managers considering why we like it?
Is the management plan attempting to accomodate those needs?

For those who don't know why I like Murphy:
For me it is a roller coaster on 2 wheels. Where Lebanon hills changes direction by turning, Murphy changes direction by going up and down.
Hitting the bottom of a hill near 40mph and feeling the compressive force as the hill flattens is a blast.
Sailing off a crest in the hill, 'catching air' without resorting to a forced bunny hop is a good time.
Its nice riding a trail where I don't have to be on the brakes all the time, where the challenge is: how much faster can I take this?
And nothing, absolutely nothing can replace the feeling of accomplishment climbing up that first hill the 10th time of the day.

[socrates]

Originally posted by Tailwind
I tRegarding getting involved, isn't posting here the first step?
I ride Murphy (often) and I haven't seen any signposts indicating any consideration of trail changes.
I am on the Three Rivers Park District mailing list - I haven't received any communication from them that any trail changes are being considered.
Before making changes to such an important biking asset as the Murphy trail, I believe every effort should be made to inform as many participants in the sport as possible, and every attempt made to understand the needs and wants of the trail users.


Not intended to flame but I'd say only posting here instead of getting involved in MORC actually is only a half-hearted effort-join and actually get involved with the trail boss at the park, I'm sure he'd love any and all assistance he can get.

As far as not being notified of the changes-I'd say that's an issue you should take up with Three Rivers not MORC

[Tailwind]

Who is the trail boss?

"As far as not being notified of the changes-I'd say that's an issue you should take up with Three Rivers not MORC"

I agree, it is an issue for Three Rivers, but I also think its an issue for MORC.
Take a look at the trail page if you want to see what initially got me going...
http://www.morcmtb.org/trailreviews/metro/murphy.shtml
It surely appears that this is MORC's official stance on the trail, since its on the web site with no by-line or opinion disclaimer.

[gopherhockey]

Tailwind - I know that you are not along regarding Murphy, but you are definitely in the minority. The problem is that you know what you like, but you haven't offered any solutions or suggestions on how to keep it.

MORC has suggestions and has offered many resources to solve problems that plague 3 Rivers. We have a plan in place and momentum to make a difference. This is all backed by international organizations with years and years of experience.

Then there are those that just aren't happy unless things go their own way.

I'm not saying you are one of them, but every park has one or two people that do nothing but complain. Dakota certainly has a few of them. Let me tell you that because these are nothing but complaints and are by far in a large minority, the land manager tends not to take them very seriously, although they will always listen (to a point).

These people write, call, email their complaints but don't suggest a solution or don't step up and offer to help out. They feel the park owes them just because they pay taxes and they have a strong opinion. They are individuals not working together with others in their sport. They probably do more to hinder thier own sport than they do good with their comments.

Again, I'm not saying you are this type of person.. approaching MORC was a good step to take vs. just firing off hate mail to the park. Getting to know why we're doing what we're doing and offering solutions to us would be a great next step.

I know you like Murphy. I just now need to hear how you propose to sustain those rolling hills so we can bike on them... what.. a few weeks a year? I'll listen whether you are a MORC member or not, as long as you bring some well thought out ideas to the table.

I'd also ask you to see what we're trying to do as a state mountain bike organization. The things we are doing may not make you completely happy, but they solve problems and keep trails opened.

Honestly... would you rather the trail were closed, or turned into 15+ miles of singletrack that was open almost all year round. (say these were your ONLY 2 choices)

Or, imagine yourself a part of the regular Murphy trail crew where you could bring your ideas and implement them - but in a more sustainable way. You'd probably be surprised that we could pull off some of what you like about the existing park, but do it in a way that benefits everyone (and nature as well).

[The Bull]

Wholly Crap!! Everyone has made some good comments here. I agree with many and can see all the point being made. I have two comments to make that we should all think about. This is especially true for the MORC leaders and trail stewards.

First, do not present any statements (excluding opinions) unless you can substantiate them, such as “we save Dakota County over $70,000 a year” and “I might also mention you would be bucking a world-wide trend” and “Chequamegon area funded by the two events every year that draw a grand total of over 20,000 paying participants, family members, support crew, spectators, etc.” and “I get a bit upset when I then read someone criticizing our efforts that I know hasn't put one penny or donated one hour to supporting his sport” and “all that gravel is washing into the wetlands in that park damaging them” and “Guaranteed it's over the $70k that Dakota Cnty spent on Lebanon.” There are probably others here, but my point is when you start throwing around statements as facts and cannot substantiate them, you loose credibility.

Second, No one here owns the trails (not that anyone has made that claim). We are all guests in the park system, unless legislative action by the Federal, State, County or City governments state otherwise. Unless you build on private property it is necessary to represent all interested parties. This include the responsibility of Three Rivers Park system.

Lastly, MORC does a great job, as well as BLAST and CAMBA. They are all necessary to sustain the biking community. I just suggest each rider commit one day to trail maintenance/planning each year. I happen to work on Elk River and Monticello because I enjoy those trails the most. 500 hours per year is not necessary.

[gopherhockey]

Originally posted by Tailwind

It surely appears that this is MORC's official stance on the trail, since its on the web site with no by-line or opinion disclaimer.

The trail reviews on our site are fairly new. They were imported from another web service that was able to give more of a single opinion (because it was owned by a single individual). We are trying to update these and remove comments like that.

I'm at fault here as well. Often when I do a trail update myself (since nobody else usually offers to do them for me) I tend to let my own feelings slide in there.

They are MORC trail reviews.. but please take them as a work in progress this year. By next year we hope to have them all re-done and be given a much more neutral voice with more information... letting the individuals review the trail at the bottom of each page and give their feedback as well.

Perhaps I should put some disclaimers on our reviews until we've had time to completely review them for content... but... then again I'd have to put a disclaimer on each and every word I type and that would really suck... ;)

NOTE: for argument sake, I put in a disclaimer on the Murphy review just to help avoid confusion. Its my opinion that it isnt' worth the time, but I understand that does not represent the entire opinion of MORC and all its members. I did the review, however, so I get to say what I think. :kiss: Everyone is free to add reviews at the bottom of each review page.

[SickBoy]

Yeah, uh, Bull, how about you go to the CFTF and the Birkie this year and see if you want to continue your argument about how many paying tourists that area draws, between those two events alone...

Sheesh. Not like it's a big secret. Here's some stats from the most recent Cheq and Birkie events:

3418 Birkie skiers
1410 Kortelopet skiers
1800 Chequamegon 40 riders
700 Short and Fat riders

7328 participants, each paying a MINIMUM of $46 to participate (that's what the bike events cost, the Birkie is more expensive by quite a bit).

Now just add in all the participants from the Cable Classic (MTB), Seeley Pre-Fat (MTB), North End Classic (ski), Seeley Hills Classic (ski), Pre-Birkie (ski), 24 Hours of Telemark (ski) events and throw in 2,000 vacationer visits for people who come up to train and tour on the ski trails in the area during the winter, and you MIGHT be close as to how many paying racers and participants that the area has. I'm pretty sure I'm forgetting 2 or 3 more events as well. Add in families and support staff for all those events and you gotta be approaching 30,000 people a year, MINIMUM.

[The Bull]

I just ended a phone call with Bo Carlson at Three River Park. I wanted to obtain as much factual information as I could on this trail. He was able to answer most of my questions. Those that he could not were referred to Steve Hannock, who is in charge of all maintenance. First and foremost, Bo had very positive things to say about MORC and appreciates all the information that they provided regarding sustainable trails. They hope to continue working with them in the future.

• Bo stated that Three Rivers never approached MORC, but MORC contacted their maintenance department to discuss the trails at Rebecca and Murphy.
• The Murphy Trail is only open part of the season because of bird nesting patterns. It has nothing to do with erosion problems.
• There has never been a plan to close the existing trail nor are there any future plans to close the existing trail.
• The current “sample” single track that was build was only for demonstration purposes. If it were to be expanded, it likely would be incorporated into the existing trail.
• It is “impossible” to derive any actual cost for maintenance at Murphy because all trails are on a regular maintenance schedule. He actually feels the costs associated with NON-paved trails are less than those that are paved. This is because the non-paved trails are really not utilized much in the overall park system.
• The comment “I observed on a yearly basis almost 10 dumptrucks full of Gravel deposited on the trails, Backhoes and Skidloaders working for 3-7 days to move dirt around on the trail to attempt to fix erosion problems,” which I quoted verbatim, Bo considers highly “unlikely.” He did refer me to Steve Hanock in trail maintenance for verification. He based his comment that if this were the case, then it would fall under a Private Contract because it is outside the parks capabilities and as such he would know about it. I will verify with Steve and report back.
• Three Rivers acknowledges that there is an erosion problem with their trails. This includes HIKING, HORSE, SKI and MOUNTAIN BIKE trails. They have agreed to work with MORC as a long-term solution. They have also asked experts to help with redesign on the ski, horse and hiking trails. This is a major re-address of all trails.
• Lastly, Bo acknowledged that the park system has not spend enough dollars on non-paved trails and they have suffered as a result. He does acknowledge that there is erosion problems on all trails in all parks.


Please keep in mind that this is from Three Rivers directly. And again, they are appreciative of MORC and all their work and information they have provided. Further, they hope to continue using their expertise because they like using “sustainable trail design.”

[The Bull]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by SickBoy
[B]Yeah, uh, Bull, how about you go to the CFTF and the Birkie this year and see if you want to continue your argument about how many paying tourists that area draws, between those two events alone...

I have been there. I am from Hayward (class of 1988) and my family has owned two Hayward area resorts in the last 10 years. Your participation numbers are correct but do not reflect sources and uses for these events.

[Tailwind]

Jeff,
Thanks for making the call.
What are Bo Carlson and Steve Hannock's positions with the park district? Do you have a direct contact for Murphy-Hanrehan?
Thanks,
Ralph

[The Bull]

Bo is the "Trails Coordinator" and Steve is "Park and Trail Maintenance Manger." You can call three rivers directly for information and their direct line.

Mind you, I have not spoken to Steve directly as of yet. I am waiting for him to return my call.

[Jake]

This has been the most open, informative forum I've been on. (I have never checked forums on a daily basis, but I check this one.)

I feel like we're hearing some much needed different viewpoints which should lead to some excellent ideas on how to deal with some of the trail issues that are confronting all of us.

We all have a natural tendance to resist viewpoints that differ from our own, but it's very important here to remember that we're not adversaries, we're all mountain bikers and each person that voices an opinion here is representative of many others. If we're going to have trails available that appeal to the variety of riders, this input is crucial.

As an example, there was an article in the last IMBA newsletter about faster, flowing trails with few or no obstacles. Many riders prefer this type of trail and need this type of trail with open sight lines to train for competative events. I believe that Harmon/Salem Hills is the first trail we've actually cut that would fit into this category.

It will be interesting to see what suggestions come up to solve situations like Murphy and Rock Lake (Chequamegon). This could be an opportunity to develop some new techniques. Let's keep this thread going.

I hope that people are getting a little more relaxed and open to hearing other opinions. The goal is in the solution.

[Wonderpony]

"The current “sample” single track that was build was only for demonstration purposes. If it were to be expanded, it likely would be incorporated into the existing trail. "

I too am a lover of the existing Murphy trail. I LOVE single track (esp. the xx loop at lebanon!!!) but I also LOVE murphy. If the above could be accomplished I think it would be EXCELLENT!

It would be great to have MORC support a wider variety of trails but I can see how that would be difficult if none of it's members are willing to 'put there money (or efforts) where their mouth is'.
I would be willing to put forth my effort and resources to make my initial quote happen - so that the existing trail could be preserved while making wicked single track to go with it.

I also think that the poll "change murphy or keep it" should be taken down until we know for sure. Not that it's not a good idea but until we really know there's no point in arguing over the 'what if's'.
As-is Murphy is very close to the hearts of many of us. (which means stay off the trails when they are closed!!!!! that I think we ALL agree on. Morons....)

[SuperClydesdale]

It would be great to have MORC support a wider variety of trails but I can see how that would be difficult if none of it's members are willing to 'put there money (or efforts) where their mouth is'.

TK

Your message confuses me. I assume that you mis-spoke in the quoted section above. Can you please clarify you position vis a vis MORC's members unwillingness to "put there [sic] money (or efforts) where their mouth is?"

BTW, the MORC Member Status section of your profile is blank.

[Wonderpony]

Sorry about the confusion...
it's not a mis-quote - earlier in the thread there were accusations flying that those who liked trails other than single track needed to help out - volunteer - in order for their opinions to be heard and taken seriously. Which I agree with. Some of those complaining were talking big and not actually volunteering or helping out in any other way. My self included!

I am VERY new (as you can probably see) to MORC. My MORC member status is blank because honestly I'm not sure what it is:)

I'm just saying that I love murphy the way it is just as much as I love single track!
I would love to see single track go into murphy while keeping the existing track. (thats in my personal perfect world) I guess I would just like to see a wide variety of trails being supported at MORC and would be willing to help make that happen.
I think we could all be happy!!:D

[SickBoy]

Originally posted by The Bull


I have been there. I am from Hayward (class of 1988) and my family has owned two Hayward area resorts in the last 10 years. Your participation numbers are correct but do not reflect sources and uses for these events.

Sorry, I'm not going to apologize for doing simple math. Not everything needs to be backed up by hard evidence. Next thing I know you'd be asking for the names and addresses of all these people.

[Wonderpony]

Hey Mark Gavin,
I have been so wrapped up in reading this thread that I just figured out how to become an actual member. :cool:
I'm ready to "put my money where my mouth is"
I would hope that others who have strong opinions about the trail systems would be willing to do the same.
:banana:

[JayT]

Steve Hancock the Parks & Trail Maintenance Manager will have the most accurate information regarding Murphy Hanrehan. Although Boe provided good information it's not entirely accurate as reported on this forum.

Steve Hancock can verify or clarify these items.

Erosion *is* one of the reasons for the limited riding season.

He can also detail the efforts by the Park District to control erosion including the placement of gravel.

A trails management plan is in the works for all non-paved trails district wide of which M-H is just a fraction. This plan will address all non-paved trails including mountain bike trails.

As I've stated before: I'm an employee of Three Rivers Park District, but I DO NOT officially represent them on any of the forums here (on the MORC web site) regarding TRPD trails. As moderator I will attempt to pass along as accurate of information that I can. I'll also attempt to make the proper Park District staff aware of issues that come up here at the MORC forums.

JayT

[SickBoy]

Originally posted by Wonderpony
Hey Mark Gavin,
I have been so wrapped up in reading this thread that I just figured out how to become an actual member. :cool:
I'm ready to "put my money where my mouth is"
I would hope that others who have strong opinions about the trail systems would be willing to do the same.
:banana:

TK - Amen, brother. You've got the idea. Getting organized is the way to get heard.

[Trevize1138]

Originally posted by Wonderpony

I also think that the poll "change murphy or keep it" should be taken down until we know for sure. Not that it's not a good idea but until we really know there's no point in arguing over the 'what if's'.

That's why I put the disclaimer "For the sake of argument."

It's separate from this because I just wanted to know what the real split was on here, if people were given an either-or decision between the two types of trails at Murphy.

[SuperClydesdale]

Hey Mark Gavin, I have been so wrapped up in reading this thread that I just figured out how to become an actual member.
I'm ready to "put my money where my mouth is"
I would hope that others who have strong opinions about the trail systems would be willing to do the same.


TK

Right on. Anybody can offer an opinion, but I think opinions are regarded more highly (and, if not, they should be; *this is my opinion only, I speak only as a member of MORC*) when they come from people who have ACTED to support the sport they love. And MORC's collective voice just got louder when you decided that $20 was money well spent.

I am stunned, frustrated really, by the small number of members we have. Not everybody can commit to trail work, but EVERYBODY can commit $20/year to local mountain bike advocacy. In my mind, if you ride ANY trail in Minnesota, there is NO acceptable excuse for not being a member of MORC. Criminy, you even get a nice pair of socks when you join.

Thanks for joining.

[Mateo]

Right on... I just joined MORC and will see you guys out for trail work!

- Mateo

[socrates]

Originally posted by Mateo
Right on... I just joined MORC and will see you guys out for trail work!

- Mateo

Welcome!

PS Don't mind the tree huggers :D

[nicnac]

Right on... I just joined MORC and will see you guys out for trail work!
Yes, welcome:)
and btw...the socks do kick a$$!