Wed, 5 Dec 2007 21:44:29 -0800 (PST)
From: michael vitti <>
To: Josh Moore <>,
Cc:, michael vitti <>
Subject: Re: [ROMP] MTBs & Self Monitoring

Well, when a land manager demands that MTBers need to
self monitor...I usually ask them if I can have a
badge and a six shooter, then I ask for help in
rassling up a posse!

It's not the wild west any longer.

My point is...leave the enforcement activities to the
police. It's irresponsible and downright foolish for
an ordinary citizen to try and enforce rules and
regulations. You can get punched or worse!

It also exposes the land manager to huge risks of
liability if someone gets hurt while trying to enforce
"their" rules.

Also ponder's the land manager's lack of
planning to accomodate a growing mountain bike
population that has caused the loss of natural
resources via rogue trail building. If they allow
mountain bikers to help design exciting trails for all
ability levels...there would be less need for rogue
trails to be built. [Right. And lack of free money "causes" bank robberies. Mike]

If you build it they will come...if you don't build it
they will come and build it anyway.

The majority on MTBers realize access is a priveledge
and will develop a community of caretakers for the
forest...if given the chance.

Sometimes MTBers are in the same boat as
politicians...the actions of a few bad apples ruin the
reputation for all MTBers.

Ride safe and happy trails,


Wed, 5 Dec 2007:

From: "Peter Donohue" <>
To: "ROMP Email List" <>
Subject: Re: [ROMP] MTBs & Self Monitoring

Paul Wrote:
>This leads to the next point, about trail standards. Both the SCCP and
>MROSD subscribe to conservative trail standards, which are pretty much
>equivalent to class 1 State standards. This yields great speedy
>trails, but nothing beyond that.  I've said it before, and I'll say it
>again: Any
>public land management agency that does not provide technical trail riding
>experiences for the burgeoning technical trail riding communitiy is
>because they should understand that where technical riding experiences are
>forbidden, the conditions for illegal trail construction and cross-country
>are laid, and compromise to resources will follow as a direct result of
>mis-informed policies, and contradict their mission.

A second area I feel they are negligent in is that they are inviting trail
conflict by using the trail standard they use.  Asking a cyclist to ride
slow on one of these "speedy" trails is like asking a driver to drive 40mph
on 280.  Instead, they should be putting speed bumps in to slow us down.  Ad
these speed bumps show up in the form of technical trail features (logs,
rocks, bumps, twists in the trails, etc.), which is what many of us like to
see in our rides.

Leaf Trail in ECdM is ridden slowly, as it is technical.  At the other
extreme, the fire roads in Fremont Older and the Canyon Trail in Montibello
are speeding ticket factories.  The standard 4' wide smooth singletrack is
about smack between these (IMHO), with examples being the singletrack found
in Montibello or Russian Ridge.

This doesn't directly impact the conversation in question (trail access in
La Honda) in the short term, but a speedy trail network causes more conflict
complaints over time which will in general make it harder for land managers
to justify opening trails.  Yet if they had developed the trails with
managing bicycle speed as one of the components, they might not be in this


Thu, 25 Oct 2007:
To: "'ROMP'" <>
Subject: [ROMP] Fw: How to talk to a non-cyclist
List-Subscribe: <>,

How to talk to Non-Cyclists              by Elden Nelson

The fact that you are reading this tells me all I really need to know
about you. You're a cyclist. I'm a cyclist. We therefore both know
what's really important in life (riding). We see the world as it truly
is (a place to ride our bikes). If we were each to answer the question,
"What would you do with a million dollars?" our answers would vary
perhaps in what equipment we'd buy and where we'd go to ride, but in
little else.

If we were to have a conversation, we'd have an understanding of how
each other thinks. Maybe you're a Cat 2 roadie and maybe I'm a
cross-country endurance geek, but we both know that turning the cranks
in a perfect circle is the ultimate form of self-expression.

Sadly, not everyone is like you and I. I am sad to say that there are
people out there who rarely - if ever! - ride bikes at all. It's
possible you even know someone like this. A coworker. A family member.
You'd be surprised at how common non-cyclists are, actually. You
probably encounter them several times per day and simply don't notice
them, because they aren't interesting.

Mostly, you can safely ignore these people, simply by riding away from
them. Sometimes, though - at a company party, say - it is impossible to
avoid non-cyclists. Surrounded, you have no choice but to communicate
with them.

Don't worry. I'm here to help. Just follow these five simple rules.

Rule 1: Understand their bizarre world view

You need to understand that non-cyclists don't realize that cycling is
the most important thing any person can be doing at any given moment at
any point in the universe. Non-cyclists' eyes - and minds - are
shuttered, leaving them to believe that things like friends, community,
work, and even family supercede what they naively call "just exercise."
It's sad - OK, it's pathetic - but it's true.

To appease non-cyclists, when asked about what matters to you, you must
from time to time mention friends, family, the environment, or some
other such nonsense. Otherwise, they'll never leave you alone and it
will be hours until you can get away, back to the comfort and kinship
you feel when with your bicycle.

Rule 2. Use metaphors from "real life"

Non-cyclists aren't ready to hear about your exquisite existence in its
unadulterated perfection. No, you will need to translate the sublime
cycling experience into terms they might be able to understand.
Naturally, you and I know that the following metaphors don't do the
actual cycling event justice, but they'll have to do.

To describe how it feels to ride down perfectly banked, twisty forested
singletrack on a cool autumn morning: "It's like that scene from Return
of the Jedi where Luke and Leia are zooming on their flying motorcycle
things. Except you're the one powering the flying motorcycle. And you're
not being chased by stormtroopers. And you don't have to tolerate the
constant chattering of Ewoks."
To explain why you gladly get up at 4:30am each weekday morning to ride
your road bike for three hours on an entirely unremarkable road: "You
know how you have to drive your car in stop-and-go traffic to get to
work every morning? Well, imagine if you didn't have to stop. And
imagine your car going as fast as you can make it go. And imagine
starting the day feeling perfect. It's kind of like that."
To explain why you pay $200 to participate in a race you have very
little chance in winning: "Ever play the lotto? It's like that, except
much, much more so."

Rule 3: Pretend to be interested in their life

This one's going to knock you off your feet. Believe it or not,
non-cyclists sometimes think they have something interesting to say,
have an interesting hobby, or an interesting experience to relate.

This, of course, is utter nonsense.

Still, for the sake of propriety, you must act as if you care. Feel
free, as they talk, to pleasantly daydream about biking. Just smile and
say, "Absolutely," from time to time.

Warning: It's entirely possible that a non-cyclist will say something
with which you disagree. When this happens, do not engage. If you do,
you will have unwittingly stepped into a non-cycling conversation, and
who knows where that will lead, or when it will end.

Always remember: Be polite, be brief, be gone.

Rule 4. Act like their theory on doping in cycling is very interesting

A tactic non-cyclists will often employ, once they have discovered you
are a cyclist, is to try to talk with you about cycling. This usually
takes the form of trying to talk with you about doping in cycling.

You will, no doubt, be tempted to gouge your ears out rather than hear
their simplistic, uninformed opinion ("Doping is bad") to its rambling,
incoherent conclusion. After all, as a cyclist, you have no doubt been
pummelled with story after story after story about doping. You have
heard so much about doping that you could now be called as an expert
witness at the next doping trial. Or open a lab. Or be the next
president of WADA (and you're rightly confident you'd do a much better

But if you point any of this out to your non-cyclist "friend," he will
no doubt take that as a sign that you are interested in continuing the
conversation. So, instead, repeat this simple phrase, "Yeah, doping

Your friend will feel like he has made his point, whatever it was.

Rule 5. Don't tell the truth about how much your bike cost

Few people ever own anything that works, fits, or looks as well as a
truly well-built bike. And yet, when they find that your bike costs as
much as their high-end computer or mid-range stereo, they will fake a
heart attack, guaranteed.

The solution? Tell non-cyclists you paid $499.99 for your bike, no
matter how much you really paid for it. This number has been
scientifically formulated to sound like more than a non-cyclist would
pay for a bike, without otherwise drawing attention to itself.

No matter how you try, you can't always avoid non-cyclists. All you can
hope to do is minimize contact with them - so you can get back to what's

And I think we both know what that is.


Wed, 17 Oct 2007:
List-Subscribe: <>
Subject: Re: mud = bad?

In a message dated 10/17/2007 10:48:35 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, writes:

So I recently bought a new bike. I picked up a 08 Specialized
Stumpjumper Expert which I totally love by the way. Lately I have heard
a lot of talk about winter bikes. A few people have mentioned picking
up a clunker for winter use so as not to ruin the new fancy bike. I
like to ride year round and I really like my new bike but don't want to
destroy it. So my question is what the heck do I do? Is it really that
bad to ride my bike in the mud? Are there things I can do to minimize
or eliminate the extra wear and tear? Should I just hang out and get
fat all winter?


Steve Atchison

Ride the crap out of it all winter long.

Good mud tires, a front down tube fender and a rear seat mounted fender will
help. Pedals that work in mud also help like eggbeater or time.

I ride my bikes more in the winter than in the summer. Too many other
things to do in the summer. I clean my bikes after every ride with a soft car
brush (blue fiber available at Shucks) and a hose. Never shoot water directly
in areas of bearings. make sure the bike is left to dry inside a heated
garage or better. I use DAWN dishwashing soap because it does not have any skin
moisturizers that might contaminate disk break pads.

Lube the chain the night before the next ride with T-9. Wipe off as much as
you can. Stuff is dynamite. Lube the pivot points on the derailers every
couple of rides. Use a tube or just about anything that has a long metal tub
spout, (looks like the needle on a syringe) Only one drop on each pivot and
then wife off all the extra.

Store your bike upside down the night before the ride. This helps lubricate
the upper bushing on most forks.

In the spring, if shifting is a problem of a correctly adjusted derailer,
have the cables replaced. they don't last forever.

Care about your bike and it will care about you. Bike looks great after
years of use.

Ride that bike!

Sherman Knight
Knight Mediation and The Law Offices of Sherman L. Knight
5400 Carillon Point
Kirkland WA 98033
425-576-4028 wk
425-822-9305 hm
425-576-4029 fax email

Wed, 17 Oct 2007:
Subject: Re: mud = bad?

get an old bike and make it a singlespeed. and other companies offer chain tensioners to aid in the process.

singlespeeds rule in the slop!

Wed, 17 Oct 2007:
From: KevinA <>
Subject: Re: mud = bad?

> singlespeeds rule in the slop!

And here's the reason WHY they rule in the slop. Its not so much
that the mud and gunk is hard on the *bike* but it IS hard on the
components and the bearings.

A FS bike will have bearings or bushings at the pivot points in
the frame. Mud and slop is going to wrech havoc at those pivot
points. Drivetrains are going to wear down. Same thing goes for
suspension components.

A singlespeed has a straight chainline which deals w/ mud much
better than a derailleur. The derailleur system puts side loads
on the chain to achieve the different gear combinations. I'm not
saying that a singlespeed is better than a geared bike ... I'm
just saying that makes a better winter bike and is easier to

So, save your fancy rig for the summer months and get a beater or
singlespeed for the winter.

"A Caffeinated Hophead"

Wed, 17 Oct 2007:
To: <>
From: Jimmy Livengood <>
Subject: RE: mud = bad?

Ride it! If you want a singlespeed or other clunker, fine. But if you like your gears and suspension, just allocate your clunker $ to spring maintenance and enjoy the Stumpjumper year round.

Wed, 17 Oct 2007:
To: satchiso77 <>
From: "Keith Karlick" <>
Subject: Re: mud = bad?

Mountain bikes are made (in the metaphoric sense) to be ridden in the slop.
As with any type of riding the more you ride and the harder conditions you
ride in the more wear your bike takes. If you rode a ton in the super dry
east side all summer you are doing damage to the linkage with sand and
everything else. The same works in the slop, all the mud will get into the
bike. Ride your nice bike in the slop!! You did not buy a nice bike to ride
a piece or crap in the rain. I remember last year riding in February near mt
rainier and a couple times during the ride I had to get off and bang some
ice off the rear derailleur. Unless you like having a super nice paper
weight, go ahead and get out there on the nice bike.

All that being said, in my mind, parts are semi disposable. They break. I
rebuild my bike every other year or so down to the wheels and have to
replace cables, housings, the normal crap. But I have been riding the same
bottom bracket, cranks, and rear derailleur for 5+ years. Keep everything
oiled/ greased and when you do work on your bike, in the winter use grease
liberally. It repels water from all the important parts. Wipe the extra oil
off the chain though, that can have a tendency to hold mud. When I am done
with a ride, I swing by a Brown Bear and hose it down. It is important to
NOT point the nozzle directly at any component  with bearings or grease
fittings. Basically, if you put grease on it, don't high pressure hose it.
But for the most part it gets all the slop off and then I go home with a
clean bike. I have noticed though that my FS bike does not like to be put
away dirty.

In the end. Ride the bike you like. Especially a mountain bike. Road bikes
are a different story, keep those nice and pretty.

Wed, 17 Oct 2007:
From: "sk00kes" <>
Subject: Re: mud = bad?  No mud = beautiful

Never baby a mountain bike. If i bust my XO's i'll replace it with
something cheaper, they came stock off my bike so i don't care. Plus
i've run an XTR derailluer for over 2 years on my Enduro ridden
through crummy weather and i've yet to shear it off the frame.
Destroyed derailluers are like flat tires in that sometimes you just
run into a string of bad luck and tear them off.
Here's some key info to help you with your drivetrain if you decide to
ride your bike through winter. As soon as your teeth in your cogs get
thin, replace your whole drivetrain. Cassette, chain, and granny cog
w/steel. Depending on how things go, you should be able to make it a
year (probably more). Your new steel granny cog should last you at
least a couple years. Always carry (including summer rides) chain
lube. If you're on a ride where you pick up a bunch of crud use your
water to clean it a bit, and douche that sucker up. Generally you
should only have to do that once during a really gunky ride, as the
rider usually get's tired of the goopy ride, hence making the time
less that bike has to endure these condtions. Hit Preston Petersons
Reiter Pit ride for an example of this...
As far as pivot points, these all vary on different bikes. If you
start getting play in your rear suspension, replace the bearings
before it get's too bad. On an older Enduro and many other FS frames
i had problems, not so much with this newer Enduro (not the newest
Enduro model, i have a 05 i think) as my rear linkage has no play.
Also whats more important is if you're going to clean anything on your
bike. Cleaning the sliders on the shocks is important as it will
prevent grime from reaching the internals eventually ruining the
suspension. If you ride year round be ready to have your shock and
fork internals serviced/cleaned annually.
All this can be helped with properly cleaning your bike. Run water on
super low pressure from a hose or what have you. Scrub/brush debris,
but don't blast with a high power hose at a car wash. Buy some
bicycle cleaning agents at your local bike store if you want your bike
to be immaculate after a dirty ride.
The singlespeed idea is a good idea, but you could always buy a
hardtail thrash bike with an old Zoke fork, some LX/XT shifters, and
old durable parts and ride like a maniac all the same without having
to be limited by lack of gears, for instance if you're riding
somewhere with steep inclines/elevation like Green Mountain/Reiter
This again brings me to the question of when or if they're going to
give internal-geared hubs with belt drive a chance to really happen.
Yah yah yah i know they weigh alot....

There is always a danger of wear and tear on a bike, and i think the
danger of breaking components is only marginally increased from wet
season to dry season. Whaddya want your bike to last forever?

Most people who ride burn through a bike every couple of years anyways.

Couple more tips, when you get your frame you will have sections on
your bike that will have cable rub. Buy some clear plate sealer
(clear sticker) from a motorcycle shop and cut out circular patches.
Introduce grime into a bad area that has cable rub, and you can dig a
mini-trench into your frame.

Plus after all that is said, there are always places to ride where you
will avoid the piggy slop. Some trails are muddier than others. Some
trails mothers are muddier than other trails mothers haha.. smiths...

Good luck.

Wed, 17 Oct 2007:
From: "bob" <>
To: "'sk00kes'" <>, <>
Cc: <>
Subject: RE: mud = bad?  No mud = beautiful

They say bikes with VPP suspension designs are bad on pivots/bearings, but
I'm going on my third winter and have had no problems. One thing that seems
to help is Never-seize; it's way better than the stuff used in most bike
shops. Never-seize holds up against moisture better than regular grease,
that's what it was designed to do; never-seize is what ya use offshore; I've
had good luck with it.

I ride all winter long and try to keep to the trails bedded with rock and
sand; they tend to drain well. Many of the trails at Sawyer are in good
shape all winter but there are a few trails you don't want to ride; too
soft, mucky and it does too much damage.

SeaTac is a great place to ride in the winter; water drains off the trail
better than most areas. Griffin Creek is another good place to ride when it
gets wet; the rocky trails don't get too mucky.

When our local trails are washed out, Anacortes is a good place to ride;
Cranberry Lake is usually in good shape. I don't ride on trails when the mud
gets deep but it occasionally by accident. I've seen some mud pits at Tolt
that are to be avoided at all cost; very deep. I've seen and heard of people
loosing their shoes in deep mud, but it's never happened to me; knock on

One thing for sure is you're bike parts will hold up longer if you use
never-seize and don't use a hose to wash it down. Once I started letting the
mud dry and then wiping it off with a rag, my bike was a lot happier.
Another thing I do is put a coat of wax on after every ride; of course I use
Turtle Wax:> It helps a lot when you go to clean off the mud. My 2 cents

Wed, 17 Oct 2007:
To: <>, "sk00kes" <>
From: "ken h" <>
Subject: Re: mud = bad?  No mud = beautiful

ride, ride, ride.

winter riding is harder on the bike, takes much more time on between rides and maintenance, and you will wear out parts. as miles davis said "so what"

many folks on this list have there own way of doing things, from my experience here's my advice:

-- fleece socks; cold feet are not happy feet. cotton socks lead quickly to cold feet.
-- other synthetic layers are also worthy. and i've gone years and years without any type of rain shell.
-- no need to use a hose. i put my bike in my garage after a ride, and then once the mud is dried it easily wipes off. and then i clean the drive train & braking surfaces each ride.
-- when replacing the chain and granny, replace the mid-ring too or visa-versa. with a new chain, chain-suck is much more likely.

ken h.

Thu, 18 Oct 2007:
From: "bcrowley20" <>
Subject: Re: mud = bad?

You got it. Don't listen to those clean bike nancies :-) It's a
MOUNTAIN bike. Ride it all winter long. Give it a little
maintenance now and then and you will be fine.

Wed, 17 Oct 2007:
To: <>
From: "Brian" <>
Subject: Re: mud = bad?

I pretty much do what every one else is doing, I wash after each use but I do not use any soap, especially any soap that cuts grease, I just use my hand on painted surfaces with lots of water, I use a nice stiff brush on my tires and a long soft brush for hard to reach places like behind my derailers, in-between my shift pods and break levers, hubs etc.

I bounce my bicycle vigorously a few times then bring it in my kitchen to drip dry. I run it like that all winter and replace bearings and bushings that need replacing in late spring and do the shift cables and a full tune at that time.

I, like you, like my paint... before each ride I use pledge furnisher polish, its good stuff, it has carnauba in it and it smells great. don't forget to get some kind of rubber or black electrical tape in that spot where your shift cables rubs on your head tube, those cables will eat your paint right off.

lastly, I'd like to add that while I do care about your bicycle, I don't care about it quite as much as the trails that we share... in other words, during the long wet winter months the club endorses a tred lightly kind of trail usage and suggests riding on trails that are well draining.

Is mud bad for our bikes? Yes, ride it anyway. is mud bad for the trail? Yes, very bad, use your best judgment and research the best places to ride that are well built and or well draining

Tue, 11 Oct 2007:

A couple of points -
1. Yes, cows are allowed in wilderness - all existing grazing rights were grandfathered into the Wilderness Act due to how widespread grazing was and still is, an unfortunate political necessity. See to see a good overview of this issue and the detrimental nature of grazing on wild lands.

2. I tend to agree about horses - their impact is far greater than foot or bicycle traffic - case in point the Wind River Range - duplicate trails across high alpine meadows, droppings along the shores of alpine lakes etc. This, of course, stems mostly from commercial operations with long strings of horses and not so much from individual users.

3. Nonetheless, mountain biking should not be allowed in all wilderness - although it is non-motorized - I see wilderness as a place for peaceful meditation, and as much as I enjoy mountain biking, this it does not provide. You are simply moving too fast and generally not appreciating the scenery and natural character of an area as much when on a bike.

Designating mountain bike trails to exclude ORVs is important and should be addressed on the ground in negotiations with alternatives such as National Scenic Areas allowing flexible management or cherry stems for strictly non-motorized MPV recreation. Dictating this from the top down as "wilderness lite" in Congress could lead to too many lands being open to mountain biking.

Thu, 20 Sep 2007:

From: "bcrowley20" <>
Subject: Re: bikers (bicyclists, not guys on Harleys) image problem

Who cares what non-mountain bikers think of what we wear? They are
never in the woods to see us anyway. If roadies want to wear spandex
outfits, they can fend for themselves.

Full Disclosure: I don't wear spandex and IMHO no self-respecting
Mountain Biker should.

Mon, 17 Sep 2007:

Best Illegal Mountain Biking - South Mountain Reservation
Imagine almost 20 miles of classic Eastern single-track-narrow, wooded, rocky, rooted trails carved into the sides of steep little microhills—only 12 miles from the Empire State Building. Sounds like a mountain biker's nirvana? Nirvana, yes, but Kurt Cobain's dead. You see, mountain biking in New Jersey's SOUTH MOUNTAIN RESERVATION is illegal, banned by a turn-of-the-last-century law designed to keep horse carriages out of the county's parks, and newly enforced after complaints by a group of cranky Sierra Clubbers. Can you still ride it? Let your conscience (or a friendly fellow desperado) be your guide. But don't tell the cops we sent you. South Orange Avenue and Cherry Lane, West Orange, New Jersey.      -Allen St. John


Mon, 17 Sep 2007:

A few wrongs does not make a right! From a mountain bike trailbuilder at the 2006 world mountain bike conference

(Where does this guy get off?)

August 2006 - 2006 IMBA World Mountain Bike Conference:

Management Solutions for Unauthorized Trails

As a builder of many so called "Illegal" trails I had a personal interest in this session. The talk was given by Jim Richardson of Surrey Off Road Cycling, Shawn Gurney from the City of Surrey and Mark Peterson from Kona Bicycles. Shawn Gurney from the City of Surrey started the discussion and talked about renegade trails built by "kids" in Surrey. They showed pictures of poorly constructed obstacles and talked about why these cannot take place in an urban setting. The City of Surrey, like many other cities in Canada and I'm sure the United States, have been dealing with the issue of renegade trails for some time now. Their response was to use the land some of the existing trails were on and create a city sanctioned downhill mountain bike park. Some of the old trails were uses, some new ones were created. The construction of park features meets the requirements of city playground regulations. The Surrey Off Road Cycling club has been involved in aiding the city in their development of the park. A great bike park was created for the residents of Surrey and has set the tone for many other municipalities to follow suit.

While I share their opinion that in urban settings these renegade trails may not have a place, I feel that without these "illegal" trails our sport would not exist. Most, if not all trails I have ridden were at some point considered "illegal". Many of these "kids" who build these trails are 30+ years old and are simply trying to create a place for them and their friends to ride their bikes. The city building a park using an "illegal" trail system only confirms this. We have built our sport which now includes city bike parks, lift accessed ski resorts, indoor playgrounds all on the backs of those out in the bush. The guys hanging in the trees have given us all a sport in which we can now have day jobs. The way some might see it is that in areas with a lack of legitimate trail access, if we all go out and build trails then someone has to do something about it. Maybe this approach will give us a legitimate place to ride our bikes? Obviously this isn't the answer I'm advocating but sometimes do not the ends justify the means?


Fri, 14 Sep 2007:

On Fri, 14 Sep 2007 14:10:47 GMT, in alt.mountain-bike "JP"

<> wrote:

"Mike Vandeman" <> wrote in message

> Hmmm. No mention of the MULTI-LANE FREEWAY right above them. In

> denial? The space is "wasted" because of people like you, who insist

> on driving motor vehicles. Or do you BIKE to all of your trails? ...


Do you really need to smacked across the head with a dead fish?




People like me apparently is everyone who isn't you.

We all drive ....


Sun, 2 Sep 2007:

To: "'Erik Alston'" <>
Cc: "'BBTC'" <>
From: "bob" <>
List-Subscribe: <>
Subject: Tolt

I rode Tolt today and wasn't alone; there were other creatures on the
trail:>). I was greeted by a Vulture and Snake in the parking lot; what a
way to start the ride:>) Next came the cyclocrossers; whoooooooooosh and up
the hill they go; how do they do that?

The next part is a gray area for me, I might be wrong or out of line; I'm
sure you'll let me know:>) I'm not sure what others do when they meet hikers
on the trail because I rarely-if ever go on other people's rides; yawl ride
too fast for me.

Anyway, my style is to either stop or slow down enough to say hi how are you
when I meet hikers on the trail; I go out of my way to be respectful. I
watched a couple guys blast by two groups of hikers today; both with kids
and dogs.

We were at the top of IAB and IMO, there was no reason they couldn't have
stopped and yielded the right of way to the hikers; after all, hikers and
other trail users have the right away. Not these guys, they just blasted
past everyone. Their dog was running ahead of them and that might be part of
the reason they didn't stop; the hikers had dogs too, but theirs were on
leashes. At the very least, I don't think the riders left a good impression
on the hikers.

I'm not sure what other people think, but as I see it, more and more people
are going to be using local trails; especially the parks. Most people do not
ride mountain bikes; we're a minority. I know many of you have been saying
this for longer than I've been riding, but I think it's very good business
for us to go out of our way to be courteous to others on the trail; you
never know who you're going to meet. My 2 cents.

I've got a question about trail work at Tolt, feedback please:>) From the
5-way, I usually head down the South-east road and start on Mystery; I
usually take one of the three trails that branch off in different
directions. I rode the same way as I have for the last few months, but when
I came to one of the trails I usually take, I found that it had been
blocked; just wondering who's blocking trails and why? The trail wasn't just
blocked with a log or pile of branches, there was brush piled all up and
down the trail; somebody didn't want any one riding or using that spur; my
question is who's blocking the trail like that and why?

I'm not sure where I rode today, but I ended up on some new (to me) trails.
I went up the road next to the entrance of Vicious Quail and took the first
trail on the left. I took what seemed like several different trails and
didn't have a clue where I was. Not sure how I ended up on the trail that
goes down to the look out, but that's what happened; I followed the trail
and popped back out on the South Road right in front of the little trail
that leads to Erik's bridge.

As I was heading down IAB, I passed a small group of riders, one of them was
holding onto a small black bag. The sack appeared to have something inside;
it was moving around as if whatever was in there was alive; I swear I heard
something screeching from inside. Do you think there's a chance the Attack
Bird was in the sack? Maybe somebody will have to ride Vicious Quail to see
if the crazy bird is still there.

Bob h

Fri, Aug 10 2007:

Newsgroups: alt.mountain-bike

From: Ride-A-Lot <>

Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2007 19:01:08 GMT

Subject: Re: need suggestions on mountain bike, thanks a lot

Any bike you buy from a big box store (i.e. Target, Wal-Mart, Dicks,

Sports Authority, etc.) is going to be JUNK.  If you ware going to do

any actual mountain biking, you will very very disappointed with the



For a new mountain bike, the low-end entry level bike (Specialized

Rockhopper is one) will cost around $500.  You should buy a bike from a

reputable bicycle shop.  They will take the time to put you on the best

bike you can afford and that fits you comfortably.


You are in Columbia, Missouri if my lookup is current.  It is a college

town.  Most college towns have at least a couple of good bicycle shops.


If the $500 is out of your price range, then your next best place is

used.  Even a used good mountain bike is better than a big box bike (or

more commonly called Bicycle Shaped Toys).  See if you can find a

Rockhopper, Giant Yukon, Kona Cinder Cone, or even a ~Shudder~ Gary

Fisher on Craigslist.


If the bike says Mongoose, Schwinn (unless it's 10 years old), Huffy,

Next, Jeep, Columbia (they make clothing and tents - not bikes), then



Sun, 12 Aug 2007:


[It's nice to see a mountain biker admit the damage they are doing. Mike]

To: bbtclistserve2003 <>
From: Lisa Parsons <>
Sun, 12 Aug 2007 08:37:11 -0700
Subject: Re:Strange encounter at Tokul E


The writing is on the wall for motos. Plum Creek and some other land
owners got a million dollar clean-up bill because of all the resource
damage from motos, people shooting and garbage dumping. They along
with Kombol have posted their property and now have full time security
which patrols their property. Out where I live when motos are found
the sheriff is called and they cite the moto users. They have also
ditched every trail access which is a drag for us non-moto users.

They have also closed areas in Idaho on private timberland where my
parents live. You now have to pay a $75/ year access fee to go on their

Private land owners simply can't afford the cost of repairing resource

I think the biggest worry we'll have as a user group is the sheer mass
if illegal trail building especially around wetlands and creeks. I
think if the trend continues that we may face the same closures as the
motos. I think at Lake Sawyer the reason the land owners have been as
tolerant of the sheer mass of trails in that area is because most of
that land is slated for development. I don't think the same will be
true on designated open space.

Just my thoughts on the issue.


Because the best adventures are right in my backyard.

31 Dec 2005:

By tomas suk

I've been a mountain biker since 1982, and i enjoy riding on dirt very much. But i don't want to see bikes in wilderness. When i'm out walking in wilderness, i don't like hurrying to get out of the way of fast-moving bikes, i don't like all the flashy colors, or the dust they create. And more to the point, just seeing the tire tracks from bikes already passed makes the area feel small and shatters the "disconnect" from the modern technoloigical world that only wilderness can provide.


16 Dec 2005:

By Michael Mejia

I appreciate the concern for the potential misuse of lands by the mtb community, i.e., "existing singletrack, willy-nilly, following game trails -- not to mention the willful construction of trails, and BC-style structures." We have soiled our own nest.


28 May 2007:



mtbr member


some bicycles are quieter than walking and of course, one can cover a lot more ground on a bike. the important thing is the noise Most game animals have excellent hearing and are very sensitive to the sounds of predators (human) which is the sound of internal combustion engines, yakking, stereos, etc. so I have had very good luck hunting fromt he bicycle as long as I can remember not to talk to myself whilst riding, a little habit of mine,


the problem is that it is hard to look around while riding a bicycle and the movement also catches the eye of game. When hunting from a bike I find it necessary to stop regularly and look around and listen. Nowadays I mostly hunt photos but its pretty much the same thing.

davidarnott some bicycles are quieter than walking and of course, one can cover a lot more ground on a bike. the important thing is the noise Most game animals have excellent hearing and are very sensitive to the sounds of predators (human) which is the sound of internal combustion engines, yakking, stereos, etc. so I have had very good luck hunting fromt he bicycle as long as I can remember not to talk to myself whilst riding, a little habit of mine,


the problem is that it is hard to look around while riding a bicycle and the movement also catches the eye of game. When hunting from a bike I find it necessary to stop regularly and look around and listen. Nowadays I mostly hunt photos but its pretty much the same thing.


Tue, 3 Jul 2007:

From: Josh <>

Subject: Re: [ROMP] Membership decline is real and fast - ROMP threatened

Mountain biking is about the American Dream - the rugged

individualist, man against the odds overcoming nature, cruising his

territory under his own power. It is not about joining a club. Look at

the names of bikes - Maverick, Nomad, Heckler, Enduro, Uzzi, Epic,

Racer X, El Conquistador de Montanas. Why aren't bikes called

Advocate, Political Action, Harmony, Peace, Co-operation, Flock, Herd,

Sea Breeze, Poppies, Druid, or Nature Boy?

Tue, 3 Jul 2007:

From: "L. Daniel Levy" <>

To: "'ROMP List'" <>

Subject: Re: [ROMP] Membership decline is real  and fast - ROMP threatened


Have book, will on, I hope to be helpful.


We have the same phenomenon in the East Bay.  While we can say that we are

presently growing out of a steady decline, it has been said that mountain

biking as a whole has seen some decline.  Bike sales have dropped.


We also have the same problems with recruiting leadership positions.  We

still have empty director seats and committees are nil.


At the IMBA Summit at Sea Otter, I briefly mentioned that we had designed a

new way to solicit membership by having local bike shops sell our

memberships for us.  I am now ready to share with ROMP, our mountain biking

advocacy sister group, what we have done up here and how the program looks



History shows that we had 500 members - probably our all time high - when we

were formed in 1987.  We met our all-time low about 2 years ago when our

rolls had dropped to a meager 150 members.  We now have about 180 members

and we are climbing thanks to our new program.


We recognized that there had been alienated portions of the East Bay due to

some of our prior leadership being so focused on the hot potatoes of certain

central parks that they forgot about the rest of the East Bay - a vast

cross-section of types of parks and a huge geographic region. 


I mention this because ROMP is also such a vast geographic region.  Is it

possible that certain regions are being neglected?


Our new program consists of outreach to the local bike shops in our area to

sell our memberships for us at a retail mark-up.  Effectively, it means we

take a break-even membership cost for each new member. 


Our annual membership is now $25, raised from $20 as of January this year.

IMBA raised theirs, we raised ours.  The end intent is to raise $3-5/member

to donate to IMBA-CA annually but initially, we needed the additional

membership to fund the program.


The program is made up of a retail packet.  The packet contains a membership

form, card, a bumper sticker and a smaller version to be stuck on a fork or

frame and a Clif Bar, donated generously by Clif.


We sell the packets to the LBS wholesale for $15/ea and they sell them for

us at $25/ea.  They make the standard 40% mark-up on it as if it were any

other retail product.  Additionally, each shop, assuming that they were not

previously a "retail member" buys a retail membership at $50, for which we

advertise on our website in trade.  For each new member, the LBS makes a

small profit and gets advertising and we get new members.


The roll-out cost was about $3500 for posters, stickers, packaging and

printing the special self-laminating membership cards and forms.  This was

for about 1500 membership packets.  It takes time to fold and stuff and seal

the packets.  A couple of members can make 100 packets in less than 20



The up-side is that we hope that when we send the renewal notice that a

portion of these new members will renew at a higher level by mail or PayPal

and that we will keep the entire membership, instead of sharing with our LBS



We started with 5 shops.  It took a while to interview shops to make sure

that they were willing to do this for us and that they would give us top

billing.  We interviewed about 12 shops before we settled on 5 for our pilot

program shops.  These 5 shops are spread out around the area. 


The intent of starting with 5 of the nearly 60 independently owned bike

shops in Alameda and Contra Costa Counties was to get all of the bugs ironed

out before approaching the other shops.  We formed an unofficial committee

of members to represent and be liaison for each of the 5 shops.  Some of

these have been more involved in the program than others and the involvement

shows in the shops' sales.


It's been a learning process.  We're corrected some marketing issues and

gotten the shop employees trained to some marginality.  Two of our 5 have

not been addressed well and so far have not sold memberships.  The other 3

have sold a total of 35 memberships since we started the program in March -

half of those within the last month.


In August, we plan to launch the next wave of shops.  We have 7 more members

that have started the process of getting our presence in the shops to

prepare them for the program.  We hope that at least 3 of the new shops will

participate.  We are also looking for other members to start with other



In order for this to happen, we have moved our monthly meetings around as

well.  We have held our meetings in Walnut Creek, Danville, Pleasanton,

Livermore and will be in Oakland next and Antioch after that.  We have seen

that we get a different cross-section of members at each meeting.  Of each

new group that attends a meeting, a sub group becomes really involved.


We have also had information kiosks and group rides that move each month.

We set up an Ez-Up at a park entrance, with the park supervisor's approval

and input of course.  We enlist a member or 2 from the nearby area to lead

group rides of their home park and keep people at the "booth" to give away

Clif Bars and inform the public of our existence and try to recruit new

members.  Coordinating the location of the Info Kiosks on the 4th Saturday

of the month and the location of the meeting on the 1st Tuesday has been a



In the meanwhile, we will also have a small party thanking the 5 pilot shops

for their participation and we have collected some swag awards from

manufacturers to reward not only the shop but the highest-selling shop



I'm proud of this program.  Chuck Davis and I, with help from the rest of

the BTCEB directors have created what I think is a really good product.


We think that once the program is in full swing that we should have about 20

shops.  If each shop sells only 2 memberships per month, we can easily have

480 new members in a year...sounds crazy, I know...


Dan Levy

Director At Large

Bicycle Trails Council of the East Bay

(925) 383-7436

Tue, 3 Jul 2007:

From: "Jim Preston" <>

To: "ROMP List" <>

Subject: [ROMP] Membership decline is real  and fast - ROMP threatened


Paul mentioned that membership is steady in absolute terms but dropping as a

percentage of the area's population.  Paul and I have previously discussed

what a poor showing ROMP has among South Bay Area MTB'ers.


This is from Josh's report in the first quarter 2007 newsletter:


18 months ago

we had about 350 members and now

we are down to about 250.


I joined ROMP about the time that Paul became president.  So as a time

reference this occurred during Paul's and Josh's presidencies. I attended a

meeting when I first joined and Glenn's report was 400+ members. So

membership has declined about 40%.  This rate and depth of decline is

usually fatal for organizations.  ROMP has something like a 20% chance of




I do not accept some poster's observations that membership naturally goes up

and down and thereby trying to bury the issue.  Hope-for-the-best management

usually results in failure. (Our involvement in Iraq?)  There are plenty of

issues that are interesting to a much broader spectrum of MTB'ers and ROMP

is addressing many of them.  Sure, issues drive membership, but why isn't

membership going up if issues alone are the drivers?



There were 7 attendees at the June meeting. Am I alone in thinking that the

membership isn't engaged and motivated.  Several times I've suggested

meeting online so that more members could participate, including myself, but

this was rejected for the more social aspects of meeting in person.  I value

participation well above having beers over club business.


The membership should know about that discussion.



I've been sounding the alarm for several years but nothing is being done.

The membership, or what share of the membership is on this list, should

understand this issue.  I don't like discussing it because it is

uncomfortable for everyone.  I would much rather discuss MTB travel



However, is the emotional challenge of the topic a reason to bury the

issue???  Is that a reason to keep it from the newsletter?  Should we just

keep discussing trail work and bike parts as the club fades away?  Should we

just hope that somehow the public will again get excited about joining ROMP?

As I've said, I've been trying to sell this club on the trails around this

valley for something like four years and it is a hard sell.  I've never seen

anything like it since I started recruiting in 1962.



Is bringing up difficult topics divisive?  Self-serving? Self-righteous?

Probably every accusation is true to some extent but at least I'm doing it.

(Self-serving for sure because I want trails that I can ride at age 70 and I

joined ROMP because I thought that was the best way to get them.  I'm 56 so

I'm in a bit of a hurry.) 


I've tried a variety of approaches but nothing seems to work.  If I'm

positive then nothing happens and if I hit hard then I get flamed and

nothing happens.  By the way, using a negative tactic is often the only way

to get people's attention and I've found it more effective at times.  I do

have supporters off-list who do not want to respond publicly because they do

not want to be flamed.  Nice healthy situation, heh?



Several years ago I started a ROMP membership drive and several of us

distributed ROMP brochures.  However, the person keeping the membership

information at the time did not want to give me reports about the

effectiveness of the campaign from the information he was receiving so I

gave up.  For those who have never done a membership campaign I'll mention

that it is critical to understand who is responding and the referral

sources.  All the information I could get was a comment that not many new

memberships were coming in so I quit.  I'm not going to waste my time.


That is information that members should be aware of.



I suggested some time ago that we have a members only list serv for such

discussions but it was rejected.  Members should know that the option was

discussed and it seems like the general membership should vote on it, not

just the very few who are active.  With all the fantastic Internet

applications available to us this is very easy and cheap to do.



I've offered many times to share my more than four decades of experience in

organization leadership, including dozens of civic groups, with the ROMP

presidents.  (That donated time could be worth tens of thousands of dollars

to ROMP, if not much more.)  I've also suggested books on the topic on

Amazon that they could read that would probably offer better researched

advice than I could provide.  Josh and Paul both know well that I've really

tried to increase the leadership skills and direction of ROMP but nothing

has happened.


(For those who don't remember and before you start flaming me I am already

very busy on a variety of other projects.  I'm only interested in trails,

not the other ROMP activities.)


Josh and Paul work their asses off for the club.  They are very fine people

and dedicated to ROMP.  They are among the small group that does the heavy

lifting in ROMP.  They do the club activities they like and have time to do,

which is fine.  However, for long-term survival ROMP needs organization

builders.  I mean many.  One builder is not enough.


The president's job should be very different than what I've seen in ROMP.

This role provides functions such as planning, organizing, controlling, and

coordinating.  The details about how this would work in ROMP is too much for

a list serv so I won't get into them.  However, the membership should be

aware that a very different and more effective approach to club leadership

is possible and is needed soon.  The qualifications for president is not who

does the most work but who can fulfill the management functions best.



For my purposes, trail advocacy, new construction, and maintenance, I think

it would be easier to build a new organization that can get involved in

politics.  ROMP certainly has a role in trails advocacy as long as it

exists, but I need a broader base.  I don't have time to organize it now but

I'm picking away at this project.  Interesting, only one person on this list

volunteered to help.  I think there is a whole different crowd out there

that is more interested in this topic and they aren't in ROMP.



ROMP needs to recruit organization leaders.  ROMP needs a business plan to

sell to these people.  ROMP needs to pay for leadership conferences /

training for incoming presidents. ROMP needs to increase membership

participation through the Internet.  After that then ROMP needs a real PR /

marketing campaign with broad support. ROMP needs to evolve from its current

processes to survive. 


Those steps will build ROMP into a more effective organization for its

varied and highly useful functions. Flying by the seat-of-the pants won't. 



Sorry if that insults some people but we can see where inaction is getting

us.  When I soft pedal an issue as to not hurt feelings then the issue

evaporates on this list with few posts and nothing happens. I bet not one of

you remembers those posts. Kathleen recently mentioned psychology and that

negativism doesn't work to motivate people to act.  Unfortunately it is

often the only way to get action and it can be very effective.  It is used

all around us every day.  It is the only tactic I have left to use with




So who with organizational and leadership skills is lined up to replace Josh

next year?


- jim

Thu, 7 Jun 2007:

From: stripes <>

To: Josh <>

Cc: "'ROMP'" <>

Subject: Re: [ROMP] [Touchy Feely] Mutual admiration personal accomplishment


Thanks for doing this Josh :)


Tonight I cleaned the Seven Springs loop, counterclockwise, down and up.

I've never linked them both before, but I was able to have some flow tonight.


I'd like to make it from the Prospect parking lot to Hunter's point without

stopping, but I can do it with only one stop. [What's the value of never stopping?! Mike]




On Wed, Jun 06, 2007 at 09:47:20PM -0700, Josh wrote:

> The idea of this thread is to post what you recently cleared / climbed

> / rode / did that you could not, or did not think you could do before.

> This is your chance to say what you did and get a pat on the back.

> Everyone is welcome to post their accomplishment and / or 'atta boy'.


> OK now, so we all now know that Paul can climb the loose churned up

> trails at RCDO. Congratulations Paul! that is quite an accomplishment!

> That is so cool! (I am not being sarcastic, BTW).


> When I first joined ROMP, for me it was a big deal to ride from the

> Prospect lot into Fremont Older and all the way to hunter's point.

> Later, it was riding up the back side from the dam without stopping.

> Last month, I cleared all of Dutches Trail for the first time. It is

> amazing to reflect on how far I have come.


> Now, what about you?

Mon, 4 Jun 2007:

You need to slow the hell down before you pass people on the trails. Make it a point, especially if you're sneaking up behind them. Nobody likes being startled, especially if they're out for a Sunday walk in the woods. Not only that, but our bikes are basically 2-wheeled 4x4 trucks. The tires kick up a lot of dust and it sucks to be a hiker and inhale that shit.


From: "Jon Kennedy" <>

List-Subscribe: <>

Date: Tue, 22 May 2007 17:55:24 -0000

Subject: Staff Night Out (5/30) -- Gray Area Conversation --


Come join Justin and Jon next Wednesday at the Redhook Brewery in

Woodinville for the fourth BBTC Staff Night Out.


At this pub night we want your feedback on what our policy on gray

trails should be. A gray trail is one where the land owner informally

allows us to maintain, build or use trails on their land, but there

is no formal written policy. Sometimes they like us there to keep the

meth heads and dumping out, but it is a "don't ask, don't tell" type

thing. Should we ignore gray trails, encourage their use, try to shut

them down, support their maintenance? We want to know what you think.


Thu, 10 May 2007:

From: Ted Stroll <>

Subject: Irony of the Little Sur River, bikes, and Wilderness


I've been following this discussion with interest. I went to the website that Jim Preston included in his first e-mail and noted that he says the trail is little-used and neglected. I've heard similar things about certain trails in Wilderness elsewhere in the western United States: they're deteriorating or disappearing because of lack of use and inadequate maintenance. How ironic, then, that cyclists can't use them, all because of federal agency misinterpretations of the Wilderness Act of 1964, which in my view does not prohibit mountain biking in Wilderness. If cyclists could ride in the Ventana Wilderness, I have no doubt we'd be helping to maintain the trail and by using it keep it clear for other users.


Ted Stroll


Fri, 27 Apr 2007:



List-Subscribe: <>

Subject: Great Weather brings out more Hikers and Equestrians


The weather is getting nicer and with that we will be coming across more

hikers and equestrians on the trails. 


Just a friendly reminder that hikers and horses always have the right

way.  When riding in areas that are known to be used by Equestrians be

on the lookout for them.  Horses can easily be spooked by our bikes and

cause the rider to be thrown from the horse and  could end up really bad

for the rider.  Watch out for them and talk to the Equestrians and their

horse, so that we spread some goodwill and let the horse know that our

bikes dont bite


Lets not ruin a great season by running over a Hiker or spooking a



Thanks for reading,





Wed, 25 Apr 2007:

From: Dave Wade <>

To:, ROMP Email List <>

Subject: Re: [ROMP] dowdy ranch

List-Subscribe: <>,



Sadly, also true for State of California wilderness.



--- wrote:


> This is true for federal wilderness. Is this federal

> land?


> --mark


> On 24 Apr 2007 at 9:10, Josh wrote:


> > No mechanized in Wilderness which excludes bikes!


Mon, 16 Apr 2007:

[So much for environmentally friendly mountain biking! Mike]

From: Paul Nam <>

Subject: [ROMP] Looking for Coe Epic Ride Leaders and SAG drivers

List-Subscribe: <>,





We had the meeting at the Tied House tonight. I am coordinating the ride leaders and SAG drivers. We need more of both.


There are various ways of riding the Epic apart from doing the whole shooting match. The entire epic is 28 miles and 6,000 feet of climbing, and smaller variations are possible. We are hoping to be able to provide a variety of smaller distance rides for those interested in a guided experience. Ride leaders will get Coe maps (to keep) and detailed instructions concerning the loops they lead. Ride leaders will be invited to the pre-ride/course marking weekend May 5-6.


SAG drivers are needed. SAG stands for Support and Gear. While SAG drivers will not be able to ride, they will also not have to ride. 4wd high clearance vehicles and first responder training are recommended, as well as bike racks and seats (DPR regulations require seats for all passengers in State Parks). Vehicles such as crew-cab pickups and SUVs are ideal. The role of the SAG driver is to patrol dirt roads and assist riders who need/request assistance with mechanical, medical, food, water and transport needs. This could also include assisting in evacuation. The patrol routes are defined. SAG drivers will be invited to the pre-ride as well.


In other news, I have word that Felt bikes will be available for demo at the event, from our remote support station run and staffed by Sunshine Bikes of Gilroy.


Over and out for now. For further details please write me.





Wed, 11 Apr 2007:

From: "Todd Schlemmer" <>

Subject: RE: Weirdest Things Are Seen When Biking

I guess I should look up from the trail more often when I ride...


Sun, 08 Apr 2007:

From: "David Coolidge" <>


Subject: Re: [ebbc-talk] FW: Another run-in with Critical Mass

List-Subscribe: <>,



The news story I read made it seem that the cyclists got in the way of the

limo and blocked it's path with no obvious reason other than to mess with

the driver.  If I were he, that would have alarmed me - I'd be thinking

along the lines of "now they've immobilized me, are they going to rob me?" 

This whole incident seems to have involved a great deal of foolishness, and

I am dismayed when my fellow cyclists get on one of these "who shot John"

kicks, like now.   People aren't going to take us seriously if we insist on

defending stupid, aggressive, obnoxious behavior.  In itself, riding a bike

is no sign of superior moral character - all it takes to become a cyclist is

a Target or Costco store and $200.    There are some real jerks out riding

around, and it's a shame they get into the papers, but they do.


David Coolidge






>From: "John P" <>

>To: "Zach Kaplan" <>


>Subject: Re: [ebbc-talk] FW: Another run-in with Critical Mass

>Date: Sun, 8 Apr 2007 14:28:38 -0700


>On 4/8/07, Zach Kaplan <> wrote:

> > After briefly exchanging words with the man, Webb said he grabbed the

> > male cyclist's bike and tried to pull it out of the way.


>In the case of the minvan it sounded overwhelmingly like the minivan

>was the first to commit assault by knocking the first cyclist over,

>after which a number of infractions and/or crimes were possibly

>committed by both sides.


>In the case of the limo it sounds like the driver admitted he was the

>first to commit assault (if grabbing someone's bike that they're

>holding is assault) after which a number of infractions and/or crimes

>were possibly committed by both sides.


>Escalation, while perhaps human, is certainly not a good way to

>diffuse a situation, but is it ok for drivers to commit assault for

>admittedly being held up in traffic?


>   -John


>ebbc-talk mailing list





Mortgage refinance is Hot. *Terms. Get a 5.375%* fix rate. Check savings



ebbc-talk mailing list

Wed, 4 Apr 2007:

From: Paul Nam [past president of ROMP]

To:, Ted Stroll <>,

        Shelley Potts <>


Subject: Re: [ROMP] Ohioans want mtn biking in nat'l parks

List-Subscribe: <>,



Sometimes it seems responsible organized mountainbikers is an oxymoron ...!


Sat, 17 Mar 2007:

From: "Doug Walsh" <>

Subject: RR: Snoqualmie Valley Tour


I expected to do this ride alone, but fortunately there were two other souls

who didn't mind braving the rain, the mileage, and my horrendous navigating

and decided to come along. I admit I was a bit nervous when I saw an

unfamilliar name with no BBTC rides under his belt sign up for today's ride.

And I was even more nervous when the first words out of his mouth this

morning involved the the phrase "second time on the bike since November".

Gulp. I turned away to hide my obvious look of concern -- he did read the 50

miles and 6 hours part of the ride description, did he not? When I looked

back I noticed that on further inspection Bill looked very fit and his red

OCLV Fuel spoke of someone who is serious about his XC riding. And yes he



After the introductions were over, I led Bill and Stephanie through a quick

tour of some Snoqualmie Ridge double-track then down towards Salish Lodge

and onto the SVT. Next stop, Tolt-MacDonald Park! We boogied up IAB --

graciously acknowledigng all of the riders who yielded to those of us going

uphill -- and proceeded to get lost. It was BIll's first time to Tolt and

Steph's first time in 2 years and, well, God knows I don't know my way

around up there. We ended up riding Oxbow, Shaefer, MLR, some of the Burn

(mostly cleared now), Mystery, and a few other choice trails (some a couple

times due to my poor navigating) and putting in about 6 miles or so of



The rain started to come just as we began working our way back to the 5-way

and starting our descent on IAB. A quick snack at the group cabin, then back

onto the SVT. Next stop, Tokul-West. The rain was coming down pretty hard

and we were getting pretty dirty. Tokul West would likely be muddy. Bill

said goodbye at the beaver dam washout on the SVT and Stephanie and I headed

up into the woods. I'm not an ace at Tokul West, but I can work my way from

the entrance up to the base of Bon-Bon. We were a ways into the ride and the

rain was coming down pretty steadily so we settled into a whirlwind tour of

Tokul West: up Bon-Bon, over to Outback and down to Full Bench and out Sgt

Wells. Good times. The horses have really made a mess of upper Bon-Bon and

upper Full Bench was a swamp, but aside from my endoing on one of the

switchbacks on Full Bench, all was well. Back down to the SVT, another

snack, and then back to Snoqualmie Ridge for a trip to the Snoqualmie

Brewery Taproom for some Green Nitro Pale Ale and a corned beef sandwich &

Irish stew.


Thanks again to Stephanie and Bill for coming out today. Everyone knows how

strong a rider Stephanie is, and it's good to get those long rides in with

her. And I hope to see Bill on other BBTC rides -- a great addition to the

local riding crew!


Mileage: 46.9 miles

Elevation Gain: 3,015 feet

Saddle Time: 5 hours

Total Time: 6 hours, 15 minutes

Calories Burned: 4500


Now it's on to Orcas tomorrow for a ride-it-all trip on Mt Pickett and Mt



Thanks for reading,



Thu, 15 Mar 2007:


To: ROMP <>

Subject: Re: [ROMP] Epic Bad Idea

List-Subscribe: <>,



All an email campaign would do now is revive focus on something that

happened back in February..


I'd rather see people emailing the NPS objecting to a sentence in the

 text they required the bozos to include on their Website,, which said that mountain bikes cause

environmental damage. (The text is now gone; apparently the

requirement was for it to be there a couple of weeks.)


These guys are from Santa Cruz, according to an article in the





On 14 Mar 2007 at 21:20, Timothy Daniels wrote:


> If you ask me, they got off easy.  All it takes is one "oh shit" to 

> erase thousands of "atta boy's"  I'm sure the image these boobs 

> portray as mountain bikers will stay those who read about it for a 

> good long time.  I'd be willing to bet they still don't think what 

> they did was bad enough to warrant any penalties.  What they need is 

> some good old fashioned peer pressure.  A kick in the pants from some 

> fellow mountain bikers would do nicely.  I think an e-mail campaign 

> would be a good idea.


> Tim


> On Mar 14, 2007, at 8:57 PM, Jane Taylor wrote:


> > Sent to me by my sister, who used to work for the National Park 

> > Service and still gets their ranger reports:

> >

> > Grand Canyon National Park (AZ)

> > Conviction For Illegal Mountain Biking

> >

> > On January 20th, three men - David Yost, Sean Monterastelli, and 

> > Jacob Thompson - hiked out the Bright Angel Trail, backpacking out 

> > their mountain bikes. The group of three cyclists told visitors 

> > that they were on a two-year-long mountain biking trip, riding 

> > their bikes from Prudhoe Bay, Alaska, to the tip of South America, 

> > and that they had carried their bikes across the canyon. They also 

> > told them to look at their web page (http://

> > Several days later, ranger Paul Austin 

> > checked out the page and discovered photos and video of the group 

> > riding their bikes on the North Kaibab Trail. In addition, there 

> > were photos and video of them camped on an upper section of the 

> > trail. In their journal, they wrote about riding the trail and 

> > their concern about being caught by rangers: "(We) began riding 

> > down the trail.'Goat' [one of the three] managed to bomb section 

> > after section of the trail, walking his bike only when coming into 

> > contact with other trail hikers, and when those infuriating water 

> > bars were too high to bunny hop.we were excited by the prospects of 

> > a day filled with epic downhill, we hopped on our bikes and headed 

> > down, sliding our way down a treacherous mix of snow and loose 

> > rock. Almost immediately I flew over a series of ledges and cracked 

> > the rear end off my Xtracycle." On February 16th, Austin and AUSA 

> > Camille Bibles presented a criminal complaint and affidavit before 

> > US Magistrate Judge Mark Aspey in Flagstaff, who in turn issued a 

> > summons for the group to appear in his court. Yost, Monterastelli 

> > and Thompson were charged with camping without a permit, camping in 

> > an undesignated area, use of a bicycle in a closed area, giving 

> > false information, and conspiracy. Austin tracked the individuals 

> > through their website as they rode to Southern Arizona and prepared 

> > to cross into Mexico. They had posted in their blog that they were 

> > attending the "24 Hours in the Old Pueblo," a large and popular 

> > mountain bike race north of Tucson. Saguaro rangers Todd Austin and 

> > Heather Yates drove to the event site on February 17th and were 

> > able to locate the trio. Austin posed as a freelance writer 

> > interested in the group's trip, then later identified himself as a 

> > federal law enforcement ranger and issued each his summons to 

> > appear in court in Flagstaff. The three men retained an attorney 

> > and subsequently reached a plea agreement to three charges. In lieu 

> > of a $500 fine, the men agreed to donate $500 each to the Grand 

> > Canyon Search & Rescue Fund. They also agreed to redact sections of 

> > their website pertaining to illegal activities and were sentenced 

> > to 48 hours in Coconino County jail. The case generated 

> > considerable media attention. [Submitted by Bil Vandergraff, 

> > Supervisory Park Ranger, Canyon District]


Mon, 12 Mar 2007:



I ran over a small diamondback once. It was OK -- I stopped and

watched it crawl away.Usually I have time to bunny hop or swing

around them. During snake season, which is now in full bloom, I often

see two or three rattlesnakes on one ride. I've seen them combat

dancing, sleeping coiled in the trail (they love to burrrow into the

loose dirt so they are half-buried during the cool of night and

morning) and stretched across the trail. I once caught a front tire

on a rock while braking for a three-foot Diamondback, went OTB and

landed on my chest. I closed my eyes on impact and when I opened them

the snake's head was maybe two inches away from my left eye, so close

it was blurry. I flopped out of the way in a nanosecond, and it never

even backed into a coil. Luck or karma, perhaps, (I am a vociferous

opponent of the idiots who think they need to be killed) but most

likely the fact that they rely on camouflage as their primary

defense, and movement compromises it. Or it could have been too busy

laughing silent little snake laughs at the idiot who fell off his



So yeah, occasionally we may run over a snake, but I don't know that

the overal environmental impact is any greater than the pollution a

hiker puts into the air driving to a trailhead.




On 12 Mar 2007 at 11:11, Shelley Potts wrote:

> Do folks out there really ride over the occasional snake!?!  I've personally

> never come across such a situation.  Does it happen often!?  As a side note,

> I have a major snake phobia so I think I'd shudder w/ heebie jeebies if I

> ran over a snake! *blech*!!


Thu, 8 Mar 2007:

To: <>

From: "Tom Fitzpatrick" <>

Subject: Re: Re: Singletrack MINDS


A couple minor problems with the stunts at St Ed/Bastyr. 1. They were mostly very poorly built, looked ghetto, and the professional opinion (e.g. the Sugoi dirt girls) was they were "tib-fib breakers". 2. They were built without the land owners/managers' permission. The jumps etc. built on Finn Hill Park attracted the unwelcome attention not only of hikers but King Co parks staff, who not only removed the jumps but a lot of downed logs that people had been riding over for 10 years and helped make these trails more fun.


As I've been flamed for saying before, St Edward State Park/Finn Hill is not Whistler. Whether or not you like it, the land managers don't want it to become so, and neither do the walkers. There are positive ways to deal with this situation, but building illegal stunts isn't one of them.


Tom Fitzpatrick


----- Original Message -----



Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2007 9:19 AM

Subject: Re: Re: Singletrack MINDS


I've thought there's an irony in the opposition towards building stunts on public lands. Anything elevated keeps bikes off the ground and cuts down on erosion. I scratched my head when the one section at Eddies was taken out - it was suspended above an area prone to erosion. Some might consider it a land use BMP? But, having worked for government bureaucracy for most of my life, I understand how sometimes decisions are made for political or liability reasons.


-------------- Original message --------------

From: <>

Good find Steve.


Fromme ROCKS! And, the work done up there is an inspiration for those that do the work down here. It's definately art and practical necessity in complete symbiosis. Love it and wish we had more trails like that closer to home.


The Marin deal still resonates from issues of old. Many in that are hae moved on and better understand each other's needs. But, as we have found up here, it's a lot easier to enact laws keeping users out than it is undoing them. Even if most users have figured out the error of their previous ways.


BBq>From: Steve Costa <>

>Date: 2007/03/08 Thu AM 09:36:01 CST


>Subject: Re: Singletrack MINDS



>I thought this one was quite good... (can't remember if I already

>posted it)




>--- In, KevinA <mtnwuff@...> wrote:


>> Check out this documentary DVD. The film examines Marin

>> singletrack access conflicts. I've sent an email to the

>> producers to see if I can get a copy of the DVD.




>> Kevin


Wed, 7 Feb 2007:

From: "Brian" <>

Subject: Re: Gray Trails and trail advocacy


Trails have always been developed for the same reason as long as man has been on earth... necessity.

Lets face it, we need more trails, much much Much more. I say kudos to pirate trails and kudos to those bitch about them, maybe after another 10 years of BS our county and state land managers will finely see that there is a need for more access for cyclists, but dont hold your breath. We will always be the red headded bastard step children of the outdoor community... I say build them where they have a chance to last and away from wet areas, but build them. Make the complainers, Tom Murdochs and serria club members work to weed them out as they are descoverd. Maybe they will get tired after a while.

Look at skate borders for example, they grind and destroy brickwork and store fronts. After years and years of complaining and relentless, non conforming skaters, we finely see skate parks poping up all over the place. This group got exactly what they wanted by doing what they wanted, where they wanted, when they wanted.

I'm not saying its cool to destory the environment we wish to enjoy, I think most of us are environmentalists... Thats the whole point! We want to see more birds, more trees, more creeks, more views, We just want more. The building of "gray trails, pirate trails and illegal trails" just goes to show that the slow turning wheels of politics, talking and environmental impact studies is not working for some. I know its not working for me, I dont build pirate or gray trails but I understand them and I'll ride them in a heartbeat.

My $0.02


Wed, 07 Feb 2007:


From: "Ethan" <>

List-Unsubscribe: <>

Subject: Re: Gray Trails and trail advocacy


Hmm... if I had to break down into three groups, and then guess as to

the percentages of, American trails that were built by various

movements/entities, I'd have to guess the following:


5% -- the CCC

20% -- other government agencies, or at least groups with official

landowner/government approval

75% -- gray trails, built by unofficial, average Joes and Janes ....

and much of that by hunters, trappers, and other explorers, plus of

course the ancient/native inhabitants of the continent.


(I'd be very interested to seem to stats on this, if anyone could dig

them up somewhere.) Regardless tho, I'd definitley agree with what

someone said earlier in this thread about how "gray trails belong in

gray areas" -- lands that only have marginal (or temporary)

recreational access, period.


Anyway, on to recent events in the Cascade foothills... So Dave,

when you called the county folks to report the new trail you'd found,

I really hope you didn't mention that you'd *met* the trail builders,

and that they were mountain bikers. Cause that would of course be

incongruous with the overall goal that we all have to not portray

mountain bikers in a bad light.


And to all those who seek to "verbally educate" naughty rogue trail

builders or other people who are doing things you don't approve of,

always remember the age-old maxim, "It's not what you say, it's how-



Since I wasn't there, Dave, I'm not sure what your tone/approach was

in educating these "evil-doers" (to borrow a term that our esteemed

president likes to use).


However, a few years ago, I was at a wintertime work party on the

Preston Trail and, at one point in the day, a couple of guys came

riding down the trail, past us. One of the crew leaders said to

them, in an angry, belligerent tone: "HEY YOU POACHERS, THIS TRAIL IS

CLOSED!!!" My jaw dropped. I couldn't believe what I'd just

observed. How does this person, who also happens to be a board

member and one of the club's top, uh, "advocates", expect to attract

new members to the club and new trail gnomes to the trailwork

movement... when [he/she] talks like that? Unbelievable.


[The Code of the Streets: Whatever you do, don't "rat" on your buddy, even if he is doing something illegal! Mike]




Wed, 07 Feb 2007:


From: "Thom Iverson" <>

List-Unsubscribe: <>

Subject: Re: Grey Trails


This is a point I DEFINITELY agree with!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

People slapping down SHODDY gray trail and then walking away without ANY

followup maintenance DOES get me torqued off.  THAT gives a bad image for

mtn biking.



[In other words, illegal trail building is okay, but SHODDY illegal trailbuilding gives mountain bikers a bad name! Mike]


Thom I


Tue, 6 Feb 2007:

To: <>

From: "Maarten van Dantzich" <>

List-Subscribe: <>

Subject: RE: Op-Ed on gray trails vs official trails


There's nothing like a false black vs white choice to get everyone stirred



But let's talk about gray trails for a moment.


- Rumor has it Lake Sawyer is likely to get developed in the next 10 years.

- A freeway through Mukilteo/Japanese Gulch has been proposed.

- Paradise used to be gray. It could've been sold to someone who developed

it into housing. Instead it went into public ownership and we have to fight

for it, but we have a decent chance of getting it re-opened.

- Part of Griffin has been sold off and will be developed.

- The edges of Tokul have residential zoning and will be sold off. Will we

lose most of the current access routes?

- Tolt is for sale. It could be sold and closed.


Where are you going to ride then?


Just move on and build gray trail somewhere else?


Let's face it. An official trail on public land is always better than a gray

trail because it's not going to go away at random whim. The more we build

relationships and stand up for ourselves, the more secure those trails are.


We're getting better at maintaining access to public trails. We got the

Middle Fork re-opened. Grand Ridge will have official trails open to bikes.

We're working with King County on agreements for new trails in two places.

This stuff happens because the BBTC is seen as a serious partner. When

people see that we can tackle something big like Colonnade, other new

opportunities will open up.


Thing is, when we do get agreements to legalize use and build new trails,

then it's time to be mature and play by the rules. Things move slower that

way, but the trails stay around longer. It also makes sense to talk to other

mountain bikers to make sure they understand what the stakes are.


Building gray trails is a sticky topic for BBTC as an organization. People

want to do it, and when it doesn't tick off the land owner, it's obviously a

win for people who want to ride. At the same time, the club can't actively

support gray trail building simply because it's illicit, and because it

would ruin our chances of being taken seriously by land managers.


Either way, gray trails belong in gray areas, not in places where we want to

keep our access to official trails.


As for building jumps--there are some at Colonnade, did you know? We're

happy to build them anywhere we can get land manager permission to do so.


Terry, just as your email does not represent the club, neither does Dave's.

Everyone's got their opinions, but don't confuse individual members with the




(I'm a board member but am speaking on personal account--and I happily ride

gray trails.)


Mon, 15 Jan 2007:

From: "Jim Preston" <>

To: "'ROMP'" <>

Subject: Re: [ROMP] Humboldt

List-Subscribe: <>,




Logging can be environmentally just fine and often is.  Some people equate

aesthetic loss, cut trees, with environmental loss.  They are not

necessarily the same.  I happen to prefer the clear-cuts because there is a

much more active wildlife community there than the old forests.  We've

suppressed forest fires but we have clear-cuts to somewhat balance our

intervention.  Not quite the same but it helps.


Also, ROMP is not an environmentalist organization and we have taken stands

against wilderness designations so we could ride the trails.  Working with

logging companies to expand available trails will not harm the environment

for the most part.  There are vastly bigger environmental issues to get

excited about. 


I realize that "logging" is a dirty word for some people.  I find that this

view is for the most part unfair and unfounded.


No harm in bringing the topic up for discussion though.


- jim


-----Original Message-----

From: Kari Olson []

Sent: Monday, January 15, 2007 5:52 PM

To: Jim Preston; 'ROMP'

Subject: Re: [ROMP] Humboldt


Depending on the logging ventures, this position may be against overall

environmental goals and may hurt ROMP's pro-environment stand, mission

statement, and our claims that mountain bike riders are pro-environment. 


Yea, maybe Mtb may get a few more trails to ride, but what is the cost on

credibility in the long run with regard to ROMP's pro-environment stand.


food for thought.


--- Jim Preston <> wrote:


> Tim, you have a big "value proposition" to offer the logging

> companies.

> They need political allies and bike riders can be allies against

> wilderness and tree-huggers.  If riders have a network of trails on

> logging company property they are more likely to defend the logging

> companies along with the trails.  Also, I find that cut areas are very

> good for riding because they offer views and aren't claustrophobic

> like dense forest.


> The companies rightfully fear that if they invite the public to use

> the land that the public will want to turn it into park.  So them that

> the opposite is true for MTB'ers.  Maybe you can find examples in B.C.

> or the Western US where bikes and logging companies are in love.


> Hug a logger.


> - jim


> -----Original Message-----

> From:

> [] On Behalf Of Timothy Daniels

> Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2007 6:35 AM

> To: ROMP

> Subject: Re: [ROMP] property owner liability


> I knew there was a reason I kept touch with ROMP's messages.  This is

> by far the most useful information I've gotten here yet.

> Here in Humboldt, an

> obscene amount of the surrounding land is privately owned by the

> timber companies Green Diamond/Simpson and Pacific Lumber.

> Neither of which are

> very gracious about permitting us to ride there.

> One of them is actually

> downright ornery about it.


> Thank you.


> Tim