Posted by: LoamtoHome
Your woke virtual signaling is top notch!
Well, that's illuminating isn't it? If it was meant as an insult, believe me, Im not upset but it doesn't reflect well on you.
Anyway, back on subject, you can happily use "unsanctioned" if you want. I'm not a lawyer (are you?) so I'll leave it to the legal experts to decide which is the correct phrase
And yes, I have done trail work. And I've done advocacy work.
How many times do we have to say the trails are NOT illegal but unsanctioned (big difference) ? I bet you've never spend any time in woods digging?
There is a notable distinction to be made between illegal and unsanctioned. According to the govt of BC (Parks), the second you move dirt/soil/rocks or alter the landscape by any means for the intent of constructing a trail or pathway you are in fact committing an illegal act and building an illegal trail. Based on the idea of right to roam, people are allowed to traverse the land freely. If they do that multiple times along the same route and end up wearing a path into the ground that is not illegal, but the result in an unsanctioned trail. So digging in the dirt, moving rocks, scrubbing moss off of slabs, etc, etc, is illegal.
If people want more detail it's here:
Posted by: thaaad
Landowner - "I'll allow these 5 trails on my land built and maintained in accordance with the local trailbuilding association "
MTBers - "Oh ok, let me just add 20 braids and 10 rogue trails this year i promise nobody will get hurt on these sketchy unapproved features"
Landowner - "I'll allow zero trails on my land. No trespassing."
It really is that simple.
I have contended for many years...just wait until there is a fatality on a hidden, illegal (think Darkside) trail.....Just you wait.
And really, posting maps etc...online is dumb, but it is not like no one knows about it. It is not hard to see where bikers are entering the forest to ride or to see tire marks/ruts from use. Rogue/hidden trails have been around since the beginning.
Posted by: syncro
How many times do we have to say the trails are NOT illegal but unsanctioned (big difference) ? I bet you've never spend any time in woods digging?
There is a notable distinction to be made between illegal and unsanctioned. According to the govt of BC (Parks), the second you move dirt/soil/rocks or alter the landscape by any means for the intent of constructing a trail or pathway you are in fact committing an illegal act and building an illegal trail. Based on the idea of right to roam, people are allowed to traverse the land freely. If they do that multiple times along the same route and end up wearing a path into the ground that is not illegal, but the result in an unsanctioned trail. So digging in the dirt, moving rocks, scrubbing moss off of slabs, etc, etc, is illegal.
If people want more detail it's here:
The same government that allows complete strip clearing of forests for housing development (think Burke Mountain area) thinking it has no impact at all and worried about a trail that would be reclaimed in two years with no use.....
Posted by: mammal
Nah, you don't need to know "someone". Everyone is free to go for a hike and find them, or go searching mid-ride, that's never changed. There's NOTHING wrong with trying to prevent them from ending up on Trailforks.
seems this is where common sense is missing again.....
I have contended for many years...just wait until there is a fatality on a hidden, illegal (think Darkside) trail.....Just you wait.
There was a near-fatality on Cambodia a few years back. Rider was saved, I believe, because a doctor happened to be nearby (Dr was either a participant or a volunteer at a trail running event which was taking place nearby at the time of the incident).
Cambodia was "hidden" back then and now it's in the process of being brought into the trail network.
So, I'm not sure whether that reflects what you intended to say!
Posted by: SixZeroSixOne
I have contended for many years...just wait until there is a fatality on a hidden, illegal (think Darkside) trail.....Just you wait.
There was a near-fatality on Cambodia a few years back. Rider was saved, I believe, because a doctor happened to be nearby (Dr was either a participant or a volunteer at a trail running event which was taking place nearby at the time of the incident).
Cambodia was "hidden" back then and now it's in the process of being brought into the trail network.
So, I'm not sure whether that reflects what you intended to say!
They didn't die. And with Metro being so litigious I am sure the outcome would be different today. I remember when the rider from the US (Utah) died on Pipeline (in fact, many at my work thought it was me), but as that was a legitimate trail there was nothing the DNV could really do, it was authorized, to say. Frankly, I am surprised the teeter was not removed. But today, with all the rogue building going on a fatality would be the thing land managers would need as an excuse to close such building. And would they find a lot if they looked.
The only reason the Darkside has been around for so long is BC Parks is underfunded and understaffed to deal with it, so it goes on. And don't think Cambodia being made legitimate is without caveats. If Metro's previous work on CBC and Neds is anything to go by Cambodia might not be the same trail as we might remember.
Posted by: SixZeroSixOne
There was a near-fatality on Cambodia a few years back. Rider was saved, I believe, because a doctor happened to be nearby (Dr was either a participant or a volunteer at a trail running event which was taking place nearby at the time of the incident).
Cambodia was also quite literally moments from sanctioning under the NSMBA back when that incident occurred. That process was immediately cancelled, they were planning to close that entire side of the mountain to bikes forever, and it took *many years* and hundreds of volunteer hours to get back to where we are today.
Thanks Cooper, that is great context.
Posted by: cooperquinn
Cambodia was also quite literally moments from sanctioning under the NSMBA back when that incident occurred. That process was immediately cancelled, they were planning to close that entire side of the mountain to bikes forever, and it took *many years* and hundreds of volunteer hours to get back to where we are today.
But with what concessions? The rock rolls are there as an option (since you can't remove them) but the rest of the trail is like the others....smooth, groomed and lacking in jank. Seems a theme (look at Neds for an example). Lowest liability as possible. And it proves my point. Had it been a fatality the closure would have been permanent and swift. Take note people.....those "off limits areas" you ride now would be gone in a heartbeat if there was a serious incident. I get a kick out of the fact when you access the Darkside there is a large sign that says "No mountain biking" and yet people on bikes go past it like it is not there, or vehicles park right in front of it all with bike racks......don't think they don't know.
They know. I talked to the Seymour PFO and he wasn't happy that riders were ignoring the sign at the first switchback (and the one on the side of the road that says "riding on designated trails only"). If it wasn't for lack of resources on their part something would have been done already. I hope they do get the resources.
NSMBA Survey re: light dark side Note the subtleties in the questions
Trail Users are invited to give feedback on recent work done on the east side of the Lower Seymour Conservation Reserve to assist future planning for Metro Vancouver.
Your feedback is appreciated!
NSMBA
https://www.instagram.com/p/CzrV-u-OrJ4/?igshid=MzRlODBiNWFlZA==
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSecdpHfgdFqTf_6fYRv88g0oj9YFmzmT726Kxixko3KjRB_og/viewform
Posted by: switch
They know. I talked to the Seymour PFO and he wasn't happy that riders were ignoring the sign at the first switchback (and the one on the side of the road that says "riding on designated trails only"). If it wasn't for lack of resources on their part something would have been done already. I hope they do get the resources.
How they going to close natural trails? With live trees? Moreover, these trails are meticulously maintained with superior drainage compared to officially sanctioned trails on the west side. It's perplexing; is there a specific aversion to accommodating bikers?
What is BMC connector trail?
Forum jump:
