# Roots anoying or technical?



## Ltrst68 (Apr 27, 2007)

Sorry if this is a stupid question I am just wondering what people think. 

Are roots an annoying trial wideing issue or do you think they make the trail more technical. 

My though's are about 50/50 some roots work and make the trail more technical while some can be down right annoying and some riders avoid them a all cost and widen the trail.


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

it depends. There's really too many variables to make a blanket statement here.

Sometimes I'll leave the roots, sometimes I'll cut 'em out.


----------



## TrailMasonJones (Apr 24, 2011)

My rule of thumb is roots parallel to the trail should be removed roots perpendicular to the trail should be left unless they pose a trip hazard of trail runners & hikers. The exception being on beginner trails where new riders will widen the trail to avoid roots at that point i will start removing or at least thinning them. On advanced trails it is good to provide control points around any area that you believe could become widened and intermediate trails an A line B line arrangement making all users happy is good.

Hope I helped

Jones


----------



## techfersure (Dec 17, 2010)

Lordy,roots should never be removed! it's mtn biking,ride the terrain or go roadie.


----------



## ajdonner (Apr 3, 2007)

Technical, yes.
Annoying, sometimes.
Remove them, why? Roots don't widen trails, people not up to the challenge that roots pose widen trails. Unfortunately we can't remove/restrict the stupid people from the trails.
If I feel like rolling along smoothly I ride my road bike.


----------



## DH.FR.0ne (Jul 17, 2010)

I used to hate roots on the trail and avoid them at all costs. Now I find speed cures anything and, if I hit them fast enough, the rooty sections are actually really fun.
If its a steep, slow, off-camber switchback though, roots can make it practically unrideable.


----------



## zrm (Oct 11, 2006)

All the people who talk so high and mighty about how "it's mountain biking" go around roots and make the trail wider just as much as the people they distain.


----------



## rideit (Jan 22, 2004)

I vote for annoying.









Unless you run right over them at speed.


----------



## slocaus (Jul 21, 2005)

rideit said:


> I vote for annoying.
> Unless you run right over them at speed.


So what is the root connection there?


----------



## cmc4130 (Jan 30, 2008)

Leogang DH Course Walk by fraserbritton - Pinkbike.com


----------



## Flyin_W (Jun 17, 2007)

Roots can make us better riders, especially when wet. [telling myself this now, as a few dark clouds may dampen today's ride.] The parallel one's, and those wheelbase spaced both mess with me baaad.

In the East, trails over 8%, and off-camber turns will erode quickly, and roots will remain a constant issue. Especially when many riders search for a smoother/faster line to create trail widening. Whether a fan or not, believe this is a main reason for IMBA's machine cut trails.


----------



## cmc4130 (Jan 30, 2008)

sometimes instead of cutting roots out.... remember, you get a wheelbarrow and fill it several times and dump dirt back on the trail and pack it down. 

exposed roots is a result of erosion, so you're just putting dirt back where it used to be....

it depends on the climate & soil type, but around here, packed clay on a trail will last a long time. if it took 4 years for roots to get exposed that badly, then it'll take another 4 years for it to erode again....


----------



## rockyuphill (Nov 28, 2004)

What? You mean all trails don't have roots as a basic surface? I need to get out of the temperate rain forest more often.

They are a good skill builder, but if the whole trail were like this it would get tedious.


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

I rode my local trails today. I covered every inch of our network and I can say after that that I only think ONE root needs removing. It's long and straight in a fairly flat, but slow section of trail. It's on the apex of a corner and it crosses the trail at an odd angle. Going one way, you hardly notice it, but going the other way, you see that water is falling over it like a waterbar and undercutting it. It's been getting worse for some time. I've been considering it just another tech feature so far, but I think it's a maintenance headache if we leave it. Cut it out, and it won't take much effort to grade out the trail. Leave it and fill dirt around it (our dirt is mostly sand, especially in this part of the system, and so it won't hold for more than half the season, I'm sure) and you'll be doing that job on a regular basis.

All the other roots in the trail system are fine. And we've got roots that run parallel to the trail, perpendicular to the trail, at odd angles to the trail, off camber roots, roots on switchbacks and all sorts. I think in most cases, the roots keep our trail tread from eroding away.


----------



## Delirious (Jun 12, 2011)

I rode all the trails today up at Bradbury Mtn. in Maine and its a root/rock fest to say the least. To make it worse it had just rained so I took a couple of nice falls due to slick roots. If I had a choice though I would leave most of them as its just boring without anything technical.


----------



## frankenstein406 (May 11, 2007)

Some uphill are a pain otherwise I'm going to fast to notice them.


----------



## Ltrst68 (Apr 27, 2007)

Now that I think of it we have most widening problems due to roots on the easier trails the advanced stuff stays narrow mostly.


----------



## rideit (Jan 22, 2004)

slocaus said:


> So what is the root connection there?


Uhhhh...


----------



## Skookum (Jan 17, 2005)

It depends on what kind of trail you are wanting it to be.

Are you shooting for a cross country slow technical trail? Then perhaps the only time you would probably remove a root would be if they are large and are spaced exactly the size of a wheel base. Or another example is there is a slow tech trail that was rogue that was legitimized. The original builder routed around every single huge old growth stump. Ring around the rosy style. The problem is that all the stumps are solid organic with no mineral, when bikes corner around it the subsequent erosion exposes the roots which are downward sloped. 
So it's an issue that doesn't get better, and in fact only get's worse until it becomes basically impossible to ride even for the most skilled riders.

That would be the scenario where you would look to eliminate roots or get creative to build the tread level up, or add rocks perhaps and make a sustainable trail feature there...

The other end of the spectrum is like the trail build i'm currently on. A slalom pump track flow style trail. We avoid roots, or bury them, but most of the time we simply route around them. Roots have no place in what we're trying to do within this particular trail build, and if you rode it, you'd understand.

Even on a beginner type trail, roots can have their place. But if you're shooting for a beginner trail, then taking out, burying, and or avoiding roots for the most part should not be overly criticized.

And finally Forest Service practice is if a root is causing erosion they will take em out. Which sometimes sucks, if we as mt. bikers are involved in trail maintenance, AND if the particular root was fun to ride because it created a fun drop or technical challenge, you can get in there and armor it up, making it sustainable, and still have fun with it. Avoiding sanitizing which diminishes the challenge and fun in many cases.


----------



## Delirious (Jun 12, 2011)

Skookum said:


> And finally Forest Service practice is if a root is causing erosion they will take em out. Which sometimes sucks, if we as mt. bikers are involved in trail maintenance, AND if the particular root was fun to ride because it created a fun drop or technical challenge, you can get in there and armor it up, making it sustainable, and still have fun with it. Avoiding sanitizing which diminishes the challenge and fun in many cases.


I thought roots prevented soil erosion?


----------



## Skookum (Jan 17, 2005)

Delirious said:


> I thought roots prevented soil erosion?


Depends on how the water and the user are responding to said root...


----------



## techfersure (Dec 17, 2010)

Skookum said:


> Depends on how the water and the user are responding to said root...


Still,you already have made an impact by the trail in it's self and then want to cut the lifelines of a tree,poor stewardship in my opinion, roots are your friend and will make you a better rider for them,smells like IMBA sterilizing mindset,god forbid that riding should challenge you to improve by stepping up your comfort level.


----------



## Skookum (Jan 17, 2005)

techfersure said:


> Still,you already have made an impact by the trail in it's self and then want to cut the lifelines of a tree,poor stewardship in my opinion, roots are your friend and will make you a better rider for them,smells like IMBA sterilizing mindset,god forbid that riding should challenge you to improve by stepping up your comfort level.


Alright i'll spend a bit more time on a retort...

First of all, where i'm from in the Pacific Northwest there is NO shortage of trees or roots on trail. You have NO idea what kind of root systems i've ridden on, probably many that you would get off your bike and walk.

Second of all, i've spent over a thousand hours at 2 mountain bike skills building parks building trails that help progress skills for riders in the last 5 years. I-5 Colonnade and Duthie Hill, Google them up if you haven't heard of them. In fact i created a feature at Colonnade where i laid small logs across the trail to emulate riding over a rooty trail.

i mean i don't think that's ever been done by anybody... Likely won't be done again as it's not everyday someone builds a trail for noobs underneath a freeway where there are no trees.

You really should be reading more than writing in this forum pal.


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

techfersure said:


> Still,you already have made an impact by the trail in it's self and then want to cut the lifelines of a tree,poor stewardship in my opinion, roots are your friend and will make you a better rider for them,smells like IMBA sterilizing mindset,god forbid that riding should challenge you to improve by stepping up your comfort level.


It really depends on the root. You can't make blanket statements like that about trailbuilding because there are going to be cases where your argument doesn't hold.

When it comes to large roots, it's a good idea to avoid cutting them out because it can wind up killing the tree in the future. Not always, but it can. That process will affect the trail. Whether that's a good thing or a bad thing depends on the trail and the soils in the area.

Sometimes, even riding over the roots can damage them enough to be a problem for the tree. It happens. Pine roots with thin bark on them come to mind in my area. There are a few exposed ones on my local trails that are weeping sap because the bark has been damaged.

Lots of variables and you have to look at each situation with a fresh perspective.


----------



## Skookum (Jan 17, 2005)

NateHawk said:


> Lots of variables and you have to look at each situation with a fresh perspective.


Exactly, for instance if you're in California things are way different.

Look at RockyUphill to get the idea for what's pretty close to what we're dealing with near Seattle. If i'm not mistaken those are Sitka Spruce roots, and that's how their roots grow, we have some of those here.

Douglas Fir grows like grass around here primarily because it's been replanted by timber companies like nobodies business. These roots are so huge and deep and stout, you're just not going to phase these type of trees.

Again i'm not advocating hacking out roots, and in some cases when it is for no good reason and sanitizing the fun from the trail i'm not a fan. i thought my post was clear on that.

And finally on the trail build i purposefully stay away from trees wherever necessary so we don't have to deal with roots. In fact where we've had problems is early in the build we ran into so many old growth stumps, and in some cases had to saw the roots of these long dead tree's. Might as well used dynamite for as many saw blades and hours we wrestled with those beasts.


----------



## pixy (Nov 8, 2005)

I'm not an advocate of cutting out roots. I will usually try to add rocks in between, over or add dirt depending on what is at hand. We have many rocks, so we use them. More often than not, the rock feature will be almost as technical as the root. I also will use chokes to keep people on the trails. 

I have ridden fall line trails that are literally held together by roots. Taking the roots out IMO would be worse. I tend to avoid that type of fall line trail building, b/c they erode too much in my area. 

My job as a trail builder is to build trails for for mountain bikers and other users, not me or what I think mountain bikers should ride. Yes, I like technical, but I would rather build new trails then spend all my time repairing eroding fall line trails or trying to narrow wide trails because people go around a root. I have learned to check my ego at the door and find solutions that serve the mountain bike community. More often than not, the sustainable trail can be just as challenging and allow for several levels to enjoy. 

1. an armored spillway built into a large root.
2. armored over some roots


----------



## perttime (Aug 26, 2005)

Ideally, you'd have many trail options so that those who cannot cope with roots or find them irritating can pick the route with few roots.

I have some places where I have that kind of options, so I pick my route according to the mood of the day.


----------



## ub in ne (May 24, 2011)

techfersure said:


> Lordy,roots should never be removed! it's mtn biking,ride the terrain or go roadie.


:thumbsup:


----------



## zrm (Oct 11, 2006)

pixy said:


> I'm not an advocate of cutting out roots. I will usually try to add rocks in between, over or add dirt depending on what is at hand. We have many rocks, so we use them. More often than not, the rock feature will be almost as technical as the root. I also will use chokes to keep people on the trails.
> 
> I have ridden fall line trails that are literally held together by roots. Taking the roots out IMO would be worse. I tend to avoid that type of fall line trail building, b/c they erode too much in my area.
> 
> ...


Nice but very time consuming. Not a big deal if you're talking about a few short runs but quite the project if you're talking about miles of trail.


----------



## zrm (Oct 11, 2006)

Delirious said:


> I thought roots prevented soil erosion?


Depends. Lot's of variables.


----------



## sambs827 (Dec 8, 2008)

Here in Central NY my college mountain biking club has gotten into building in the past 3 years. Our general sense is to avoid roots when possible, but if we do hit them, then cut out the small ones (2 inches or less) and build up and over the big ones. This is only because this place has plenty of rocky, rooty trail already and our goal is to complement that with sections of wide-open rippers. We do have a few choke points where the trail is slow in either direction, and here we might leave roots and make it technical.

Overall though, I think Skookum hit the point on the nose.


----------



## SacredYeti (Aug 24, 2011)

I vote keep the roots, rocks and shale have been more of a PITA than any tree root.


----------



## smokinoak (Aug 17, 2010)

Here is a nice little uphill section on our trail


----------



## SacredYeti (Aug 24, 2011)

smokinoak said:


> Here is a nice little uphill section on our trail


Owning a downhill bike I HATE going uphill, but that looks fun


----------



## joshman108 (Jul 6, 2009)

ive never met a root that I didnt like or wished wasnt there.


----------



## David C (May 25, 2011)

Going down, roots are fun to an extend.

Going up, roots are annoying like horse **** on a singletrack.

But the real thing is sticks. Dangerous and annoying both uphill and downhill. Because your bike won't grip on it, it will just get you unstable.

David


----------



## BuiltforSin (Sep 10, 2011)

I love how technical roots can be when they are in a certain section of the trail, but when the whole trail is roots I find it can be aggravating at times. Especially when climbing!


----------



## Ilikemtb999 (Oct 8, 2010)

Roots don't bother me. They provide a level of sketchiness I enjoy. 

Here in northern Illinois there are plenty of flat trails. People like putting log overs on the trail (stack of 1-5). Those I hate more then anything in the world.


----------



## raganwald (Mar 1, 2011)

I don’t think it has anything to do with whether they are annoying. A tree is a living creature in the woods. So are weeds. There are going to be exceptions, so no blanket statement applies to everything, but I would hope that cutting the roots of trees would be a very last resort, not the go-to technique, in most cases for most places.

In my neck of the woods (Ontario), if someone proudly showed me all the work he’d done to cut the roots of trees, I would go ride somewhere else. It completely defeats my personal purpose to ride in a place where trees have been chopped to make the ride more copacetic. It isn’t a macho issue, I just would be bothered knowing that the smooth bit of trail I was on was created by hacking roots away.

I ride in the woods to enjoy the trees. It would be ironic if chopping their live roots was what made that possible. My 2c, I can’t speak for your feelings or your forests.

We have some other issues that are a tad OT for this, but peripherally related. We have some trails that are unstewarded. There is no official body governing them. There seems to be one individual who regularly shows up with his bike and a hatchet and he chops anything that protrudes above the dirt on the trails. There was one uphill test piece that was considered a rite of passage to learn to clean, and this Summer he chopped all those roots. Now everyone can climb that hill easily.

From a macho perspective, the trail is worse. From an accessibility perspective, the trail is more democratic. Personally, I think the trail was more interesting to have that challenge right there, but some people don’t want “interesting,” they want to ride and have a good time with their buddies. If those were rocks he removed and not living roots, what could I say except that we have different tastes?

Given that they were living roots and that in most cases roots do prevent erosion and that those roots were on hill... I’m against his chopping them. But that’s an opinion, not the Word of God. He obviously feels differently.


----------



## radiocraig (May 28, 2010)

Ilikebmx999 said:


> Roots don't bother me. They provide a level of sketchiness I enjoy.


I like the challange as well...leave em...and the rocks too!


----------



## Ilikemtb999 (Oct 8, 2010)

radiocraig said:


> I like the challange as well...leave em...and the rocks too!


Those are good too!

Let's flip this thread around.

My favorite roots are the ones that make natural step ups on climbs. Nothing more challenging then having to lift the front wheel or hop WHILE in the middle of a climb.


----------



## hado_pv (May 26, 2006)

The only time we mitigate roots is when we're on steep side slopes and need a substantial bench. Then the roots have to be either cut or filled around, otherwise, let em be and learn to ride em. Hacking flat roots, even on a relatively steep pitch, is something I hate to see.


----------



## Kevin Woodhouse (Oct 4, 2011)

*Leave the roots!*

I think roots should be left in place; build up around them if necessary. I am continuously challenged by roots that are angled across my local trails in San Francisco, wet with fog-drip, that have rocketed my tires sideways and my face buried into eucalyptus leaf covered hillside before I even knew what happened! It's fun!


----------



## playdead (Apr 17, 2009)

*"roots run deep"*

It's funny. I used to live and ride in New England where roots were EVERYWHERE. I would always get annoyed, but when I moved out here to Washington where there's less roots I realized how much I missed riding on slow technical trails with tons of roots. One of my favorite trails out here in Bellingham is full of roots.

Is it good to keep them or get rid of them? There is a time in place for when roots should be covered or removed. They can sometimes cause river canyons in steep sloped areas that get lots of use, but they really hold the soil together in most instances. Not to mention they also keep the tree healthy and prevent it from falling over. I usually try to keep most of the roots I encounter, but I like to built technical trails.

Also, like others above have said. There are different types of trails that have different purposes. I was trail building yesterday on a trail that was purposely built to be technical. One of the guys was all about removing all the gnarly roots. I was like "DUDE!?!?!" :eekster:

Anyways... gotta love them 'roots'


----------



## miatagal96 (Jul 5, 2005)

My favorite roots are on "Pasture Point" in Kingdom. I used to hate them (especially when they were wet), but they really helped me increase my skills. Now I enjoy the challenge of trying to ride the trail cleanly when its wet. The trail is avoidable so those who don't like roots don't have to do it. 

My least favorite root was the off-camber root on West Branch as you climbed out of Sidewinder (at Kingdom). I think it may be gone now.

If erosion causes the root problem, removing the roots would make the erosion problem worse.


----------



## Skookum (Jan 17, 2005)

miatagal96 said:


> If erosion causes the root problem, removing the roots would make the erosion problem worse.


Yes and no. If you remove the root(s) and don't re-work the tread to where it will not erode, then it will make the problem worse.

Every situation is different, but usually what happens on trails cut over a rooted area, you have a nice layer of organic over the top. If you're building a trail that will have any type of use that mt. bikers are going to use, then you'll understand that the use will compact the soil. Eventually the use will expose the roots, and they will get pitted and more pronounced with use and water erosion.

What this means is that more often than not you're getting a final product that may or may not have been the original intent.

Cutting out roots is a hell of a lot of work in some situations. Most often times you're going to see people back-filling the pockets with gravel or rock. And you still see complaints about how people are sanitizing the trail.

Having being able to ride over many root systems even in the slick rain of the pnw i can understand the concern by folks who want to keep technical aspects of the trail relevant. But in many cases if you get situations where erosion progressively makes trails harder and harder, on trails where you're trying to attract new riders you can lose many to frustration, because people want different things out of riding. Just is.

i think a solution is trail inventories, and trail designation. If you are lucky to have a network of trails, i would say try to best preserve the characteristics of trails and balance that out with other concerns. For instance you have 3 trails, have it be know the third trail is off-limits to sanitizing, and put a volunteer who has a good handle on how to work erosion areas and still keep technical character. i know it can be done because i've done it, but i also know it takes more work, and know-how.


----------



## matbar20 (Jan 30, 2012)

If you are building a new mountain bike trail in your area, i would start by asking yourself this: Are there already technical bike trails that are all covered in roots? If the answer to this is yes, if you want your trail to stand a part and be a unique addition to your local riding scene, than I think that you shoud get rid of as many of them as you can. Conversely, if every other trail is as buff as a biabies forehead, than it might be cool to leave the roots and create something that can challenge people. 
Maybe this can help answer your question:
10 Ways to Make Your Mountain Bike Trail Awesome!


----------



## cmc4130 (Jan 30, 2008)

matbar20 said:


> If you are building a new mountain bike trail in your area, i would start by asking yourself this: Are there already technical bike trails that are all covered in roots? If the answer to this is yes, if you want your trail to stand a part and be a unique addition to your local riding scene, than I think that you shoud get rid of as many of them as you can. Conversely, if every other trail is as buff as a biabies forehead, than it might be cool to leave the roots and create something that can challenge people.
> Maybe this can help answer your question:
> 10 Ways to Make Your Mountain Bike Trail Awesome!


What about covering roots back over with the soil/clay that was eroded and exposed them.
As a dirt jump digger I'm surprised how many xc rider-trailworkers seem unfamiliar with moving dirt with a wheelbarrow!! You might say it'll erode again, but at least around here, packed dirt lasts several years in that shape. It usually took 10+ years to get to the eroded state it's in....


----------



## 475856 (Feb 6, 2010)

cmc4130 said:


> What about covering roots back over with the soil/clay that was eroded and exposed them.
> As a dirt jump digger I'm surprised how many xc rider-trailworkers seem unfamiliar with moving dirt with a wheelbarrow!! You might say it'll erode again, but at least around here, packed dirt lasts several years in that shape. It usually took 10+ years to get to the eroded state it's in....


I agree! 
Roots are a double edged sword as on the one hand they can be a PITA to ride over, but OTOH they are the tree's life blood and without trees there is no shade! Not to mention wildlife.... 
When/where it makes sense, I am in favor of filling the roots on the trail back in with the same type of soil where possible or build features around/over them. I Markham Park, there are a few low lying area's where this has been done with great success, as the features added are long narrow bridges going over swampy root infested areas. Not only are the roots out of the way, but skills features were added at the same time....win win IMHO..


----------



## Skookum (Jan 17, 2005)

cmc4130 said:


> What about covering roots back over with the soil/clay that was eroded and exposed them.
> As a dirt jump digger I'm surprised how many xc rider-trailworkers seem unfamiliar with moving dirt with a wheelbarrow!! You might say it'll erode again, but at least around here, packed dirt lasts several years in that shape. It usually took 10+ years to get to the eroded state it's in....


If you're doing something that justifies bringing a wheelbarrow in. Many times on Forest Service work parties, you are hiking miles and miles to the work area. So many times it's not practical.

DJ's are in one area, so all the work is confined to a small space.

i've been a part of a quite a few XC work parties that involved wheelbarrows, even wheelbarrows with brakes, and i've seen vast amounts of dirt harvested on a cable/bucket system where even though the work area was in a small section of trail, it was a switchback traverse on steep hillside. Using wheelbarrows for dirt that day would have slowed things down.



OscarW said:


> they are the tree's life blood and without trees there is no shade! Not to mention wildlife....
> When/where it makes sense, I am in favor of filling the roots on the trail back in with the same type of soil where possible or build features around/over them.


A trail in it's most raw basic form is simply dirt compacted. Whatever use it get's the path of the trail that goes over a root system, a tree will typically not draw water from that compacted area.

Most all of the time a tree is not going to be so ill-effected as to die from this, then it would be common for all trees standing trail side to keel over. It's an impact, but it's an impact that's not going to kill most trees. So replacing dirt then compacting again as the trail get's use will not really help the roots there, as there needs to be a certain amount of air along with the water for a root to be healthy. You pound out the fluff in the dirt, so the root can't breathe. So in the case where you route the trail all the way around a tree, then you're probably slowly killing it.


----------



## mtbikernc69 (Mar 23, 2004)

Skookum said:


> If you're doing something that justifies bringing a wheelbarrow in. Many times on Forest Service work parties, you are hiking miles and miles to the work area. So many times it's not practical.
> 
> DJ's are in one area, so all the work is confined to a small space.
> 
> ...


Thank you. I've been reading this whole thread thinking in my mind "packing dirt on the roots is just going to kill the root anyway".

One more thing to interject...you would have to cut a lot of roots from most mature (60years +) trees to do any considerable damage to the health of the tree. As leaves, branches and roots are lost, the tree will balance itself out with new growth in new leaves, new branches and new roots.

I've pruned my own trees, shrubs and plants for over 20 years. Top pruning and root pruning. Both can be advantageous to the health of the tree as pruning helps promote new growth. Go in the woods and cut a branch off a tree and prove me wrong. Everyone here could benefit from a little conversation with a good arborist. I happen to have several that are customers.

I don't advocate blindly cutting out roots if you don't like them. But when they cause excessive trail widening, braiding or erosion sometimes they need to be removed. If a root sits above the ground and get's ridden over long enough, it will eventually die. And piling dirt over the root isn't any better. The root will die anyway and you've caused artificial erosion by removing the dirt from another source.


----------



## craftbrewed (Sep 26, 2008)

Covering a root with soil will not kill a tree but covering the root flair will. On the other compaction of the root zone can kill but in terms of trail tread we are only talking a small area of the root zone. My thought is the soil will actually protect the cambium layer of the root. Also of you are using roots as erosion control you're doing it wrong, get the water off the trail.


----------



## 475856 (Feb 6, 2010)

The trails usually only cover a very small percentage of the root system of any give tree and recovering with dirt should pose no problems AFAIK... The flare is more important for the trees and bikes should be kept from riding on them...A few interesting articles...

Root Flare Management - Natural Organic Home Garden Health Howard Garrett Dirt Doctor

Root Collar Inspections

Windsor Park - Discussion


----------



## cmc4130 (Jan 30, 2008)

what is y'all's opinion of the rocks in this trail ?

(A) technical and fun? 
(B) evidence of erosion/trail damage? 
(C) pointlessly bumpy & flow-killing . . . .?


----------



## Dave_schuldt (May 10, 2004)

If it hasn't been said already roots on a downhill slope will cause serious damage. People ride over them with the rear brake on thus the rear wheel skids when it hits the trail below the root.


----------



## SJKevin (Nov 30, 2011)

Depends on the root...In my local park there are roots that making climbing/descending more technical and interesting. Then, there is the root that caught my pedal like a piece of rope and send me over my handlebars as I dropped into a naturally occurring half pipe. I might go back and clip that one.


----------



## NEPMTBA (Apr 7, 2007)

If the roots have dirt under them, they are good stuff...

...if they become elevated as to catch a pedals, then they are removed...

...if the trail have multiple roots in an area, another thing is I will place flat field stones between them making a wear proof area and held in by the roots, but yes you have to have field stones in your area for this trick.


----------



## cmc4130 (Jan 30, 2008)

NEPMTBA said:


> If the roots have dirt under them, they are good stuff...
> 
> ...if they become elevated as to catch a pedals, then they are removed...
> 
> ...if the trail have multiple roots in an area, another thing is I will place flat field stones between them making a wear proof area and held in by the roots, but yes you have to have field stones in your area for this trick.


"if they become elevated" is another way of saying that a lot of soil has been eroded from underneath them. Once again, why isn't replacing and packing soil the preferred solution ? 
The trail will continue to get lower and lower until it is a perfect mini-creek style water conduit.


----------



## henry9419 (Nov 18, 2010)

Depends in the root imo larger ones that stick up to far and catch the wheel are annoying, the groups of small ones are fine as you can ride over them and they make a nice technical feature


----------



## Ridnparadise (Dec 14, 2007)

cmc4130 said:


> what is y'all's opinion of the rocks in this trail ?
> 
> (A) technical and fun?
> (B) evidence of erosion/trail damage?
> (C) pointlessly bumpy & flow-killing . . . .?


Not that they are roots, but, the current trail on lookers right seems pretty hardened and sound with minimal small protruding rocks. Those that are there could be hammered in if they are a problem to the line. Removing them will cause local erosion and probably expose new stone, eventually leaving things the same, except with the potential to change riding lines and maybe further widen the trail in time - ie not good. The big rocks are a feature to the eye and could either help or hurt the trail by catching and slowing water flow coming off the slope to the left in the best case scenario, or funneling and increasing water damage in the worst. At least they will stabilize the upper trail tread and show you where to put in drainage as needed. Isn't pointlessly bumpy what riding trail is all about? I mean there's always road riding, although in most places I've lived you could say the same thing because of the road quality.


----------



## hado_pv (May 26, 2006)

cmc4130 said:


> what is y'all's opinion of the rocks in this trail ?
> 
> (A) technical and fun?
> (B) evidence of erosion/trail damage?
> (C) pointlessly bumpy & flow-killing . . . .?


Close the braid on the right of the photo. Riders need to harden up and ride the rocks!


----------



## Cormac (Aug 6, 2011)

on climbs roots are technical. On descents, they ruin the fun and speed. For me at least. I prefer fast and smooth for descents. Unless the roots create a drop, then thats cool, but the little ones that shave your speed are a problem.


----------



## crank1979 (Feb 3, 2006)

Cormac said:


> on climbs roots are technical. On descents, they ruin the fun and speed. For me at least. I prefer fast and smooth for descents. Unless the roots create a drop, then thats cool, but the little ones that shave your speed are a problem.


Do you have pics of these roots that cause issues when descending? Do you mean those running across the trail or parallel to it?


----------



## Cormac (Aug 6, 2011)

[email protected] said:


> Do you have pics of these roots that cause issues when descending? Do you mean those running across the trail or parallel to it?


parallel and in the middle. Running across I'd rather not have, but I can deal. When they are parallel it takes a lot to avoid washing out on those. I'm sure erosion is to blame. I'll take some pics next time I'm out.


----------



## cheezy (Mar 27, 2012)

hado_pv said:


> Close the braid on the right of the photo. Riders need to harden up and ride the rocks!


I see a nice and faster line by bunny hopping to the left of that first big rock and landing parallel to that big stick branch.

Oh, and I don't understand the point of cutting roots on a public trail. So what if your pedal got stuck on it and broke. So what if you ate it over the handlebars. So what if its slick and you wash out. Bring a shovel and pack some dirt over it, ride around it, hop over it, get off your bike, or ride a different trail! Public trails are for everyone, not just you.


----------



## pascale27 (Aug 26, 2011)

recently added a new trail to my local trail system, it's a heavily rooted area with alot of vines. We left a good amount on the root/vines to add some challenge and direct flow. If you take them all out you might as well ride the bike path. The trail is called Vine St. Here's a pic during consturction


----------



## Ridnparadise (Dec 14, 2007)

Cormac said:


> parallel and in the middle. Running across I'd rather not have, but I can deal. When they are parallel it takes a lot to avoid washing out on those. I'm sure erosion is to blame. I'll take some pics next time I'm out.


Do you mean this sort of roots? Multiple stutters going up or down.


----------



## Cormac (Aug 6, 2011)

Ridnparadise said:


> Do you mean this sort of roots? Multiple stutters going up or down.


No those are fine. Sometimes my wheel will slip on climbs that look like that, but it's ok, part of the challenge. I was referring to roots that run parallel with the direction of travel. I took a pic today, but it didn't save to my phone. Will try again in a couple days. Parallel roots are an unnecessary nuisance imo.


----------



## Chopliker (Jan 14, 2012)

I love the ones that stick up out of the ground into a sharp point, gives me more incentive not to fall off!!


----------



## redd4573 (Apr 15, 2012)

A I like this section of trail with the rocks it has something to offer ALL skill sets. Not just the hamerheads:skep:. Plus it encourages skill building at a personal level and time


----------



## AdrienneA (Nov 18, 2006)

*The symptom...*



Ridnparadise said:


> Do you mean this sort of roots? Multiple stutters going up or down.


(sorry, can't repost the image, I'm a noob)

This is a classic example of roots as a symptom of erosion. I sure looks to me like this trail has water running down it, which means that it need to be rerouted or rebuilt.

In my experience roots appear from two main causes: 1) direct erosion from tires, feet & hooves flicking dirt (dry) and mud (wet) directly off the trail tread and 2) erosion caused by water running down the trail (fall line, inadequate grade reversals, etc.)

Even the most buff trails will get cause #1 over time. Cause #2 means the trail was poorly sited and/or built and needs serious work.

Here's my thought on roots: if the trail was built and intended to be a beginner trail, and it's gotten rooty over time, it won't be any fun for beginners. So re-covering the roots, and maybe cutting out the smaller ones, will return the trail to its intended use. If the trail is supposed to be intermediate to expert, more roots makes for a more challenging trail, so Go Nature! EXCEPT if the roots are a symptom of severe erosion. If your trail is a stream when it rains something's wrong.


----------



## AdrienneA (Nov 18, 2006)

@pixy beautiful rockwork!


----------



## AdrienneA (Nov 18, 2006)

@rockyuphill that's a textbook example of a poorly sited trail. Looks like it was built in the flats, no drainage.... it will never be anything but a mud hole unless a lot of fill is brought in and the trail built up.

And yeah, trails like that are tedious.


----------



## Ridnparadise (Dec 14, 2007)

_
Quote:

Originally Posted by Ridnparadise

Do you mean this sort of roots? Multiple stutters going up or down.

(sorry, can't repost the image, I'm a noob)

This is a classic example of roots as a symptom of erosion. I sure looks to me like this trail has water running down it, which means that it need to be rerouted or rebuilt. _

I totally agree


----------



## design-engine (Aug 12, 2012)

I grew up in GA with roots and terraces biking. With all the folks building wood ramps and such... wheres my root obstacle course? Those were more popular back in the 1990's


----------



## t135 (Jul 11, 2011)

I don't like roots except occasionally. Pain in the ass.


----------



## design-engine (Aug 12, 2012)

I treat the roots as an obstetrical to peddle over. They are markers. While other people cost over them.... Ill peddle hard and pass. It's why you have suspension in the first place. Mind game.


----------



## David C (May 25, 2011)

design-engine said:


> I treat the roots as an obstetrical to peddle over. They are markers. While other people cost over them.... Ill peddle hard and pass. It's why you have suspension in the first place. Mind game.


Hehe, GT i-drive will get you rocket up the hill


----------



## Ridnparadise (Dec 14, 2007)

If you pedal hard and bypass obstetricals, does that make you a pedalitrician?


----------



## Hutch3637 (Jul 1, 2011)

Roots are technical IMO. It's riding a controlled crash. Picture of local trail at the beginning of the root section.


----------



## playdead (Apr 17, 2009)

I don't know about you, but this famous shot by Sterling Lorence makes me want to ride some wet ones:thumbsup:


----------



## RTM (Sep 17, 2005)

We've got a lot of roots in the northeast. I have lost as many battles as I've won but almost never have I thought the answer was removing the root. Its got as much right to be there as i do. one thing I've learned in many many years of riding is every time I think there's no way to clean a section, wait long enough and you'll see someone do it.

And to answer the question, roots are technical and fun, for sure.

- Rob


----------



## dgw2jr (Aug 17, 2011)

On a 29er, roots cease to exist. The lowlands of Levis-Trow are nothing but sand and roots. Love it!


----------



## FlyBye (May 26, 2012)

Ltrst68 said:


> ...Are roots an annoying trial wideing issue or do you think they make the trail more technical...


It's kinda like asking...
Do you welcome water? _(A sip of cool water is often refreshing Verses "Da levee just broke!")_
or
Do you fear fire? _("Da house is on fire" Verses "It's hard to melt the marshmallows for the s'mores without da fire!"_

It's all relative without a few more specifics&#8230;

Because I ride a rigid frame/fork, I tend to prefer mostly rootless trails although several nice jumbo roots are nice to "bunny hop" or "wheelie" over occasionally.


----------

