# Traildoc - Unapproved or illegal trail construction?



## Cycle64 (Nov 10, 2004)

This is a serious question, if the Forest Service deems a trail you or others created to be illegal and closes it down for use. Working with the Forest Service, what obligation do you feel you or others have to return the soil back to it's original condition? If you or others feel no obligation to repair the land, would you or others think jail time and or fines are appropriate punishment for defacing the land?


----------



## Noelg (Jan 21, 2004)

Do NOT feed the monkey...


----------



## Eazy_E (Sep 30, 2011)

Tagged.


----------



## Cycle64 (Nov 10, 2004)

Noelg said:


> Do NOT feed the monkey...


Noel, this is not a troll post. I am interested in a response. We all like new trails and such, I have no issue with that! I am just thinking someone cuts a illegal trial and it gets closed off. Yet it is still been cut into the soil. Sure over time vegetation with return as mother nature tends to the earth. Anyone know what the Forest Service stance is on this? Is it simply block off the trail and let it return to it natural glory. They hold people liable for setting forest fires even if it was not intentional.


----------



## Eazy_E (Sep 30, 2011)

If it's done right, is singletrack much different than a game trail in terms of environmental impact? Of course, assuming the singletrack was done correctly is a big stretch most of the time.


----------



## rockman (Jun 18, 2004)

You could argue that you create more resource damage by trying to naturalize a trail. But all trails are in a sense resource damage. Let's face it, we're not very good stewards of the land.


----------



## Cycle64 (Nov 10, 2004)

Eazy_E said:


> If it's done right, is singletrack much different than a game trail in terms of environmental impact? Of course, assuming the singletrack was done correctly is a big stretch most of the time.


I see a difference in the two types of trails you speak of.


----------



## traildoc (Mar 5, 2007)

64:

Interesting thread, it will be interesting where it goes. Have you ever heard of the following trails: Hazard County, Green Dot, Blue Dot, UPS, MPS, LPS, Hog Heaven, Hog Wash, High on the Hog, Slim Shady, Made in the Shade, Lizardhead, Tunnel of Love, Braille, Lama, etc.?


----------



## Cycle64 (Nov 10, 2004)

traildoc said:


> 64:
> 
> Interesting thread, it will be interesting where it goes. Have you ever heard of the following trails: Hazard County, Green Dot, Blue Dot, UPS, MPS, LPS, Hog Heaven, Hog Wash, High on the Hog, Slim Shady, Made in the Shade, Lizardhead, Tunnel of Love, Braille, Lama, etc.?


Off topic, could you please respond to the topic!


----------



## traildoc (Mar 5, 2007)

Cycle64 said:


> Off topic, could you please respond to the topic!


I did you just don't get it yet, but others do who enjoy those trails know what I am getting at. Moab, Bend and Jackson Hole went through this painful process and now its Sedona's turn.:thumbsup:


----------



## Cycle64 (Nov 10, 2004)

traildoc said:


> I did you just don't get it yet, but others do who enjoy those trails now


Obviously you have no comprehension skills or simply are trying to redirect because you have no logical response to the original question.


----------



## Casual Observer (Jan 12, 2004)

Cycle64 said:


> Obviously you have no comprehension skills or simply are trying to redirect because you have no logical response to the original question.


I made an amazing Chickpea curry last night. Shall I share it?

(TD is a bot.)


----------



## Cycle64 (Nov 10, 2004)

Casual Observer said:


> I made an amazing Chickpea curry last night. Shall I share it?
> 
> (TD is a bot.)


Share it.


----------



## Bill in Houston (Nov 26, 2011)

ibtb



Eazy_E said:


> If it's done right, is singletrack much different than a game trail in terms of environmental impact? Of course, assuming the game trail was done correctly is a big stretch most of the time.


fify


----------



## bikeabuser (Aug 12, 2012)

> The U.S. Forest Service is cracking down after bikers secretly cut up to 30 miles of trails in the Tahoe backcountry over the last decade.





> *Agency officials blame bikers*





> "It's a national problem," said Garrett Villanueva, engineer for the agency's trails program at Lake Tahoe. "Some places the problem is more pronounced than others."





> In North Carolina, four men were arrested in 2003 on suspicion of building an illegal bike trail in the Pisgah National Forest. They agreed to pay a fine, to accept an indefinite ban from the national forest and to take part in supervised trail work to avoid prosecution.





> Near San Francisco, three men were ordered to pay $34,360 in restitution and perform at least 200 hours of service after they pleaded guilty to destroying federal property to build an illegal bike trail in the Golden Gate National Recreation Area in 2001.
> 
> One of the men was arrested again in 2008 on suspicion of building an illegal bike trail in China Camp State Park in San Rafael, Calif.





> In Colorado, the Forest Service recently closed a network of bike trails around the Telluride Ski Resort. Officials hope to see fewer illegal trails now that a private bike park is under construction there, said Judy Schutza, a district ranger in the Grand Mesa-Uncompahgre-Gunnison National Forest.
> 
> At Tahoe, the Forest Service has cited six offenders this year and urged bikers to cooperate in building sanctioned trails. Offenders risk fines up to $5,000, six months in jail and restoration costs.


What more do you need to know :madmax:

Illegal trail builders have/are putting a target on every MTB'rs back.

The damage is done ... We now await the aftermath of such activities.


----------



## Cycle64 (Nov 10, 2004)

bikeabuser said:


> What more do you need to know :madmax:
> 
> Illegal trail builders have/are putting a target on every MTB'rs back.
> 
> The damage is done ... We now await the aftermath of such activities.


I was just wondering if anyone attempts to repair the land and if any builder is liable for the cost? Might not be worth the effort to repair it I just don't; know. I made a call to the Red Rock Forest Supervisor's Office and the person provided me with a number to call in Flagstaff.


----------



## Eazy_E (Sep 30, 2011)

Cycle64 said:


> I was just wondering if anyone attempts to repair the land and if any builder is liable for the cost? Might not be worth the effort to repair it I just don't; know. I made a call to the Red Rock Forest Supervisor's Office and the person provided me with a number to call in Flagstaff.


Droppin' the dime on somebody?


----------



## Cycle64 (Nov 10, 2004)

Eazy_E said:


> Droppin' the dime on somebody?


Not at all. I am just curious on what the procedure is besides placing a few rocks at the end of a closed illegally built trail. I would never rat someone out. I am also curious if someone or group is liable for the illegal trail if they have been found to have constructed it. I know there have been some fines and land use bans. Some illegal trails have been adopted for public us! So if you're fineing and banning builders at what stage are you a person of interest or a person that has built a trail that might be adopted.

My questions are not so much related to what TD has done or not done. Should not have placed his name in the title of this thread.


----------



## bikeabuser (Aug 12, 2012)

Cycle64 said:


> Not at all. I am just curious on what the procedure is besides placing a few rocks at the end of a closed illegally built trail. I would never rat someone out. *I am also curious if someone or group is liable for the illegal trail if they have been found to have constructed it.* I know there have been some fines and land use bans. Some illegal trails have been adopted for public us! So if you're fineing and banning builders at what stage are you a person of interest or a person that has built a trail that might be adopted.
> 
> My questions are not so much related to what TD has done or not done. Should not have placed his name in the title of this thread.


Everything I've read says ... Yes they will be held liable.

Ya gotta remember, the people who do this are typically in violation of Federal Laws, and if a problem becomes big enough, they (Judge/Prosecutor) won't be messing around.


----------



## tysonnemb (Jan 23, 2010)

I can't believe I am actually responding to this...

Anyways, I'm just a bit curious about something. I am not questioning whether or not the user built trails are good. I'm sure they are great. I just wonder why one would play the victim if they built something on someone else's land for people to use, and get upset when they risk losing the ability to use said trails. I don't have the right to redecorate my neighbors yard so the rest of the community will enjoy driving by it more. I understand that they just got free labor for something professionally built, but that's not the point. It wasn't your land to mess with. I may not always agree with the politics of it all, but that is the system in place, and we all gotta live with that. The passion to build trails will always be appreciated (or at least it should be) but you can't get upset for trying to improve something that wasn't yours to improve, even if you know it's for the best interest of a good sized group.


----------



## Casual Observer (Jan 12, 2004)

tysonnemb said:


> I can't believe I am actually responding to this...
> 
> Anyways, I'm just a bit curious about something. I am not questioning whether or not the user built trails are good. I'm sure they are great. I just wonder why one would play the victim if they built something on someone else's land for people to use, and get upset when they risk losing the ability to use said trails. I don't have the right to redecorate my neighbors yard so the rest of the community will enjoy driving by it more. I understand that they just got free labor for something professionally built, but that's not the point. It wasn't your land to mess with. I may not always agree with the politics of it all, but that is the system in place, and we all gotta live with that. The passion to build trails will always be appreciated (or at least it should be) but you can't get upset for trying to improve something that wasn't yours to improve, even if you know it's for the best interest of a good sized group.


But do 95% of those who drive through your neighborhood find your neighbor's yard to be an eyesore? If so, you should find some spare time to redecorate it. But be sure to do it on the hush-hush, at least until the project is complete. And then post up here about what a great job you did, and ask why none of us helped you break the law.


----------



## tysonnemb (Jan 23, 2010)

Casual Observer said:


> But do 95% of those who drive through your neighborhood find your neighbor's yard to be an eyesore? If so, you should find some spare time to redecorate it. But be sure to do it on the hush-hush, at least until the project is complete. And then post up here about what a great job you did, and ask why none of us helped you break the law.


Unfortunately for me, my yard is the 'better by comparison' yard. I make the neighbors yards look great! I kinda wish that I had a rouge landscaper in my neck of the woods.


----------



## Cycle64 (Nov 10, 2004)

Casual Observer said:


> But do 95% of those who drive through your neighborhood find your neighbor's yard to be an eyesore? If so, you should find some spare time to redecorate it. But be sure to do it on the hush-hush, at least until the project is complete. And then post up here about what a great job you did, and ask why none of us helped you break the law.


In doing said repair, my mower tossed a rock into the 8x8 front window. I now damage my neighbor's home, do I run and hide and not take responsibility for the damage? Even though I thought I was doing all my neighbors a favor in cleaning up the eyesore?


----------



## Casual Observer (Jan 12, 2004)

Cycle64 said:


> In doing said repair, my mower tossed a rock into the 8x8 front window. I now damage my neighbor's home, do I run and hide and not take responsibility for the damage? Even though I thought I was doing all my neighbors a favor in cleaning up the eyesore?


Was neighbor's boyfriend, let's call him X, also redecorating other neighbors' front yards? If so, then I would post up on www.landscapereview.com that I feel I was doing nothing wrong because others, including the boyfriend of the person whose front yard I redecorated, was doing the same thing. And therefore, two wrongs make a right. In addition, it's really bad design to place a 8X8 window in the path of a rock that could easily be tossed from a mower. One has to assume that if one has grass in the front yard, said grass would at some point need to be mowed. And there is a chance--due to high winds perhaps?--that a rock would fall into the lawn. And therefore, it's not the person's fault that the neighbor did not follow logical building standards.


----------



## Cycle64 (Nov 10, 2004)

Casual Observer said:


> Was neighbor's boyfriend, let's call him X, also redecorating other neighbors' front yards? If so, then I would post up on www.landscapereview.com that I feel I was doing nothing wrong because others, including the boyfriend of the person whose front yard I redecorated, was doing the same thing. And therefore, two wrongs make a right. In addition, it's really bad design to place a 8X8 window in the path of a rock that could easily be tossed from a mower. One has to assume that if one has grass in the front yard, said grass would at some point need to be mowed. And there is a chance--due to high winds perhaps?--that a rock would fall into the lawn. And therefore, it's not the person's fault that the neighbor did not follow logical building standards.


I agree, but was cooking Curry while designing the layout.


----------



## justinwp (Nov 12, 2010)

Cycle64 said:


> Not at all. I am just curious on what the procedure is besides placing a few rocks at the end of a closed illegally built trail. I would never rat someone out. I am also curious if someone or group is liable for the illegal trail if they have been found to have constructed it. I know there have been some fines and land use bans. Some illegal trails have been adopted for public us! So if you're fineing and banning builders at what stage are you a person of interest or a person that has built a trail that might be adopted.
> 
> My questions are not so much related to what TD has done or not done. Should not have placed his name in the title of this thread.


The federal govt can seek restitution in addition to citations. For example, I have documented the cost and labor of restoration for certain illegally constructed trails. That doesn't mean the govt will pursue it....

Arid lands restoration has come a long ways in the last 20 years. Of course it depends on the available resources when determining the level of restoration and the effectiveness of the different techniques for each situation.


----------



## woahey (Sep 1, 2010)

bikeabuser said:


> Everything I've read says ... Yes they will be held liable.
> 
> Ya gotta remember, the people who do this are typically in violation of Federal Laws, and if a problem becomes big enough, they (Judge/Prosecutor) won't be messing around.


The person has to be caught in the act. Otherwise, it's just a bunch of here say. You can't get a speeding ticket just because you were driving a sports car.


----------



## m77ranger (Jan 12, 2009)

woahey said:


> The person has to be caught in the act. Otherwise, it's just a bunch of here say. You can't get a speeding ticket just because you were driving a sports car.


If they know a trail is being built they will set up motion activated wildlife cameras at the build site.


----------



## Eazy_E (Sep 30, 2011)

I often wonder how much stuff goes on that nobody has any idea about because the guys who do it, keep it to themselves. If you just robbed a bank, it's pretty smart to NOT walk in and buy a $100,000 sports car a day later, know what I mean? 

If you just cut an illegal trail, the smart thing to do is NOT tell every swinging d!ck you run across, "Hey, check out the new trail I cut." 

OPSEC would save a lot of headaches. Just sayin.......


----------



## bikeabuser (Aug 12, 2012)

woahey said:


> The person has to be caught in the act. Otherwise, it's just a bunch of here say. You can't get a speeding ticket just because you were driving a sports car.


Not much of a problem with today's technology.


----------



## bikeabuser (Aug 12, 2012)

Eazy_E said:


> I often wonder how much stuff goes on that nobody has any idea about because the guys who do it, keep it to themselves. If you just robbed a bank, it's pretty smart to NOT walk in and buy a $100,000 sports car a day later, know what I mean?
> 
> If you just cut an illegal trail, the smart thing to do is NOT tell every swinging d!ck you run across, *"Hey, check out the new trail I cut." *
> OPSEC would save a lot of headaches. Just sayin.......


Ya mean like this - The John Finch Adventure | Freehub Magazine

I seriously laughed at this article's revelations, yet would have had no idea who the author was, if not for this forum.


----------



## raisingarizona (Feb 3, 2009)

bikeabuser said:


> What more do you need to know :madmax:
> 
> Illegal trail builders have/are putting a target on every MTB'rs back.
> 
> The damage is done ... We now await the aftermath of such activities.


You are a f-ing cop. Things are not all black and white as you are suggesting. There are good cops and bad cops, you "not" my friend would be the latter. This world is not so black and white as you believe. You and your like are what some call sheeple.

PS, Go beat it ya roach


----------



## bikeabuser (Aug 12, 2012)

raisingarizona said:


> You are a f-ing cop. Things are not all black and white as you are suggesting. There are good cops and bad cops, you "not" my friend would be the latter. This world is not so black and white as you believe. You and your like are what some call sheeple.
> 
> PS, Go beat it ya roach


Name calling is usually the first sign that one is loosing a debate/argument.
However,
Considering that we are engaged in neither ... I am inclined to believe that the truth is what you are lashing out against.

Would you claim that illegal trial building, that is being blamed on mountain bikers, is somehow good for the mountain biking community ?


----------



## Tone's (Nov 12, 2011)

''Build it and they will come, but if you dont build it, we will build it''


----------



## PhxChem (Aug 4, 2010)

I think we've all been living the John Finch "Adventure" one way or another.


----------



## Phillbo (Apr 7, 2004)

I'd rather have a bleeding hemorrhoid.


----------



## Mrwhlr (Sep 16, 2006)

The stupid ones will be caught. Let nature take care of it.


----------



## bikeabuser (Aug 12, 2012)

Mrwhlr said:


> The stupid ones will be caught. Let nature take care of it.


And on that note........


> The decision to adopt some user-created trails is not an endorsement of the unauthorized trail construction, and should not be viewed as a precedent regarding the adoption of user-created trails.
> 
> The unauthorized construction of trails on National Forest is prohibited under the Code of Federal Regulations.
> 
> http://a123.g.akamai.net/7/123/1155...ai.com/11558/www/nepa/84160_FSPLT2_289229.pdf


----------



## jessh510 (May 25, 2005)

bikeabuser said:


> Name calling is usually the first sign that one is loosing a debate/argument.
> However,
> Considering that we are engaged in neither ... I am inclined to believe that the truth is what you are lashing out against.
> 
> Would you claim that illegal trial building, that is being blamed on mountain bikers, is somehow good for the mountain biking community ?


Don't worry about RA, he's harmless. This is his MO. Several months ago while I was debating how inconsiderate it was to allow dogs off lease on the trail, I used an example about a dog invading my wife's personal space and he responded by making a crude remark about my wife. I'm sure in real life he is a great guy and his testlcles are not the size of basketballs like they are here. As far as this not being a a black or white issue. Actually it is exactly that. Violating the law is violating the law no matter how one tries to justify it. oh yea, I am a cop, Coconino County Sheriff's Office, badge number 103. Last I checked with my Forest Service LEO buddies it is not illegal to ride user build trails just construct them, so I ride the hell out of them and so do they.


----------



## bikeabuser (Aug 12, 2012)

jessh510 said:


> Don't worry about RA, he's harmless. This is his MO. Several months ago while I was debating how inconsiderate it was to allow dogs off lease on the trail, I used an example about a dog invading my wife's personal space and he responded by making a crude remark about my wife. I'm sure in real life he is a great guy and his testlcles are not the size of basketballs like they are here. As far as this not being a a black or white issue. Actually it is exactly that. Violating the law is violating the law no matter how one tries to justify it. oh yea, I am a cop, Coconino County Sheriff's Office, badge number 103. Last I checked with my Forest Service LEO buddies it is not illegal to ride user build trails just construct them, so I ride the hell out of them and so do they.


I'm not worried about RA ... I've read enough of his previous posts to realize his testicles are of average size.

And on the aspect of legalities ... I agree, violating the law is violating the law
If someone doesn't like a particular law, they should work to get the law changed/revoked ... Circumventing or ignoring any law can be bad for more than just the individual who is in violation, as this forum section clearly shows.

Thanks for doing what you do ... It's a job that requires a special type of individual.


----------



## Eazy_E (Sep 30, 2011)

One question I have to ask is, that if illegal rail building is such a problem, why not make it easier to build a legal trail? I know that flies in the face of how government operates, but still. 

Why not offer a certification course every six months, or open it up to anybody with X hours of volunteer work? Submit an application for the trail you want to build and demonstrate why something else in the system isn't suitable, if approved, build it right, it's automatically adopted, and done. 

Don't just let any hosebag with a shovel do whatever, but if you have a group of experienced builders submitting rational, written plans, why not just let them do it and then adopt it after they're done?


----------



## bikeabuser (Aug 12, 2012)

Eazy_E said:


> One question I have to ask is, that if illegal rail building is such a problem, why not make it easier to build a legal trail? I know that flies in the face of how government operates, but still.
> 
> Why not offer a certification course every six months, or open it up to anybody with X hours of volunteer work? Submit an application for the trail you want to build and demonstrate why something else in the system isn't suitable, if approved, build it right, it's automatically adopted, and done.
> 
> Don't just let any hosebag with a shovel do whatever, but if you have a group of experienced builders submitting rational, written plans, why not just let them do it and then adopt it after they're done?


A good starting point, with most of your answers - Trail Building and Design | International Mountain Bicycling Association

Also, the FS does have courses, and uses volunteers on most of their trail projects ... Although lately (last few years) they've spent a lot of time (Nationally) fixing damage that is caused by illegal trail construction, or so I've read.


----------



## Mrwhlr (Sep 16, 2006)

Two cops here, good. I have a cop question. 

A couple times a week, usually late, one or two cops come ** my sh!t bird neighbor's place and knock on the door many times w/ their lights, shine them in the windows, intently watching the blinds for movement. My question is this: If they know he's home, what difference does all this knocking make? If they can't enter, they can't; does seeing him peeking out somehow change all that? I'd rather they kick in the door and drag his ass out, 'cuz I'm sick of the loud knocking. 

"We just want to talk to you." I think he's heard that one before .


----------



## jessh510 (May 25, 2005)

Not knowing what jurisdiction or department you reference, I'd speculate that your neighbor either has a warrant or is involved somehow with a case being worked and the police want to question him. You'd be surprised how often persistancy pays off.
Sorry to hear it disrupts your peace and quite. I assure you that is not the intention of those officers.


----------



## RideNShine (Apr 5, 2012)

Holy thread derailment batman!!

IMHO FWIW Trail building on public lands is neither legal or illegal, it is simply unwanted activity deemed ** the USFS. If you build a trail without due consideration, and it causes an adverse impact on the land, you ARE liable for any restorative costs. Since this cannot be easily assed at the time of defense it is implied that some form of punishment is to be applied to serve as a deterrent for future unwanted activities. This is a reactive solution, reactive to what who the heck knows for CERTAIN!!


----------



## Mrwhlr (Sep 16, 2006)

jessh510 said:


> Not knowing what jurisdiction or department you reference, I'd speculate that your neighbor either has a warrant or is involved somehow with a case being worked and the police want to question him. You'd be surprised how often persistancy pays off.
> Sorry to hear it disrupts your peace and quite. I assure you that is not the intention of those officers.


Even junkies and dealers have rights, I suppose. I suspect they'll have better luck looking for him loitering outside one of the many QT locations in N. Phoenix though .


----------



## jessh510 (May 25, 2005)

RideNShine said:


> Holy thread derailment batman!!
> 
> IMHO FWIW Trail building on public lands is neither legal or illegal, it is simply unwanted activity deemed ** the USFS. If you build a trail without due consideration, and it causes an adverse impact on the land, you ARE liable for any restorative costs. Since this cannot be easily assed at the time of defense it is implied that some form of punishment is to be applied to serve as a deterrent for future unwanted activities. This is a reactive solution, reactive to what who the heck knows for CERTAIN!!


Imagine that, a thread goes off topic on the Arizona forum on MTBR. That never happens. The man asked a questions and I tried to answer it for him, but I digress.
Trail building on public land is just as illegal as building a structure on public land without the proper authority. I'll refer you to the analogy about landscaping your neighbor's yard because you don't like the way it look. It is not yours to change or fix. Period. It belongs to all of us. Period. If the USFS wasn't around the regulate our public lands it would be a free for all. Not saying that the FS is perfect, far from it.The USFS budget and resources is limited and has to be utilized accordingly. I think everyone knows that if you build a unauthorized trail and do not advertise your endeavors on a public forum or in a magazine article the chances of that trail surviving and you not being prosecuted is significantly reduced. The USFS LEO's have more serious issues to deal with on a daily basis within the Coconino that hunting down all those rogue and vicious illegal trailbuilders and making them pay for thier transgressions. That was sarcasm by the way. Ride On!


----------



## bikeabuser (Aug 12, 2012)

RideNShine said:


> Holy thread derailment batman!!
> 
> IMHO FWIW Trail building on public lands is neither legal or illegal, it is simply unwanted activity deemed ** the USFS. If you build a trail without due consideration, and it causes an adverse impact on the land, you ARE liable for any restorative costs. Since this cannot be easily assed at the time of defense it is implied that some form of punishment is to be applied to serve as a deterrent for future unwanted activities. This is a reactive solution, reactive to what who the heck knows for CERTAIN!!


Not to start a pi$$ing match, but ... Federal Law says your honest opinion is wrong.
And the fines/sentences we have been made aware of at MTBR, are much less than the maximum potential.

Don't like the laws ... Work to change them


----------



## bikeabuser (Aug 12, 2012)

jessh510 said:


> Imagine that, a thread goes off topic on the Arizona forum on MTBR. That never happens. The man asked a questions and I tried to answer it for him, but I digress.
> Trail building on public land is just as illegal as building a structure on public land without the proper authority. I'll refer you to the analogy about landscaping your neighbor's yard because you don't like the way it look. It is not yours to change or fix. Period. It belongs to all of us. Period. *If the USFS wasn't around the regulate our public lands it would be a free for all*. Not saying that the FS is perfect, far from it.The USFS budget and resources is limited and has to be utilized accordingly. I think everyone knows that if you build a unauthorized trail and do not advertise your endeavors on a public forum or in a magazine article the chances of that trail surviving and you not being prosecuted is significantly reduced. The USFS LEO's have more serious issues to deal with on a daily basis within the Coconino that hunting down all those rogue and vicious illegal trailbuilders and making them pay for thier transgressions. That was sarcasm by the way. Ride On!


NAA ... Do away with all laws 
Then we can watch damage occur, daily - Tree cutter arrested - The Verde Independent - Cottonwood, Arizona

OK, Back on topic !!!


----------



## jessh510 (May 25, 2005)

jessh510 said:


> Imagine that, a thread goes off topic on the Arizona forum on MTBR. That never happens. The man asked a questions and I tried to answer it for him, but I digress.
> Trail building on public land is just as illegal as building a structure on public land without the proper authority. I'll refer you to the analogy about landscaping your neighbor's yard because you don't like the way it look. It is not yours to change or fix. Period. It belongs to all of us. Period. If the USFS wasn't around the regulate our public lands it would be a free for all. Not saying that the FS is perfect, far from it.The USFS budget and resources is limited and has to be utilized accordingly. I think everyone knows that if you build a unauthorized trail and do not advertise your endeavors on a public forum or in a magazine article the chances of that trail surviving and you not being prosecuted is significantly reduced. The USFS LEO's have more serious issues to deal with on a daily basis within the Coconino that hunting down all those rogue and vicious illegal trailbuilders and making them pay for thier transgressions. That was sarcasm by the way. Ride On!


Sorry, that should be increased not reduced above when talking about not advertising your trail building endevavors. I'm too lazy to go through the new thread post edit rigmarole.


----------



## bikeabuser (Aug 12, 2012)

jessh510 said:


> Sorry, that should be increased not reduced above when talking about not advertising your trail building endevavors. I'm too lazy to go through the new thread post edit rigmarole.


I kind of like reading self-awarded (appointed) Darwin issues.


----------



## RideNShine (Apr 5, 2012)

jessh510 said:


> Imagine that, a thread goes off topic on the Arizona forum on MTBR. That never happens. The man asked a questions and I tried to answer it for him, but I digress.


I meant no disrespect towards anyone, just hoping the topic stays the focus is all.



jessh510 said:


> building on public land is just as illegal as building a structure on public land without the proper authority. I'll refer you to the analogy about landscaping your neighbor's yard because you don't like the way it look. It is not yours to change or fix. Period. It belongs to all of us. Period. If the USFS wasn't around the regulate our public lands it would be a free for all. Not saying that the FS is perfect, far from it.The USFS budget and resources is limited and has to be utilized accordingly. I think everyone knows that if you build a unauthorized trail and do not advertise your endeavors on a public forum or in a magazine article the chances of that trail surviving and you not being prosecuted is significantly reduced. The USFS LEO's have more serious issues to deal with on a daily basis within the Coconino that hunting down all those rogue and vicious illegal trailbuilders and making them pay for thier transgressions. That was sarcasm by the way. Ride On!


Sarcastic tone aside, I understand your point and analogy, I also understand the FS LEO's resources are better served on other issues. I can't find a federal law that prohibits trail building on public lands. I can however find several laws that punish use of public lands that adversely affects the "natural" resources of the area where use occurs.

The unwanted trail building that occurred in the Sedona area was a direct result of improper management by the FS, the community of Sedona not accommodating a growing sport and user group, and because there was no clear channels of communication between MTB, hikers, and the FS. It is not the responsibility of the USFS to create a trail "anything", well at least I can't find it in the USFS directives set by the USDA. It's up to the local community to establish a trail plan that meets the needs of the recreating public (local/tourist) without adversely impacting the environment, disrespecting cultural history and diminishing the lands natural resources. The USFS doesn't have the budget for much more than to say, "This looks good, and since it requires no actions from the USFS' office that are outside of our directed duties, all we require is plan overview, update of activity and/or work, pictures and gps files of completed work.", this would put the responsibility of the land back in the rightful group, THE PEOPLE. This is how it should work, it is not the FS' responsibility to do any sort of plan development, it's the local communities', the FS need only ensure that the plan and associated activities doesn't adversely impact the natural resources of the land within their respective jurisdictions.

If some want to compare watershed affects of a 10 mile 18" wide single track trail, to none at all, I say what are your plans for a severe flash flood that causes a new wash to form on the OC that contaminates the water with sediment for decades? Singletrack trail when routed properly is RARELY seen by anyone from a "public" residence or place (so no visual impact), can avoid arch sites with respect, will not adversely impact the natural resources it runs through and reduces the traffic on higher traffic trails. I'm not saying it's a free for all, I'm saying "Trails were in the Sedona area well before the sport of MTB, with the extreme popularity of the sport in full swing, IT WAS ALREADY BUILT AND THEY CAME, HAD A GREAT TIME AND RETURNED WITH FRIENDS TIME AND TIME AGAIN, and MTB quickly took over as primary users of the trails. Problem...Not enough trails for MTB, (on average MTB goes twice as far if not more than a hiker) and the system was congested. Instead of the community taking the responsibility for themselves, they gave it to the USFS and the ball was dropped!


----------

