# MTBR in the community is threatening to try to close our trail. Please help.



## evilinthemidst (May 13, 2015)

There is a mtbr, of all people :madman:, in our community, for unknown reasons, threatening to make political our local trail:nono::madmax:, to scare us into closing our trail. At this time, I'd like to keep it private but rest assure, this is a REAL threat on a REAL trail. Although the trail has a tremendous amount of signage indicating dangers, precaution, and overall riding advice, we want to make sure we are as protected as possible. We probably don't have the best sign in waiver at this point and plan to create a new one. For now, we really need the mtbr community's advice and if possible assistance. So please, anyone with a legal background or have in depth knowledge of how to keep our park as protected as possible from liability and thus lawsuits, please reach out to me ASAP. ANY advice or help is needed and is greatly appreciated. Thank you.


----------



## Mark E (Feb 7, 2006)

Here are some free web articles (remember free means you will get what you pay for).

https://www.imba.com/resources/liability-and-insurance

Be sure to look at the sub-menu of articles on the right side of the page.


----------



## bweide (Dec 27, 2004)

You might want to consider adding a technical feature to specifically function as a technical skills filter gate keeper. Each rider would need to successfully ride the obstacle to get into the trail system. I have seen one that requires the rider to ride a skinny up to a platform, ride through a narrow gap and then execute an 18 drop at low speed. Someone on the site here may be able to share a photo. To make it work you would have to tie it into a linear barrier like a barbed wire fence.


----------



## Mountain Cycle Shawn (Jan 19, 2004)

Is this someone's private property?


----------



## evilinthemidst (May 13, 2015)

Mountain Cycle Shawn said:


> Is this someone's private property?


No, it's a county park.


----------



## evilinthemidst (May 13, 2015)

Just so we're clear, and again, I apologize for the double post. This is also on the "General" forum. I just want to make sure we get as much exposure as possible.

"Could you be any more vague?
I'm sorry if I wasn't clear. Let me try again. We have a rider, who, for no reason at all, is trying to intimidate our trail builder into closing the trail. He's been harassing the trail builder with different types of scenarios and how he will try to sue if anything happens. He is also threatening to doctor up worst case scenarios to the county in an effort to scare them into closing the trail in an effort to avoid any type of litigation. In short, although he has no basis for suing, he's trying every which way to inimidate the trail builder through scare tactics to the county, into closing the park. He's a frequent rider on the trail for several years funny enough. He's hurt himself before but it's never been an issue. Somehow, now it is.

The purpose of this post was to seek advice on protecting ourselves as best we can. I've detailed what we've done thus far but I'm sure we could do more. We plan to read up on what's detailed in IMBA's book, but are also seeking advice so that we'll know for sure, we're doing exactly what IMBA or others(legal) suggest, hence our request for help. If we can make sure our park is thoroughly protected, regardless what this imbecile tries to scare the county with, we will have a very well thought out rebuttal with all the precautions we've taken in the event anything should happen. Our hope is to CYA the county/park as thoroughly as possible so that if the county were to come asking, we can assure them that the trail is safe and the county is covered in the event anyone tries to sue. Hopefully then, they can tell this idiot to go ...himself. 

Please help."


----------



## UncleTrail (Sep 29, 2007)

Holy cow. An illegal trail in a County Park? That's smart.


----------



## evilinthemidst (May 13, 2015)

UncleTrail said:


> Holy cow. An illegal trail in a County Park? That's smart.


It's not illegal. The county knows about it and is FULLY aware of it and is fine with it. It's advertised at the park, FB, wherever. This person is trying every which way to SCARE the county about the "dangers" of a mtb trail by painting worst case scenarios. It's a political ploy to scare them to close it so they don't ever have to deal with ANY lawsuits. As you know, just because a county/land manager is aware and approves of it DOES NOT MAKE IT immune to lawsuits and closure.


----------



## evilinthemidst (May 13, 2015)

I'm trying my best to seek out any advice to help make sure our trail doesn't get closed out of fear, just in case we don't have all our I's dotted and T's crossed . I apologize if I've not worded my concerns to exactly how everyone wants or needs it to be. Please, if you don't want to address my concern, please stop it with the smart comments.


----------



## UncleTrail (Sep 29, 2007)

evilinthemidst said:


> It's not illegal. The county knows about it and is FULLY aware of it and is fine with it. It's advertised at the park, FB, wherever. This person is trying every which way to SCARE the county about the "dangers" of a mtb trail by painting worst case scenarios. It's a political ploy to scare them to close it so they don't ever have to deal with ANY lawsuits. As you know, just because a county/land manager is aware and approves of it DOES NOT MAKE IT immune to lawsuits and closure.


Did you build stunts on the trail?

Most Counties are self-insured, but many are covered by a State recreational use statutes.

If you have built stunts on the trail, then they might consider those an attractive nuisance which could make the County liable for injuries. You would need to ask an attorney about that. Kind of like having a swimming pool with no fence around it and no lifeguard.

If it's just a trail on public land then the County is most likely covered by a recreational use statute at the state level.

I'm not an attorney though so don't listen to anything I say.


----------



## evilinthemidst (May 13, 2015)

We have table top jumps and rock gardens galore. Would that be considered nuisances? Our jumps are rollable by anyone. The rock gardens are more dangerous.


----------



## evilinthemidst (May 13, 2015)

Let me talk to the trail builder. There are videos here and there but I doubt he wants to put anything out at the moment. Would you be OK if I messaged you the links after getting OK tomorrow? Out table tops range anywhere from 10ft to 17 ft. As far as the rock gardens, it's a bit more challenging. But it's all relative in the end.


----------



## Berkeley Mike (Jan 13, 2004)

evilinthemidst said:


> But it's all relative in the end.


There, as they say, is the rub.


----------



## Ridnparadise (Dec 14, 2007)

Has this guy made it clear what his issue is? People start getting weird about trails if the pace increases and they are reaching their comfort zone. Also people get weird when the trail they have always ridden exactly the same line on changes, even if it changes for good reason. It may be appropriate to publicly announce to said person that they have given sufficient reason to be considered a suspect if there is any trail vandalism or sabotage and that you are going to report them to the LM in advance out of concern for riders. TBH, the trail builder is the person who should be dealing with this.


----------



## aero901 (Apr 11, 2012)

I doubt this guy poses any real legal danger since the trail in question is approved by the land manager. Keep records of his actions just in case and ignore the empty threats until he makes good on them. The only thing you can do at the moment is keep that trail well maintained and let the LM's know about him.

Why does he want the trail closed anyways?


----------



## smeets1 (Dec 30, 2003)

I agree with aero, I would encourage an open dialogue with the parks director.


----------



## zrm (Oct 11, 2006)

Me thinks there is more to the story than the OP is presenting.


----------



## Mark E (Feb 7, 2006)

The guy who is complaining can cause trouble, for sure, but he can't really file a lawsuit if he has no damages.

If your technical trail features are built with dirt and rock that's probably a better situation than wooden features.

If the trail is not officially recognized by the land manager -- even if it appears on their marketing materials -- you probably should work on gaining that status. That should help shift the liability exposure away from the trail builders and onto the county.

Bottom line is that there are trails with technical features all over the USA and around the globe. Liability is always a concern but if your trail system is inline with current trail building practices your liability exposure should be manageable.

IMBA's latest book on bike parks provides two excellent essays about risk management:

https://www.imba.com/catalog/book-bike-parks-imbas-guide-new-school-trails


----------



## bitflogger (Jan 12, 2004)

To the OP, you're probably wasting time, disk space and bandwidth if you're not saying where this is. First because that makes it easy to find the law - not speculation and guessing - regarding what's called recreational immunity. Next because it will probably help align you with resources.

Most parks (probably all) in the US are in a master plan that states what's approved, or that master plan has amendments stating what's approved or allowed.

If your trail is not approved by the land manager - not just a dude or dudette you talk with at the county - your only job for the moment is get that done or live with whatever may occur.

Are you an IMBA member, is your group a member club, or are you associated with an IMBA chapter? If yes to any of that you have resources to help.


----------



## evilinthemidst (May 13, 2015)

All, thanks for your replies. The reason I've NOT disclosed the location is due to the trail builders wish. To be as transparent as possible, from what I understand, it's simply an issue of one sibling having a personal issue with another sibling. They both ride the trail. Whatever happened between them, somehow one decided, I'm going to try to screw you over by trying to scare the county into closing the trail. There are NO wood features. Again, there are challenging rock gardens and and a dozen 10-17 ft table tops on one section of the trail. There is NOTHING outside of that. One individual is trying to ruin it for the community as a whole by doing this and this is why I came here for any assistance or advice. I've read our state Recreational Use Statue which is very similar to others. Because the park does NOT charge a fee, there ISN'T and obligation to make the place "safe" per se. They even documented a case in one of the parks in our state where an individual tried to sue but lost, because of our Rec Use Statue. Regardless, we post signage all over, before rock gardens, drops, high speed berms, jumps, etc. It's littered with signage all over. We have a sign in at the trail head. Again, I'm just trying to help protect our trail from frivolous lawsuits and asenine attempts such as that could cause our trail to be closed.


----------



## bankerboy (Oct 17, 2006)

You can never stop a filing of a frivolous lawsuit, hence the name. 

I will be the 15th person to say you need to be more specific. Can't name the trail? How about a state and city. At least it will help define the rules and regulations that govern your concerns.


----------



## Cayenne_Pepa (Dec 18, 2007)

We need ALL pertinent details, before giving you any unbiased support....


----------



## evilinthemidst (May 13, 2015)

North Carolina


----------



## bitflogger (Jan 12, 2004)

evilinthemidst said:


> it's simply an issue of one sibling having a personal issue with another sibling


Getting the property or resource as an approved trail or activity is your only protection but that may take the fun out of it for some and add rules and work.

My involvement with the advocacy goes back to the 1980s but very active as a trail steward and club leader for past 15 years. Sorry to be blunt but you're describing something that repeats. The trails I've seen live and thrive have all been official and with some rules and regulations not everyone likes.

You say protect. The only way I can think of that will protect the sport is an official relationship with the land manager.

If your area has an IMBA rep you will also get help organizing and having the kind of group that makes it all sustainable.


----------



## evilinthemidst (May 13, 2015)

thanks bitflogger.


----------



## watts888 (Oct 2, 2012)

brother vs. brother BS. Even if the d-bag does try to file a law suit, it'll have to go through the same legal procedure as some kid who broke their arm playing baseball. I wouldn't worry about it, because I can almost guarantee, the county and their insurance provider have already talked at great length.

Our local trail builders had to tear down some legally built bike obstacles that were made in a county park. Originally, the county leadership was behind it (one of the trail builders actually works for the county), but as it got farther along, the insurance company underwritter said it was beyond what they would cover. Ultimately, the obstacles got torn out. In all honesty, I have to agree with tearing them out. There were 10' tall large area platforms made out of just 2x4's with no railings and almost no support joists. there were skinny's that were 8' above jagged rock gardens, and there were long run-in drops that went immediately into sharp switchbacks with almost no warning. I had a difficult time walking most of this stuff. 

However, there are other areas of our trail system that are just as dangerous, but they are 100% natural materials with no man-made obstacles. Building a trail through an existing natural feature does not equal building an obstacle. These all come under recreational use categories that have implied consent safety laws. There is no fixing stupid. If a person is warned that an area is dangerous and they do it anyway, they are responsible.


----------



## evilinthemidst (May 13, 2015)

Watts888,

We aren't so much worried about a lawsuit as much as we are worried about the political aspect of it. Our concern is to make sure we can assure our land manager, the county, that in the event anyone tries to sue, we've taken as much precautions as possible to keep us and the county protected. We cant's stop anyone from trying to sue. We can however, educate our land managers that we've taken all the right steps and due diligence to keep the county safe from any idiots too. Thanks for your reply.


----------



## drag_slick (Sep 24, 2004)

Have you talked to the land manager yet? I serve on a county political subdivision that has 13+ miles of officially recognized trail, we retain our own legal counsel, which would clarify any liability issues. We have a good board with a lot of common sense so YMMV.


----------



## gt2brew (Mar 23, 2006)

Are you guys incorporated, 501c3, carry your own G/L policy? Watts888 has a great point with regard to the land manager liking the idea until the insurance company sends a risk assessment team in. Same with your own insurance company, you should be 100% sure you are covered for that product.


----------



## evilinthemidst (May 13, 2015)

drag_slick said:


> Have you talked to the land manager yet? I serve on a county political subdivision that has 13+ miles of officially recognized trail, we retain our own legal counsel. We have a good board with a lot of common sense so YMMV.


The trail builder has not talked to the land manager yet. He's still on vacation and has been harassed with emails WHILE ON VACATION by this individual. Drag_slick, can you possibly detail how you guys went about protecting yourself/land manager, etc? We're open to ANY advice from you and the lengths you took to protect the trail/county/land owner. I'm sure some of it we've done but I'm sure there's a lot we haven't either.


----------



## evilinthemidst (May 13, 2015)

gt2brew said:


> Are you guys incorporated, 501c3, carry your own G/L policy? Watts888 has a great point with regard to the land manager liking the idea until the insurance company sends a risk assessment team in. Same with your own insurance company, you should be 100% sure you are covered for that product.


I'll have to talk to the trail builder as far as that's concerned. Thanks for your input. We'll definitely look into that.


----------



## drag_slick (Sep 24, 2004)

I'm probably a slightly different case since I serve on the county board that owns the land. The trail is actually why I agreed to serve on the board, and it helps tremendously when one of the land managers is a mountain biker. The trail was built with RTP grants that were applied for by the county and the county oversaw construction by a professional trail contractor. The only man made features are bridges spanning creeks and there are railings when required, otherwise all the other features are natural, rock gardens, roots, etc.. If there is a feature, man made or not that might be considered sketchy, we will build an alternate line.

Any trail maintenance, enhancements, expansions, are always led by the board (me), so we technically don't have a the general public making unapproved changes to the trail.

We are covered by our county insurance policy as well as our states recreational statutes. Trail is open to the public and free to use, which is important.

If our board was presented with this situation we would look to our legal counsel.


----------



## evilinthemidst (May 13, 2015)

San Lee Park in Sanford NC - originally built with state grant 20 years ago - trail system grew to an 11 mile single track system now we added a new section called San Lee Gravity bike park - 300 hours of mini ex machining work in red clay - 4 gravity runs .2 to .3 miles in length - giant berms table top jumps some hips / step downs and one small double - extensive video testing and tuning - proven design / we have heavily signed and rated difficulty - park ranger / county manager / park and rec director are aware of construction but not totally aware to what extent - park nominated builder who received state governor award for volunteerism / volunteer builder bought $14,000 mini ex out of his own pocket to build the trails. Park bought addition land to expand bike trail / park built a parking lot for bikers / We are all very heavily invested in this project and the trail is heavily used. The main issue is single track riders interface with the gravity section and all jumps are rollable but some go for with high seats and land on there faces - one maybe two broken collar bone in two years - I am planning Gravity park trail head would installing a sign in - waver at entrance to jump line buy additional protection for the county / also considering separating singletrack from gravity - plenty of videos on facebook and youtube


----------



## aero901 (Apr 11, 2012)

I wouldn't waste your time with a sign in sheet or waivers. They won't hold up in court if it comes to that anyways. Also, how are you going to get users to sign them? Hire a security guard?

Honestly, I think you are overreacting to this situation. It is highly unlikely one person is going to shut down this trail if there is as much time and energy invested as you say and such a strong land manager commitment. If all your ducks are in line, tell your boogieman to go pound sand and move on to more productive endeavors.

If you want to appease your tormentor, add bypasses around the more difficult features. Personally, I wouldn't do this if it is a clearly marked area for only advanced riders. If novice riders are required to ride through the gravity trail to connect with the rest of the system well marked bypasses would be mandatory and common sense IMO.

I checked out some videos of the area and that is a pretty sweet thing you have going. :thumbsup:


----------



## evilinthemidst (May 13, 2015)

Thanks aero. For now that's what we're going to do. Overall, his threat does open our eyes to getting our ducks in a row for anything in the future. Thanks again.


----------



## faceplant72 (Oct 25, 2009)

Just for perspective search Duthie Hill park. It's a King County park. Ambulances regularly take people out of Duthie but the same could be said for any sports field


----------



## UncleTrail (Sep 29, 2007)

evilinthemidst said:


> now we added a Gravity bike park
> - park and rec director are aware of construction but not totally aware to what extent - Park bought addition land to expand bike trail / park built a parking lot for bikers / We are all very heavily invested in this project and the trail is heavily used. The main issue is single track riders interface with the gravity section and all jumps


Sounds like you sold your trail project to the community and parks department as a single track expansion and then built a gravity park instead? or maybe you just went out and built a trail and want to ask for permission after the fact?

Now you are CYA and looking for help because all the XC riders are going WTF this isn't singletrack.

The reason I say that is because I don't see anything about a gravity bike park on the park website....

But I did find your FB page. 
https://www.facebook.com/pages/San-Lee-Gravity-Bike-Park/1531546737134923

Yeah those are attractive nuisances. You probably should have talked to the County attorney before you built them.

That trail wouldn't fly out here in the Rockies with the greenie meanies. Looks like fun though.... good luck keeping it open. If I were 20 years younger I would hit those too....


----------



## woodway (Dec 27, 2005)

We built a trail in a local County Park that has advanced terrain, technical wood features, drops and table tops. The trail was built in conjunction with the County Land Manager. Here are the steps we took to protect ourselves and the County:

1. Developed a set construction standards for the features we built that specify things like height of the feature vs. minimum width, required fall zones, materials, construction techniques, etc.

2. We built all the features to the standards and had them inspected/approved by the land manager.

3. All the features are inspected annually with the land manager. The manager documents the inspection and any repairs that are made.

4. We signed the trail as advanced at the entry. We specifically noted on the sign that advanced skills are needed to navigate the trail.

5. The biggest feature on the trail (a drop that is almost 6' off the ground) has:
- a signed ride around
- a sign indicating that the feature is advanced and ends in a drop
- a filter feature you have to navigate to get on
- an easy bailout if you get on and realize that you are in over your head
- an area just before the big drop where you can stop and put your feet down

6. All the tabletops, booters, etc. have ride-arounds.

It's a lot, but it's what the County required if we were to build the trail.


----------



## LyNx (Oct 26, 2004)

OK, so OP may not like this, but how old are the children involved in this conflict? Ask because that's what this sounds like, 2 children bickering because they had a fight. Seriously, reading the OPs last post it seems like they got permission to build one type of trail and then went on to make it more advanced, which in and off itself isn't so bad, but it sounds like they ran it into the normal singletrack and that is where the issue is. You cannot throw a more advanced piece of trail into an already existing designed trail like that, I'd be pissed too if I was an XC rider.

That aside, doesn't look like anything too major, looks fairly fun, but if you've made it so easier trails link into, or made this from a section of easier trail, you did wrong and need to correct that.


----------



## evilinthemidst (May 13, 2015)

I'll have the trailbuilder address all the questions above.


----------



## rebel1916 (Sep 16, 2006)

OP, you need to delete this thread.


----------



## UncleTrail (Sep 29, 2007)

rebel1916 said:


> OP, you need to delete this thread.


Why? It's on public land.


----------



## rebel1916 (Sep 16, 2006)

UncleTrail said:


> Why? It's on public land.


Cause he says stuff in this public forum that is extremely unhelpful to his cause. The kind of stuff that gets printed out and given to people that don't need to see it. Further, as he is apparently just a busybody, who was not really involved in the decision making process, the things he says may not even be accurate. But that doesn't mean they won't be used.


----------

