PLRA: why reroute?

[Farmer_John]

Truth is, it can't be saved. Water bars clog, diverting ditches cause a different and more pronounced erosion problem, Geoweb...people end up riding around it and accelerate erosion on the edges...

The only way for long term erosion evasion is to armor the trail. Even then, somebody has to go out and maintain that.

IMBA's rule of thumb for max grade doesn't work for S.E. Michigan's glacial Moraine land mass. More than 7-8% in a sustained grade for any stretch will not last. Tried it, called out the choir for support, had to have them back out a year or so later for the sequel. And just because it isn't a wall anymore, does not mean that it cannot be a challenge. Technical features can be built into any trail.

And "fixing" trail that has already been "fixed" isn't just bad manners, it lessens the people who are actually trying to maintain the trail's credibility with those that actually manage the land. If you want to add input to trail changes, be there to help with said changes.

[davedejonge]

do you mean those rubber flaps that are 3/4 exposed on the side of a washed out hill? or, was it the sunken logs that everyone rides around so as not to challenge themselves with a 2 inch bump.

I'm all for sustainable trails, build them right so they don't need to be repaired every season. IF that means giving up on a section of trail, so be it.
build a log over or a skinny to make up for it.

[Farmer_John]

do you mean those rubber flaps that are 3/4 exposed on the side of a washed out hill? or, was it the sunken logs that everyone rides around so as not to challenge themselves with a 2 inch bump.

I'm all for sustainable trails, build them right so they don't need to be repaired every season. IF that means giving up on a section of trail, so be it.
build a log over or a skinny to make up for it.

Well, that's the thing. with the wide variety of skill level, experience and manpower, not all sections of trail get created on a level playing field. Nobody is perfect and soil composition can vary hill to hill.

[mr_opjones]

Saying that eliminating eroded sections and climbs on the trail is 'dumbing down' the trail is like saying the paving roads or repairing pot holes is dumbing down the roads.

I mean, they are harder to drive, so they have to be more technical, right? The trails were never built with these 'features', they developed over time as the trail eroded.

We're just dumbing them down to IMBA standards, which are obviously flat, paved, beginner friendly. BTW, Keweenaw/Copper Harbor is having IMBA Ride Center dedication ceremony next month, now that we've been able to dumb down Tech Trails, Swedetown, and Copper Harbor to the lame IMBA standards.

Spin it however you like, so EZ to chalk it to the "IMBA' is this or that, but when it comes down to it removing a major portion of the trail in favor of less grade is dumbing down, when it could have been saved. Did anyone look into water breaks to save the climb? No, we need to model all our trails after rail trails.

Water break?

I think he means either water bars or grade reversals. If there's sufficiently water to regularly need them those spots will become maintenance / sustainability issues in and of themselves.

That is highly subjective, properly made and installed breaks/bars will need relatively low maintenance.

How many trails have you put these in on and watch evolve?

[irishpitbull]

Saying that eliminating eroded sections and climbs on the trail is 'dumbing down' the trail is like saying the paving roads or repairing pot holes is dumbing down the roads.

I mean, they are harder to drive, so they have to be more technical, right? The trails were never built with these 'features', they developed over time as the trail eroded.

We're just dumbing them down to IMBA standards, which are obviously flat, paved, beginner friendly. BTW, Keweenaw/Copper Harbor is having IMBA Ride Center dedication ceremony next month, now that we've been able to dumb down Tech Trails, Swedetown, and Copper Harbor to the lame IMBA standards.

Spin it however you like, so EZ to chalk it to the "IMBA' is this or that, but when it comes down to it removing a major portion of the trail in favor of less grade is dumbing down, when it could have been saved. Did anyone look into water breaks to save the climb? No, we need to model all our trails after rail trails.

Water break?

I think he means either water bars or grade reversals. If there's sufficiently water to regularly need them those spots will become maintenance / sustainability issues in and of themselves.

That is highly subjective, properly made and installed breaks/bars will need relatively low maintenance.

How many trails have you put these in on and watch evolve?

Ever been to Bull/Jake Mountain? I was part of that group that saved that trail system from closer from GDNR. We also had to design our trails to put up with abuse from horses.

[dirt]

Saying that eliminating eroded sections and climbs on the trail is 'dumbing down' the trail is like saying the paving roads or repairing pot holes is dumbing down the roads.

I mean, they are harder to drive, so they have to be more technical, right? The trails were never built with these 'features', they developed over time as the trail eroded.

We're just dumbing them down to IMBA standards, which are obviously flat, paved, beginner friendly. BTW, Keweenaw/Copper Harbor is having IMBA Ride Center dedication ceremony next month, now that we've been able to dumb down Tech Trails, Swedetown, and Copper Harbor to the lame IMBA standards.

Spin it however you like, so EZ to chalk it to the "IMBA' is this or that, but when it comes down to it removing a major portion of the trail in favor of less grade is dumbing down, when it could have been saved. Did anyone look into water breaks to save the climb? No, we need to model all our trails after rail trails.

Water break?

I think he means either water bars or grade reversals. If there's sufficiently water to regularly need them those spots will become maintenance / sustainability issues in and of themselves.

That is highly subjective, properly made and installed breaks/bars will need relatively low maintenance.

How many trails have you put these in on and watch evolve?

Ever been to Bull/Jake Mountain? I was part of that group that saved that trail system from closer from GDNR. We also had to design our trails to put up with abuse from horses.

And it sounds like they are rerouting sections of the trail, and eliminating the water bars, as they trail was again under threat of closure due to erosion.
http://www.sorba.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=38456

[irishpitbull]

I have the final assessment in PDF form if any wants to read it and what was done to each and every trail. The section and study on 'user impacts" is mind blowing. Water breaks, bars and armoring were done to preserve rather than reroute, unfortunately the trails were in very bad shape mainly do to horse traffic, reroutes or bypasses were used. I never said not use them, this hill PLRA did not need it.


Edit: Here is the assessment. http://www.sorba.org/sites/default/file ... t-Plan.pdf


Page 50 will show what an "unsaveable" trail looks like.

[MediumRB]

Show up for trail day next time and give your input. When the PLRA ranger offers a couple of options to avoid the erosion, CRAMBA takes advantage of it.

The re-route really didn't dumb down the trail, it just made yokels scrub some of their speed to take a hard left, climb an off-camber switchback, and then do another tricky left at the top to hold a good line. Because the "smarter" path was straight up an eroded slushfest.

And finally, change is good. I get bored with predictable paths. If things are too easy, try riding a less awesome bike.

[utabintarbo]

Show up for trail day next time and give your input.

This.

If things are too easy, try riding a less awesome bike.

All my bikes are too awesome. Can I borrow yours?

[mr_opjones]

Saying that eliminating eroded sections and climbs on the trail is 'dumbing down' the trail is like saying the paving roads or repairing pot holes is dumbing down the roads.

I mean, they are harder to drive, so they have to be more technical, right? The trails were never built with these 'features', they developed over time as the trail eroded.

We're just dumbing them down to IMBA standards, which are obviously flat, paved, beginner friendly. BTW, Keweenaw/Copper Harbor is having IMBA Ride Center dedication ceremony next month, now that we've been able to dumb down Tech Trails, Swedetown, and Copper Harbor to the lame IMBA standards.

Spin it however you like, so EZ to chalk it to the "IMBA' is this or that, but when it comes down to it removing a major portion of the trail in favor of less grade is dumbing down, when it could have been saved. Did anyone look into water breaks to save the climb? No, we need to model all our trails after rail trails.

Water break?

I think he means either water bars or grade reversals. If there's sufficiently water to regularly need them those spots will become maintenance / sustainability issues in and of themselves.

That is highly subjective, properly made and installed breaks/bars will need relatively low maintenance.

How many trails have you put these in on and watch evolve?

Ever been to Bull/Jake Mountain? I was part of that group that saved that trail system from closer from GDNR. We also had to design our trails to put up with abuse from horses.

What type of soil is in that area, is it comparable to the sandy soil at plra?

[irishpitbull]

There is good mix of clay and sugar/beach sand in the summer months. Biggest difference is the trails are orange.

[ArcticRobot]

Show up for trail day next time and give your input. When the PLRA ranger offers a couple of options to avoid the erosion, CRAMBA takes advantage of it.

The re-route really didn't dumb down the trail, it just made yokels scrub some of their speed to take a hard left, climb an off-camber switchback, and then do another tricky left at the top to hold a good line. Because the "smarter" path was straight up an eroded slushfest.

And finally, change is good. I get bored with predictable paths. If things are too easy, try riding a less awesome bike.

I never said trail was dumbed down. I asked why, and got a lot of insightful replies.
I don't have less awesome bike, sorry. My two main awesome bikes are 140mm travel full suspension RZ140 and fully rigid singlespeed Gary Fisher with 38:18 gear ratio. They give me good variety of riding styles even on the same trail.
I really hope community will support the idea of building as many technical sections as possible. Log obstacles, stair-like climbs, rock-gardens, drops of different variety. And I will gladly join maintenance crew on the trail where those things are planned by trail coordinators.

[b_b]

That climb was a mess. You can really get hauling leading up and almost coast up to the first switchback, so I doubt new switchbacks will make it easier. Probably harder.

[Farmer_John]

That climb was a mess. You can really get hauling leading up and almost coast up to the first switchback, so I doubt new switchbacks will make it easier. Probably harder.

This begs the question then; are these really switchbacks or climbing turns? Big difference.

[c0nsumer]

For what it's worth, I was just reading stuff online about trail construction and I came across this nice description of why waterbars aren't used much anymore:

Dips Are In, Bars Are Out

For existing trails with water problems, we encourage the use of rolling grade dips or knicks instead of waterbars. Here's why. By design, water hits the waterbar and is turned. The water slows down and sediment drops in the drain.

Waterbars commonly fail when sediment fills the drain. Water tops the waterbar and continues down the tread. The waterbar becomes useless. You can build a good rolling grade dip quicker than you can install a waterbar, and a rolling grade dip works better.

The full Trail Construction and Maintenance Notebook can be found here.