This is so annoying! RE: Patapsco changes

[urbaindk]

http://www.more-mtb.org/forum/showthread.php?t=3623

Many of us have grown accustomed to riding the jump trail (aka Lewis and Clarke) over by Landing Rd. In the near future, this will be plowed under. Get your runs in now before it's too late.

I realize Mike has probably done everything with in his power to stop this but would it not be prudent to express our displeasure at this directly through either phone calls or letter writing campaign?

Patapsco Valley State Park
8020 Baltimore National Pike
Ellicott City, MD 21043
(410)461-5005

I recognize that the trails were "unsanctioned" however they are there now and it sounds like a lot of people are going to miss them. As far as I can ascertain they have caused no harm, I understand that they are well built, enjoyed by many riders, and because of these factors I believe it is a waste of the state's resources to pay a dozer crew to plow them under.


I think we should tell the Park Authorities that.

[ChrisR]

Illegally built trails on public land should not be tolerated or condoned. The people that built them should not be rewarded by having them left in place. Leaving the trails in place will only encourage this sort of behavior which will get bikers kicked out of Patapsco. I imagine that park management was pretty ticked off when they found the trails, and rightfully so.

The park is not ours to make our own as we see fit. If people want to make changes in the park, they need show up for trail maintenance days and get involved.

Honestly, I'd love to see the people that built the trail prosecuted.

[urbaindk]

Tearing these trails down will only encourage the builders to build more illegal trails some place else and the cycle of unsactioned building will continue. The trails are going to get built no matter what.

[RetroG]

Tearing these trails down will only encourage the builders to build more illegal trails some place else and the cycle of unsactioned building will continue. The trails are going to get built no matter what.

If that happens, you can say "Goodbye" to all riding at Patapsco. The DNR has the power to shut it down for mountainbikes. It was close to that happening a few years back. We have a good reputation with the land managers in the Balto./D.C. area. Don't -f- it up for the rest of us, and for yourself.

[allroy]

While the trails were built well and are fun, they were built without the sanction of the park authority, plain and simple.

If the park authority leaves them up that would open the door to other rogues trails being built. There is a lot of planning that goes into building a new trail before the building phases even starts, is the area enviromentally sensative, how does the trail follow the contour of the land or is it on a fall line and how will it affect erosion, making sure there are full bench cuts, where does the trail need to be backsloped. These are just a few considerations that need to be taken into account for building a trail, that not even getting into the details of a multiuse trail. Are any of these things taken into account when a couple people go on their own and build a trail in the woods, probably not.

It has been brough up many times if people want freeride type riding to progress in the area, IMBA and MORE are willing to help push it forward, but instead of doing things that will get bikers kicked off the land permantently, do something positive and help change peoples perception and work with the sytem to get what you want along with many others.

If you go in and tell the park authority that by tearing down the trail that will cause people to build more illegal trails, they would laugh at you and tell you were to stick it, ban bikers all together and make it strickly horses and hikers, sounds like a well thought out idea.

We are not guaranteed the right to bike on the land (changed to more appropriate response), we have to work with the system to show them we are responsible, conservation minded and dedicated to sustaining their land.

Tearing these trails down will only encourage the builders to build more illegal trails some place else and the cycle of unsactioned building will continue. The trails are going to get built no matter what.

[urbaindk]

If that happens, you can say "Goodbye" to all riding at Patapsco. The DNR has the power to shut it down for mountainbikes. It was close to that happening a few years back. We have a good reputation with the land managers in the Balto./D.C. area. Don't -f- it up for the rest of us, and for yourself.

Just so you know, I'm not one of the unsanctioned trail builders and I haven't even ridden this particular trail at Patapsco so I am speaking in the hypothetical sense here...

I still think it is wrong to tear these trails down and a lack of foresight on the part of MORE to not recognize the needs of all mtb riders, particularly freeriders sooner. If the ground work for this kind of thing had been laid when this sort of riding was new say 5 - 10 years ago, this stuff would be in place now and you probably wouldn't have a bunch of kids (and adults) with shovels busting at the seams to dig and build unsanctioned trails.

[allroy]

Trail work days (http://www.more-mtb.org/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=17).

If you are that concerned, here's a list of trail work days. Put up or shut up, if the people building illegal trails put that effort into helping us, we could get more done and have a better idea what others are looking for in the trails.

[urbaindk]

There is a lot of planning that goes into building a new trail before the building phases even starts, is the area enviromentally sensative, how does the trail follow the contour of the land or is it on a fall line and how will it affect erosion, making sure there are full bench cuts, where does the trail need to be backsloped. These are just a few considerations that need to be taken into account for building a trail, that not even getting into the details of a multiuse trail. Are any of these things taken into account when a couple people go on their own and build a trail in the woods, probably not.

So make the spot legal and go in and fix it up right, don't just tear it down. You can have fall line trails in Patapsco. There are rocks out the yingyang there for paving in steep sections. I can think of a lot of areas there that need it really badly and it's not because freeriders go in an tear stuff up. It's because newbs and inconsiderate yahoos ride around every obsticle and mud puddle that pops up.

It has been brough up many times if people want freeride type riding to progress in the area, IMBA and MORE are willing to help push it forward, but instead of doing things that will get bikers kicked off the land permantently, do something positive and help change peoples perception and work with the sytem to get what you want along with many others..

I realize that and I have been trying. But I just don't see why closing down trails helps anybody. Try to push to make the spots legal and fix them to IMBA trail building standards. Don't just roll over.

[langer]

Tearing these trails down will only encourage the builders to build more illegal trails some place else and the cycle of unsactioned building will continue. The trails are going to get built no matter what.
I'm surprised the DNR or whoever manages the park let the landing road 'freeride' trail get to the level that it did. I'm sure any other subsequent ttfs will have a much shorter life. I agree with RetroG and ChrisR...cutting new trails and building ttfs (unsanctioned of course) only jeopardizes the tenuous relationship we have with landowners and park authorities. If folks want us to get kicked out of the majority of rideable trails around baltimore, then by all means, build your (not saying yours as in yours, but you know what I mean :D ) jumps. I loved that part of Patapsco too, but it's not worth not riding at all there.
just my $.02, that's probably all it's worth...second thought, not even that...
-jonny lang

[urbaindk]

Riderx just explained to me in more detail the tenuous nature of riding at Patapsco. I'm sorry I didn't realize that you all had to fight so hard to get in there in the first place. I didn't live in this area at the time and had no idea. I guess I shouldn't take these things for granted!

And langer your last post helps a little too. Sorry if I ruffled too many feathers. I still think it sucks. But maybe it's best to lose some battles so you can win others?

[langer]

I realize that and I have been trying. But I just don't see why closing down trails helps anybody. Try to push to make the spots legal and fix them to IMBA trail building standards. Don't just roll over.
Doubt the park would have any notion of 'legitamizing' the lewis and clark/freeride trail no matter how hard anyone pushed/begged/whined, etc. Furthormore (my dear watson), it doesn't give MORE or any mountain bike advocacy group much creedence if we/they try to condone unsanctioned trail building...kind of makes us look a little hypocritical, I would posture.
-jonny lang

[urbaindk]

Doubt the park would have any notion of 'legitamizing' the lewis and clark/freeride trail no matter how hard anyone pushed/begged/whined, etc.


Can we at least all agree that the whole thing is annoying?

[langer]

Can we at least all agree that the whole thing is annoying?
I think I can agree on that. Better to have ridden some jumps and lost, than to not have ridden jumps at all....or something like that....
-langolier

[ChrisR]

Tearing these trails down will only encourage the builders to build more illegal trails some place else and the cycle of unsactioned building will continue. The trails are going to get built no matter what.

As long as that "some place else" isn't on public land, it sounds great to me.

The trails will not "be built no matter what" if responsible people have their way and would like the park to remain open to bikers. If they continue to pop up I'm sure the park will be closed to bikers and then no one will ride there and no trails will be built. That would stink.

I agree that free riders need somewhere to do their thing. Unfortunately most public parks are not setup w/ free riding in mind. But they are not setup for many things for a reason.

Whatever happend to "leave no trace"?

[urbaindk]

Whatever happend to "leave no trace"?


Well the very act of building any trail what so ever blows that theory out of the woods now doesn't it?

I'd also argue that Joeblow rider seems to feel the need to ride around every obstacle and around every mud puddle lest they have to learn a new skill or get their precious stead dirty and thus turn and churn what was once single track in to quadruple and quintuple track.

I know no freeriders who fear such things. In fact the very idea of building structures and bridges was developed by riders who wished to leave as little impact on the environment as possible by bridging over sensitive, watery, and muddy areas.

[markie]

I can see both sides to this argument. But Urbaindk does have some good points.

It is wrong to go build unsanctioned trails on public land, but I find it moderatley unlikely that the builders were more members or read this forum. I also find it unlikely that if riding was banned in the park they would stop riding there either.

I am sure there are some precedents for illegal trails becomming legal.... The whole network of trails at Fruita is probably a good example.

[crashmore]

We do not own or have any rights to this land,

I have to disagree slightly on this point. As taxpayers in the state we do have rights to this land. Specifically we have the right to work within the system to maintain/expand our access to the park and trails. We certainly do not have a right to take matters into our own hands and ignore the system.

There's no doubt the folks building these types of illegal trails are quit simply endangering our future access. Not to mention the fact that they’re shooting themselves in the foot since it only hurts any chance of getting these types of trails legitimately built in the future

That being said I do have a fundamental problem with the attitude that the park is doing us a favor by allowing us to ride their land. It is in fact public land, there for us to use as long as we responsibly take advantage of it.

[ChrisR]

Well the very act of building any trail what so ever blows that theory out of the woods now doesn't it?

There's a link at the bottom of this page to the IMBA. If you don't understand what "leave no trace" means, I suggest you check out this link: http://www.imba.com/about/trail_rules.html

I imagine MORE subscribes to the same rules.

[allroy]

I do agree it would be great if they would leave the landing road trails and we could go in and fill in the gaps jumps and spend some time finishing everything that needed addressed instead of loosing everything.

Crashmore does have an excellent point I agree with, this is public land. Same with Markie about if the trails are closed would people stop riding...

Can we at least all agree that the whole thing is annoying?

[urbaindk]

I know what leave no trace means. But thanks for the refresher.

"Be sensitive to the dirt beneath you. Recognize different types of soils and trail construction; practice low-impact cycling. Wet and muddy trails are more vulnerable to damage. When the trailbed is soft, consider other riding options. This also means staying on existing trails and not creating new ones. Don't cut switchbacks. Be sure to pack out at least as much as you pack in."


And I'm saying that Joeblow rider who rides around obsticals and puddles pretty much breaks every one of those rules and leaves far more impact / traces than the majority of freeriders / freeride trails ever will.

[crashmore]

And I'm saying that Joeblow rider who rides around obsticals and puddles pretty much breaks every one of those rules and leaves far more impact / traces than the majority of freeriders / freeride trails ever will.

I agree 100% but unfortunately two wrongs don't make a right.

[allroy]

I've seen good and bad examples from every 'type' of rider. A lot of this is ignorance, most people just don't know.

There seems to be a good bit of illegal trail building going on in parks that can't sustain that type of riding currently and it is a very sore subject. At Wakefield there are 2 lame attempts at 'freeride' lines straight down the side of a hill where new trails were built. There has been a lot of time and effort that has been put into this trail system and all it takes is a couple dumb people to give everyone else a hardtime. Wakefield is not the place for that kind of riding, it's a fun XC place but would be boring as crap on that kind of bike. I've done both, been to the North Shore, ridden everything at Whistler, dig the stuff at the watershed.

So anyway my rant is over, I do see your point, but it's just frustrating when we are playing by the system and as much progress as we make, we get pushed back.

I know what leave no trace means. But thanks for the refresher.

"Be sensitive to the dirt beneath you. Recognize different types of soils and trail construction; practice low-impact cycling. Wet and muddy trails are more vulnerable to damage. When the trailbed is soft, consider other riding options. This also means staying on existing trails and not creating new ones. Don't cut switchbacks. Be sure to pack out at least as much as you pack in."


And I'm saying that Joeblow rider who rides around obsticals and puddles pretty much breaks every one of those rules and leaves far more impact / traces than the majority of freeriders / freeride trails ever will.

[urbaindk]

Just so you all know. I bent / mangled my frame about a month ago and am still waiting to get my crash replacement. I'll probably be less of a thorn in everyone's side once I have a decent bike to ride again. ;)

[crashmore]

Just so you all know. I bent / mangled my frame about a month ago and am still waiting to get my crash replacement. I'll probably be less of a thorn in everyone's side once I have a decent bike to ride again. ;)

I think this and the other "freeride" themed threads have generated alot of positive discussion on the subject. It seems we're seeing issues like this one popping up more and more as of late. One thing is clear, we're going to need to collectively decide as a club how we're going to deal with this stuff since it's not going away anytime soon.

[ChrisR]

And I'm saying that Joeblow rider who rides around obsticals and puddles pretty much breaks every one of those rules and leaves far more impact / traces than the majority of freeriders / freeride trails ever will.

I've seen all types of riders neglect the trail and I'm not singling out any one group. Illegal trails are just that. Illegal.

I feel that somone widening a trail by going around a puddle is less destructive than building an entirley new trail. The action of building illegal trails is significantly more likely to cause the park service to close the trail system to bikes than some ignorant riders. Just because some riders are ignorant to the rules doesn't give others the right to break them. Everyone has the right to use the park responsibley w/in the bounds of the rules.

Does anyone know why the park service does not post the rules of the trail at every trailhead? Seems simple enough.

[urbaindk]

Does anyone know why the park service does not post the rules of the trail at every trailhead? Seems simple enough.


I've often wondered this as well. Patapsco has a lot of entrance points, that could be part of the problem.

This has nothing to do with freeriding but it is one of my pet peaves:

A simple reversible sign that says "The trails are wet, don't ride" / "The trails are dry, ride on" Could be posted at key trail heads such as the park and ride and Landing RD.

I'm sure we've all encountered this many times but I was hiking out there last winter after a good soaking rain. It was so muddy I was questioning myself as to whether or not I should even be hiking. I confronted a pair of riders about it just 50 yards down the trail from the trailhead. I simply said "you realize that the trails are very wet today and you probably shouldn't be riding". I was trying to be nice and polite. They replied that "they knew" and kept riding. At that point I yelled back to them as they rode on "that if they knew then why didn't they turn around and leave." Their response to this was the old F.U. finger and I was just left standing there scratching my head, thinking I had probably just met 2 of the biggest assholes alive.

[BikerMiker]

I'm glad that everyone is having a constructive discussion (pun intended).

The reality is that the jumps are there, they have great access for crash stuff and they are mostly well built. I'd love to go in there and 'fix' everything to IMBA standards.

I do believe that more will pop up out there. We'll have to do something about it. I'd like to have people get together so we can find a place to build this stuff with the park. I can't do it alone.

Show up to the trailwork day. PLEASE!

mike
i said please.

[vwmtnbiker]

it is completely possible to legalize "illegal" trails, 495 for example. takes a little time, effort, and some freakin unity. i thinik what we all need to realize is at the end of the day we're all still riding a mountain bike and enjoying the same sport. i know you all would be pissed if wakefield got closed, so look at it from that point of view when something like this comes up and try to understand the anger, frustration, and distain someone might have towards "the system" that is tearing our their favorite trail. not a sermon, just a thought...

m

[gaz]

If someone wanders onto my land and builds stuff on it without my permission, I tear it down. If they ask my permission beforehand... maybe I let them do it, maybe I don't, but it at least stands a chance if they go through the proper channels, and display a modicum of respect.

If after tearing down said illegal stuff, it reappears, I tear it down again. And decide that that sort of person is my enemy. Nobody resembling that sort of person will be allowed on my land again.

I don't see what's so hard for folks to understand about that mindset.

[crashmore]

Your analogy isn't 100% accurate here. You reference your land ie. as in you own it. Land managers do not own the public land they manage any more than the local manager at McDonalds owns the restaurant.

Again I in no way support building unauthorized trails on public land.

I just think it's important to remember it's fundamentally our land (as taxpayers) to make use of. We just need to go about it in the correct way. If we're not getting the results we want there is a way to go about pushing change within the system.

Again I think if we assume the attitude that land manager are doing us some sort of favor by letting us ride "their land" we're going to have problems down the road.

I guess the bottom line is until a group of dedicated folks step up and start to work within the system to promote Freeride / Agreesive style trails this is going to continue to be a problem. As someone who just bought their first freeride rig I'm certainly willing to help anyway I can. If nothing else I wanna help make sure I have a place to ride it.





If someone wanders onto my land and builds stuff on it without my permission, I tear it down. If they ask my permission beforehand... maybe I let them do it, maybe I don't, but it at least stands a chance if they go through the proper channels, and display a modicum of respect.

If after tearing down said illegal stuff, it reappears, I tear it down again. And decide that that sort of person is my enemy. Nobody resembling that sort of person will be allowed on my land again.

I don't see what's so hard for folks to understand about that mindset.

[jks9199]

There used to be a location in Vienna where local kids (mostly) had built a number of jumps. I watched kids do stuff on BMX bikes out there that was pretty incredible. And they put lots and lots of hours into building the place. And the spot had a pretty wide reputation. I was even told that it was written up in a couple of places on the internet at one point.

BUT...it was private land. They didn't have permission to be on the land, let alone build the jumps. The property owner didn't want the liability concerns of it. Especially after someone got seriously hurt out there. It was bulldozed more than once. The property was posted, and access ways blocked. The kids would go around it or cut the chains, and rebuild their jumps.

Today -- it's been paved over into a parking lot. I had kids ask me about what they could do to keep places to ride. None of them have taken me up on the advice to work with the town to make legal places to ride (or skate, 'cause skaterboarders have been an issue in lots of places too).

MORE does everything it can (and the various trail laisons put a whole lot of unpaid, and minimally acknowledged time) into getting us access. MORE's developed a solid reputation for access. As others have said -- you want freeride locations, work with the system.

Personally -- I'd love to see IMBA's cycling rules added to the various bulletin boards like at Wakefield. Maybe it'll make a few people think about when they ride wet trails, or cut their own trails. And I think it's more likely to happen than any "RIDE/DON'T RIDE" signage...

[werace424]

Your analogy isn't 100% accurate here. You reference your land ie. as in you own it. Land managers do not own the public land they manage any more than the local manager at McDonalds owns the restaurant.

Again I in no way support building unauthorized trails on public land.

I just think it's important to remember it's fundamentally our land (as taxpayers) to make use of. We just need to go about it in the correct way. If we're not getting the results we want there is a way to go about pushing change within the system.

Again I think if we assume the attitude that land manager are doing us some sort of favor by letting us ride "their land" we're going to have problems down the road.

I guess the bottom line is until a group of dedicated folks step up and start to work within the system to promote Freeride / Agreesive style trails this is going to continue to be a problem. As someone who just bought their first freeride rig I'm certainly willing to help anyway I can. If nothing else I wanna help make sure I have a place to ride it.

All I can add here is a big healthy AMEN Brother!! :)

[BikerMiker]

There is a little lack of historical perspective in these last few posts. Park land isn't for the people to do with as they please (see: developers), it's for the enjoyment of the public and it serves a civic purpose so people can unwind and enjoy nature. There's a lot more conservation-based mindset in all park rangers and in DNR, specifically. Keep the land natural and let people walk through it. Thoreau type stuff.

Just because our tax dollars fund the parks, it doesn't mean we can demand things that are out of line with the intended uses. Your tax dollars pay for roads. Try and build a set of doubles out of asphault on I95. How about Police? 'Can I borrow your service revolver, officer?'

Park managers are responsible for keeping and maintaining the land in accordance with how DNR has been tasked with managing it. Mountain biking and building jumps and stuff is hardly something they consider a natural use of the land. That couldn't be further from their thoughts. Hell, if they went ahead and banned mtn bikes 100%, they WOULD have the justification for doing it. They could ban horses just the same if it weren't for the history and $$ involved.

So, we just need to find a piece of land in the park that is not valuable in terms of conservation (land near the Avalon pavillions, for example) and propose something that looks a lot like something that has already been done somewhere else with great success. Getting the park to embrace this stuff is a stretch, to be sure, and not in their job descriptions. Again, they would have every right (and the backing of the DNR) to refuse us.

We need to all be a little more humble when we ask for this stuff. If you can't see yourself making an argument directly to the park manager, it might not be a good idea to throw it around out here in MORE-land.


mike

[gaz]

Your analogy isn't 100% accurate here. You reference your land ie. as in you own it. Land managers do not own the public land they manage any more than the local manager at McDonalds owns the restaurant.Not 100% accurate, but not too far off the truth, IMHO. Land managers may not OWN the land, but they're the custodians of it, and their job is to do right by said land, as they see fit. And while that McDonalds manager may not own the restaurant (and I use that term loosely, lol) he has every right to boot out or refuse service to someone because they're not obeying their rules. You may not like the rules, I may not like the rules, but that's the bottom line.

I would LOVE to see some of these trails be developed, but I have zero sympathy for rogue trailbuilders who lose their work, purely because (again IMHO) they're not helping to dispel the "punk a** kid" reputation that many view mountainbikers with (even though a lot of us are the same age as 'em, hehe) and if they actually went through proper channels - as Mike said - we would HAVE trails with the TTFs we'd all like to see. And if any of the rogue builders happen to be reading this, think of it this way - either keep building your backyard stuff illegally, and keep facing it getting torn down (with more and more haste and dilligence each time), or go through the proper channels - it might take a year, but that 12 months could bring grant money, a permanent home for freeriding in the area, and countless volunteers to build it.

[crashmore]

Just because our tax dollars fund the parks, it doesn't mean we can demand things that are out of line with the intended uses. Your tax dollars pay for roads. Try and build a set of doubles out of asphalt on I95. How about Police? 'Can I borrow your service revolver, officer?'

That's taking what I said out of context and to a silly extreme. My point is simply that I believe we have a fundamental right to use park land. I think conservation and recreation / use etc is pretty open to interpretation depending on the individual. Not too long ago it was pretty easy for folks like the sierra club and so on to argue that mountain biking is far from an intended use of our parks system.
I think the only reason we have as much access as we do today is because some very dedicated groups and organizations have worked within the system to make it happen. If they didn't feel we had a right to use the trails I guess we'd all be riding asphalt.

If the use we envision (whatever it is) falls outside of the current policy we can work to change it. Ultimately that's what our system of government and a democracy is all about. If you don't like things as they stand work to change them. Sometimes it just takes compromise and reason, sometimes some good old fashioned physical labor/hard work sometimes it may even take choosing who you vote for more carefully come election time.

You misunderstand me if you think I'm advocating illegal trail building or making "demands" or being disrespectful to anyone least of all park managers.

[BikerMiker]

I don't think I'm misrepresenting what you said, I'm just trying to make a point. The land managers have a 'keep your head down' mentality in terms of new stuff in parks in general.

In terms of interpretation, WE may have room to interpret what conservation means, but the DNR doesn't. They keep it pretty strict. As an example, see any parks open after dark? Hail no. 'It disturbs the wildlife' is what I usually hear. Huting (day or night) doesn't disturb them? It's just an excuse not to have to justify it to upper management. Lord knows they aren't studying what the wildlife is actually doing in the vast majority of state land. Poor bears...

We are obviously all on the same page here. I'm just doing a poor job illustrating the huge amount of resistance that is out there on the part of the people who have the 'go/no go' power.

The point is that nothing with a big reward is ever easy to accomplish. Change is difficult and understanding the point of view of others can be nearly impossible for some. The park is coming around and I hope to see more openness to what we are talking about in the near future.

mike

[crashmore]

The point is that nothing with a big reward is ever easy to accomplish. Change is difficult and understanding the point of view of others can be nearly impossible for some. The park is coming around and I hope to see more openness to what we are talking about in the near future.

mike

Now on that I agree 110%. This isn't going be an overnight fix and it's going to take alot of hard work to get it done. Hopefully the folks who have spent so much time building the unofficial stuff decide to get involved and work with us to do it the right way.

[werace424]

See, basically we all agree on the same issues. It is just really easy to misinterpret what someone means just by reading it. Heck, it's easy enough to do when you're talking to someone. I understood what Crashmore was saying, and I aggreed wholeheartedly. We all may not yet "know" the exact way to do things but, we all know the right and wrong way to do things.

I think? :confused:

Paul

[BikerMiker]

All I can say is that I've worked with the park for a long time now and I know that my involvement has made a difference. Of course, I wasn't 100% sure until this past Thursday...

(squiggly lines, fade to last Thursday. Scene: me and Eric Crawford standing on some singletrack talking to Amy and Jen, the Patapsco Trail Crew).

I says, 'you did a great job on that re-route on Ridge will the crib walls and the insloped turns with all of those grade reversals. It's a lot of fun and everyone out here really likes riding it.'

Amy/Jen: 'Well since sitting through all of those classes with Rich from IMBA and using that IMBA book that we now have two of, we really understand what it is that needs to be done out here.'

(Close shot of my face, jaw dropped). And, fade back to now...

So all of the time that we've spent with them and all of the work that MORE did getting money in the DNR budget for trail stuff and all of the work that Dan Hudson did setting up the trail classes at Patapsco and all the work that Rich did being a great guy paid off.

We couldn't be luckier. Amy and Jen are huge fans of Rich and IMBA now because of all of th work that we've ALL DONE TOGETHER! We rock. Members are the ones who ultimately make it all possible. Members who pay their membership fees, contribute to the forums, go to trailwork, volunteer as liaisons, board members and ride coordinators... (By the way, they already love MORE because of all the volunteer hours, but I digress).

We all did this together. We should all share in the outcome. And getting more freeride/dirtjump/dh people involved will only mean larger and better outcomes for more people.

I have a lot of demands on my time and MORE is one organization that I ALWAYS find time for.

mike
a little teary...

[drewdane]

it is completely possible to legalize "illegal" trails, 495 for example.

m
Is this the part where someone jumps in and screams:

DOOD! NEVER, EVER, EVER BREATHE A WORD OF THE SOOPER-DOOPER TOP-SECRET-HANDSHAKE RADICAL AWESOME WAKEFIELD DIRT JUMPS, MAAAAAAN!!!!!

:rolleyes: ;) :D

[gaz]

DOOD! NEVER, EVER, EVER BREATH A WORD OF THE SOOPER-DOOPER TOP-SECRET-HANDSHAKE RADICAL AWESOME WAKEFIELD DIRT JUMPS, MAAAAAAN!!!!!
Those things are HELLA awesome!

[jagayers]

I agree...but it is going to become tough to keep them a secret for much longer...due to the new super highway (hint, hint) built next to them....

even I finnally found them....OHHHH NOOOOO I have said to much....

Does this mena I now become a "runner" and must find "sanctuary" (can anyone guess the movie?)

[gaz]

Does this mena I now become a "runner" and must find "sanctuary" (can anyone guess the movie?)LOGANS RUN!! LOGANS RUN!!! :cool: :cool: :cool:

[crashmore]

I hit up the Lewis & Clark trail today for the first time in a good while. (Thanks for your efforts in keeping it open Mike) If nothing else Dad and I got to ride it at least once more.

Not having ridden it in a while I was a wee bit surprised when I came down the trail to the first jump. Seems it's grown a bit :) As have a couple of the others there.

I was able to ride and enjoy most of them. There was no way I was hitting that crazy gap jump over the creek at the end though. (At least not on my Blur :) )

I do have to say, that after seeing how much the trails/jumps have been built up just since my last visit I kinda have a better understanding as to why the park suddenly decided they may need to do something.

In any even I sure hope Mike's efforts pay off. Dad and I had a blast there today. It'd be nice to have a place to go and practice this type of riding available.