grog wrote:The 10 mph has always been there - at least as since I started riding in '99. I'm guessing that it's under more scrutiny now since there's a higher probability of user conflicts during the transition. Give it time - my gut says an equilibrium will be reached as the two groups get used to the new situation and it won't be an issue any longer.
Meanwhile, with the exception of one post, all I've seen here are complaints. For those that have made it out there, what're the positives? Hope to hit it tomorrow during lunch. I'm sure the NPS would like some positive feedback along with the negative they're already getting here.
grog wrote:It appears that not all are happy with the new trails . . .
Letter to the editor in the MDJ . . .
Article on the signs being vandalized . . .
Article on the expansion of trails. The funny thing about this is that if you've been around mountain biking long enough to remember him, anti-mtb activist Mike Vandeman makes an appearance in the comments . . .
vrk75 wrote:I guess NPS will look at strava segments and ticket all those people with 10 MPH or above.
iride wrote:ScottGreer wrote:Nothing to deter you from not riding.
as is often the case....
Perry wrote:Anyone know the logic behind closing the wide road bed from the Sibley Forest Subdivision to the top of the hill?
Why close that road? It's not even a trail... it's a road (plus just a little bit of trail where you (used to) turn to the left at the top of the hill to start the decent).
I live near the trail, and very much liked being able to get down to the river quickly and back for a lunch ride or a fast ride in the evening - or to just use the fitness trail around the river for a few laps. This has made the opening of the new trails a let down for me (otherwise they are great).
Now I have to go through Sandy Springs and back to make it to the river - especially on M, W, F. Getting back is harder either way. That's fine if I've got a lot of time, but often I don't. The new trail from the subdivision down to the river on M, W, F doesn't shed water very well either. The old trail is ready at least a day earlier than that part of the new one.
Why not leave us the option as a fast way back, a drier trail after recent rain, and/or a bailout? It's not like that goes through some delicate ecosystem. Open that back up as a bidirection section and it's perfect.
Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot]