Running trails

Not Jobless · Oct 20, 2006

Newb runs are a great idea to teach people the all so important trail ettiquette that most people seem to lack these days.

Being that you have decided to run Sca-up I can only imagine that you will be sticking to the main trail and not using the abundance of go-arounds so that the newer wheelers can see what a mess the less considerate wheelers have made of that trail.

Thanks for your efforts.
Brad

EDIT...Sac-up is not a trail I would consider for new wheelers to learn on as it was originally built for trailer queens and will require significant winching, stacking & body damage if you stay on the real trail.

War-Jeeper · Oct 20, 2006

Jobless said:
Newb runs are a great idea to teach people the all so important trail ettiquette that most people seem to lack these days.

Being that you have decided to run Sca-up I can only imagine that you will be sticking to the main trail and not using the abundance of go-arounds so that the newer wheelers can see what a mess the less considerate wheelers have made of that trail.

Thanks for your efforts.
Brad

EDIT...Sac-up is not a trail I would consider for new wheelers to learn on as it was originally built for trailer queens and will require significant winching, stacking & body damage if you stay on the real trail.

We ran it on the last noob run......and crash was our fearless leader then

War-Jeeper · Oct 20, 2006

MarcW said:
lets see if i can get a new crossmember, O2 sensor, and motor mounts in my cherokee by the weekend before, then figure out whats wrong with my T case, and why it doenst like 4 wd :flipoff:

If ya need some help give me a call, o and im buying a plasma cutter either today or monday wahoo im excited

Not Jobless · Oct 20, 2006

War-Jeeper said:
We ran it on the last noob run......and crash was our fearless leader then

Yes...I know. And I also remember seeing all the pictures of vehicles using the go-arounds.

War-Jeeper · Oct 20, 2006

Jobless said:
Yes...I know. And I also remember seeing all the pictures of vehicles using the go-arounds.

I personally only used one that i can remeber cause if i had gone down the "acctual" trail i would have gone over backwards being as my jeep has a very short wheel base. But anyway back to this noob run seems how we are starying off topic

Not Jobless · Oct 20, 2006

War-Jeeper said:
I personally only used one that i can remeber cause if i had gone down the "acctual" trail i would have gone over backwards being as my jeep has a very short wheel base. But anyway back to this noob run seems how we are starying off topic

Actually we are not straying off topic as this is the whole intention behind the newb runs...education.

Especially given all the hard work of the individuals involved at Reiter to keep it open and potentially convert it to a designated ORV area.

If it is going to become an ORV area then we have to start thinking about the general rules & regs that go along with it such as those that we find at Walker Valley and other ORV areas.

Freeride · Oct 20, 2006

Sac-up is a black eye for Reiter. The whole trail looks like a warzone from all the go-arounds.

Comet · Oct 20, 2006

I agree with Jobless. Karl, you have talked about the Tamers wanting to adopt that trail and block off all the endless go arounds. I suggest either changing the name/intent of the run or making sure everyone stays on the main trail or finding another trail to run. My two cents.

KarlVP · Oct 20, 2006

Comet said:
I agree with Jobless. Karl, you have talked about the Tamers wanting to adopt that trail and block off all the endless go arounds. I suggest either changing the name/intent of the run or making sure everyone stays on the main trail or finding another trail to run. My two cents.

Part of the reason I want to run Sac-Up is because we can use the main trail, for those that wish to challenge thier rigs. If they don't like what they see, they can take the bypass.

My last Noob run I did on Isabel, = no bypasses. Yes, this was a pain because those that didn't like what they saw didn't have an option, but it would have been easy to stage winch vehicles along the way.

I will be in keeping with the main lines of the trail. But for those that aren't so bold, they will have an option.

And just for the record of me saying it, if and when Reiter Trails becomes an ORV park, there will HAVE to be bypasses in place. However, not so many.

Someday, I'll get off my ass and organize a work party to clean that trail up, I know GARYTJ went out last weekend to survey what we really need to do. I'll get with him and we can discuss what needs to be done.

For now. I do my noob run. Please come and educate. That's what we need.

Freeride · Oct 20, 2006

KarlVP said:
And just for the record of me saying it, if and when Reiter Trails becomes an ORV park, there will HAVE to be bypasses in place. However, not so many.

I don't think that's how it works. I know at Walker there are no go arounds. If you can run the trail, stay out of the double black diamonds on the bunny slopes.

Comet · Oct 20, 2006

We need to make sure that people are educated then because there were some pics last time of people running by passes that were part of the more recently created craziness.

Comet · Oct 20, 2006

By passes should be determined by the DNR. My bet is they will want at least one on Sac Up.

Not Jobless · Oct 20, 2006

Comet said:
By passes should be determined by the DNR. My bet is they will want at least one on Sac Up.

Bypasses should not be tolerated....they are an eyesore and are a welcome invitation for others to create more.

You should be running trails that are within the limits of your driving ability and your rigs capabilities....period.

I can not remember how many times in the past as I was starting to wheel that I either did not run specific trails, such as Highrider for example, or I turned around on a trail that got me in over my head.

Freeride · Oct 20, 2006

Jobless said:
Bypasses should not be tolerated....they are an eyesore and are a welcome invitation for others to create more.

You should be running trails that are within the limits of your driving ability and your rigs capabilities....period.

I can not remember how many times in the past as I was starting to wheel that I either did not run specific trails, such as Highrider for example, or I turned around on a trail that got me in over my head.

X2. I think trails & trail systems should have gatekeepers. I'm all for having trails for all levels of rigs/drivers but lets keep them distinct.

It's like riding the 7th Heaven chairlift at Stevens up and then looking for "the bypasses" and then bragging around the watercooler on Monday that you ran a double black.....

skrause · Oct 20, 2006

Comet said:
By passes should be determined by the DNR. My bet is they will want at least one on Sac Up.

I thought Sac Up WAS a bypass. :flipoff: :haha:

KarlVP · Oct 20, 2006

MMMk... when I talk about a bypass. I am talking about a bypass at a single trail obstacle. Not a whole bypass along the entire trail.

Like this spot.

We all know where that is, and when it is wet and nasty, it may not be something everyone wants to tackle. Hence the bypass around that single obstacle.

I totally disagree with an obstacle getting so hard for EVERYONE that a bypass is built around it. The obstacle should be maintained, not a new cut put in so people can get around it. Or an above average obstacle should have an EASY, PAVED (paved meaning not going to get torn up) bypass so those that don't want to break thier junk can go around. If an installed bypass is getting torn up, it should be taken care of PROMPTLY, so people don't make another bypass around the bypass.

Here is what I am talking about. The trail is to my Right that you can see in the back of the picture. The hole I am in can get pretty nasty when it is wet. However, there is a nice, easy bypass to the left. Something you can drive your honda civic through. If you want to have fun, stay to the right, if you want the easy way stay left. And if you can't drive, this is what happens.

I also agree with not tackling trails that are too hard for you. But I think you should push your vehicles limits a little bit, this is why we wheel. To try new things.

There are also trails that people shouldn't go on too. Take the busywild at elbe. Once you are in there, and down the big hill, you are ****ed. There are no bypasses down there. It's pretty nasty. Most people know better and the ones that don't should be educated, not made fun of. (I only bring the making fun of people part because I have seen that happen.)

Anywho; to sum it up, take Little sluice, on the Rubicon. If there wasn't a bypass, that would be the turn around point for 90% of the people that went to that trail. It would become "buggies only"

NotMatt · Oct 20, 2006

I think something that should be added here is that until Reiter is officially an "ORV park" or the trails are somehow sanctioned by some authority, there is technically/legally/whateverly no official determination as to what the "real" trail is, and on the flip side, no way to specify or lay out which bypasses are ok and which are not. As far as I see it, from an official standpoint, it's a free for all. Yes, there may be an "original" line... but then again, there wasn't a trail there until someone whacked through the bushes originally to create it. So what is the answer then?

I'm playing devil's advocate here and doing a little :stirpot: because I don't necessarily have a firm foot on either side of the fence. On one hand, yes people should stick only to the original line and pull cable when they can't make it... but what's the original line and what's a bypass? Maybe I've been wheeling sack-up for a long time and taking what I thought was the original line... and somebody comes along and says "nope, this is it, you're wrong"... who's got the authority to say so if the whole trail itself is not even "official"?

OldGreen · Oct 20, 2006

That is just wrong. If the original trail is too tough, you winch your ass up that spot or turn around and go home.

It never ceases to piss me off that some people think that they should be able to alter the trailscape just because they can't make it up an obstacle. That is what God created winches for. There is no shame in pulling cable on a trail. It is a more friendly way of getting up a spot that you can't make.

Bypasses are arrogant, ugly, un-environmentally friendly and go directly against the wheelin' code of conduct/trail etiquette.

EDIT: SAying KarlVP was wrong, not NOTMATT. He just posted to fast.

Not Jobless · Oct 20, 2006

OldGreen said:
That is just wrong. If the original trail is too tough, you winch your ass up that spot or turn around and go home.

It never ceases to piss me off that some people think that they should be able to alter the trailscape just because they can't make it up an obstacle. That is what God created winches for. There is no shame in pulling cable on a trail. It is a more friendly way of getting up a spot that you can't make.

Bypasses are arrogant, ugly, un-environmentally friendly and go directly against the wheelin' code of conduct/trail etiquette.

EDIT: SAying KarlVP was wrong, not NOTMATT. He just posted to fast.

:beer:

NotMatt · Oct 20, 2006

OldGreen said:
That is just wrong. If the original trail is too tough, you winch your ass up that spot or turn around and go home.

It never ceases to piss me off that some people think that they should be able to alter the trailscape just because they can't make it up an obstacle. That is what God created winches for. There is no shame in pulling cable on a trail. It is a more friendly way of getting up a spot that you can't make.

Bypasses are arrogant, ugly, un-environmentally friendly and go directly against the wheelin' code of conduct/trail etiquette.

Like I said... I'm playing devil's advocate here... with a bit of a philosophical bent... bear with me.

In an area like Reiter... where the trails are mostly all bootleg to begin with... where IS the original trail?

Say I felt like making a trail (as somebody originally did when they made sack-up) and I wanted it to run directly next to the main line of the Sack-up trail... then what? Does someone have the authority to tell me I can't create that trail because it's a bypass for all the hard obstacles on the "real" trail through there? Who says that's the real trail? Do you have the authority? Cause I don't.... only the landowner/manager has the authority to say what is and what isn't the trail.

Having said that, I agree... sack-up and many of the other trails at Reiter have gotten so ridiculous with bypasses in just the last few years that I've been wheeling there... there are numerous bypasses upon bypasses, and even I have gotten lost and off the trail at times because I didn't know or wasn't sure where the original lines were. That's simply outrageous if you ask me... If there are bypasses, they should be clearly marked as such and no other bypasses should be allowed. If there are no bypasses, fine, people can pull cable or get a tug through an obstacle... that's SOP as far as I'm concerned... but until there's some kind of authority to say what is and what isn't allowed... how can we begin to enforce that kind of thing? The bypasses are already there and established.

Again, let me re-iterate, I AGREE with you OG... there's no excuse for cutting through the woods around an obstacle that's "too hard"... but unless you or I want to go play trail cop and follow everybody around and through the trail, I don't see a reasonable solution other than having some kind of official status so that blocks for bypasses can be created/maintained and handing out tickets for violators can be done by somebody with the authority to do it.