Tacoma
Et incurventur ante non
- Location
- far enough away
Word, yo.
Constrictor Restoration
- Thread starter Kiel
- Start date
Now you guys got me wondering...I haven't been out there for a few years so I think I will head out there and see just how much damage we as a collective community have done to warrant a trail restoration after a VERY short few years!!
Can we put together a collection of pictures highlighting what exactly needs to be done with comments on them? I have some old pictures but it has been a while.
I am willing to help out as I am considering getting back into the rock crawling as opposed to spending all my time on the ATV for offroad.
Can we put together a collection of pictures highlighting what exactly needs to be done with comments on them? I have some old pictures but it has been a while.
I am willing to help out as I am considering getting back into the rock crawling as opposed to spending all my time on the ATV for offroad.
Kiel
Formerly WJ ZUK
CrawlerCraig
Registered User
- Location
- Saratoga Springs Ut.
You don't need to close off the road entirely.............Leave enough room between 2 posts for a ATV to fit but NOT a Jeep or Buggie..........that way the ATV people still have acess and we have to go up WW.....
Kiel
Formerly WJ ZUK
I just don't think that will last all that long one guy who thinks he will fit through anyway and crunch. I really thing we need to focus on blocking the bypasses everywhere and just make the trail make to what is was originally and let the atv's make it if they can. If they can't do the wolverine or the nest then they should be up there either
I just don't think that will last all that long one guy who thinks he will fit through anyway and crunch. I really thing we need to focus on blocking the bypasses everywhere and just make the trail make to what is was originally and let the atv's make it if they can. If they can't do the wolverine or the nest then they should be up there either
good points...
Hey...I got a winch on the front of my quad and I am dumb enough to use it so I don't see why you should think about blocking access to those with ATVs...if we can get there then leave it alone. I did a couple ledges in Moab where I was hanging from the handlebars running the winch switch.
There is a place you can hook your cable on the nest, Badger has done it, I've helped others do it but I've never done it. Why? Because I have no burning need to mangle plastic and scratch off powder coat.
I can't understand why people object to a gatekeeper that you may need to winch for a trail that you HAVE to use your winch to complete unless you are in a comp buggy.
It has already been discussed that we really don't have the right to limit the travel on a trail to just rock crawling vehicles. The BLM is not going to go for it unless they see serious environmental damage caused by vehicles going around obstacles. I don't see a problem with people running ATVs along side rock crawlers up a trail...yeah you may get in each other's way but guess what...the ATVs have just as much a right to be there as rock crawlers, it's a free country.
Now that said, I don't want to do damage to a trail by trying to hang with rock crawlers while on my quad.
Now that said, I don't want to do damage to a trail by trying to hang with rock crawlers while on my quad.
timpanogos
Push to the Peak
- Location
- Heber
Even in a large group of should be informed wheelers, I believe I saw one of our group on the Wolverine bypass yesterday.
I assume the vehicles driver had no idea that they were on the controversial bypass. The solution here, or at least a start to it, might be as simple as putting one of those plastic flat poles in the middle of the bypass that informs that it is not to be used. Some branches making it a bit more obvious will also help.
I assume the vehicles driver had no idea that they were on the controversial bypass. The solution here, or at least a start to it, might be as simple as putting one of those plastic flat poles in the middle of the bypass that informs that it is not to be used. Some branches making it a bit more obvious will also help.
- Location
- Sandy, Ut
Purely academic until someone actually takes the neccissary steps... Its not as easy as planting a couple of rocks or signs on the bypass...
The reason this project has fallen on its face several times in the past is two-fold...
1. A sizeable amount of Constrictor is on private property. Neither the BLM nor we have the right to make ANY changes to the trail in all reality. The BLM allows user maintainance on their trails, with their approval... and in many cases blocking bypasses and trail weaving would be appreciated to the fullest... but its a different situation with Constrictor as the owners would accept any proposed changes. Thats not to say they would even notice a bypass blocked, I don't know... I don't know the owners. There was rumor that a few RME'ers ran into them last year as they were riding their dirtbikes, but thats never gone past just that... rumors. I know WJ ZUK & Tacoma offered up their "investigative" services at the last U4WDA meeting as this is a major issue we have been working. Finally having somebody willing to track them down is a big step (thanks guys!). From there, its really up to their mercy.... for all we know they could tell us to pound sand and stay off their property. In fact they might take notice of the popularity and want to start charging a user fee or close it off to public access, especially considering the use (overuse??) it potentially gets. I wish I had more clarity on the subject but its all speculation at this point...
2. The BLM is currently revising their travel plan. The latest maps we received from the contact we are working with most likely did not (the maps were very ambiguous) have Constrictor nor the trail leading up to it on their "proposed" systems trails. So... all the work in the world might be all for not as they could close the trail to all motorized use with the signing of a pen. There may or may not be any legal standing to fight it... but groups like U4WDA & Usa-All likely don't have money to fight this type of battle. And apathy won't get us much money from users sadly. We have spoken with the BLM on several occasions about the future of Constrictor, they realize it is a complex issue too... hence why they had us pull the car out from day 1. They know it exists, they know its a prized trail to us... but it was missed in their initial inventory 5+ years ago (as were countless other trails in the area). I don't know what trails they inventoried and what the requirements they had were... mabey it didn't look passable to them? Mabey they stopped their inventory at the private property boundary? Mabey they used old maps and aerial photography to determine routes? Its hard to say what some "unauthorized" improvements would do for the situation... could be good, could easily be really bad... not worth the risk IMHO. There are similar situations where people were ticketed and fined for "restoration" of the "restoration" they did to public land... I can think of a couple instances, sad but true. Realistically until the BLM is ready with even a "sample" motorized travel plan, there is little we can do other than "play nice" and keep on their good side. They can't make comments nor take comments until they have some proposed plans. Our NPLD RME cleanup was a huge step there... JuLee from the BLM surveyed our dumpster (that she provided) the next day before the picked it up... the was beyond excited that we would spend a random Saturday picking up trash in the area. Can't be a bad thing that they noticed our hard work... Sadly we had ~20 participants (weak, weak, weak)... expecially considering how many users that area gets on any other weekend. Imagine how much trash we could have picked up with 100 volunteers? Imagine what that would say to the BLM... I have no doubt it bolsters our cause!
The reason this project has fallen on its face several times in the past is two-fold...
1. A sizeable amount of Constrictor is on private property. Neither the BLM nor we have the right to make ANY changes to the trail in all reality. The BLM allows user maintainance on their trails, with their approval... and in many cases blocking bypasses and trail weaving would be appreciated to the fullest... but its a different situation with Constrictor as the owners would accept any proposed changes. Thats not to say they would even notice a bypass blocked, I don't know... I don't know the owners. There was rumor that a few RME'ers ran into them last year as they were riding their dirtbikes, but thats never gone past just that... rumors. I know WJ ZUK & Tacoma offered up their "investigative" services at the last U4WDA meeting as this is a major issue we have been working. Finally having somebody willing to track them down is a big step (thanks guys!
). From there, its really up to their mercy.... for all we know they could tell us to pound sand and stay off their property. In fact they might take notice of the popularity and want to start charging a user fee or close it off to public access, especially considering the use (overuse??) it potentially gets. I wish I had more clarity on the subject but its all speculation at this point...2. The BLM is currently revising their travel plan. The latest maps we received from the contact we are working with most likely did not (the maps were very ambiguous) have Constrictor nor the trail leading up to it on their "proposed" systems trails. So... all the work in the world might be all for not as they could close the trail to all motorized use with the signing of a pen. There may or may not be any legal standing to fight it... but groups like U4WDA & Usa-All likely don't have money to fight this type of battle. And apathy won't get us much money from users sadly. We have spoken with the BLM on several occasions about the future of Constrictor, they realize it is a complex issue too... hence why they had us pull the car out from day 1. They know it exists, they know its a prized trail to us... but it was missed in their initial inventory 5+ years ago (as were countless other trails in the area). I don't know what trails they inventoried and what the requirements they had were... mabey it didn't look passable to them? Mabey they stopped their inventory at the private property boundary? Mabey they used old maps and aerial photography to determine routes? Its hard to say what some "unauthorized" improvements would do for the situation... could be good, could easily be really bad... not worth the risk IMHO. There are similar situations where people were ticketed and fined for "restoration" of the "restoration" they did to public land... I can think of a couple instances, sad but true. Realistically until the BLM is ready with even a "sample" motorized travel plan, there is little we can do other than "play nice" and keep on their good side. They can't make comments nor take comments until they have some proposed plans. Our NPLD RME cleanup was a huge step there... JuLee from the BLM surveyed our dumpster (that she provided) the next day before the picked it up... the was beyond excited that we would spend a random Saturday picking up trash in the area. Can't be a bad thing that they noticed our hard work... Sadly we had ~20 participants (weak, weak, weak)... expecially considering how many users that area gets on any other weekend. Imagine how much trash we could have picked up with 100 volunteers? Imagine what that would say to the BLM... I have no doubt it bolsters our cause!
- Location
- Sandy, Ut
Oh, and if there are some that want to take this past the "chat" and make something of it. Get working with Tacoma & WJ ZUK... after contact is made with the landowner, we will obviously know more... but we will also still be at the mercy of the BLM as to wether or not they choose to recognize it on their new Motorized Travel plan. In the meantime, pending the OK from landowners... the plan is for all the interested parties (U4WDA, RME folks, any other club, group, etc) to put together a proposal and working agreement with the BLM to fix the problem.
Tacoma
Et incurventur ante non
- Location
- far enough away
I should have something for us all by next Friday. Tuesday I will be hitting the county building and talking with the BLM. I'm trying to find That Guy That Knows Everyone in the county...
I have hope that we'll be able to work something out. It's not like we are asking to build a welcome center or anything, and I think that if it's couched as a restriction on destruction, as it is, we'll be met with at least an open mind.
I have hope that we'll be able to work something out. It's not like we are asking to build a welcome center or anything, and I think that if it's couched as a restriction on destruction, as it is, we'll be met with at least an open mind.
- Location
- Sandy, Ut
Very good!
The County Assessors (sp?) office should be able to tell you the owner... after all I'm sure they have his name on a tax payment
As soon as contact has been made with the owner and they give the OK, etc. We can send our proposal over to the BLM (better yet hand deliver it to them).
Tacoma
Et incurventur ante non
- Location
- far enough away
Depends on the terms. Lots of land out here is some kind of split ownership or lease scenario, like all the cattle range in Rush Valley. I've run into people who are running the cows on "their" land, but in that case they're leasing it from the BLM or something. I am not sure how that arrangement works, to be honest. I just know what they say about land that's on the map as BLM.
I imagine I will learn a bunch this week LOL
I imagine I will learn a bunch this week LOL
- Location
- Sandy, Ut
Absolutely... because the trail in and the trail out are BLM. I'm not 1000% sure of the boundaries... it would take a surveyor to plot it out for us. While that would be cool... it would be easier to have the blessing from both sides
Also, say we do get permission from the landowner... but then in 6 months the BLM decides they don't like it (for whatever reason), they can choose to leave it off their new Travel Plan... CLOSED. Now the landowner could probably go after the BLM to maintain the "access" to his property or claim, but its all $$$