Fallen Timber FLUZ zone???????

Dragon997 · Post by **Dragon997** » Sat Jul 07, 2007 9:15 am

After reading about the Willow Creek/IG Fluz area.
It got me to thinkin, smell the smoke??
Would a Fallen Timber Fluz area work?
Around the Fallen Timber area creat a FLUZ zone, with same weight and camping restrictions.
If you outside of the FT FLUZ zone stay on the numbered trails.
Its a easy way for SRD to open some trails back up, which they have stated they want to do.
I know it will ruffle some feathers, but the 4x4s dont go there anyway.
Its mostly 2wheel and ATVs on 4x4 trails.
Johnathan

Grumps · Post by **Grumps** » Sat Jul 07, 2007 9:32 am

I may be mistaken but I thought Fallen Timber was already within the boundaries of the Ghost FLUZ?

Dragon997 · Post by **Dragon997** » Sat Jul 07, 2007 9:42 am

Grumps, your correct.
But the diffrence is in FT area you are limited to numbered trails.
In IG/WC Fluz the riding area is open, now that may change.
My point is to open up a "Fallen Timber OHV area" in the Ghost Fluz zone.
with the same camping and weight restrictions as in the IG/WC Fluz.
Johnathan

Post by **Spinalguy** » Sat Jul 07, 2007 10:37 am

Dragon997 wrote:Grumps, your correct.
But the diffrence is in FT area you are limited to numbered trails.
In IG/WC Fluz the riding area is open, now that may change.
My point is to open up a "Fallen Timber OHV area" in the Ghost Fluz zone.
with the same camping and weight restrictions as in the IG/WC Fluz.
Johnathan

The problem is that if we continue to "allow" weight restrictions in Alberta than none of us will be allowed to transport our 'weight allowed OHV's' and trailers to the areas we want to be in. Because a 4x4 is the only way you will get there...make sense?
5% of all OHV use is 4x4's, somehow i doubt they are the cause of all the problems.
A unified rally would be to have the governmnet ban random camping in Alberta and set upi designated paid camping. The $ is your user fee for camping. Random camping is the problem, not 4x4's.

Tom

Dragon997 · Post by **Dragon997** » Sat Jul 07, 2007 4:37 pm

The problem is that if we continue to "allow" weight restrictions in Alberta than none of us will be allowed to transport our 'weight allowed OHV's' and trailers to the areas we want to be in. Because a 4x4 is the only way you will get there...make sense?
5% of all OHV use is 4x4's, somehow i doubt they are the cause of all the problems.
A unified rally would be to have the governmnet ban random camping in Alberta and set upi designated paid camping. The $ is your user fee for camping. Random camping is the problem, not 4x4's.

Hello Tom

Let me tackle these one at a time, remember I am just thinking outloud. And nobody ever listens to me anyway.

I think we will still be able to access the campspots the majority of campers and ohv users camp at. Granted you wont be able to acess remote random campspots with a 4x4.
But if SRD created more campsites of the 40 it would also be more managble.

I wasnt stating that 4X4 are the sole problem, I dont want to throw the 4x4s under the bus, pardon the analagy.
We all have issues in every discipline of OHV use.

But, if it takes separating myself from the 4x4 community to get trails back, then I am ready to say adios!

Thats just my slant on the way that SRD sees it.

Johnathan

Post by **Spinalguy** » Sat Jul 07, 2007 5:55 pm

Jonathan and all,

the problem is that with 4x4's gone, you can no longer blame them for all the problems

So who do you think will be blamed next? My vote goes to quads as they are the majority user. If you go to Waiporous, you will see that our singletracks are being cut down to fit quads, not trucks. Skegs now are full of tiremarks. The width suggests its not trucks, hmmmmm...

My biggest beef (and you will see the irony of my concern) is that people want to sell out the 4x4 community thereby making all future generations of kids unable to have a CHOICE of how they want to enjoy the backcountry. Your kids might want to take a 4x4 trail in a 4x4? The irony? i have no kids and am not going to, so it really does not effect me.

i fight for fairness. Closing entire areas to one group is akin to the government telling you that all red cars will no longer be allowed on city streets.

The reality is quite simple.

Designated trail systems. Just like the states. Levels of difficulty posted. User groups segregated to their own trail systems within a multi use area.
Build a BOG that does not affect watersheds.

But most importantly, PUNISH heavily anyone off a trail. That would eliminate all the random camp spots and staging areas where the 4x4's seem to play. If its not a trail...punished.

Johnathan and all reading this,
how did you and do you feel about ALL of Waiporous closed to singletrack?
If i said to you that it is good if they get rid of bikes so quads can survive, how would you feel?
That is how i feel about selling out 4x4's.

Do the big holes and deep ruts suck if we have to ride there? Yes, but trail feathering will always exist because it will be the increased traffic of quads that will cause it, its not because they are intentionally doing it, its because there are SO MANY. And they are now modifying quads to fit 27+" tires

A stock 4x4 jeep runs 30" tires!
Even worse is that all of us singletrack guys NEVER see these ruts/holes because they do not exist on our trails we do.
Traffic is the root of this problem. Everyone can agree that our own singletracks are deeper and nastier than 5 years ago. Do we have bigger tires? No, we just have more riders.
Mark my words, without trail designation, our singletracks will become quad trails. As more and more quadders 'explore" and have easily accesible chainsaws, our singletracks will be a thing called HISTORY.

Be careful who you align with. It may be time to put together a STRONG provincial bike group. AOHVA has a quad rep at the Framework Land Use Group but they have no bike rep. i got us a bike rep, not AOHVA. Look at their site and tell me where you see anything that helps BIKES. And finally, the 150,000 dollars given to them has done nothing to help our bike community out. Waiporous is QUAD NIRVANA. Indian Graves is QUAD NIRVANA, Big Horn is QUAD NIRVANA, what area is the next QUAD NIRVANA?
By the way, i will be selling my jeep and getting a QUAD as the NIRVANA areas will be awesome to quad in. AOHVA has done a fantastic job of looking out for their own interests and i want to have full advantage of their hard work. Most of my 4x4 buddies already bought quads.

i just get a bad taste selling out any one group knowing that is not the answer.

i write this with no anger, just sadness.

Tom

Dragon997 · Post by **Dragon997** » Sat Jul 07, 2007 9:51 pm

Tom

You are so passionate and I admire that.

i fight for fairness.[quote]
I believe in fairness also!
When I go to Fallen timber staging area and see that horses and mountain bikers have all access, but I am limited to numbered trails it pisses me off.

Now can I rant, I have had a bottle of Merlot, so pardon the slurs.

Land advocasy is the most important issue, but the majority of the OHV riders dont give a sludge.
47 views of this topic and only 3 people seem to care enough to type thier thoughts.

EVANOL COOLANT THREAD IN THE TECHNICAL SECTION, 2199 VIEWS AND 47, YES 47 REPLYS....AHHHHHH!!!!!!
If we dont wake up we wont need any freakin coolant.

Carrying on, I dont feel we, as the 2 wheel OHV community are well represented by any of the associations charged with representing us.

A question?

Does SRD see 3 levels of back country use?
1. hikers,horses and mtn bikers.
2. motorcycles and quads.
3. 4x4 trucks.

I dont have the answer to that because, I am not in any meetings, forums or commitees. Not for a lack of trying.
Again, thanks for getting the 2 wheeled community a voice on the Land Use Framework.

Johnathan 606-0505