JP/COX Trail Building Society

PB Forum :: All Mountain, Enduro & Cross-Country
JP/COX Trail Building Society
  • Previous Page
Author Message
flag ibisrox
Posted: Oct 19, 2010 at 9:43 Quote
My riding buddy and I have been talking about how sweet it would be, to have a singletrack link, from Dawson/TSnorth To Canyon Creek paralell to the rd so the JP/Cox ride could be a true mtn bike loop.
SRD would require it to be 200m from the rd so there could be some sweet lines up there looking at the topo of the area.
I remember Pneuma started when A whole bunch of us xcr's whined about dust on moose!
So this wouldnt be too difficult to try to get going.
This depends on participation tho.
Lets see what we can get.
flag crosscheck
Posted: Oct 19, 2010 at 10:09 Quote
OK, I recommend every aspiring trail builder read this book:
IMBA Trail Solutions

and then a get clinometer:
Unsecure image, only https images allowed: http://www.forestry-suppliers.com/Images/Medium/1316_43830_p1.jpg
flag ferday
Posted: Oct 19, 2010 at 10:23 Quote
the IMBA book (which i've damn near memorized) and a clinometer have contributed to some crappy trail sections out at moose IMO. respect, but beware of the IMBA rules...

i'm with you Gord, there are a lot of potential connectors as well we don't have to focus on the Tom Snow area....
flag Tneault
O+
Posted: Oct 19, 2010 at 11:02 Quote
I have spent a lot of time trying to figure out a good line from dawsons to lusk. It won't be an easy task. It will take days to ribbon it, months to build it, years to have it worked in. You need someone very motivated to lead this task. This is a serious undertaking and it might be best to do this one as a "sanctioned" trail. You wouldn't want to spend all that time on it, then have it shut down. Plus, the builder organizations (CMBA et al) have more resources.
flag pinkrobe
Posted: Oct 19, 2010 at 11:42 Quote
If y'all need a hand, the CMBA is able to assist. We can help with the trail proposal to SRD and Parks, give some advice regarding trail placement so you don't run afoul of ranchers and wildlife biologists, and can help you apply for funding if you need it. If you want to treat this like a project, you find yourselves a PM, we'll contribute technical support and SME resources.

There is nothing that can't be done.
flag ferday
Posted: Oct 19, 2010 at 11:50 Quote
pinkrobe wrote:
If y'all need a hand, the CMBA is able to assist. We can help with the trail proposal to SRD and Parks, give some advice regarding trail placement so you don't run afoul of ranchers and wildlife biologists, and can help you apply for funding if you need it. If you want to treat this like a project, you find yourselves a PM, we'll contribute technical support and SME resources.

There is nothing that can't be done.

awesome work Pinkrobe! thanks to you and CMBA!
flag pinkrobe
Posted: Oct 19, 2010 at 16:18 Quote
ferday wrote:
pinkrobe wrote:
If y'all need a hand, the CMBA is able to assist. We can help with the trail proposal to SRD and Parks, give some advice regarding trail placement so you don't run afoul of ranchers and wildlife biologists, and can help you apply for funding if you need it. If you want to treat this like a project, you find yourselves a PM, we'll contribute technical support and SME resources.

There is nothing that can't be done.

awesome work Pinkrobe! thanks to you and CMBA!

Hey, don't thank us yet - it's a long road ahead... Wink
Trails for the people! [pumps fist in air]
flag fargle
Posted: Oct 26, 2010 at 10:14 Quote
gotta keep this idea alive - when is the first meeting?

I have zero spare time right now, but hopefully by summer/fall 2011 that will change. I'm real good at grunt labour.
flag pinkrobe
Posted: Oct 26, 2010 at 20:13 Quote
Here's some stuff you'll want to do:
- Pick a leader. This is the go-to person for the project who organizes the labour, hires the trail crew [if needed] and is generally responsible for the execution of The Plan.
- Start writing up The Plan. What exactly are you trying to accomplish? The words "sustainable", "environmentally-friendly", "multi-user", "riparian-sensitive", etc. should be in there somewhere. How are you going to deal with horses? [Dawson is an equestrian trailhead] How are you planning on maintaining the trail after its built?
- Map out a route that is at least 200m away from any water. Crossing water is okay, just don't pull a Tom Snow and route your trail 10m away from a creek for 25km.
- Start looking for funding, unless you want to hand-build 20km of singletrack.
flag fargle
Posted: Oct 28, 2010 at 9:59 Quote
I had a good look at the topo. In my very humble opinion, it doesn't look like an easy project, as the valley gets tight in a couple of spots and one or the other side quite steep. There are also a number of tributary creeks to deal with, and good bridges are not going to be cheap.

I submit that one question that will need to be answered on the outset is how hard do people want this trail - is it to be a fast-rolling alternative to the road, or cool singletrack in its own right? A lot of climbing will create a true epic loop, but make it less useful for a lot of riders. On the other hand, a fun trail creates a whole whack of options, including loops using the road.

One question for Pinkrobe or anyone else in the know - was the main part of Ridgeback built by a paid crew or volees?
flag pinkrobe
Posted: Oct 28, 2010 at 10:58 Quote
fargle wrote:
I had a good look at the topo. In my very humble opinion, it doesn't look like an easy project, as the valley gets tight in a couple of spots and one or the other side quite steep. There are also a number of tributary creeks to deal with, and good bridges are not going to be cheap.

I submit that one question that will need to be answered on the outset is how hard do people want this trail - is it to be a fast-rolling alternative to the road, or cool singletrack in its own right? A lot of climbing will create a true epic loop, but make it less useful for a lot of riders. On the other hand, a fun trail creates a whole whack of options, including loops using the road.

One question for Pinkrobe or anyone else in the know - was the main part of Ridgeback built by a paid crew or volees?

The Ridgeback build started at the south end as a volunteer build, and went north from there to Ranger Creek. Everything north of Ranger Creek is machine/paid crew built. Cutting into the sidehill, especially in the section closest to Moosepackers, would have taken a long time to do with hand tools.

Building along the top of a ridge is popular with the wildlife and watershed folks, as it keeps the trail away from water courses. It's also pretty easy to build up there, as there are fewer trees, a thin organic soil layer and drainage is almost never an issue.

When you're looking at the grades of your climbs/descents, keep in mind what the land can handle. If you're on rock slabs, a steep grade works and makes for a challenging trail. If the surface is a bit gravelly, it's best to keep the grade mellow so that it holds together a bit better. If you're looking at a section and wondering if somebody will drag a brake for the entire length of a descent, assume they will.
flag billybilly
Posted: Oct 30, 2010 at 9:45 Quote
As this is a public forum, I will express one point as part of a diversity of opinions on this. I am an mmbts member, I attend the trail days, I do maintanance on my own. That being said, I am opposed to this idea. I think some areas are high traffic, ie: moose, and others should keep their more "backcountry" feel if you can call this area that. Therefore, I think leave it as is. Does this area need more traffic? does it really need a trail so we don't have to ride the road, is it that bad? I have seen cougars,and a few bears in my years riding there. I think we should be cautious about putting in new lines. I remember riding this trail years back and rarely seeing anyone. I think it should keep its original appeal (to me at least). Some "manicured" high number loop option areas should be for that purpose and others should be a little more "rough and tumble" so to speak. Not to raise any feathers, but I just thought I would chime in to indicate that not all dedicated builders/ riders think more trails are necassarily better.
flag ferday
Posted: Oct 30, 2010 at 17:12 Quote
billybilly wrote:
As this is a public forum, I will express one point as part of a diversity of opinions on this. I am an mmbts member, I attend the trail days, I do maintanance on my own. That being said, I am opposed to this idea. I think some areas are high traffic, ie: moose, and others should keep their more "backcountry" feel if you can call this area that. Therefore, I think leave it as is. Does this area need more traffic? does it really need a trail so we don't have to ride the road, is it that bad? I have seen cougars,and a few bears in my years riding there. I think we should be cautious about putting in new lines. I remember riding this trail years back and rarely seeing anyone. I think it should keep its original appeal (to me at least). Some "manicured" high number loop option areas should be for that purpose and others should be a little more "rough and tumble" so to speak. Not to raise any feathers, but I just thought I would chime in to indicate that not all dedicated builders/ riders think more trails are necassarily better.

dude, thanks for chiming in! feel free to ruffle feathers, we're not sensitive...or at least shouldn't be!!

but i disagree with you completely! i suspect most that post here will agree with me....but that doesn't mean we can't go for a ride sometime...

for the record, there are far, far more "rough and tumble" areas in kananaskis, the general bragg area is heavily trafficked by any definition, and they are also doing plenty of logging.
flag Tneault
O+
Posted: Nov 1, 2010 at 11:06 Quote
ferday wrote:
billybilly wrote:
As this is a public forum, I will express one point as part of a diversity of opinions on this. I am an mmbts member, I attend the trail days, I do maintanance on my own. That being said, I am opposed to this idea. I think some areas are high traffic, ie: moose, and others should keep their more "backcountry" feel if you can call this area that. Therefore, I think leave it as is. Does this area need more traffic? does it really need a trail so we don't have to ride the road, is it that bad? I have seen cougars,and a few bears in my years riding there. I think we should be cautious about putting in new lines. I remember riding this trail years back and rarely seeing anyone. I think it should keep its original appeal (to me at least). Some "manicured" high number loop option areas should be for that purpose and others should be a little more "rough and tumble" so to speak. Not to raise any feathers, but I just thought I would chime in to indicate that not all dedicated builders/ riders think more trails are necassarily better.

dude, thanks for chiming in! feel free to ruffle feathers, we're not sensitive...or at least shouldn't be!!

but i disagree with you completely! i suspect most that post here will agree with me....but that doesn't mean we can't go for a ride sometime...

for the record, there are far, far more "rough and tumble" areas in kananaskis, the general bragg area is heavily trafficked by any definition, and they are also doing plenty of logging.
+1
flag pinkrobe
Posted: Nov 1, 2010 at 11:46 Quote
billybilly wrote:
As this is a public forum, I will express one point as part of a diversity of opinions on this. I am an mmbts member, I attend the trail days, I do maintanance on my own. That being said, I am opposed to this idea. I think some areas are high traffic, ie: moose, and others should keep their more "backcountry" feel if you can call this area that. Therefore, I think leave it as is. Does this area need more traffic? does it really need a trail so we don't have to ride the road, is it that bad? I have seen cougars,and a few bears in my years riding there. I think we should be cautious about putting in new lines. I remember riding this trail years back and rarely seeing anyone. I think it should keep its original appeal (to me at least). Some "manicured" high number loop option areas should be for that purpose and others should be a little more "rough and tumble" so to speak. Not to raise any feathers, but I just thought I would chime in to indicate that not all dedicated builders/ riders think more trails are necassarily better.

My perspective can be summed up as "More trails", but I understand what you're saying.

The first couple of times I rode JP/Cox, it was pretty deserted, and I had that "I'm in the woods" feeling. Over the years, I've seen hiking groups of 20 people camped out on one of the lookouts, groups of 10 riders at a time and lots of horses [and piles of their shit] on there. On a busy weekend, it doesn't feel like the backcountry at all. Just my opinion.

As to the road being "that bad", I suppose it's not horrible. Still, it's a road. Will most people skip the road and do the whole loop on singletrack? I doubt it. It's 3-5 hours ride time if you ride the road, a full singletrack loop will tack on way more climbing and a produce a significantly lower average speed. I see most people choosing to do one side or the other, with a few hardy souls riding the full loop. A ridgetop singletrack trail on the other side of the road will give people a choice they didn't have before. That's the real benefit.
  • Previous Page

 


Copyright © 2000 - 2024. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv56 0.012640
Mobile Version of Website