LCWP TnA Trail

Bummed that in sentence 1 of the article the relatively few riders who attended the meeting, at least some of whom I know are passionate about the whole experience of our parks, were characterized as thrill-seekers, which has a negative connotation among readers. I for one an am environmentalist and all around outdoorsman as well as a mtber, yes I want the challenge preserved as much as possible but I am not just a self centered thrill seeker
 
In addition to last nights LCF trail forum/meeting, this morning I also attended their informal "coffee morning" get-together hosted by Hallie and Paula (who was also there last night)

It was over an hour before anyone else arrived for coffee and bagels, so we were able to have a good chat. Obviously we covered the previous evenings discussion, but also delved into a few other related areas. While there's nothing specific to report back on this, it did reinforce to me that they're committed to dialogue with us. Interestingly, the next person who arrived had also been at the previous evenings forum. She was an older lady, and hiker. Perhaps she isn't a completely representative sample of the public, but it was interesting to hear how much she was concerned about the trails - FOR US! Seriously. Although she didn't actually speak at the trail forum herself, she did take away a fresh perspective about our concerns/wants/wishes. This is what happens when people sit down and talk!

I also spent Sunday afternoon at their volunteer orientation (for things like their trail work, you can just turn up, you don't need any prior experience or training), so I think I'm going to try and get a little more involved and see what happens...
Obviously nothing is guaranteed, but a little respectful and civil discourse is a good start and an appropriate way forward.
 
sir crashalot said:
Bummed that in sentence 1 of the article the relatively few riders who attended the meeting, at least some of whom I know are passionate about the whole experience of our parks, were characterized as thrill-seekers, which has a negative connotation among readers. I for one an am environmentalist and all around outdoorsman as well as a mtber, yes I want the challenge preserved as much as possible but I am not just a self centered thrill seeker
Click to expand...

I agree that it's too bad about the thrill-seeker comment. I'm even more annoyed by the qoute he used from Alan: "Alan Kaufmann, the foundation’s restoration program director, said Monday that the Laguna Ridge trail used to be a “narrow, single track” route but had grown to 30 to 40-feet wide in a section." This is a continued exaggeration that I called them out on when we met a while ago, and they repeated it last night. Granted, Alan wasn't at the first meeting, but they've used this line in their official documents and continue to repeat it. To anyone reading that in the newspaper it paints a pretty dramatic picture of a 30-40' wide trail.

Here is what it actually looked like:
Screen Shot 2017-04-25 at 4.28.59 PM.png


This is from Apple Maps, and shows where the trail split into two trails at the very top before the trails rejoined. You can get to the 30-40' estimate if you include 15-20' of vegetation in the middle. Each line was maybe 8-10' wide, and when they came back together (the bottom of the screenshot), they remaining rock garden was never more than 8-10' the rest of the way. You can pull it up in Google or Apple Maps and see slightly different time periods (Google is a little more recent because you can see some of the reroute work, but I can't see an option to show scale on the screen), but either way it shows that simply shutting down one side or the other at the top would have taken care of the width issue that they like to quote.

Anyway, it's water under the bridge now, but it bugs me seeing this exaggeration perpetuated and now published in a newspaper.

I also would have liked to see Herzalot's quote put in better context. All of that said, the article could have been a lot worse and it would be hard to get the context of what we were talking about if you don't ride or know anything about mountain biking. The nuances of our sport were also clearly missed by some people there who seemed to say that we'll have all kinds of challenging trails at the new mountain bike park in Fullerton. Don't get me wrong, the new park will be great and I'm looking forward to it, but a skills park is not the same thing as real, natural trails in someplace like Laguna. People who don't ride just have no context to understand the differences. It's all the more reason for us to get involved and speak up for ourselves.
 
Last edited:
MattB said:
Regarding "armoring" with pavers, I had a good discussion with Alan after the meeting where he described the pavers on 5 Oaks as a last resort after they tried just using dirt and didn't hold on its own. He also mentioned being willing and interested in experimenting with other options if there are ideas (and the money and labor to support them - he mentioned soil additives, which could firm up soil in key spots that might otherwise require pavers - this sounds appealing to me).
Click to expand...

I lobbied hard against pavers when they were being planned for 5 Oaks, but was shut down by LCF. The trail was fine without them. Actually, better because it didn't have unnatural and unaesthetic geometrically patterned concrete pavers that weren't even the color of the soil.

There was even a question as to why LCF was working on 5 Oaks, since an OC Parks volunteer was already committed to it and maintaining it. Other trails, like Car Wreck, were in bad shape and dangerous due to lack of maintenance.

I made suggestions as to other solutions, such as mixing clay (found within park boundaries) with the existing sand or using a soil stabilizer to harden the sand. The discussion went nowhere. They didn't try any alternatives first. The problem areas weren't really problems. And their attitude cost Aliso and Woods a dedicated volunteer and superb trail builder.
 
MattB said:
There was one hiker in attendance who pointed out that the meeting seemed very focused on mountain biking and said something about Car Wreck not being fun to hike down, as an example. I spoke up in the meeting and pointed out that while I wouldn't want to hike down it, I have had fun hiking up it, and almost every time I ride down it I see hikers coming up. To me, this shows that there are plenty of hikers who also enjoy the challenging, natural trails of Laguna.
Click to expand...

Good news is that no one needs to hike down Car Wreck if they don't want to. Hike up it for the challenge, and hike down Mathis for a smoother descent.

Lots of choices in Aliso and LCWP, and that's the way it should be.
 
I keep bouncing around from being encouraged with posts like @Andy 's in post #185, and then skeptical by the questionable facts like @MattB describes in post #186.

I know that article is written by someone probably not very knowledgeable of the whole situation.... but it just feels like a poke in the eye. Especially with the lead off picture (supplied by LCF) of everyone working hard on the berm near the bottom of 5 Oaks (good job), but is now is a sidewalk of concrete pavers, which isn't mentioned, just like the backhoe tearing up TnA isn't mentioned. I think I should stay away from this topic for awhile, not worth it. And surely everyone is tired of me slamming the use of pavers by now.

la-1493145750-1wbin2yu96-snap-image.jpg


5 oaks.jpg
 
kioti said:
Good news is that no one needs to hike down Car Wreck if they don't want to. Hike up it for the challenge, and hike down Mathis for a smoother descent.

Lots of choices in Aliso and LCWP, and that's the way it should be.
Click to expand...

EXACTLY!
 
knucklebuster said:
I keep bouncing around from being encouraged with posts like @Andy 's in post #185, and then skeptical by the questionable facts like @MattB describes in post #186.

I know that article is written by someone probably not very knowledgeable of the whole situation.... but it just feels like a poke in the eye. Especially with the lead off picture (supplied by LCF) of everyone working hard on the berm near the bottom of 5 Oaks (good job), but is now is a sidewalk of concrete pavers, which isn't mentioned, just like the backhoe tearing up TnA isn't mentioned. I think I should stay away from this topic for awhile, not worth it. And surely everyone is tired of me slamming the use of pavers by now.

View attachment 27753

View attachment 27754
Click to expand...

I agree. I've been going back and forth too. After reading the article again and getting my wife's perspective as someone who read it, but wasn't at the meeting, it feels kind of like a propaganda piece for LCF. The pictures were supplied by LCF and their storyline is laid out as fact, without noting the other perspectives that were discussed. I could have supplied this picture of me riding down what they refer to as "a scar seen from space" and a 30'-40' wide trail. Those don't seem like accurate descriptions to me.

IMG_7022.JPG


This was May 2016 heading down the right side trail from the map screenshot I posted above. You can also see the rider down trail reentering from the left side trail. That is some healthy, thick vegetation separating the trails at the top, and that was before all of the growth that would have happened with this winter's rains.
 
MattB said:
I agree. I've been going back and forth too. After reading the article again and getting my wife's perspective as someone who read it, but wasn't at the meeting, it feels kind of like a propaganda piece for LCF. The pictures were supplied by LCF and their storyline is laid out as fact, without noting the other perspectives that were discussed. I could have supplied this picture of me riding down what they refer to as "a scar seen from space" and a 30'-40' wide trail. Those don't seem like accurate descriptions to me.

View attachment 27757

This was May 2016 heading down the right side trail from the map screenshot I posted above. You can also see the rider down trail reentering from the left side trail. That is some healthy, thick vegetation separating the trails at the top, and that was before all of the growth that would have happened with this winter's rains.
Click to expand...
That shot of you riding down TnA says it all. Closing one side and encouraging some run-off would've solved a non-existent problem and kept it sustainable. And it sure looks a lot better than other trails in the system.
 
sir crashalot said:
ha reporters always get things wrong.
Click to expand...
I have to defend Bryce. He is a very good reporter and strives to understand the whole story. He has done me right in the three years I have worked with him, while others look for scandal or provocation. He endures lots of long meetings and takes copious notes just to get a few lines. He didn't misquote me, but there was no context to the quote. He wrote me an e-mail for clarification this morning. He didn't use it, just like he didn't use anything that Taylor said, but he really does strive to understand. I am hoping he has a few more column-inches to dedicate to this story in the print version, and I hope he gets it balanced and doesn't pit "thrill seekers" against "responsible land managers/environmentalists." We shall see.

On the other side of the Laguna Beach reporters, we have anyone from The Independent. They are typically quite negative, and seem to sensationalize and only tell one side of a story.

Again, we shall see.
 
im just being snarky, didnt really mean any particular offense. It just seems that whenever i read an article thats about something I have personal knowledge of, theres always some details or ideas that are wrong, people are misquoted or taken out of context, spin, etc. Im not saying their intentions are as such, im sure its tough to keep it all straight in unfamiliar situations.
I guess the "thrill seekers" thing rubbed me the wrong way a bit. Kinda like other articles in the past where instead of refering to mountain bikers or trail users, we're called "daredevils". Yes, some riders only care about the adrenailine and not the land or environment, but not all (and were not all one dimensional) and characterizations like that continue to foster a negative public perception of the entire spectrum of mountain bikers.
How about "Some of Laguna Beach’s mountain bikers and hikers had a non confrontational dialogue with Laguna Canyon Foundation officials Monday and told them they were concerned that recent and planned changes to sections of dirt trails throughout the Laguna Coast wilderness park were leading to a less natural rugged and challenging feel."
 
Last edited:
Yup, Bryce is actually a good reporter in a context in which he is familiar. This is only the 2nd time I've dealt with him personally. Again, a lot of positivity was accomplished last night. That's a dub ya in my book. Solid work by those in attendance.
 
Last edited:
StrandLeper said:
Agree on Camarillo. It is tough now, but there is a new line to the right over a boulder on the second rock problem. It seems sketchy, but if you recon it, you can clean it. The erosion has made it more challenging, but all it needs is some dirt love.
Click to expand...

Yeah if we are talking same place I like that line takes a bit of commitment, but that is also where people are going straight and cutting down through to next section... Minor I know .

Anyways I appreciate all the commitment and interaction with LCF and others on all our behalf.

Thanks again.
 
tbarnesarc said:
Yup, Bryce is actually a good reporter in a context in which he is familiar. This is only the 2nd time I've dealt with him personally. Again, a lot of positivity was accomplished last night. That's a dub ya in my book. Solid work by those in attendance.
Click to expand...
Glad to see you there, Barnes...

BTW, all the rest of you reading this thread, please click on the link in Taylor's signature. you won't regret it. No it's not hot chicks, sorry.
 
herzalot said:
Glad to see you there, Barnes...

BTW, all the rest of you reading this thread, please click on the link in Taylor's signature. you won't regret it. No it's not hot chicks, sorry.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the suggestion on his link. Those are some amazing pictures, Taylor! They could have used some of those mountain biking pictures to represent all of us "thrill seekers" for the article ... I'm pretty sure that's what we used to look like seeking our thrills riding TNA before the reroute;)
 
herzalot said:
Glad to see you there, Barnes...

BTW, all the rest of you reading this thread, please click on the link in Taylor's signature. you won't regret it. No it's not hot chicks, sorry.
Click to expand...

Since when do you call me Barnes ya old phertz? ;)

MattB said:
Thanks for the suggestion on his link. Those are some amazing pictures, Taylor!
Click to expand...

Thanks Matt glad you enjoyed them. I need to get out and shoot more. Still have plenty of progression to get to...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top