A thread just for The Bottom Line (aka Blackballed)

[2TrakR]

John,

Here's your posts with my responses. Please take your time to address each and every one. Please do not use the excuse like on TT where you claimed it may take weeks to respond. If I've missed any points, it was unintentional and I urge you to bring those items up.

The orv update plan is being forged out of incomplete and dated data

In your opinion.

The motorcyclists and their cronies on the advisory board haven't said a word about this data

If you don't disagree with the data, then why would you say anything about it? Just as you do not agree with it, you are speaking up, if you did agree with it, would you be speaking up anyway?

Motorcyclists are now demanding that "worn" trails be retired and new ones built beside them

No one has demanded anything. There has been a proposal made to scientifically study the effects of an old trail being closed down and a new one put in it's place. This would show if the old trail could be "regenerated" or put back to a state prior to the trail (can the forest grow back in or not). If we can show the forest will grow back in, then we should be able to close worn out trails and put in new trails to improve the riding experience. A major concern with closing of any trail is getting that mileage back on the ground - historically we have only lost trail mileage.

yet refuse to open up the entire system and build "new" cycle trails beside what can easily be fixed with the proper equipment.

We are in support of parallel trails. A bulldozer is proper equipment only in your opinion.

their recent proposal to grab 100 miles of single-track in the Huron Forest?

What 100 miles of single track did we propose to grab?

Damaged trails somehow "fix themselves" by having 3 or 4 guys run down them with "hand tools" twice a year?

Maintenance is done with similar tools on a similar schedule but is for signing and brushing only. This is to keep the trail at least rideable. It has nothing to do with grading/grooming of the trail. The damage being referred to, although I'm guessing at where you came up with the term "damaged trails", is the over-use of the trail system. Excessive use damages the system and is justification for more trails.

And these guys want this "phenomena" studied?

A scientific study of closing trails and putting in the same or more miles of new trail is something of value. This study may help to get the DNR to allow more new trail. We already know that new trails will stay in better shape for longer periods of use than old, well established, trails will.

I guess $180,000 will cause some people to say and do just about 'anything' in eastern Michigan.

If the $180K being referenced is the amount of money contracted with the CCC for trail maintenance, it would be prudent to know that money goes to 12 organizations underneath the CCC (the CCC gets none of it). Similarly to what the USFS, DNR and other groups get.

My argument has always simply been the fact that arrogant Michigan motorcyclists are flat out refusing to even "debate" the fact that these trails can be laid down right beside the multi-use trails we so desperately need.

Well of course the cyclists do not want to debate the topic - they are in FULL agreement with you. We want parallel trails. (this is the part where we are all in agreement, yet John continues to argue the point)

encouraging antiquated methods that keep the cash flowing in and their #1 lobbyist "employed".

While I'm pleased you've been able to figure out what you think is the CCC's budget, what you fail to determine is that not a dime of trail maintenance money is used for the CCC's Executive Director's salary. The CCC, as an organization, makes no money off of trail maintenance; all money is paid directly out to the chapters doing the actual work.

Why should I have to waste my allotted 5 minutes at these advisory meetings arguing that the general public can't contact their own advisory board

Probably because you are the lone soul who feels this way.

or that the motorcycle gang won't say a word when the DNR changes their mind regarding just who can serve on OUR board or who we have to "go through" when approaching same?

First you claim that the open position was an ORV associate then when you find out otherwise, that it was a public "non-ORV" person, you change your tune to _blame_ the cyclists for your lack of reading comprehension. I must admit that I did not know there was an open position nor what is was for until you brought the topic up on TT; if you have evidence to the contrary, evidence like a printout that clearly shows the board position was originally an ORV position, then please show me so I may be corrected.

I am tired of these arrogant *******s running this system into the ground and making this state lose out on all the potential revenue that other states have reaped

How would the State's revenue be increased if we ran bulldozer's down each & every trail? To which other trail systems do you compare us to?

I have never advocated any special consideration for my machine (do a search, my friend!)

Ahh, but you have. "Minimum width trail" & "should have used a bulldozer" tells me you do indeed want special consideration for your machine; you just don't like to say it outright and use the guise of arrogance on other's behalf to mask your own.

I've laid down some pretty damning facts about how you guys operate in just this little piece here (never mind the 19 pages at ThumperTalk)....when are you all going to start realizing that your inability to answer or refute even one of them..

It's quite easy for you to make the above statement when you've not provided a counterpoint to any of the items I brought up in just the TT thread.

What reasoning have you used to justify your recent attempt to bust out the largest new Michigan trail system in DECADES (See the now infamous "Huron Foresat Land Grab")

I searched for the quote you used above and even with corrected spelling, Google gave me no hints. Can you expound on what the "Huron Foresat Land Grab" is?

....and then demand that it be impact studied as all single track?

Is there an impact study being done and if so on who's bequest?

How about an official position from "God" on that one?

I asked God, but so far no response. I will pray again tonight. I also did a bible search, but no luck there either.

Was this one of your 'shining' examples of how you guys are "all about" multi-use trails and working TOGETHER?

If it were one of my shining examples, I would have probably brought it up. Since I'm uncertain what this land grab proposal is/was I can't say for certain.

WHAT IN THE HECK DATA HAS EVER BEEN "PROMISED"..... AND WHERE DID YOU GET ANY INFORMATION THAT SUCH A MASSIVE STUDY HAS EVEN BEEN SO MUCH AS FUNDED TO DATE?

No data has been promised, but one is underway. Doubtful you will agree with it's outcome because you have a very different view of things. Given that you've not ridden on the MI public trail system in at least 3 years probably accounts for your skewed view.

Please don't blow smoke at us about facts that haven't even been so much as sought after or would mean a hill of beans AFTER this update plan has been finalized.

So even if a study was done, and you were happy with it, it wouldn't mean anything 'cause nobody would listen to it. That's what I call putting yourself in a lose-lose position. No matter what happens you will be unhappy with the result and be able to blame somebody else.

Again, how arrogant can you guys be for believing we are stupid enough to wait on info that was never so much as asked for!

First the plan and date is outdate and then your are aghast that there is a new study underway. Given your position I'm surprised you are displeased a new study is being done, given the chance of more accurate data.

Why do you think your leadership blew me off when I brought UP this lack of sufficient and current data at the very first meeting Dr. Nelson attended?

That's an easy question. The same reason you are on most people's ignore list here, same reason that ATVOffRoad called the cops on you, same reason most everyone who meets you thinks you are not a person worth taking up their time.

What are you guys going to do...show up at the next advisory board meeting compalining about the "need for more accurate data" after this orv update plan has been in the work for literally YEARS and is nearing completion?

You want more accurate data as well, why would you be concerned if we want the same thing?

Why is it that when I asked Dr. Nelson at the meeting if the DNR had indeed funded his current studies at the same level (in 2004 dollars) as they had done the last one....his answer was NO?

I'm guessing that his answer was no because this study did have less funding that the '99 one. I suppose he could have been lying to you just because he felt like it.

More importantly, why weren't the motorcyclists jumping all up and down over this obvious lack of funding and its EFFECT on gathering accurate and current data TODAY?

Repeat question, repeat answer. You feel it was underfunded and do not agree with the original data. Your opinion. Show me something contrary to the original study, something that backs your position up.

The problem being that these suburban Detroiters think that the state "owes" them a riding area right outside their back doors and have absolutely no interest in FIXING WHAT WE HAVE....FIRST.(these guys don't even want to demand that the DNR STUDY the state of the trail system "to closely" or who even uses it).

Somebody tells you what they want and then you rip on them for wanting that. Many people do not want to drive 2+ hours minimum for an ORV riding experience. I can certainly agree with their position. Please do not blame them for your view on the current ORV plan update, the two items are separate issues.

If motorcycle leadership won't stand up and fight for the best studies possible leading up to a 25 year update plan; claiming that we should CLOSE TRAILS DOWN instead of finding solutions to (again) FIX WHAT WE HAVE with the kind of modern equipment that eliminates their manual tool work crews (and their $180,000 cash cow)...what makes you think they care about "western Michigan"?

Again with your bulldozer approach. See above. I can comment on the cash cow issue though. The CCC has grant sponsors that cover the entire state, east/west/LP/UP. Those trails immediately by you are maintained by the USFS, nothing to do with the CCC. As to the money aspect, I just got my club's check for the trails we maintain. $3762.00 for ~80 miles of ORV Trail. That's 10 or so guys' effort on 8+ separate days. Even if you said 5 guys for 80 hours, they would be only getting $9.50 per hour and that's without consideration for benefits such as insurance, FICA and all that fun stuff. This is where Bill G's argument for privatizing trail maintenance gets me - who is he going to find that will do the "quality" of work he wants for this kind of money?

By proposing this "Detroit" riding area FIRST.....do you think these people give a rip about fixing/building the kind of MULTI-USE trails up north that would revive these area's economies and make their systems sustainable through private maintenance contracting? And give up $180 grand in the process?

When I've read the CCC's list of priorities, this item has always been low on the list. Obviously, then, they do not propose this item first. However it is high on the list from many riders in that area (again, I agree with them).
Even if they were to create such an area, no loss in trail maintenance money is foreseeable.

Dream on, my friend....the minute these guys get a "pay-to-play" riding area out their back doors?.....you can forget about their interest in any trails beyond a couple hours drive from the "suburban city" lights.

So even if southeast Michigan residents wants a riding area close to them, they are to blame for your opinion of our trail system. Are they good or bad for their wants?

Just dig a little into who ends up owning/running this proposed area and just where it ends up....you'll have all the answers you'll ever want about who these guys actually are and what they have been up to regarding this that they have refused to make public (ask the DNR about it?....you get crap like "we've decided to approach this "privately". PRIVATELY!!! You work for me, not the people who stand to PROFIT from this!).

Obviously you've done the research on your hypothesis, since I have not, please give me the answer to who will end up running/owning this magical land. Why or why not would this be good? How would it compare to "The Mounds"?

Try to find a public position on any of this and tell me why it isn't time to start blowing this "behind the scenes" crap right out of the water .

I looked for a public position on this, but can only find your statements, statements that allude to many things, but state nothing. You tell me why it's not time to start whistle blowing.

Here's a "brain stormer"....open up every orv trail in this state to the people who OWN the land on it and cut out "special use" trails for motorcyclists right besides them all (many trails like the Big 'O' and others will obviously always be cycle only because of the road issue).

Ahh, back to your minimum width trails. Did you not just say that you never wanted special consideration for your vehicle?
Better yet, now you say no to parallel trails, something you clearly said yes to only hours earlier. Which is it, yes or no to parallel trails.

Again...when you can't even turn the discussion to properly evaluating and/or fixing what we already have....how do you intelligently discuss what the community desires "additionally"....or who is going to pay for the former problem? (not to mention the consequences of ignoring same).

Turn the discussion, eh? I asked you on the TT thread repeatedly to tell me what would be better equipment, what was wrong with what we have and what was needed to fix it. You never responded. Here's your chance now to give your thoughts on what is wrong with our trail system, what would fix it and how that should be accomplished?

The problem being that the ONLY trails proposed to date have been either single use only cycle trails (and a 100 miles of them at that) or a brand new riding area outside Detroit that serves the need of "suburbanites" only and TAKES AWAY FROM FUTURE FUNDING TO "FIX" WHAT WE HAVE NOW.

I have hard evidence that refutes this statement regarding new trails. Prove me wrong; as a refresher I point to the new trails put in around St Helen.

Yeah, "I forgot"....all these automatic cvt transmission atvs are whooping out "your" trails and you just can't figure out how to "fix them" with some contraption pulled behind a Kubota (or better yet, according to your AMA guy..."we don't even "talk" about heavy equipment....because none of it will fit down a CYCLE trail" (plus the fact that one piece of heavy equipment means less dollars spent NOT on manual tools and chain gangs and one long time cyclist lobbyist out of a job).

Usage creates whoops, the more usage, the more whoops. ATVs will generate more whoops then bikes under identical circumstances due simply to available tire contact patch (the ATV has much more contact with the ground). They both still create whoops. Michigan trails are mostly sand, something that will "whoop out" quickly. The trail graders used by the CCC do an excellent job of removing those whoops, but they can only to a decent job when conditions are favorable. Just like any other type of earth moving equipment - if you move dry sand, it will whoop out within days, but if you move it when damp/wet it will compact and stay in that condition (ie "de-whooped) for much longer.
What is not being done properly now and how should it be done?

Let me retell the same story that got me started on this quest 5 years ago.
I popped into a DNR field office at that time and asked somebody familiar with the dog and pony circus an atv leader alluded to at one of his meetings. It was put very SIMPLY to me and in no uncertain terms. He asked me to simply "follow the money" and ask myself just "how" ANY group could afford to hire a full-time lobbyist; if hundreds of thousands of dollars was suddenly "taken away" and used for modern trail maintenance equipment on a bid basis. The next thing that came out off his mouth had to do with certain people threatening the DNR with their participation in the maintenance program.....and that was about all "I" had to hear in regards to the people we would be dealing with.

Ahh, so five years ago one disgruntled DNR person (who may or may have not been familiar with the ORV Program) gave you his spin on things. You took his statement and ran with it, regardless of what anyone else had to say.
First, the CCC does not have a lobbyist. Second, follow the money and see where it goes, I've already said where it goes, now it's your turn to tell me. Third, what is modern trial maintenance equipment? Fourth, the CCC never threatened the DNR, however they did opt to not sign the grant contract when language was not changed; language that would - and has - benefited all grant sponsors; language that was legally required due to a lawsuit.
Your turn, you gave your points, and there's my counterpoints/additional info, now you get to show me what is wrong with the system (what needs fixed), how that should be accomplished and with what; also tell me who threatened who and why it happened.

..continued in next post..-->

 

[2TrakR]

(lol)... Nobody said that the "Little Manistee" was an example of "dead end" anything (do I have to read these things back to you guys....?). It is an example of a PARALLEL TRAIL SYSTEM!!!

John, re-read my sentence. Little Manistee is NOT an example of "dead-end" routes. It is a good example as you plainly state. The point I made was that routes such as those on the southern end of Kalkaska or Grand Traverse were pointless and should be modified to go somewhere, at least connect with the trail system. It's fun to watch you argue just to hear yourself type - I stated that the Routes needed modified to go somewhere and they need to have service loops. Little Manistee is an example of a good system.

Do any kind of search you want for ANY information that has ever been released outside a Lansing meeting every 3 months; where the public is required to sit there with their mouths shut....AND YOU WILL NOT FIND A THING THAT HAS EVER BEEN BROUGHT FORWARD OR REVEALED BEFORE, AFTER OR SINCE THESE "AUDIENCES" WITH THE "GODS" OF MICHIGAN OFF-ROADING.(and that is an irrefutable statement ALSO)

What kind of information are you looking for? The DNR website has press releases regarding the ORV program which did not originate at the ORV meeting. To me, that refutes your statement. Need a link?

 

[buffmaster]

:yikes:

 

[fender92883]

Where's the :applause: icon when you need it?

:ride:

 

[The Bottom Line]

Listen pal, if you think FOR A SECOND.....that you can avoid all the questions you have dodged recently (both @ TT, here and at every orv meeting you didn't have the kahunas to come up and shake my hand at)...THEN imply that I somehow have some tragic and devastating disease that is no "joke"...followed up with these ridiculous demands that I NOW answer YOUR questions; after insisting that I be "discouraged form posting in this (your previous) thread".....you can take your arrogant attitude and shove it.
Same goes for your "leadership"; who never had the guts to extend that hand or come out from behind the curtain HERE (or anywhere, for that matter) any more than our atv "God" your board cronies forced us to believe was truly representing "all of us" for 3 years before they broomed him.

Thanks for the reading material guys...we'll be certain it all gets passed along to every two and 4-wheeled enthusisast that we can reach ("save" is a 'beautiful thing' on these computers).

 

[2TrakR]

Listen pal, if you think FOR A SECOND.....that you can avoid all the questions you have dodged recently

Not only have I not avoided them, they are listed above, just like I did for you on TT. As with that thread, once all of your questions are listed in chronological order per your request and every other excuse you can think of has been omitted, well then you simply refuse to continue the discussion. The TT thread is still open, just as this one is, awaiting your responses.

(both @ TT, here and at every orv meeting you didn't have the kahunas to come up and shake my hand at)

Never said I had kahunas.

...THEN imply that I somehow have some tragic and devastating disease that is no "joke"

I implied you have symptoms of those I know/knew who have/had the disease or were on medication that affected their rational thinking ability. I have no evidence that you fit into either category.

...followed up with these ridiculous demands that I NOW answer YOUR questions; after insisting that I be "discouraged form posting in this (your previous) thread".....you can take your arrogant attitude and shove it.

Funny, I thought it was you who were jumping up & down about "your" questions not being answered. Perhaps I'm missing something.

Same goes for your "leadership"; who never had the guts to extend that hand or come out from behind the curtain HERE (or anywhere, for that matter)

There is nothing manly or noble in getting into a p|ssing contest with another online. That is all you are after, why give it to you? I, on the other hand, hoped to give you a different outlook on your beliefs and perhaps allow you to focus your negative energies in a more productive manner at the same time allowing for others to learn what little information I have and using that to be better informed themselves.

any more than our atv "God" your board cronies forced us to believe was truly representing "all of us" for 3 years before they broomed him.

Still don't know who you are talking about, although you have claimed to be representing the ATV community yourself - something that several from "that" community have rebuked.

Come on, John, this is your turn to show you are not all talk and no substance.

 

[buffmaster]

Some ppl just don't get it, do they? :bang: :bang: :bang: :bang:

BTW 2TrakR, great big :cool:

 

[KTM Mike]

boy these posts sure are fun to read when TBL is on your ignore list!

 

[2TrakR]

His final post in this thread (and probably on this board) are worth reading. Truly sad.

 

[MWEISSEN]

Whew! :eek: I've never seen someone type so much, spit so much negativity, and make NO point whatsoever. :moon: I'm glad he's on my ignore list! Thanks for putting taking the time to put together those threads, 2TRAKR. I'm glad there's people like that are willing to look out objectively for our trail system. I wish I had that energy, however to me motorcycling is a RECREATION and escape from all of the political things I deal with each day at work.

 

[fender92883]

"save" is a 'beautiful thing' on these computers.

Good. Go ahead and show off how dense you are. Anybody with any common sense will see that all you want to do is cause trouble. You just want to make everyone that you possibly can miserable...JUST because you are.

GO AWAY.

 

[YZ165]

:yikes: