Trails - what do YOU want

[2TrakR]

I'm having a fun time with a thread over on ThumperTalk (general forum, quad bashing revisited..). I'd like to share one of my posts with this group and ask for your opinion.
First, I'm not anti-quad (I have 2 ATVs and have ridden quads since 84). Shared trails are good. More trails are better. Some cycle only trail is good (real single track).
What would you like to see regarding our (Mich) trail system? More, less, ATV only, etc.

Here's an interesting, in my opinion, hunk of a post I just popped over there. It's in reply to another poster's statement that ATVs can only access half of the trail system but outnumber cycles by 3 to 1, plus the MCCCT is another 750 miles that ATVs can't get to. He won't work with cyclists because of this (ie their, or our, greedy agenda). -->

Top Wop, glad you could make it over to TT.
I too agree we need to work together to accomplish common goals. We also need a larger presence representing ATV interests. I sort of disagree with the "exclusive trails" aspect. Horses need their own trails, having ridden "shared" horse trail I can assure you it is not pleasant on an ATV and dangerous on a bike (like riding down railroad tracks). Hikers need their own as well; snowmobiles need trails too. Some of the snowmobile trail can be shared by other User groups depending terrain and property ownership. To not support snowmobile groups in their trail agenda is to limit our own opportunities.

Your reference to the MCCCT being just for Dual Sport riders is a bit misleading. While a licensed vehicle is required to travel the entire system, much of it is shared with public road and public (ORV) trail, so it is not another 750 mile trail system just to themselves. Since I have almost finished recording (GPS) the trail system in the lower, I have a few numbers to share. The Michigan Cross Country Cycle Trail is 689 miles, which includes the Cross State Connector. Of those 689 miles:
69 are 40" cycle only trails not shared with other systems
59.6 are 50" trails (mixed with some forest roads so not all can be traversed with just an ORV sticker)
232.2 are public roads and highways which any licensed vehicle (in theory any car) can traverse
The remaining 328 are shared with other marked trail systems, the majority being 50" ATV trails.

Again, I only have current actual data for the lower peninsula and here it is:
Trail Spec...Miles
40"...234
50"...1052.9
72"...326.1
Total...1613

Combined with the trail only sections of the MCCCT:
40"...303
50"...1112.5
72"...326.1
Total...1741.6

I'm short about 100 miles of ORV Route and about 50 miles of 40" trail. I should be receiving the UP data within the next couple of weeks, but it's not here yet and I may end up recording it myself (have some already at least). Some of the trail mileages will be changing next year, for example the 13 miles between St Helen Motorsports and Geels North will become ORV Trail (50") from it's current MCCCT designation.

If you want to see the numbers, I can make the Excel doc available.

This tells me that ATVs have access to more than half of the available trail systems, in fact my math says ATVs have access to 86% of the trail system in the lower (or 83% if including MCCCT only trails).

According to the 1999 ORV Study done by MSU (can't wait to see the 2004 study data, but Dr. Nelson indicated similar trends in his data collection so far):
Those registered in the state qualifying for ORV (I'm leaving out full size stuff):
23% are bikes
57% are ATVs
Of those, they account for days of use on the designated trail system:
450,000 for bikes
528,000 for ATVs

So while ATVs do indeed outnumber cycles (better than 2 to 1) their use of the trail system is slightly greater than that of cycles when counting "use days".

The even more interesting data is that:
"Less than a quarter of the off-road days for ATVs are primarily on the designated trail system" and "conversely, the majority of the cycle ORV use days are on the designated system".
This is backed up with their data indicating:
63% of cycles are used on the trail system
18% of ATVs are used on the trail system

Bikes are driven 493 miles off-road where ATVs are driven 337 miles off road, referencing "use days".

All of that data tells me, and I'm very open to discuss this as well as having my position changed, that cycles use the public trail system more than ATVs. Even though there number of use days are lower, their traveled distance is greater, thus accounting for more "usage".

This position is the counter point to "ATVs only get to access half the trail system yet there are 3 times as many of them". I say, based on the data from 5 years ago, that 44% of the User base (ATVs) can access 86% of the trail system.

 

[Nestrick]

Hey 2TrakR

Incredible compilation of data ... you certainly appear to have all the facts necessary to support your position, and assuming that all of these data are sound, then your assessment is plausible and defensible. Based on your data, I too would draw the same conclusions ... hence, it makes the findings of Dr. Nelson somewhat predictable.

One question though ... you mention:

"Those registered in the state qualifying for ORV (I'm leaving out full size stuff):
23% are bikes
57% are ATVs
Of those, they account for days of use on the designated trail system:
450,000 for bikes
528,000 for ATVs"

Where do these figures come from? When I purchase ORV licenses I don't remember having to give the state any info upon what the sticker is actually to be used upon? Also, how do they compute the 'days of use' on the designated trail system ... perhaps another way of asking the question might be: "from what data to they compute the 'days of use'?

I am certainly not questioning your positions or logic, nor your statements of the data ... but I am interested in the basic data used to compute these findings as the "devil is always in the details" !!

Thanks for sharing this information ... most informative.

terry nestrick :cool:

 

[70 marlin]

More new trails closer to southern MI! I’d be OK with quad with. For the new stuff. As for the existing cycle only trails. It would be a shame to wreck them by making them all wider. Maybe a few where really it’s needed to make the system more user friendly. Jeremy great info!

 

[Smit-Dog]

According to my fairly limited and un-scientific observations, 76% of quad riders are tank-top wearing, helmet-less, drunk, chain-smokin' hillbillys who enjoy parking lot donuts and littering the trail with beer cans and King Dong wrappers. This data was collected at Gladwin.

I gotta believe too that the majority of ORV users ride quads. Walk into most any large powersports dealer, and 80% of the off-road floor space is dedicated to quads. Sure... I wish they had their own dedicated trail system.

BTW.... Great data.... excellent post.

 

[2TrakR]

Terry,
This data is from the 1999 study done by Dr Charles Nelson of MSU commissioned by the DNR. We should have more current data in a few months when the 2004 study is done.
You can read the info for yourself by getting the PDF from the DNRs site.
Here's the page:
http://www.michigan.gov/dnr/0,1607,7-153-10365_15070-93372--,00.html
Here's the actual PDF document that explains the methodologies:
http://www.midnr.com/publications/pdfs/ForestsLandWater/ORV/MI_ORV_Study_98-99.pdf

 

[TCTrailrider]

2 TrackR,
First, I have followed the thread on TT and look forward to the updates. You have done a great job shooting holes through TBL :worship:
Quads are a significant user group and need proper places to ride. At times I enjoy riding the 50" single track and think most trails should accomodate this width. Some should be true motorcycle only single track, so skinny that the quads won't fit. I very much like the idea of some parallel trail systems, no problems with quads, just want some skinny trail options.

 

[woodsy]

Yes 2trackr - thanks for the interesting read!!!
Unlike Nez, and more like Smitpuppy, I am going to bite "hook, line and sinker" into your original question and tell you exactly what I would like to see (yea, I know, its a flaw i my charecter... :think: )
First of all, when I see the State of Michigan kicking motorcyclist/snowmobilers/atvers/horse riders/mountain bikers off of our land and give reasons like erosion or "tender plant life" for doing so I WANNA PUKE!! Why do I say this you ask (thanks for asking :laugh: )? Because I can show you THOUSANDS of acres of land that this happened on and 15 years later the state hired some loggers to come onto this same land and DECIMATE it by removing ALL the trees and leaving nothing but 4 foot deep trenches and debris that not even a deer could find a way thru and then leave - NO REPLANT - NO NOTHING!!
I would like to see ALL the two tracks/seasonal roads/and tax-payer owned right of ways and logging trails in lower Mi reopened for dirt bike/quad/snowmobile usage!! In other words - OPEN UNLESS POSTED CLOSED - it would be nice to see the land come back to the people.. Now back to reality...
I personally like the idea that the Manistee Loop presents. Double wide snowmobile/atv and dune buggy trail with a 32 inch wide single trail for dirtbikes beside it (ok, I know its wider then that but I like it tight and this is my soapbox). I have ridden/sold bikes/quads/sleds for years and truely believe that a simple rule for quads/sleds needs to be that all of their trails need to have room for the machines to pass by each other or bad things start happening. Even in the woods at "slower speeds" a hill top collision caused by not being able to get out of the way is no fun!! The same "rules of the road" that we drive our cars by (stay on your own side) would work just fine for rules for these 2 wayers..
Another simple but necessary evil that I think we single trackers need to think about is to have our bike loops become directional.. I have personally had MANY close calls - some of my own makings - that could have been avoided if we were all going the same way on the same day (hey, now there is a cool saying for this rule - call it "THE SAME WAY ON THE SAME DAY" rule!). I am fearful that the insurance industry is going to step in sometime and put some skidders on us "outside enjoyers" if we dont self moniter and I think this directional thing may help our cause..
Personally, I believe you are RIGHT ON TARGET with your "To not support snowmobile groups in their trail agenda is to limit our own opportunities." comment. Same goes for us and the ATVers too. Bottom line - WE NEED EACH OTHER!!! Lets join hands and get some REAL clout going! :aj:
Thanks for all your time and energy you have personally invested into all this 2trakr!!! :worship:
Woodsy

 

[2TrakR]

First of all, when I see the State of Michigan kicking motorcyclist/snowmobilers/atvers/horse riders/mountain bikers off of our land and give reasons like erosion or "tender plant life" for doing so I WANNA PUKE!!

Me too. I can show you more land that you that's been closed down. Ok, maybe not, but dang close. That and all the land that's been clear cut and either let go or planted with jackpine - now there is a useless option. Along the Ogemaw/Oscoda County line there is one of the great examples - sections of pure clear cut. Sections! That's 1 square mile!! There are several of these all around each other - you can see straight across for several miles!

I would like to see ALL the two tracks/seasonal roads/and tax-payer owned right of ways and logging trails in lower Mi reopened for dirt bike/quad/snowmobile usage!!

You, me & the CCC all agree on this. That's why legislation like what Ogemaw just passed (and others have had) are steps in the right direction to reclaim our land.

I personally like the idea that the Manistee Loop presents.

Same thing again. Dual trails are ideal in many cases (whether it's route or atv trail and cycle trail). The Meadows has this (40" parallels 50") and it works. Both systems last much longer because the use or "load" is more spread out. Same principle will apply if the forest roads are opened up, as much traffic that is on the trail system will be spread over to the forest roads.

I don't like your views of directional trails. Yuck. No questions on how or why you've arrived at that opinion, but I disagree with you.

 

[3KDXXR2]

Hey Smit-dog What is a King Dong ? Curtis

 

[woodsy]

"I don't like your views of directional trails. Yuck. No questions on how or why you've arrived at that opinion, but I disagree with you."

2trakr - I dont even agree with myself on that one :rotfl:
Since you didnt ask me to I will elaborate more (there is that flaw again ;) )
Personally, I detest rules/laws that directly effect the pleasure we derive out of good clean fun and have the potential for setting up a case for litegation (i.e. - your responsible for my damages because YOU were going the wrong way).. On the other hand, living near and riding at Cedar Creek (called "the highway" for a reason) has shown me over and over again that the idea could solve alot of problems. I have seen it done very effectively at the Snow Chicken and they have fewer riders on the trail at one time then a busy day at Cedar ( and they use the comparitively HUGE Manistee Loop).
Another brain slip just occurred, perhaps a "recommended trail direction" would better serve our cause... And then only at the Trail Loops like Cedar that are sooo busy... Hmmm...
Thanks for disagreeing so openly! You would make a GREAT addition to our "Monday Riders" group and could probably add another hour or so to our regular 2 hour "trail side" chats. :laugh:
Woodsy

 

[2big4akdx]

Great thread and info. The main thing is, we get a new trail from my back yard up to somewhere along the MCCCT. Yuk Yuk.

 

[Smit-Dog]

Hey Smit-dog What is a King Dong ? Curtis

Combine a 30 year old memory with dyslexia, and you have King Dongs. These things were great as kids... you could wad up the tin-foil wrapper into metal ball, and flick it off your desk across the classroom at about a bazillion miles an hour. :debil:

 

[Godzuki]

i knew it, i stopped having food like this for many year wile i was road racing, then like many things in life i stopped due to out side forces, anyway, i was going through the local meijers, and i decided i wanted some trash food, just to change it up a bit, i rememberd those KING dons, and i started looking for them, to my surprise there they were, but hey what happend to the name. i just though i was remembering those wrong, but you gave me proof i was right.

 

[YZMAN400]

"I don't like your views of directional trails. Yuck. No questions on how or why you've arrived at that opinion, but I disagree with you."

2trakr - I dont even agree with myself on that one :rotfl:
Since you didnt ask me to I will elaborate more (there is that flaw again ;) )
Personally, I detest rules/laws that directly effect the pleasure we derive out of good clean fun and have the potential for setting up a case for litegation (i.e. - your responsible for my damages because YOU were going the wrong way).. On the other hand, living near and riding at Cedar Creek (called "the highway" for a reason) has shown me over and over again that the idea could solve alot of problems. I have seen it done very effectively at the Snow Chicken and they have fewer riders on the trail at one time then a busy day at Cedar ( and they use the comparitively HUGE Manistee Loop).
Another brain slip just occurred, perhaps a "recommended trail direction" would better serve our cause... And then only at the Trail Loops like Cedar that are sooo busy... Hmmm...
Thanks for disagreeing so openly! You would make a GREAT addition to our "Monday Riders" group and could probably add another hour or so to our regular 2 hour "trail side" chats. :laugh:
Woodsy

Ok I will pipe in here also. While I wouldn't want to see the tails be directional, I can see the benifits. As a pop with a young 8 yr old son ridding it would be really nice to let him ride in front of me on the trails, so I can keep an eye on him -vs- behind me were I cant see him, and know that he wont get pealed by a fast moving 2-wheeled freightrain.

The organized CCC trail rides are good for this. Because the trail rides are directional, I can ride all day with him without worrieng that him and his little bike will get crushed like a beer can around the next corner by a monster XR650.

But as a member of the fast moving 2-wheeled freight train, I like beeing able to go either way on a trail. If the trail gets boring going one way (I have rode Cedar to death) I can always reverse direction and have a completely new trail to ride.

This is a great post. Lots of good info in here.

 

[woodsy]

A quick story about how easily things like that happen Don...
My son and I were out riding the powerlines and trails behind my house. We decided to play "hide and seek" - I went one way on my CR500 and he went the opposite direction on my 89 Banshee (thats a quad folks..). About 20 minutes later we collided headon - (thankfully I was on a bike so I could lay it down without running over him!!). I bent the frame on the CR - bent a "J" arm on the Bansh and burned my leg pretty bad.. Bottom line - we both knew we were in the woods - both "sober" and both "looking for the other" and we still did it!!
As much as I HATED to broach this subject on Jeremy's thread, IMHO it certainly is something that needs thought..
Anybody else got an opinion?
Woodsy

 

[3KDXXR2]

Bill, I thought that it was a typo and maybe someone would have some fun with it . I had no idea that there really was such a thing. Maybe they only sell them in Mich, Or maybe you are good with photo editor programs. Curtis

 

[2TrakR]

King Dongs - I thought that was there name too, but I was mistaken if all you could find was "dons".
Back to Woodsy's alternative suggestion on the directional thing. I was way too wound from playing with The Bottom Line over on ThumperTalk to politely discuss the topic with you. There's truly no need for a heated discussion on it (being started by me). I have a couple minutes now to chime in but first..
YZMan - put your kid behind you and get a Bug Eye for your helmet. You WILL be able to see him and won't be breaking your neck from turning around nor crashing 'cause you can't see ahead. I agree having directional trails makes it more safe for riding and the CCC events really help in that situation.
As for directional trails I think it would lead to a false sense of security. It will make guys surprised to see somebody coming at them, and they will be coming at them, and lead to more accidents. I see this topic frequently brought up right after somebody has a close call (or sadly is involved in some sort of an accident). Then it's "a must do thing". BS. It's up to you (me) to avoid obstacles on the trail. That might be a tree, bike, quad, deer, suicidal squirrel or just a misguided pickup operator. If you (I) can't avoid those items, than change your tactics and/or accept the facts you will be crashing 'cause it's going to happen.
Directional trails will lead to fines, tickets and stupid legislation and lawsuits. Lawsuits suck. Directional trails will beat the heck out of a trail in one direction only, and cut it's lifespan by 50%.
Directional trails are good for special events (like the CCC stuff, like Enduros) and very very good for novice riders - they surely have enough to be worried about.
Got one to compare with Woodsy's example. Nephews have 6 acres of woods to ride their PW80s on. Strick rules. Follow each other, no splitting up, no passing in the woods, must pass by the house every lap so you can be seen and so on. On no circumstance can you go looking for the other guy. So yeah, it took a month or so, but eventually one thought he passed the other and went back on the trail the only direction they are supposed to go and the other had the same idea, but thought he was racing back to find/help the other, but in the wrong direction. Just some bumps and bruises, bent forks and rims, and a few other fixable things were the result. I think they were grounded from the bikes for a time as well.
Point, counterpoint, it's always fun. ;-)
So, anyways, I know where you're coming from and don't disagree with the rationale (safer riding), just disagree with the solution except in special situations.

 

[YZMAN400]

WOW!! I just got done devoting my Sat evening to reading that ENTIRE post over on TT. WOW is all I can say. I think I need a drink after all that. I feel like i just gave birth. I have a headache after all that.

 

[2TrakR]

I have a headache after all that.

You read the whole thing in one sitting?! Ouch. I was hitting the character limit per post on a couple of mine (10K chars).

Be interested in your reaction once the headache goes away.
Hope to see you tomorrow @ HH.

 

[Tomck]

2TrakR,

As usual, good information in your note. Thanks for taking the time to share all that factual information.

What would I like? A riding area in southeast Michigan.

Recently, I read some information provided by Bill Chapin (CCC) where he stated that "Legislation as passed in 1990 required that an “Official Southeast Michigan Use Area” be created." Not sure why this has not happened, but in my opinion, it should be a priority. Some creativity and compromise would be required, as it would likely require the purchase of private land, and very strict noise controls. The many dirt bike and ATV riders in Southeast Michigan would then have the alternative of a morning or afternoon ride without having to commit half a day to travel.

Tom

 

[woodsy]

2TrakR,

As usual, good information in your note. Thanks for taking the time to share all that factual information.

What would I like? A riding area in southeast Michigan.

Recently, I read some information provided by Bill Chapin (CCC) where he stated that "Legislation as passed in 1990 required that an “Official Southeast Michigan Use Area” be created." Not sure why this has not happened, but in my opinion, it should be a priority. Some creativity and compromise would be required, as it would likely require the purchase of private land, and very strict noise controls. The many dirt bike and ATV riders in Southeast Michigan would then have the alternative of a morning or afternoon ride without having to commit half a day to travel.

Tom

Yea, but then all my east side buddies would ride over there instead of coming over here and riding with us westerners :( I cant stand the thought of that :|

 

[2TrakR]

Tom,
Your recent read was right on the $. There is supposed to be another area, not just the Mounds. I think that place was the "close enough" for the Program to not complete it's job.
A private facility could make a killing on entry fees alone down that way, that's fur sure.
Thanks for your input!

 

[Godzuki]

the only spot i think i would like to see dierctional or one way trails is on the quad loop where everybody is doing 80mph around every corner. id be nice not to worry about a 500lbs quad comiing at you in a full tilt slide around the corner, and he fading into your side of the trail. as for the single track both directions is okay for me cause 90% of the time you have plenty of time to spot somebody before you ram them at the speeds we go in the single track, well exscluding trevor that is hehe

 

[INCA]

There are as many sides to this situation as there are people. No matter what kind of trail system you end up with, there are going to be some that complain because you can't please everyone. Majority rule is close to a thing of the past now. However, there is progress being made. In the Kalkaska area on Friday April 29th there will be tree planting done by volunteers and the school children as part of Arbor Day. I have it on my schedule to be there and pitch in. The biggest problem I see is that the DNR in Lansing is on one page and each district is individually on a different one. To have somewhat parallel trails for quads and bikes is fine but then you have complaints about destroying more land. Yet the figures now are approximately 2 square miles taken up by trails out of 9000 square miles of state land. Another point is that you don't accept the saying - you can't fight city hall. They are exactly the ones you want to fight and they can be beaten.
Ding Dongs - I wanted to use that name for the first enduro team, but my son and his friend objected. It seems I was the Ding Dong.

Young Ted

 

[woodsy]

"It seems I was the Ding Dong."

Funny, I never thought of you as a "Ding Dong" Ted. A rascally, sneaky, Nelsonish, kind hearted trail ripper yes but never a Ding Dong :)