Anyone ever ridden there before? I've heard nothing but good things about this trail system, but this weekend I went riding there and it was horrible. The trail I went on was just wide enough for a dirtbike. I don't know if I went the wrong way or what. We parked at the Bluffs resort, and went north. The trail was great until you passed the scramble area, and then it got worse from there. Is the south loop any better?

 

I rode almost the entire loop system and I too was a little miffed??? The scrambler area has some really nice hill runs and the trails to and from the scramble are average. but as you get passed twin lakes road (north) the trail REALLY GETS NARROW [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-frown.gif[/img] , and it continues for about 2 miles than it opens up a little and even has some routes to open it up on. I rode all the way to railroad grade road and back around loop. Some of the trails off the route get kinda on the narrow side also, but nothing like that 2 mile crap. All those little pop can size stumps have to go, nothing like leaving 6" of it stick out of the ground. If you rode the power lines you could find a few mud holes to play in, I did !!! Beside Alpena road there's not many others marked. very hard to tell where your at on the trail but somehow I managed. I feel all trail systems are worth doing once but it's a long ride for me (4.5 hours)and most and I probably wont be going back too soon. Oh ya I believe the south loop (Bummers Roost) is for bike only. Try Red Bridge on the south side of Black Lake, not very technical but has nice views of Black river.

scott
01 Rancher ES
91 KX80 (race ready)

 

I live on the north end of the trail system and have to agree with both of you. It is a decent trail system, but if you have anything over 30" it will be a slow ride due to the fact that there are alot of narrow spots. It is difficult to tell where you are out there, between the trails the routes and all of the 2 tracks. It is a decent trail though, if you don't mind a few narrow sections.

-02AC375

 

Just curious on how you all think this system should be fixed and with what equipment? Do you care if you work with folks in a motorcycle or any other kind of mixed group if it GOT THE JOB DONE? Short of joining a club, would you pay a small fee for insurance to be on a crew here or anywhere else in the state to maintain trails now and then?

Have you ever heard these questions asked before to folks that aren't necessarily 'club' members but may still recognize the importance of pooling every availiable resource to fix the system?

This subject is a lot more controversial than you might think it should be.

John
'00 SP500

 

Well it would be nice if the trail were the 50 inches that all of the maps say the are, and a grading probably wouldn’t hurt. As far as the equipment, the only ones with access to equipment is the clubs and associations that can apply for the grants to pay for the
equipment.

As for helping out, I think that most people who use the trail and are able to help would help if somehow made aware of the opportunity.

Before reading these forum I was never aware of any clubs even in Michigan, let alone all of the things that they were responsible for doing. I believe that your talked of controversy is just hype. If these clubs made an effort to educate more people on when these events take place, by an add in a paper or an announcement on the radio to the local
trail using community, that the numbers would increase for them.

As for paying, every user in the state pays to maintain the trails buy purchasing their 16.25 permit. For this year there is an appropriation of $1,374,500 for trail improvements, reconstruction of damaged public lands, and law/safety education. So the money is there already. Don’t get me wrong as of right now I am looking into joining into a club right
now so I have no problem with paying the dues.

The subject is not controversial it is pretty straight forward:

- non profit organizations (clubs) are the only ones able to get the grants

- the clubs need people to do the work and extra money not covered in the grants for operating expenses and club benefits (dues).

-everybody wins you have good trails to ride with good people that are all part of a club that is trying to better the sport.

So what club do you belong to? CCC? MIATVA?
well that was my .02 cents worth on a good conversational topic. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif[/img]

-Mike
-02AC375

 

Mike,

I think I asked 'if you CARED if you WORKED with folks in a motorcycle or any other kind of MIXED group if it GOT THE JOB DONE?'

If you DO, then you are right, there IS no controversy in YOUR mind as you obviously believe you should NEVER pick up a shovel or saw with another group besides your own.

Again, what I said is that 'this subject is a lot more controversial than YOU MIGHT THINK it should be.'

As far as what club do I belong to? It looks like I will have to belong to at least one more if I'm not happy with being TOLD where I can or cannot work on our multi-use trail system.

And THAT'S 'pretty straight forward'.

I'll ask the question again. Have you EVER heard these questios asked before to folks that aren't necessarily 'club' members but 'somehow' can recognize the importance of pooling every availiabe resource to fix and maintain the system? Might these people possibly BECOME a club member if they knew the reason they were trying to manually cut trees and dig/yank stumps from the ground instead of following behind a piece of automated equipment was why.................? Oh yeah, wheeled (or for that matter non-wheeled) clubs don't physically WORK together.

From what I've observed so far; that's fine and dandy with the majority of those that belong; which is the type of attitude those that would take away our rights love to see.

Mike, I ENCOURAGE you to pick a club and join. I will always be a member of some type of club as I feel (as you I'm sure do) that our govt. is NOT responsible for maintaining our recreational opportunities down to the very last branch that's in our way. I hope we could agree on some aspect of what I've offered above and in no way mean any disrespect to yourself. I'd really enjoy some debate on this topic as I sometimes wonder if this hick from Vicksburg has any support at all on this. Believe me, this is NOT meant to disparage any club past or present. Just an idea that I believe HAS to start taking shape when considering the present state of the system; which quite frankly, nobody has even started to quantify.

Thanks for your response,

John
'00 SP500

 

John,
part of the problem as I perceive it is that the cycle guys dont want the 24 inch trails cut to 50 inches so that ATVers can enjoy all Michigan has to offer to?

Michigan has 3100 miles of designated trails.There are approx 3 times MORE registered ATVers in our State than cycles,yet we [ATVers]have access to less than half the 3100 miles of trails.I'd like to see all 3100 miles of these trails cut to ATV widths of 50 inches or more,after all,we are the biggest user group and we do have the most $$ into this ORV fund.Trouble is,the cycle guys have had their way for so many yrs [since 1968]with not really anyone to challenge their trail making decisions until now.Now that MATVA is around and is making some noise of their own,I think the cycle guys may find that we are getting in their way in more ways than one?

Should we work together?Yes,can we?Only time and hard work from BOTH groups will tell.It would benifit BOTH groups to work together on this trail maintenance issue and I hope it happens.Will I pay an insurance fee to help out on trail maintenance?Hell no,there is allready a SURPLUS of ORV funds in our State ORV fund from our 16.25 ORV stickers,allmost a 1/2 million dollar surplus in this ORV fund and our Governor is thinking of moving these surplus $$ over to the General State Fund.What a kick in the a$$ that would be to the ORV users in Michigan!

Yes,
im a member of the CCC AND MATVA.I support both user groups!

Bill

 

Bill,

You've brought up some very good points.

First off, my mention of a small fee for insurance was prefaced with 'short of joining a club'. I suggest this because possibly putting a small dollar amount on some coverage that was not specific to any club would shut up for good those that really don't want to actually WORK at maintaining trails but simply complain that 'well, that club doesn't necessarily stand for what I BELIEVE in and I have to join them to work on the trails to get the mandatory insurance, so................... The other side of this, that I hope does not come about, is that the different clubs finally get together and proudly proclaim that their individual insurance works on ALL the trails and this is a shining example of how the clubs are 'working together' to maintain trails. The idea is great; breakthrough in cooperation......no.

You will have no problem going to ANY of these organizations(the CCC has even mentioned it in it's newsletter)and get a quote from someone on how much they 'work together' with so and so and are really dedicated to 'a lasting partnership' with everybody. I'd like somebody to tell me of ONE public instance where the members of two groups in the state of Michigan EVER toiled over the same piece of ground when it wasn't a year later when the other group took over control of the same system.

Should we not be able to stand up and wonder if the reason these groups won't go to the mat on this issue is simply that any mention of physically 'WORKING with atvers' would probably mean the end of any respect certain leaders would have with their 'old school' members and maybe the end of their tenure? Is there a reason why I flip on my t.v. to a Michigan snowmobile show and there sets predominently in the background a 'no atvs' sign? Why do I go to a trail and see only the ATV confidence markers hung upside down and shot at?

Frankly Bill, I'm just tired of dancing around this issue as I've SEEN how much work needs to be done and there is NO REASON it can't and shouldn't be done TOGETHER. We ride the same trails and honestly, if the state has to step in and FORCE us to do it together, if nothing else for safety's sake, then so be it. Try(and I know I'll be misquoted on this) CLOSING a few key trails for a year and watch the clubs finally find a way to SHOW their members that trail maintenance money is NOT more important than just doing what's right for their respective sport.

Thanks for giving your opinion; really appreciate someone not being shy about speaking their mind on this. Nobody is the bad guy in this situation as the history of the system has brought us to this junction. Will we act on this now, or drag it on through countless meetings every two to three months?("Yes, we're still studying ways we can work together on this;we'll get back to you.......................).


John
'00 SP500

 

John
I believe i did answer your questions, and as far as controversy it seems that from your responce it is between cycles and atv's. Which in a way is sad. If people have to join clubs based on what type of ORV they choose to ride and then that club only maintains their trails to their members requirements I can see where the controversy comes into play.

Personally I couldn't care less who I have to work with to get the job done, and the fact that some clubs are discriminatory twords other users is appalling. It seems that they are all in the same boat paddling different directions.

The money that these clubs acquire through grants is to maintain the trails to DNR standards. If the DNR states it as a cycle trail then maintain it that way but the majority of the trails in the system are classified as open to 50 inches and under. so why aren't they maintained to that standard.

you argue that there is a need for more people and money to do the work. The money is out there and as far as people, if the clubs would make an effort to educate more people out side of the club on when and where these events take place, by an add in a paper or an announcement on the radio to the local trail using community, that he number of people to help would increase and it might even bring in new members for them.

By the clubs trying to keep everything "in House" it is hurting them and our trails. When they finally relize this is when we will be able to start seeing the trails improve and our permit fees better spent.

Mike

 

Mike,

Thanks for not taking any offense to my response and keeping the debate going.

A few things to clarify:

One is that the clubs for the most part are maintaining most trails to the letter of the law if not the spirit of it. If you can squeeze your 'full size' quad through any trail it probably is 50" wide in most spots. I think this is ridiculous as does any atv club I've come across and they would cetainly like to change this if possible. One of the problems I see in doing this is the sheer number of areas where this is an issue and the skilled operators of heavy equipment needed to reasonably tackle it. These projects, while not cheap, will be better accomplished with a mix of these people /equipment and volunteers because it has been proven elsewhere that they will accomplish much more for the time and money spent. My point is, that whatever the cost, the pooling of our club money/grants and people is more advantageous.

Secondly, I've never seen any club be 'discriminatory to other users' as the fact that they may not have been able to keep up with the upkeep in certain areas of these trails should not be held against them if they are willing to work together with everybody to improve them. They built them and at least TRIED to maintain them; then comes along a whole new manner of vehicle that just didn't fit on them.

Lastly, and I may not be explaining this clearly (or if someone would tell me, correctly) we cannot simply advertise the fact that we need help as you MUST BE A MEMBER OF A CLUB(for insurance reasons) to work on any trail in the state, period. Can you now see my point why it is so important to be seen as working together so that the choice of an organization that a person chooses to make is not necessarily dependent on the trail they live by? I don't WANT people just buying insurance to work on a trail; just not having them to make this kind of choice(if even possible) because they don't ride a motorcycle but the closest trail is cycle club maintained by members only.

Thanks again for your reply,

John

John