December 2009 ROC meeting crucial!!!! - Pirate4x4.Com : 4x4 and Off-Road Forum
 
Pirate4x4.Com : 4x4 and Off-Road Forum  

Go Back   Pirate4x4.Com : 4x4 and Off-Road Forum > Land Use and Trails > Rubicon Trail
Notices

Reply
 
Share Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-02-2009, 10:32 AM   #1 (permalink)
Pirate4x4 Addict!
 
cruzila's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Member # 6650
Location: Garden Valley
Posts: 5,546
December 2009 ROC meeting crucial!!!!

As you may know, the County is reviewing its proposed routes to identify the trail formally. This ROC meeting is the second of two for public input on this issue.

Quote:
Next Rubicon Oversight Committee meeting will be December 10, 2009 at 7:00 p.m. Location: DOT Ready Room, 2441 Headington Rd. Placerville, CA 95667. Current discussion is the Rubicon Trail Route Recognition. Documents related to this item are below.

http://www.edcgov.us/Rubicon/pdf/RouteRecognition.pdf
http://www.edcgov.us/Rubicon/pdf/Pro...TrailRoute.pdf
The next post will be the text description for the routes. Please read them and understand them. What it means to you is that if routes are defined as a single route, bypasses will be closed and a single trail will be maintained for all vehicle travel.

What does this mean to you? Well, think of Little Sluice, Old Sluice and Postpile for example. If a single route, they will be maintained for all vehicle traffic. That would mean blasting for Little Sluice, losing the Old Sluice, and heavy work at Postpile to make it easier.

See you there,

Scott
__________________
Scott Johnston
Rubicon Trail Foundation
Founding Director
Past President 2010-2012
Retired Director 2004-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by resqme View Post
Punctuation eludes you.
cruzila is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2009, 10:32 AM   #2 (permalink)
Pirate4x4 Addict!
 
cruzila's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Member # 6650
Location: Garden Valley
Posts: 5,546
Rubicon Trail Route Recognition
The following items are listed in order from the west end of the trail proceeding east towards Rubicon Springs. Please consult DOT map entitled “Proposed Rubicon Trail Route” where the items are referenced by A, B, C, etc. CGS references are to the map produced by the California Geologic Survey. The route that CGS identified as the main Rubicon Trail is designated as CGS 1.0. Other CGS references are to bypasses or alternate routes. At the end of this paper are 5 additional items not shown on the DOT map.

A. Vicinity of Postpile (CGS 1.3, 1.4, 1.5)
There appears to be two routes currently used. The lower route to the east is the narrow, more difficult, older trail called the Postpile route (CGS 1.0). The upper route on the left is the newer and easier route (CGS ____). These routes separate at 3900'49.80"N and 12018'55.62"W, then there is a connection between them at 3900'51.46"N and 12018'54.99"W, and then they rejoin at 3900'54.41"N and 12018'55.93"W. Several other routes are present but do not appear to be used (CGS ___, ___, ___).
Options:
1. No action.
2. Create a trail corridor, and manage the routes within the corridor using BMPs.
3. Keep both the Postpile Route (CGS 1.0) and the easiest and least environmentally sensitive alternate route (CGS ____), eliminating all other routes (CGS ___, ___, ___).
4. Limit use to the single Postpile route (CGS 1.0) only, close all alternate routes (CGS ___, ___, ___).

B. Top of Postpile (No CGS Reference)
After passing the top of the Postpile, the shelf road empties onto a granite slab through fading trees at a clear intersection at 3900'55.46"N and 12018'51.51"W. The lower route to the right and the southeast (CGS 1.0), is the historic trail that goes through Lost Sluice at 3900'59.57"N and 12018'36.94"W. The upper route on the left and the northwest (CGS ___) is the newer route that crosses flatter slabs and allows safer winter access. Both routes join back together at 3901'5.91"N and 12018'34.94"W before entering the trees.
Options:
1. No action.
2. Create a trail corridor, and manage the routes within the corridor by BMPs.
3. Keep both the traditional Lost Sluice route (CGS 1.0) and the upper route (CGS ___).
4. Limit usage to the traditional lower Lost Sluice route (CGS 1.0) only, close other route (CGS ___).

C. Ellis Creek Campground Stub (USFS Road 14N34B) (No CGS reference)
West of Ellis Creek at 3901'20.53"N and 12018'25.39"W, there is an intersection where a historic route (USFS Road No. 14N34B- also known as the McKinstry Trail) splits off uphill and to the north, and the original trail proceeds straight to the east.
Options:
1. No action. Road 14N34B is not a part of the Rubicon Trail, and is subject to USFS jurisdiction.
2. ?

D. Trail Split After Ellis Creek (CGS 1.6)
After Ellis Creek at 3901'22.23"N and 12018'14.68"W, there is an intersection where an easier bypass splits off uphill and to the north (CGS 1.6), and the original trail proceeds straight to the east (CGS 1.0). The bypass runs parallel with the trail and joins back in near 3901'22.41"N and 12018'09.25"W. Usage of the original trail causes more sedimentation than the bypass.
Options:
1. No action.
2. Create a trail corridor and manage the routes within the corridor by BMPs.
3. Close the traditional route (CGS 1.0) and use the bypass (CGS 1.6) only.
4. Limit use to the single traditional route (CGS 1.0) only, close bypass (CGS 1.6).

E. Soup Bowl (No CGS reference)
At Soup Bowl, there is an intersection at 3901'17.50"N and 12016'47.95"W where a newer and more challenging bypass splits off uphill and to the north, and the original trail (CGS 1.0) proceeds straight to the east through an off-camber granite notch. The bypass runs parallel with the trail and joins back in near 3901'17.15"N and 12016'47.48"W. Vehicles can become stuck on bypass and threaten to roll over onto the original trail, creating a safety hazard and potential blockage.
Options:
1. No action.
2. Create a trail corridor and manage routes within the corridor by BMPs.
3. Limit usage to the single traditional route (CGS 1.0) only, close bypass.
4. Close the traditional route (CGS 1.0) and use the bypass only.

F. West of Winter Camp (CGS 1.7)
After descending the stair steps, there is an intersection near 3901'17.33"N and 12016'42.83"W where a bypass (CGS 1.7) splits off directly downhill and to the west, while the original trail (CGS 1.0) proceeds due east and downhill into a drainage. The bypass parallels the original trail and joins it near 3901'17.05"N and 12016'39.23"W.
Options:
1. No action.
2. Create a trail corridor and manage the routes within the corridor by BMPs.
3. Close the traditional route (CGS 1.0) and use the bypass (CGS 1.7) only.
4. Limit use to the single traditional route (CGS 1.0) only, close bypass (CGS 1.7).


G, H, I and J. Little Sluice and its Bypasses
The original trail through Little Sluice (CGS 1.0) follows a deep seam in the granite that runs almost straight to the southeast with granite cliffs on the north, and a smooth granite slope on the south.
At 3901'14.79"N and 12016'31.95"W, two alternate routes head due east and uphill from the original trail, before Little Sluice proper. The bypass to the east, closest to the Little Sluice, is called the Little Sluice Short Bypass (G on map, CGS 1.9). The bypass further East is called the Little Sluice Long Bypass (H on map, CGS 1.8). A proposed bypass over the smooth granite to the south and west of Little Sluice is called the Little Sluice South Bypass (I on map, CGS ___).
General Options for Little Sluice Area:
1. No action.
2. Create a trail corridor and manage the routes within the corridor (CGS routes 1.0, 1.8, 1.9 and map item I) by BMPs.
3. Limit usage to the single Little Sluice route (CGS 1.0) only, eliminating other routes (CGS 1.8 and 1.9, and map item I).
4. Reduce the rock size in Little Sluice by controlled splitting of the largest rocks into quarters or thirds.

G. Little Sluice Short Bypass (CGS 1.9)
This lower, shorter route to the north and east of main Little Sluice was maintained in 2003 with County, Forest, and FOTR cooperation. It lies close to and parallel with the main Little Sluice, rejoining it just past the Little Sluice at 3901'10.53"N and 12016'24.41"W. This is the shortest summer bypass, but is dangerous in winter and late spring from ice and snow on steep slopes.
Options:
1. No action.
2. Keep both the traditional Little Sluice route (CGS 1.0) and the Short Bypass (CGS 1.9) as the only two routes.
3. Eliminate this bypass.

H. Little Sluice Long Bypass (CGS 1.8)
This upper, longer bypass going easterly around the traditional Little Sluice route dates back to the early 1900s and provides access to camping and helicopter landing areas. It follows more gently sloping terrain and is the safest winter route, at 3901'09.75"N and 12016'20.20"W.
Options:
1. No action.
2. Keep both the traditional Little Sluice route (CGS 1.0) and the Long Bypass (CGS 1.8) as the only two routes.
3. Eliminate this bypass.

I. Little Sluice South Bypass (No CGS reference)
A less-used bypass skirts Little Sluice to the south, staying on smooth granite from near 3901'13.12"N and 12016'29.27"W to 3901'12.08"N and 12016'26.66"W.
Options:
1. No action.
2. Keep both the traditional route (CGS 1.0) and the South Bypass (no CGS reference) as the only two routes.
3. Eliminate this bypass.

J. Thousand Dollar Hill Bypass (east end of CGS 1.8)
The original trail descends tall ledges that have become virtually impassible. As a result, most traffic takes the Thousand Dollar Hill bypass from 3901'10.31"N and 12016'19.81"W northwest to 3901'11.07"N and 12016'20.30"W. Thousand Dollar Hill itself is a loose, rocky climb with several dangerous off-camber spots. There is no separate CGS reference for this bypass, which is at the east end of CGS 1.8.
Options:
1. No action.
2. Keep both the traditional route (CGS 1.0) and the Thousand Dollar Hill bypass (east end of CGS 1.8) as the only two routes.
3. Eliminate this bypass.

K. Middle Sluice Trail (CGS 1.10) and Indian Trail (CGS 1.10)
The original trail (CGS 1.10) is called Middle Sluice (or sometimes Old Sluice, True Sluice, or Flatfender Alley), with its southern third commonly referred to as Old Sluice Box. The Middle Sluice trail goes through tight cliffs and boulders to the southeast. The Indian Trail (CGS 1.0) splits off from the Middle Sluice trail just past Arnold's Rock near 3900'49.56"N and 12015'59.93"W and descends downhill due east, following an easy slope. The Indian Trail rejoins the Middle Sluice trail at 3900'25.27"N and 12015'41.75"W. Indian Trail is a well-defined alternate route across the granite slabs northeast of Old Sluice, first laid out in the early 1900's by Vic Wikander.
Options:
1. No action.
2. Keep both the Middle Sluice route (CGS 1.10) and the Indian Trail (CGS 1.0).
3. Limit usage to one of the two existing routes only.

L. Buck Island Trail (CGS 1.0) and Bypass (No CGS reference)
The original trail (CGS 1.0 0) went close by the shore of Buck Island Lake, but when the lake level was raised by SMUD as part of a hydro project, the original trail is now partly submerged depending on the time of year, weather, and SMUD operations. At 3900'16.24"N and 12015'06.71"W, where the main trail (CGS 1.0) goes down to lake level, the Buck Island Bypass (CGS ___) splits off to the north and east and follows the contour of the hillside. This more-or-less level alternate route rejoins the main trail as it climbs back up from lake level near 3900'15.66"N and 12015'00.56"W. The Buck Island Bypass goes across a loose, rocky, side hill that is occasionally unsafe. SMUD is obligated as a condition to its hydro license to improve the bypass.
Options:
1. No action.
2. Keep the original route (CGS 1.0) and the bypass, and manage using BMPs.
3. Limit use to the original route (CGS 1.0) route only, close bypass.
4. Close the original route (CGS 1.0), and improve the bypass.


OTHER ITEMS NOT SHOWN ON MAP
Several locations of concern are not shown on the current DOT Proposed Rubicon Trail Route map. They are listed below for discussion purposes

M. Wentworth Springs Campground Bypass (CGS 1.1)

A user-created bypass (CGS 1.1) goes around a low lying area that held water prior to the road maintenance done by DOT and FOTR in 2006 and 2007.
Options:
1. No action.
2. Create a trail corridor, and manage the routes within the corridor by using BMPs.
3. Keep both the traditional route (CGS 1.0) and the bypass (CGS 1.1).
4. Limit use to the single traditional route (CGS 1.0) only, closing the bypass (CGS 1.1).

N. Granite bypass west of Postpile (CGS 1.2)
CGS route 1.0 is actually a user-created bypass, and CGS route 1.2 is the original trail. The bypass goes over granite around a low lying area.
Options:
1. No action.
2. Create a trail corridor, and manage the routes within the corridor by using BMPs.
3. Keep both the traditional route (CGS 1.2) and the bypass (CGS 1.0).
4. Limit use to the single original trail (CGS 1.2) only, closing the bypass (CGS 1.0).
5. Limit use to the bypass (CGS 1.0) only, closing the traditional route (CGS 1.2).

O. Ellis Intertie Route (CGS 2.1, 2.1a, 2.2)
The main route currently used (CGS 2.0) was created by the grant of easements to the County from the underlying landowners. The former routes (CGS 2.1, 2.1a and 2.2) are no longer used. This is a preferable arrangement, and no changes are being suggested.

P. Mud Lakes Trail Re-route (not identified by CGS)
This is a proposed trail re-route approximately mile in length that would replace the existing trail between the benchmark east of Walker and the bottom of Little Sluice. This proposal may be considered in the long term planning process to direct users away from the original trail which passes through a problematic drainage area. The proposed re-route is to the south of the original trail, and would be on a high line over granite.
Options:
1. No action.
2. Create a trail corridor, and manage the routes within the corridor by using BMPs.
3. Keep the traditional route (CGS 1.0) and consider creating a new southerly route as a long term possibility for managing this section of the trail.

Q. Alternate Routes Near Placer County Line (CGS 1.11)
Options:
1. No action.
2. Create a trail corridor and manage the routes within the corridor by BMPs.
3. Close the traditional route (CGS 1.0) and use the bypass (CGS 1.11) only.
4. Limit use to the single traditional route (CGS 1.0) only, close bypass (CGS 1.11).
11/19/2009
__________________
Scott Johnston
Rubicon Trail Foundation
Founding Director
Past President 2010-2012
Retired Director 2004-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by resqme View Post
Punctuation eludes you.

Last edited by cruzila; 12-02-2009 at 10:49 AM.
cruzila is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 12-02-2009, 11:30 AM   #3 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Member # 19251
Location: Dixon, Ca
Posts: 853
Thanks for keeping up with and helping push this forward Scott. One question, what exactly does "create a trail corridor......using BMPS." mean?
__________________
RIP Dennis Mayer
KI6MLD
microtus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2009, 12:13 PM   #4 (permalink)
Pirate4x4 Addict!
 
cruzila's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Member # 6650
Location: Garden Valley
Posts: 5,546
Great question! What it means is that the Forest Service and County would agree that the County would take responsiblity for a wider corridor than a typical road which is close to 50 feet in width. It could be 100 or more feet in width, allowing the County to maintain some of the multiple paths in existance. Travel between them would be discouraged as it is now. The FS has managed routes in different places by this management technique. Dusy/Ershim is one such example.

This is a good concept for the people that use the trail. I have seen evidence of this on Wrights Lake road where there are two paved paths. Any Interstate freeway is an example of multiple paths.

The other concept is that there are two smaller corridors for split trails such as the Indian Trail/Old Sluice.

The idea of a varying corridor came out of discussions involving many stakeholders, including private owners, FS personnel, public users, FOTR, RTF etc.

Please note the additions to the map descriptions as they are NOT shown as lines on the actual map.

Scott
__________________
Scott Johnston
Rubicon Trail Foundation
Founding Director
Past President 2010-2012
Retired Director 2004-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by resqme View Post
Punctuation eludes you.
cruzila is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2009, 12:18 PM   #5 (permalink)
Pirate4x4 Addict!
 
cruzila's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Member # 6650
Location: Garden Valley
Posts: 5,546
BMP's are Best Management Practices. Not something I am able to explain fully right now but I am sure someone can help out there.

I do know that DOT has a standard set of BMP's and will develop more specifically for Rubicon.

check here for an example: http://www.co.el-dorado.ca.us/ag/bmps.html

BLM has them as well as every agency out there under the sun.
Quote:
What are Best Management Practices (BMPs)?

Best management practices (BMPs) are innovative, dynamic, and improved environmental protection practices applied to oil and natural gas drilling and production to help ensure that energy development is conducted in an environmentally responsible manner. BMPs protect wildlife and landscapes as we work to develop vitally needed domestic energy sources.

Some BMPs are as simple as choosing a paint color that helps oil and gas equipment blend in with the natural surroundings, while others involve cutting-edge monitoring and production technologies. All are based on the idea that the "footprint" of energy development should be as small and as light as possible.
__________________
Scott Johnston
Rubicon Trail Foundation
Founding Director
Past President 2010-2012
Retired Director 2004-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by resqme View Post
Punctuation eludes you.
cruzila is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2009, 04:03 PM   #6 (permalink)
flamethrower
 
Bebe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Member # 75270
Location: Auburn, CA
Posts: 9,028
Send a message via Yahoo to Bebe
Quote:
2. Create a trail corridor and manage the routes within the corridor by BMPs.
Depending on what the BMP's are of course....this should apply to all of them IMHO.

We have to keep in mind that BMP's for a "county road" may not be the best way to manage a trail.

Do we know when these BMP's will be written and who will be involved in their creation/adoption/execution?
__________________
What's all the Hub-bub about Blue Stars??? Click Here
Haulin the Groceries AND Haulin the MAIL
Bebe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2009, 07:04 AM   #7 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Member # 12263
Location: not here legal then go home
Posts: 963
Will try to get off work and get up there.
Jerry
__________________
TTC Recovery/Safety guy
Jeep wrangler warn9500/ 3-linkft-4 linkR/37" GY M/T beadlocks,truehi-9 rear detroit, 44 front ox-locker warn shafts CTM joints/Atlas 5-1,coilovers ECT.

Member: Friends Of The Rubicon,Cal 4--wheel clubs Asso.,Blue Ribbion coalition, Motherload Rockcrawlers
rockwrangler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2009, 04:08 PM   #8 (permalink)
Registered User
 
PJohnson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Member # 263
Location: Gilroy, CA
Posts: 883
What are the methods to provide input to the ROC on this issue?

Phil
__________________
1966 FJ45 LPB-1973 FJ40- KR6AWL
MTA 4x4 - San Jose, CA
PJohnson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2009, 05:46 PM   #9 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Member # 347
Location: Fair Oaks, CA
Posts: 8,622
Attend ROC or email DOT.
I'm running out the door but will bump another thread with this info...
randii is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2009, 07:23 AM   #10 (permalink)
Rock God
 
Curly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Member # 20205
Location: California
Posts: 1,225
See you all tonight TTT
__________________
KI6PPU
It's very black and white. It becomes Gray when you give quarter....
Curly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2009, 08:05 AM   #11 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Member # 12263
Location: not here legal then go home
Posts: 963
Can't make it wifes heater core went out in the Jeep and it's gushing coolant Please post up what went on
Jerry
__________________
TTC Recovery/Safety guy
Jeep wrangler warn9500/ 3-linkft-4 linkR/37" GY M/T beadlocks,truehi-9 rear detroit, 44 front ox-locker warn shafts CTM joints/Atlas 5-1,coilovers ECT.

Member: Friends Of The Rubicon,Cal 4--wheel clubs Asso.,Blue Ribbion coalition, Motherload Rockcrawlers
rockwrangler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2009, 08:58 AM   #12 (permalink)
Zeus of the Sluice
 
R290's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Member # 46467
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 4,236
Map quest link

How long do you think the meeting will last?

They are looking for public input, but looks like we need to pick one of the 3 or 4 options offered for each item listed above. Correct?
__________________
73 IH Scout

Last edited by R290; 12-10-2009 at 08:59 AM.
R290 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2009, 09:05 AM   #13 (permalink)
flamethrower
 
Bebe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Member # 75270
Location: Auburn, CA
Posts: 9,028
Send a message via Yahoo to Bebe
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curly View Post
See you all tonight TTT
Ditto!
__________________
What's all the Hub-bub about Blue Stars??? Click Here
Haulin the Groceries AND Haulin the MAIL
Bebe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2009, 09:57 AM   #14 (permalink)
Pirate4x4 Addict!
 
cruzila's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Member # 6650
Location: Garden Valley
Posts: 5,546
Quote:
Originally Posted by R290 View Post
Map quest link

How long do you think the meeting will last?

They are looking for public input, but looks like we need to pick one of the 3 or 4 options offered for each item listed above. Correct?
Correct, each bypass has its own list and that list varies somewhat for each one. The option of a corridor makes sense for some of them and there are a couple that a single route may work better. Knowledge of the trail is key to being able to decipher the options.

If you need to have more time to digest this information, I would suggest you comment to the County that way. Comment on what you can to Tom Celio, there is nothing set in stone and this thing is changing and hard to keep up with.

A continued involvement is the way for us to have the best result. I have faith that the County is trying to do the right thing for the OHV trail users.

See you tonight,

Scott
__________________
Scott Johnston
Rubicon Trail Foundation
Founding Director
Past President 2010-2012
Retired Director 2004-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by resqme View Post
Punctuation eludes you.
cruzila is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2009, 11:43 AM   #15 (permalink)
Zeus of the Sluice
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Member # 21815
Location: Pollock Pines, CA
Posts: 3,657
I'll be there.

Really.
__________________
WWDD?

N6YBH
-
"If you need a tool and don't buy it, you will ultimately find that you have paid for it but don't have it". -Henry Ford


Use Goodsearch and support the Rubicon Trail Foundation.
resqme is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2009, 01:47 PM   #16 (permalink)
Land Use Zeus
 
Jeepndel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Member # 3982
Location: Mokelumne Hill, CA, USA
Posts: 2,583
I take it the meeting is still on, power out or not?
Del
__________________
Del Albright
BlueRibbon Coalition Director of Operations
Co-Founder, Friends of the Rubicon (FOTR)

Building an Access Army to Fight Back -- SOLDIER UP
Jeepndel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2009, 02:21 PM   #17 (permalink)
flamethrower
 
Bebe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Member # 75270
Location: Auburn, CA
Posts: 9,028
Send a message via Yahoo to Bebe
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeepndel View Post
I take it the meeting is still on, power out or not?
Del
LOL lets hope so, I'm not missing a Christmas Party and driving 90 minutes for nuthin!!!
__________________
What's all the Hub-bub about Blue Stars??? Click Here
Haulin the Groceries AND Haulin the MAIL
Bebe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2009, 10:17 PM   #18 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Member # 347
Location: Fair Oaks, CA
Posts: 8,622
Good meeting...

This evening's ROC was incredibly productive -- DOT again managed to prevent spending too much time on the big issues that we're unlikely ever to agree on (should there be just ONE route or multiple routes where necessary, what's legal and what's not, etc.), and kept focus on the segments of specific trail/alternate/bypass/reroute in question. We got through basic discussions of all of the sections in questionadding to the strong foundation of discussion that we made in November.

I was pleased to see so many users in the room, even some Pirate4x4 readers this time all with the normal ROC advocates and agency folks. Members of RTF are always at these meetings, and always try to deliver a wide range of trail user opinions, but nothing is quite as compelling as a trail user speaking his/her own truth, in his/her own voice. My thanks to everyone who prioritized attending and participating in this meeting (email is OK, but in-person is way better).

As the County and the Forest work towards delivering the requirements of the Cleanup and Abatement Order (CAO), these discussions will drive inexorably toward definining the right-of-way, and is almost guaranteed to decrease trail/alternate/bypass/reroutes -- our community's battle is to help the agencies select the important trail/alternate/bypass/reroutes and help keep the greatest access in the most sustainable way. Actual users and user representatives giving their testimony... that's how we have best impact.

This is the last meeting on these topicss but they extended the written comment period for ten days, since there was such limited response (they have only letters from Panel B, the Water Board, and RTF!). You can still let your opinions be know meaningfully, with specific comments on specific trail/alternate/bypass/reroutes by sending them to vickie.sanders at edcgov dot us.

Thanks for all who have participated thus far...

Randii
Randy Burleson
Rubicon Trail User
FOTR Volunteer since the beginning
RTF officer, director, or grant administrator since the beginning
randii is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2009, 11:14 PM   #19 (permalink)
Team 4554
 
Kurtuleas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Member # 23188
Location: Discovery Bay, CA
Posts: 8,423
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by randii View Post
You can still let your opinions be know meaningfully, with specific comments on specific trail/alternate/bypass/reroutes by sending them to vickie.sanders at edcgov dot us.
[/SIZE][/I]

Randii,

Is there a deadline as to when we need to e-mail Vickie Sanders?
__________________
4554 OCD Racing

Our partners: Falken Tire, Vegas 4x4, CRAWL Magazine, Reid Racing, Metal Cloak, MJ Motorsports, Jessie Haines Fabrication, SFS Industries, Susanville Transmission, Pacific Fabrication, Raceline Wheels, Outlaw Grafix, The Kyburz Krawlerz, and Keith's credit card.
Kurtuleas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2009, 12:26 AM   #20 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Member # 347
Location: Fair Oaks, CA
Posts: 8,622
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurtuleas View Post
Is there a deadline as to when we need to e-mail Vickie Sanders?
We have ten more days, so we need to get them in by 12/21.

Technically, they were due a week before December's meeting, and they've already given us extension.
http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/showt...ght=prioritize

More time for more comment makes some sense, tho.

Randii

Last edited by randii; 12-11-2009 at 02:56 PM.
randii is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2009, 08:25 AM   #21 (permalink)
Zeus of the Sluice
 
Rubicrawler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Member # 2037
Location: Brentwood, CA 150 mi. from the 'Con
Posts: 4,504
Thanks for the update Randy. I'll be sending Vickie a letter!
__________________
Mark Langford
KI6TMK


'86 CJ7, ProRock60's, 4.88's/Detroits/35 Spline Alloys/CTM's, TBI 350, 700R4, 4:1 D300 w/Twin Stick, 17" x 8.5" Trail Ready HD Aluminum beadlocks, 37x13.5x17 Toyo MT's

Dysfunctional Rockcrawlers (TDO)

Wheelers for the Wounded of California
Rubicrawler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2009, 08:45 AM   #22 (permalink)
Land Use Zeus
 
Jeepndel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Member # 3982
Location: Mokelumne Hill, CA, USA
Posts: 2,583
Helpful comments would include statements like in support of:
- corridor management of the trail system leaving most existing bypasses allowing for two-way traffic as needed and recovery of disabled rigs, as well as bypass by moderate rigs of serious obstacles;
- leaving all serious obstacles like Soup Bowl and Little Sluice so folks can have challenge along with adventure;
- developing new bypasses where needed, such as around Soup Bowl to avoid trail backups and possibly dangerously crowded (congested) conditions;
- leave as many routes, alternate routes and bypasses as possible during this phase of maintenance, and use Best Management Practices (BMP's) to determine if FOTR and the county can adequately maintain all the routes.

I would get my comments in to Vickie (the county) within the next ten days just to be sure they are in the hands of staff who will make a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors in mid January.

Del
__________________
Del Albright
BlueRibbon Coalition Director of Operations
Co-Founder, Friends of the Rubicon (FOTR)

Building an Access Army to Fight Back -- SOLDIER UP
Jeepndel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2009, 08:56 AM   #23 (permalink)
flamethrower
 
Bebe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Member # 75270
Location: Auburn, CA
Posts: 9,028
Send a message via Yahoo to Bebe
Thank you DEL!!


AND, the Board of Supervisors meeting will be a public one!! SO we will have the opportunity to speak to them as well!!

When we have the date for the BOS meeting we'll be sure to let everyone know!

We need to make sure we reiterate, as Del mentioned above, that many of these bypasses are necessary for safe passage, to ease congestion, allow for the continued flow of traffic, AND to assist in the extrication of damaged/dead vehicles, and in some cases for safe Winter travel.

Imagine not having either of the Post Pile bypasses and having to come down PP with a dead or damaged rig!!
__________________
What's all the Hub-bub about Blue Stars??? Click Here
Haulin the Groceries AND Haulin the MAIL
Bebe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2009, 11:13 AM   #24 (permalink)
Zeus of the Sluice
 
R290's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Member # 46467
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 4,236
Del and Randii summed up the meeting pretty good.

There were a couple updates to the map and options to pick from. Some of the "no action" options were removed as the county needed to do something in those areas.

To me the county DOT folks seemed reasonable, their job is road engineering and maintenance.

The DOT is presenting recommendations to the county Board of Supervisors for maintenance of the trail. They are keeping most all of the bypasses open ( means more maintenance responsibility on their part and volunteers). Private land owners are also working with the county on easement access to make maintenance easier, but bypass 1.11 will be closed. They said the time line is tight to get everything rolling so maintenance could begin in the spring/summer time.

Other options discusses would be temporary closer of some bypass in wet weather, meaning you would need to take the high line around the water filled areas during the spring, but both routes would be open in the summer time to allow passing and two way traffic.
Thats where corridor management allows several routes through an area based on conditions vs just one path.

I was very glad to see they are keeping the OLD Sluice route in place.

My take was they will leave Little Sluice the way it is, but make the long bypass the main route around LS. The short by pass is in need of major work where it enters the LS. So this would mean changes in the the Thousand dollar hill area to help protect the big trees were the long by pass comes out. Again my take and not exactly what was said
__________________
73 IH Scout
R290 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2009, 11:31 AM   #25 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Member # 12263
Location: not here legal then go home
Posts: 963
Glad to here the meeting went well! I'll send in comments later tonight
__________________
TTC Recovery/Safety guy
Jeep wrangler warn9500/ 3-linkft-4 linkR/37" GY M/T beadlocks,truehi-9 rear detroit, 44 front ox-locker warn shafts CTM joints/Atlas 5-1,coilovers ECT.

Member: Friends Of The Rubicon,Cal 4--wheel clubs Asso.,Blue Ribbion coalition, Motherload Rockcrawlers
rockwrangler is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:25 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.