I agree that demonizing those that engage in motor sports isn't a good path forward, but I don't think it's necessarily a foregone conclusion that use of this section of the Military Ridge path should continue to be open to snowmobiles. It's essentially part of urban Verona at this point and is used by many for transportation purposes when the conditions are good. It is and should be a key bike route for employees and guests to the Epic campus (many thousands of each) as well as other destinations and origins in Verona and could very well serve walkers and joggers and cyclists in the winter if it were maintained.
I wanted to share this original Military Ridge Trail Master Plan <http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/lands/masterplanning/documents/MP-PR-MilitaryRidgeST-1986.pdf> document that calls for a vision of a shared use path from early on, including opportunities for "hiking, biking, snowmobiling and non-motorized winter uses." But also states that "Snomobiling will be restricted to the west edge of Mt. Horeb to Dodgeville section". [image: snowmobiles.JPG] Clearly that idea changed somewhere along the line and it doesn't mean that snomobiles don't belong on this stretch today, but it also doesn't mean that they necessarily do. The overall tone of the document seems to seek out the highest value to the largest number of users. Compatible use is great, but not all use is necessarily compatible. Michael does raise a good point about snowmobiles on pavement also. I've heard that Minnesota does regularly allow use of snowmobiles on paved sections of trails, so I'm not sure that paving the trail needs to necessarily be tied with prohibiting use by snowmobiles. As far as the condition of the trail currently (as of last week), it is definitely because of use by people on bikes and people on foot; probably more foot holes than bike ruts. And whether that's from recreational or transportation use, there's clearly a lot of desire and interest to use the facility early in the season. Paving this very well used section of trail would seem to be a high-value proposition. Grant On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 4:19 PM Michael Lemberger via Bikies < [email protected]> wrote: > Hi Peter, > > Excellent point about it also being a transportation corridor, especially > within the city limits. What I wrote probably sounds odd because of an > unwritten assumption I had in mind, which is that most of the trail use > that results in surface damage is recreational. I’m assuming that because > it continues west of town, often well beyond the box culverts and Epic. I > would also note that the stride length and footprint patterns of the > postholing look like that which runners would leave behind. With regard to > bikes, I can tell you from experience that pushing through wet aggregate > gets old really fast, and I doubt there are many transportation cyclists > that would want to put up with doing so for any period of time. > > If encouraging transportation use is the primary goal, then paving the > stretch between the current end of pavement at highway PB and Nine Mound > road or perhaps the intersection with the paved Epic path would be the only > alternative worthy of serious consideration. > > Best, > Michael > > PS…maybe addressing this issue with more regular maintenance would be > cheaper, but it really depends on how often it would have to be done. > > > On Apr 18, 2016, at 3:48 PM, Peter Gray <[email protected]> wrote: > > Michael, > > I appreciate the balanced and overall sane and considerate tone of your > comments. Thank you for reminding us that we should not demonize other > users of shared resources. > > I take your point that "Trail users in Verona have, in the last couple of > years, shown an exceptional lack of consideration for the trail surface" > ... and yet ... > > If we think of this stretch as a transportation facility and not just > a recreational facility, that sounds like an odd way to put it. When paved > roads deteriorate, we consider it a road maintenance issue. We don't say, > "Road users have shown an exceptional lack of consideration for the road > surface." > > In addition to the "two most obvious solutions" you mention (paving and > allowing snowmobile access; or restricting trail use when it's soft), how > about increased seasonal grooming maintenance? That's a recurring expense > not a capital investment, but still, wouldn't it be a lot cheaper than > paving? > > Cheers, > Peter > > On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 2:26 PM, Michael Lemberger via Bikies < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Snowmobiles did not cause any of the damage in question, nor was it >> caused exclusively by bicyclists. The condition of the trail might be >> better described as rutted and postholed, the former by bikes, the latter >> by pedestrians. >> >> Here’s an example of what I’m referring to when I write “postholed” >> (though in snow in this photo): >> >> https://www.flickr.com/photos/mababo/24314791136/ >> >> Trail users in Verona have, in the last couple of years, shown an >> exceptional lack of consideration for the trail surface. There might be >> something in the municipal water supply that causes this behavior, but it >> could also be that the trail segments in question tend to be low and not >> well drained, tending to stay wet for quite a while. >> >> The whole debate about whether to pave the section between PB and Verona >> (and beyond?) centers on whether snowmobiles would then be allowed to use >> the trail because it’s paved. My understanding is that they are not >> generally allowed on pavement (the Badger north of Purcell would be one >> example) because studded tracks and carbide-shod skis can easily pit and >> gouge the pavement surface if there’s inadequate snow. Even so, they *are* >> allowed to use the paved section east of PB to the snowmobile gate to >> connect to a system of private trails, presumably because there isn’t >> another good place to cross the 18/151 bypass. >> >> Whether or not we agree with the existence of snowmobiles, they are a >> fellow user group that exists and they contribute at least as much as we do >> through tax revenue and user fees. In addition to using the rail trails to >> get places, they use them to connect to a large network of private trails. >> Telling them to step off would be the moral equivalent of motorists telling >> us to get off of "their" roads. >> >> The two most obvious solutions would be to pave the trail and allow >> snowmobile access on that section, or to do some kind of community >> education in the hope of keeping users off the trail when it’s soft. >> >> Michael Lemberger >> Madison >> >> >> >> On Sat Apr 16 14:24:24 PDT 2016, Rob wrote: >> >> >> I think it's worth pointing out that the Military Ridge State Trail is >> not a bike trail. It's a multi-use trail that allows bikes and bicyclists. >> >> I don't think singling out certain types of trail users and casting blame >> is a good way to address problems with the trail. Are the ruts we're >> discussing even caused by the snowmobiles? Presumably the trail surface is >> frozen when they're out. The ruts are probably from cyclists using the >> trail when it's too wet -- maybe we are to blame for more damage than the >> snowmobiles. >> >> And let's be realistic: cyclists are never going to ouster snowmobilers >> in Wisconsin (though global warming may eventually do it anyway). Instead, >> we should work to find a compromise that makes the trail accessible to the >> largest number of people and activities possible. If that means more >> regular trail grooming instead of paving out through Verona, great. If it >> means we pave through Verona, and snowmobiling happens between Verona and >> Mt. Horeb, great. I'm just happy this resource exists for everyone. >> >> I see a lot of comments on newsfeeds and articles saying that cyclists as >> a group have no place in X location or on Y street. I'd love for this group >> to learn from the vitriol that we, as cyclists, experience and try to avoid >> doing the same to others. >> >> Best, Rob >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Bikies mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Bikies mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org >
_______________________________________________ Bikies mailing list [email protected] http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org
