Stay On Trail

Grooming Reports and Trail Conditions
Tom
Posts: 25
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2007 12:21 pm

Post by Tom »

I see the portion of the trail that has been discussed is closed. Very unfortunate situation for many that is caused by a few bad apples. I know a lot of riders like to do what I call the Armstrong Creek loop. Great places in Armstrong Creek like Jerry's Blue Roof, Jerry's Green Shack, Den & Ren's. What does the closed section mean to anyone riding that way? Will there be an alternate route set up that one can make it through that area? Thanks for any detailed info on this. Great snow right now and I hope the businesses in Armstrong Creek can take advantage of it.
User avatar
Jim
Site Admin
Posts: 6331
Joined: Sat Jul 29, 2006 9:48 am
Location: Armstrong Creek, WI
Contact:

Post by Jim »

Tom wrote:I see the portion of the trail that has been discussed is closed. Very unfortunate situation for many that is caused by a few bad apples. I know a lot of riders like to do what I call the Armstrong Creek loop. Great places in Armstrong Creek like Jerry's Blue Roof, Jerry's Green Shack, Den & Ren's. What does the closed section mean to anyone riding that way? Will there be an alternate route set up that one can make it through that area? Thanks for any detailed info on this. Great snow right now and I hope the businesses in Armstrong Creek can take advantage of it.
The alternate road route has been posted.
User avatar
CRZ
Posts: 1222
Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2008 6:22 pm

Post by CRZ »

the reroute just means another 2 miles of road route, which won't be too bad until the first 40degree day
snoway
Posts: 765
Joined: Tue Aug 29, 2006 7:22 am

Post by snoway »

That is too bad. I hope this landowner is the exception instead of the rule....if not, we will lose a lot more trails. If i stopped and took a pic every time I saw tracks off trail I'd never get anywhere on a trail ride...just the facts. I can't help it. I stay on trail. Not everyone does. That needs to be considered when getting permission from a reluctant landowner. Just the way it is and if a landowner is that particular then a whole chitload a signs need to be placed on that kind of property in the future. Yes the land owner giveth and will take away. so what. You can't control that anymore than you can control the idiots. Acting like everyone is going to be a trail riding saint isn't realistic and anyone who rides a sled or grooms a trail, or asks for landowner permission KNOWS that. This all needs to be laid out when getting permission in the first place.
User avatar
Jim
Site Admin
Posts: 6331
Joined: Sat Jul 29, 2006 9:48 am
Location: Armstrong Creek, WI
Contact:

Post by Jim »

You got that right! To make matters worse, it was locals.
Z1 TURBO
Posts: 25
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2012 6:54 pm
Location: Armstrong Creek

Post by Z1 TURBO »

The idiots that did this also rode through the woods to the land owners cabin and rode around his cabin a couple times and then up and down his driveway. So I think that is what he is pi**ed about and I don't blame him one bit. Now with the reroute down Chitko there's a homeowner there that I know is not going to be very happy listening to a couple hundred machines a day going by on the weekends. Also there are more fields along that road that are going to have some pi**ed off landowners if someone decides to ride across their fields. This reroute is all down black top road so like some one else already posted a couple warm sunny days and it will not be good!!
snoway
Posts: 765
Joined: Tue Aug 29, 2006 7:22 am

Post by snoway »

Just so everyone knows, I greatly appreciate everything, everything, everything, everything, everything you all do to make the best trails in Wisconsin.
We need shock collars for some of the non thinkers out there.
I hope there is someway that things can be smoothed over with this gracious landowner.
User avatar
CRZ
Posts: 1222
Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2008 6:22 pm

Post by CRZ »

Jim;24208 wrote:You got that right! To make matters worse, it was locals.
the sad thing is the trail going through had nothing to do with the incident that caused its closure, that would have happened without the trail there
snoway
Posts: 765
Joined: Tue Aug 29, 2006 7:22 am

Post by snoway »

CRZ wrote:the sad thing is the trail going through had nothing to do with the incident that caused its closure, that would have happened without the trail there
??? not sure what you mean. If permission wasn't given then it never existed and the idiots would simply be idiots and not trail closing idiots.
User avatar
CRZ
Posts: 1222
Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2008 6:22 pm

Post by CRZ »

snoway wrote:??? not sure what you mean. If permission wasn't given then it never existed and the idiots would simply be idiots and not trail closing idiots.
I'm saying the'idots' would have ridden the swamp whether the trail was there or not ,but because the trail happened to run through the swamp it was seen as the sole reason for the actions of the"idiots".
Post Reply