When discussing sustainability we must discuss the volume of use. A trail that isn’t used much at all is 100% sustainable even when designed “incorrectly”. A trail like FHP’s that sees 1000s of feet and wheels every year will take a lot of effort to keep it sustainable even when designed “correctly”. Sometimes those trails or part of them aren’t sustainable while other times they can be made and kept sustainable. The fact that RA-MORE and the City continue to make changes to the NorthTrail and Buttermilk to improve their sustainability makes me think they would do the same for FHP.

As I understand it, the trails were NEVER built or maintained by RA-MORE. RA-MORE members may have been involved, even that I’m not sure of, but RA-MORE wasn’t leading the way. Did someone from RA-MORE talk with Linwood and FoFHP 3 years ago?

Closing the trails at this time could be worse for the area, the park, and yourself. I hear the city is looking for a new home for their school board, they could just clear the trees and put in a building for the school board. Now wouldn’t that suck!

It’s funny to me to hear about people living in a city complaining about having people around them. If you want nature move to Alaska, Oregon, Montana, ... You do realize there are close to 2 million people that live within 30 miles of you.

Regards,
Eric

I continue to be surprised that residents of the Forest Hill Park area would complain about recreation in the park. Anyone familiar with Richmond knows the crime element should be more of a concern. I have been using Forest Hill Park for about 8 years now and the crime and loitering in the park by druggies and filth has decreased exponentially with the increased use of the trails by hikers, runner, and cyclists. The more people who use the park for legitimate reasons the less people use if for bad things.

The park is a place for the public to enjoy safe, clean outdoor recreation, that is why parks exist.

It’s time for everyone, every type of park user in the community to come together and embrace the green space that we are lucky to have. There will be no more parks, only more houses, more malls, and more people. Just look around, it is pretty obvious that the park is a gem. I hope that I will be able to continue to enjoy it as a cyclist, runner, and hiker.

For those of you still reading this post I would like to interject with some facts….

Fact #1 In March of 05 my husband and I heard chainsaws in the park on a Saturday and said, hmmmm thats weird. We checked it out and three men were cutting down branches AND TREES and digging into the ground, I said, whatcha doing? and they said building a trail, we have permission from “the lady” from FoFHP and Linwood, (a park employee, not the Director). I figured it was sanctioned and went about my business.

Fact #2 When these trails became so plentiful that it interfered with the landscape I became upset with FoFHP and contacted them. No one from the organization gave permission to the trail builders. I then called the city and wrote letters. Linwood stated that he gave permission to a group of mountain bikers to clean up the trails after Isabell.

Fact#3 I have no affiliation with FoFHP and had to start my own group for the protection of the park from trails because every time a meeting was planned or the subject brought up on neighborhood website a rather personal and bullish attach on anyone against the trails started and scared a bunch of people off. Ra More who was identified as the trail builders even suggested on their website that the meetings be flooded with bikers. On the first meeting 8 mtn bikers showed up and circled our table arms crossed (seriously).

Fact#4 An intensive research plan was done on the grade of most of the park, the soil type and the sustainability of the then new trails. The findings were that the trails were for the MOST part, unsustainable.  FoFHP adopted this study and worked with the researcher to present to the city a plan that made the case for a shut down of MOST of the trails, leaving a single, sustainable loop around the park that tied into Buttermilk.

Fact#5 It came to light in the initial meetings that the Ra More members who built the FHP trail had not been trained. Training for trail building and responsible mountain biking were done POST trail building. At this point I went on a walk with a neighbor and we both photographed and logged 217 trees that were cut down in the biking path.  Most were around 1 inch to 2 inches in diameter.

Fact#6 I contacted a lawyer to see what my group (now defunct because of intimidation by mountain bikers) could do, here is his post: I certainly enjoyed chatting with you this morning.  I’m in the process of starting my research and came across this item.  Because what the MORE Richmond Chapter did in cutting trees for the paths in Forest Hill Park was without the express written permission of the director, offenses have been committed under the Richmond Code of Ordinances. (If you counted 217 trees, there are 217 offenses).

Sec. 26-404. Cutting down any tree on city property prohibited.

It shall be unlawful for any person to cut down or cause to be cut down any tree on any city-owned real estate or in any city-owned right-of-way without the express written permission of the director of parks, recreation and community facilities.  Each tree so cut down or caused to be cut down shall constitute a separate offense under this section. (Code 1993, § 8-226).

At a minimum, this would entitle any citizen to swear out a warrant or to contact the Commonwealth’s Attorney to ask for prosecution under this section.

Fact #7 Ra More walked away from the MOU that was presented in a meeting with the City when they found out that they would be responsible for the repair of the unsustainable trails. Remember that this plan and MOU still contained a biking path.

Since then, I had given up because I was insulted, bullied and defeated by people that did not understand that I have nothing against mountain biking, that I want what is best for the park.  If butterfly watchers cut trails in the park irresponsibly, then I would have a problem with that. Furthermore on the use of park statements, yes a park should be used, but it also needs to be saved for future use. There are many activities that could go on in the park i.e. frisbee golf, climbing, those stationed exercise thingys, but if every interest group decides on their own to create their activity without permission then we have no forest in Forest Hill park.  I sincerely want to share the park with others that appreciate and love it, but it must be done with careful planning, ecological means and intelligence.

As far as the tree, myself and others along my block all said the same thing when the tree fell and we were all looking at the big trees and then at our houses. That we were concerned about the trails effects on the forest, and want to have the city be responsible for taking care of the trees and the trails, so that this does not happen again regardless if it was directly because of the trails or not. We all believe it was a disaster due to all the factors of rain soil erosion Isabel damage and trail damage to roots.

I am again, bullied and defeated with this subject, but wanted to ad my voice and let everyone know that there are many more people in the neighborhood opposed to the trails, they are just busy or actually too intimidated to say anything about it.

Pat,
FoFHP are not in on negotiations because the club and city are seeking a city wide MOU.

However, if such an MOU happens, chances are FHP will either be left out of the MOU and/or more complaints will be called into the city by a few people if trailcare begins in FHP.

The leaving out of FHP, including for the Bike Patrol program which is simple a “neighborhood watch/help program” sponsored by IMBA/Ric-MORE are direct results of the FoFHP.

Come to the meetings, ask questions directly to Nathan Burrell of the JRPS, talk to anyone in JROC, Friends of Powhite, Hanover Equestrian groups, Forest Hill Neighborhood Association folks.  As individuals and a club we strive to work with others to produce the most effective non-impact outdoor environment for everyone.

To Johanna,I am sorry that you feel the parks beauty is only for your and the neighbors to enjoy. While I admit it’s nice to be backed up to woods rather than a street or an alley, it’s still a public park for everyone to enjoy and in my opinion all the beautiful stone work covered by years of neglect is the tragedy.

And “paved” paths of oil and stone are neither friendly to the environment, easy on the eyes, or help with actually feeling less “urban”.

Johanna Spyri, are you for real????
“The beautiful vista of FHP we had from our front porches and back decks is now being destroyed by excessive noise, physical impact and overall inconsiderate activities of park users”
Please tell me what part of “public park” you didn’t understand??? Just to make it clear, public city parks are for the public to use, it is that simple. Now, when the public use the public parks, some of the public like to run, some like to walk, some like to sit and some like to bike, oh, and how could I forget, the dogs of the public like to walk and run there too, it is just what it is. What can you do about it? Probably NOTHING!!! I never considered living near a city park a prime real estate, because of that reason, maybe you should consider moving.
I don’t know if you’ve ever been outside of Richmond before, but having off road/off pavement trails within city limits like Richmond has, it’s a luxury that not a lot of cities of this size can claim they have. Cities grow that’s their nature and you can’t stop it. With the growth comes some DESTRUCTION, like to the flora and fauna. That is the nature of things. I’m sure Richmond is not as wild as it used to be in the 1800, would you destroy the city? I say so be it, if I want more flora and fauna I’ll go to the mountains. The truth is that people who live in the city needs places to relax and unwind, where they can see green and not concrete, where they can walk on dirt and not pavement, where they can hear the sound of running water and playing children and not rushing cars, where they can see their fellow humans doing their thing without worrying about the harshness of every day life…

You are talking like your heart is bleeding, but the truth is that you are thinking only about yourself and thinking about FHP as an extension of your backyard and it’s NOT.
So, P E L E A SSS E woman, GET REAL!!!

To PDM and other insensitive park users -

I live very near FHP and all of you are failing to realize the damage that you are doing to the parks.

Everyone is trying to minimize the damage, but the facts prove otherwise.  The impact of mountain bikers to the ecosystem of Richmond parks is dramatic.  Trail runners do similar damage as vital flora and fauna are being trampled and destroyed everyday.  Loose dogs in the parks are terrorizing the dwindling widelife population.

The beautiful vista of FHP we had from our front porches and back decks is now being destroyed by excessive noise, physical impact and overall inconsiderate activities of park users.

Why can’t we just have vast green spaces?

What are we leaving for the next generations?

The woods of FHP (and other Richmond parks) need to be reclaimed and returned to their natural state.  Bikers, runners and leashed dogs should use the paved, multi-use paths that exist around the lake and STOP THE DESTRUCTION!

Johanna Spyri

Jay…thank you for your input and honesty in regards to the negotiations surrounding the FHP MOU.

It appears that Pat(pdm) will shrug any attempt for us to reveal the truth surrounding this circus romp with FoFHP.

We know the truth as well as the city directors…..that’s all that really matters.

He has his own ideas and I can bet that he won’t bother to attend any of the RA-MORE meetings even though he has been invited. 
The truth might reveal that he really isn’t very well informed about the negotiations with FoFHP and the timelines regarding this entire issue. 

RE-MORE isn’t perfect, never claimed to be. We do our best to be involved, get informed, and offer our services. Our efforts are in concert with the city and how it chooses to move forward.

Thanks again,
Marianne

So you’re saying that Friends of Forest Hill Park isn’t part of the MOU negotiations now, but they *probably will* interfere in the future.

Too many versions to be credible. The truth is buried somewhere, but I don’t think I’ll be hearing/reading it here.

Pat

Hello Pat,

I am a founder and until Jan.08 was a board member w/in Ric-MORE so this is how I can fill you in about your MOU question.

To answer your question about a MOU with Richmond-MORE and the city, the MOU supposed cover all parks, but FHP may end up being on a separate MOU all together. 

The 2 clubs already had one MOU signed 2 years ago after about 4mo of negotiations with all parties (Ric, FoFHP, and Ric-MORE) creating the agreement. 

Studies were done by an ‘outside’ source, DCR who were both fair and impartial to the agreement, plus they were able to lend recommendations to all parties as to all issues surrounding the FHP. IE: trails, terrain, overall condition, trail density, etc.

After the MOU was signed all was fine for a few months until trailwork was to begin, (IE: Repairing area, reworking/removing some of the trail density in the Eastern side of the park, etc.)

But when trailcare began, FoFHP complained and the city ordered all work stopped.

Eventually the city allowed ONLY their employees back in the park to fix a few areas, meanwhile the MOU was dissolved because FoFHP and Ric-MORE would not both agree that all trails must come out and that is the ONLY way FoFHP wants Ric-MORE involved.

So while a city wide MOU is being obtained and with the backing of many local groups such as JROC and Forest Hill Neighborhood Association, you can bet that when the time comes fix FHP trails (which we all want) near FoFHP will be calling the city again. 

This has been the way that a few within the group of FoFHP turn it into a game. They cry bad trail conditions when no work is done, yet when it’s attempted they stop it.  Their only goal is NO TRAILS, period. 

A side note, Richmond-MORE is always on the quest to improve itself and to be the most knowledgeable trailcare club around.  To the point where we have had IMBA (International Mountain Bike Association) come to Richmond and teach classes as well as go out and put that knowledge to working use. 

Our last class was so sought after that it was not made up of just members of the club, but local, regional, and state authorities from 2 or 3 states came to participate and learn along side us.

I hope this helps to answer your question. 

Also, anyone and everyone is welcome to sit in and join the conversations pf Richmond-MORE’s monthly meetings that are held at the JRPS Nature Center on the 3rd Wed or each month.  Time to meet is 6pm.

Jay deBellonia

PDM….“Some of you keep saying that Friends of Forest Hill Park keeps holding up this MOU… Parks and Rec. tells me that NONE of the Friends groups are even part of the negotiations.
How can a group be holding up a process if they aren’t even part of that process?
You’re just not making sense.

Pat

—
pdm
Apr. 25, 2008 at 01:13 PM”

You are partially correct…...we started the negotiations on the MOU over 1 1/2 years ago and at that time the city was doing their best to include both the FoFHP and RA-MORE in the negotiation process.  As a group we came up with and ALL signed an MOU that was mutually agreed upon.  From that point forward the FoFHP proceeded to raise their voices, change the maps,complain and block progress for RA-MORE to be able to perform the agreed upon work. As a result the city put a halt to everything.

At this point the city realizes the need for the trails to be improved and is moving forward with a city wide MOU with RA-MORE. The city knows and trusts RA-MORE as a result of their work throughout the surrounding area.
This is where the FoFHP get left out.  They had their chance, they were able to speak their piece, they approved and signed the original MOU and then renigged on their part of the agreement.

Thank goodness the city recognizes that this is a CITY PARK…and not owned by any of the surrounding homeowners. 

We knew the trails needed work, that’s why we went into negotiations with the city and FoFHP in an attempt to do this the right way.  The additional disrepair on those trails now lays in the hands of the FoFHP.  They continue to place blame instead of moving forward to have the trails repaired and improved.

The reason they are left out of the negotiations is because they have shown that they are unwilling to work with the other interested parties and have not shown themselves to be reliable in regards to what they agreed upon.

In regards to well built trails in this city, RA-MORE works directly with the Parks and Rec crew and Nathan, the one trained city staffer.  We do nothing without Nathan’s approval.
If you were at the IMBA class then you know that Nathan was in attendance as well.

Even though FHP is not officially part of JRP, no work will be performed within the park boundaries without the express approval of the city and in accordance with the MOU.

We are making sense because we know the timeline all too well.
This is again just another witch hunt by the FoFHP.
It’s totally ridiculous.

The fact is that the trails are going to be used….and used by everyone that wants to use them.  Let’s stop denying that.  They need work, we all know it….so why are the FoFHP focusing on placing blame instead of moving forward.

Marianne

Marianne…I’m a mountain biker who is phasing out of the sport: in the meantime, if and when I do ride trails, I’ll ride the ones that were made with the help of the one trained city staffer who supervised their creation.

So, it’s not contradictory for me to say that I won’t ride in FHP, will ride better trails, and am planning on dropping the sport altogether.

I DO support well built trails…they’re just hard to come by in this town. 

Apologies if you find that confusing or contradictory in any way.

Some of you keep saying that Friends of Forest Hill Park keeps holding up this MOU… Parks and Rec. tells me that NONE of the Friends groups are even part of the negotiations.

How can a group be holding up a process if they aren’t even part of that process?

You’re just not making sense.

Pat

PDM….this is your quote from a differnt blog on April 23, 2008, “Really, all you have to do is open your eyes and look around to see the damage our sport does. That’s why road riding is looking better to me now, and I’m selling my mt. bike. I thought the sport would be a good way to enjoy nature, but I was wrong.

—
pdm
Apr. 23, 2008 at 01:19 PM

AND….this is your quote from this blog on April 24, 2008, “I really want to be able to continue to ride through the park, but the trails are just too crappy. I’ll keep riding Buttermilk and Northbank.

See ya on the trails, once they dry out!

—
pdm
Apr. 24, 2008 at 09:21 AM

Just curious…...what is it that you are trying to say?  Do you support the trails and are you a mtn. biker or do you NOT support the trails and are just posing as a mtn. biker to make it sound like you have a viable argument here.  It’s dangerous to try to play both sides of the argument.

You attended the IMBA class, you gained a wealth of knowledge in regards to trail building, you know, as well as I do, that the trails in FHP need alot of work.

FoFHP doesn’t want anyone to use the park except for themselves.  That is very clear.  They have blamed mtn. bikers for everything and anything they can think to blame us for.

THE REALITY IS THAT THIS IS A CITY PARK.  If the city says trails are ok and they like them in the park, then that is how it should be.  The city decides who will build and maintain the trails and the work should move forward. 
There is no point in trying to deny the fact that crime activity within the JRPS and FHP has fallen since the trail system has been improved and extended.  When I first visited FHP in the early 90’s it was not a safe place visit, especially in and around the lake area.  It was drug infested.
Now I never think twice about traversing that area or any trail in that area due to the amount of other healthy minded individuals out and about on the trails.
Check any Richmond, Virginia visitors website and read for yourself how access to this type of trail system in an urban area is a major selling point for the city.  The trails are a good thing!
If everyone would just get off their high horse about feeling ownership and try to work together to create and maintain these trails our lives could move on to more and important issues than arguing over whether a trail in the park caused a tree to fall on someone’s house during a storm which brought almost 6 inches of rain over the past week.

It’s plain to see that this is a witch hunt.

Let’s move on a focus on what’s important.
Marianne

As stated, “"The FHP trails need work.  Even the bikers admit that there are some sections that are improperly built and need to be repaired.  The answer seems to be to fix the gosh darn trails.  A signed MOU would help.  I wonder why there isn’t one.  Hmmmmm…” 
As an RA-MORE member, we are all too aware of why there is no signed MOU in regards to FHP.  We tried for a very long time to negotiate with the Friends of FHP along with the city of Richmond, Parks and Recs.  It is very apparent that some parts of the trails are unsustainable.  RE-MORE wants to fix that.  It is the friends of FHP that have drug their feet and blocked forward motion on the MOU and needed repairs.  It is the same old griping from the same people who dislike mountain bikers. 
Mountain bikers are not the only trail users…...alot of the trails were in the park prior to our work there.
PDM…..yes, we all went to the IMBA trail class and we all learned a tremendous amount.  That fact in point is why we want the opportunity to fix what is unsustainable in FHP. 
It’s those few members of the Friends of FHP that are blocking forward progress and acting like they OWN the park.
This is a city park, I am a city resident, I use the park for a lot of different activities.  FoFHP, this is not just your playground, it for all to use and enjoy.

Marianne
City Resident
FHP Trail User
RA-MORE Member
Mtn Biker, Runner, Dog Walker, Hiker

Reading comprehension: it’s a wonderful thing, Bill.

Sounds like trying to point out the obvious to this pdm dude is a lost cause….look out, everyone, the sky is falling!!

Bill

For those who believe that the trail caused the tree to fall - like I said in my post on the other site - maybe the tooth fairy and the Easter Bunny had a part in it!

Northtrail Bill

“The FHP trails need work.  Even the bikers admit that there are some sections that are improperly built and need to be repaired.  The answer seems to be to fix the gosh darn trails.  A signed MOU would help.  I wonder why there isn’t one.  Hmmmmm…“

That’s an excellent point. From what I’ve heard from Park’s staff, they have been working on a city-wide MOU with RA MORE for months now (Friends groups aren’t involved), but haven’t finalized it yet.

Pat

I went I saw

I went over to see where this tree fell - in reality 3 things caused this tree to fall: 1) its on the side of a steap hill 2) prior damage from tropical storm Isabel….also a heavy rain event.  A decent size tree was uprooted in Huricane Isabel and is about 6 feet BELOW this tree (that is on side of a hill) 3) 6+ inches of rain. 
 
Why channel 8 didn’t show this is beyond me, and quite frankly irresponsible

Online talk is too easily interpreted the wrong way.
Pat, I simply wasn’t pointing at you in the least.  My intent was only towards the two listed in my first post and a third person who I left out as this time, but also works closely with the other two ladies.

Even what I wrote in my first post was said with a a calm demeanor, but again the statements may not have come out like that during a reading of them.

I mean no offense to anyone, but more less just wanted to point out that those throwing stones at glass houses live in them too.

Lastly and inherently, most of us who love outdoor activities are also PRO environment and we all want it be the best it can be. 

Again, sorry for any misunderstanding.

“But the proof is in the pudding and your relentless attacks on the a single user group who only makes up a fraction of the overall park use is simply wrong…..“

James, I haven’t attacked anyone: you must have me confused with someone else.

Please re-read my comments if you need to refresh your memory.

Thanks.

Pat

My comments are not personal attacks.
My comments are simply to point out inconsistencies with those who speak up on behalf of all park users and neighbors without any regards for how the majority feel.

YES, I mentioned names at the end of my commentary, but that simply stated, “Thanks anyway Heidi and Stephanie, but I think my vote is USE a park, NOT let is go to waste and crime.“ and this is a fact.  Heidi was on the airwaves and reported on behalf of everyone, not just saying “I feel this, that, and the other.“

Feel free to prove me wrong on any point and I will apologize for each that I was incorrect.  But the proof is in the pudding and your relentless attacks on the a single user group who only makes up a fraction of the overall park use is simply wrong and it’s only done because there would be ZERO community support if they attacked the moms, fathers, and kids, etc that use those same trails for walking, hiking, running, etc.

And your propaganda against mountain bikers and the trails as a whole is everywhere; from the internet to emails, to interviews, to city complaints.  So you can’t hide from your past and present choice of words.

Meanwhile I simply can not take having a few people speak on my behalf any longer.

James

Q: If the tree falls in the woods,and there’s no mountain biker there to hear it, does it make a sound?
A: Who cares.  It’s the mountain biker’s fault.

Consider:
One of the biggest problems in ALL city parks is crime.  Drug deals, prostitution, vehicle break-ins, or worse, our parks are often very sketchy places.

One of the biggest deterrents to criminals is park use.

One of the best ways to promote park use is to offer activities: hiking, swimming, maybe even mountain biking.

The FHP trails need work.  Even the bikers admit that there are some sections that are improperly built and need to be repaired.  The answer seems to be to fix the gosh darn trails.  A signed MOU would help.  I wonder why there isn’t one.  Hmmmmm…

LoveThePark,

What’s with the very personal attacks? The debate here is over tree damage, with some trail routing and erosion discussion thrown in. It was pretty civilized for a while.

It’s too bad that you feel it necessary to stoop to making unrelated accusations… Have a nice day.

Pat

There is a smart way to build trails, and there is a bad way…didn’t any of you come to the IMBA trail building workshop? Rich showed us a lot of important techniques to use. The trails in FHP were done before most of us had any training, and now that we do have the knowhow, it’s easy to see where a lot of mistakes were made.

I really want to be able to continue to ride through the park, but the trails are just too crappy. I’ll keep riding Buttermilk and Northbank.

See ya on the trails, once they dry out!

Heidi,

You are the one ‘on the attack’ as you have been since 3 years ago. Remember that?

Also, why was the title of the Ch8 story something to the effect of ‘Mountain Bike Trails Cause Tree to Fall on House…‘???

I’m guessing because of your attack on the mountain bike community within FHP.

And Val P, no mountain bikers have cut any trees. The trees you see down were from a couple little storms a few years back. You might have heard of them. The trees were cut through to try and reclaim the park.

For a case-in-point about the backlash of furious mountain bikers please see comment below from “Love the park” aka Mr. too chicken to put my name on my bs.  I think the facts and accusations were wrong on just about all of it.

This happens every time I bring the subject up, but wow, it gets weirder each time.

Heide

“That a mature tree fell where it did is an illustration of just how fragile those ecosystems really are, and why the trails should never have been put there at all”.  That has nothing to do with this particular issue.

trees fall.  It happens often, sometimes due to saturated ground, other times due to winds.  If the trail was not disturbed by the roots, when the tree fell, there is no argument that it was the trail’s fault.  You can keep repeating that trails are bad.  Ok, but that does not apply here, so stay on subject.  Did the trail cause the tree to fall…no, not in this case.

First, I am tired a few people speaking on behalf of a whole neighborhood.  FHP is public property and as a citizen I have a right to enjoy this park without hearing people whine all the time.

I’ve been using the park for at least 7 years now and the trails are NOT mountain biking trails.  They are simply trails for all to use.  While it’s true that cyclists may use them more often, I still use them to walk alone, with my wife, and/or with my dogs.

Let’s get one thing clear too, the person raising the stink about this is someone who is OBSESSED with her own agenda, period!  This person while claiming to be a friend of FHP and the environment also has been cited in a local paper for admiring spray painting (IE: taggin) of buildings in Richmond.  Also lending more “artistic credibility” to the rogue painting if it’s on historic property.  (Check back issues of Style Mag on 06 or 07)

This lady and 2 others are upset because they have been fighting the city to keep FHP lake from being reclaimed and now they are trying to assert themselves again by making outlandish commentary about trails toppling huges trees.

Both the city and volunteers have been wanting to fix the trails, but are constantly blocked by these woman. 

If people want to talk about erosion in the park, just look at the “pathways
cut from 32st to FHP from the road and the yards along the park and see how those erosion issues have washouts heading straight downhill, something the trails don’t do.  Looks at all the yard clippings & debris that the adjacent neighbors pile into the park or the trucks and cars parked along the woods of FHP like a personal parking lot, each possibly leaking oil and other chemicals into the soil.

My point is to show the hypocritical side of these folks who only represent themselves and no one else.

Just look at listings for house in the neighborhood and see how people reference living just around the corner from the trails as a *bonus* to living in and around FHP.

These trails bring value all around and if these ladies would step up and let the city and volunteers clean up the few trail issues everyone would be happier!

I don’t know what FHP does to people, but it seems that there are about 5 people around all sides of the park that feel a sense of “entitlement” as if by owning a house nearby they own the park too.

There are 2 people completely upset and ticked off that there is going to be a farmers market at the park.  They called the city complaining because they simply don’t want to see anyone using the park since it borders their land.

These same people complain about the outdoor music in the park too, claiming it’s not a valid use of a park.  And to them neither is hiking, walking, running, fishing, cycling, bbqing, tennis or anything else.

I can’t stress enough that everyone appalled by the story that lead to this article needs to call Ch8 and the city to make sure the real truth is heard.  That the FEW do not rule the MANY, we can and do speak for ourselves.

Thanks anyway Heidi and Stephanie, but I think my vote is USE a park, NOT let is go to waste and crime.

Hi,

I am the woman that was in the news story. I think the point here is not that the trails directly caused the tree to come down, it is that the trails were improperly built and unsustainable due to the grade, the type of soil in the area, the injury to tree roots and ground cover loss. All of these factors COUPLED with the heavy rains caused the tree to come down (there were no high winds at the time).

Look, I am not quite sure why the mtn bikers get so offended (and go on the attack) every time a person shows concern for his or her neighborhood and the erosion and other problems these mountain bike paths have caused. I am not attacking the sport per se, I want to see one party (the city) responsible for shutting down unsustainable trails and maintaining the sustainable ones.  I think that is a pretty reasonable request given that I watched these trails get built (by mountain bikers), and when I asked about the legality and permits to build, I was lied to. Since then I have seen the spread of erosion and damage to the park so its a no-brainer for me to be concerned. Obviously due to the signs currently hung on the trail, I am not the only one.

Heide

When discussing the sustainability of the trails in FHP I think it’s important to distinguish between the trails that were built in the past few years and the trails that have been around since I first ventured into the park in the mid 1990’s.  There is a considerable difference.  Saying that “the trails are not sustainable” suggests that NONE of the trails are sustainable, and that is simply not true.  There are sections that are not, and I know these sections were there way before the work from 3 years ago.

Fair enough assertion, that the trails shouldn’t have been put there at all, but it seems a bit after-the-fact. What are people supposed to do if the trail is still there, and open, and there’s no indication that “a mature tree” is in danger of falling? Blame the city agency responsible for maintaining them, not mountain bikers.

“Fragile Ecosystem”  Hahahahaha

It’s a city park for crying out loud!  Not ANWR.  Trees fall all the time in the woods. 

I’m sorry about your house but the trails didn’t cause this. REMEMBER Isabel?  Months of rain and a hurricane have damaged the tree roots and they will continue to fall at the least little rain and wind until all the weak ones are gone.

Perhaps you shouldn’t have put sidewalks, driveways and streets around the trees in front of your house.  Better get them cut down now they’re gonna go any minute!!!

Happy Earth Day!!!

I measured and the trail is 6 feet from the tree, I am not sure what you people are talking about but as a resident of the neighborhood, I am in agreement that the constant wear and tear on the root systems could have caused this tree to fall.

As I went on the trails I saw signs stating that the trails were not built by the city or by trained professionals. 

If they were built illegally then is it not illegal to ride them?

Why can’t the people that built them be held accountable for the erosion and the trees that were cut down.

Just wondering…..

pdm,

Are you serious?

“That a mature tree fell where it did is an illustration of just how fragile those ecosystems really are, and why the trails should never have been put there at all.“

This statement (among others) is baffling. Following your logic, all of the oak trees within ‘root distance’ of the trails in the park would be on their sides?

Why haven’t all of the oak trees in the park fallen? Answer that.

What about all of the healthy trees that fell in other parts of the city? Don’t you think it is because of the recent heavy rains and winds, since there aren’t trails in people’s yards and neighborhoods throughout the city?

“Did they cause this tree to fall? There’s simply no evidence to suggest that’s the case.“

There is no evidence to support your notion that they didn’t, either.

You say tomato….

I guess there will always be disagreement on the subject.

In the meantime, thanks for publicly acknowledging that the Forest Hill Park mountain bike trails are not sustainable.

There are two different arguments here: 1) You’re right that many MORE members will admit FHP wasn’t designed in the sustainable fashion of the current Buttermilk-Northbank loop. But that doesn’t lead to the conclusion that a trail that has eroded in places is to blame for this specific tree falling down.

Could the trails of FHP be improved? Yes. Did they cause this tree to fall? There’s simply no evidence to suggest that’s the case.

I have been to the site.
Forest Hill Park is very hilly, and a lot of the trail has been bench cut, particularly in the area where the tree fell.

There are plenty of studies that show poor trail design to be very detrimental to the environment, whether they are used for biking, horseback riding or hiking. If a study presumes that a trail is well designed, then of course the data will show little detriment.

What happens when a trail isn’t well designed? All you have to do is look around at all the sections of trail (throughout the city park system) that have been closed off due to bad design and severe erosion. Years have gone by and many of these trail sections have yet to recover.

All I can say is go to the site. The trail was entirely undisturbed by the tree’s roots pulling up, out of the ground. In addition, the trail is relatively flat, not a bench cut into a steep slope, in this section. The idea that this flat, two-foot wide trail caused this enormous oak tree to fall seems like a huge stretch.

Here’s a link to a study done on MTBing and its effects on the landscape. The page also includes a link to other research done on the subject.

http://www.imba.com/news/news_releases/10_06/10_24_mtb_impacts.html

A tree’s roots extend at least to, if not farther than, the so-called drip line. Here’s an illustration:

So an oak tree with a 50ft diameter canopy will have a root system that extends at least that far as well.

The “perfectly healthy oak” was in the Park for decades. The 3 or 4 mile trail system that exists now has only been there for about 3 or 4 years.

Most mountain bikers I know think that the Forest Hill trail system is a failure and has done more damage than good. I’ve only ridden it once or twice myself, and it’s terrible: it needs a total re-design. Its’ a lousy walking trail, too, with all those switch backs and steep, rutted turns, and all the tree stumps that were left in the ground when trees were cut to make the trail are hazards.

So I don’t walk it, either.

Just wanted to add, that Oak trees roots’ can extend up to 15-20 feet in all directions, so giving the distance of the tree from the trail, and the trail width being maximum 1 yard, makes this unfortunate men’s claim, that trail use erosion caused the tree to fall, pretty weak. So much rain fall in such a short time, will cause a much more substantial erosion, and giving the fact that oak trees are shallow rooted, you don’t need to be a rocket scientist to do the math and figure out what could happen.
Also, click on the link below to see what the Virginia Department of Forestry have to say about the oak trees.
http://www.dof.virginia.gov/press/nr-2005-08-08-Oaks.shtml

You can even see it with your own eyes!! I now live in Ft. Collins, Colorado, but used live in Richmond, VA. I’m an avid MTBer, and more then one time I’ve used the trail when it was raining heavily, and could see the ground being washed off under my wheels (occasionally even seeing a tree fall), if you’re a heavy trail user, like me, you know I’m not just saying that. All I’m saying, I truly feel sorry for the men’s house, but blaming trail use for the cause, its reaching too far. I sometime miss the days living in Richmond and being able to use the wonderful trail system the city has to offer. Being a world traveler and as a person who rode his bike in many places around the world, I can say that Richmond has one of the most remarkable trail system I’ve ever seen within city limits. SAVE THE TRAILS and KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK.

See y’all at the Xterra race in mid June.
Cheers,
Samuel

Here’s one fact: I just went to the site where the tree fell. The trail doesn’t cut across a single one of its roots. It is 17 feet from the tree. How can trails be to blame when this is the case?

Do you have any facts with which to back up your assertions?

The trails *have* been cut into the ground, which is a real problem.

The trails were created a few years ago by mountain bikers with no proper training in trail building, and it shows. The trails are disintegrating.

That a mature tree fell where it did is an illustration of just how fragile those ecosystems really are, and why the trails should never have been put there at all.