Quantcast

st ed's pump track

ichiwan

Chimp
May 2, 2007
37
0
sucks it got torn down. anyone know why (besides the obvious assumption) and by whom?
 

trailhacker

Turbo Monkey
Jan 6, 2003
1,233
0
In the hills around Seattle
Which should be reason enough for people to not build things there?
ST. Ed's is what it is. I feel comfortable in saying it is never going to be anything more than it is.
And it was (and still is) a fight just to maintain what is there.
 

Snacks

Turbo Monkey
Feb 20, 2003
3,523
0
GO! SEAHAWKS!
What really sucks is everytime something is built when they tear it down, they go though and 'sweep' the trails of anything that is on them that a child couldn't walk over.

I'm surprised the track lasted as long as it did.
 
Jun 18, 2004
945
0
You mean it took the "trial work crew" that long to get rid of Don Miguels dealio?
You know spring is right around the courner when the kicker into the gultch gets the flattening... I was bumbed about the kicker between the tree limbs... but that was 2 or 3 months ago... I was surprised the pump track lasted that long... I guess it takes longer to flatten a pump track

I end up riding that place in the winter when the good stuff is covered in snow...
 

ichiwan

Chimp
May 2, 2007
37
0
i don't get it though - the pump track isn't dangerous at all... i WAS surprised when i first saw it there. i have a theory: whoever was responsible for tearing the damn thing down probably doesn't frequent the area very much. it was there for like 5 months, wasn't it? it's just bogus that whoever "decided" to dismantle it rarely rides there - buncha jerkoffs if you ask me :rant:
 

NOOP

Chimp
Apr 26, 2007
59
0
I rode there earlier this week and someone had dug a fairly large & deep hole right in the open area where you would walk or ride your bike onto the track. In addition they left a bunch of water bottles and other trash, too (which I picked up).

I suspect whoever did that was the catalyst for the tear-down. It seemed pretty egregious, and it made us mountain bikers look bad, in my opinion.
 

Borneo

Turbo Monkey
Mar 22, 2004
1,010
0
Duvall
Never saw it, rode it, etc but heard that it was put where they tore down the previous illegal DJs and KingCo revegetated the area. IF that is the case. It should not have been built in the first place and the jerkoffs are the ones that destroyed the re-vegetation and make it harder for those just trying to keep bikes in there at all...

Just asking for permission and going through the channels may have led to a place in the park where they will allow one that will stay.
 

fuzzycatnuts

Monkey
Dec 14, 2005
944
0
There is a legal place were the existing pump track could be greatly improved, and we would not have to worry about it being torn down.....in fact the city has agreed to spend money on it.
 

Borneo

Turbo Monkey
Mar 22, 2004
1,010
0
Duvall
True. But, if it's a legally designated trail, it's pretty hard to get anyone to work on it. Kinda odd, huh?
 

Bullitrider

Monkey
Apr 17, 2004
577
0
Seattle
From what I remember there was little to no vegetation in that area before the dirt jumps were put in. Those got torn out and the area was (re)-vegetated which means whoever did that now has claimed ownership of the area that really isn't warranted ensuring animosity on both sides of the issue.
 

Borneo

Turbo Monkey
Mar 22, 2004
1,010
0
Duvall
I believe the parks department or whomever the land manager is did the re-vegetating. So, "ownership" is a moot point. If that is the case, the only people that should be pissed are the land managers.

And, if that is the case, it just makes us look worse to them and gives ammo to the folks that want us out of there completely.
 
Jun 18, 2004
945
0
Just build another one where the super secret djs are... the ones that are out of the way and off all of the trails... sort of like the ones in Mukelto...