<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Peavine Congested Area</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.poedunk.com/war-zone/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.poedunk.com/war-zone/</link>
	<description>Mining Peavine's Singletrack</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 27 Jul 2009 04:35:24 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: dhreno</title>
		<link>http://www.poedunk.com/war-zone/comment-page-1/#comment-53</link>
		<dc:creator>dhreno</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 03 Jun 2007 14:30:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://poedunk.wordpress.com/2007/05/30/war-zone/#comment-53</guid>
		<description>You hit the nail on the head Randy: my only agenda is building and riding sustainable &amp; legal trails.

Steve</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You hit the nail on the head Randy: my only agenda is building and riding sustainable &amp; legal trails.</p>
<p>Steve</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: randog</title>
		<link>http://www.poedunk.com/war-zone/comment-page-1/#comment-52</link>
		<dc:creator>randog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 03 Jun 2007 04:45:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://poedunk.wordpress.com/2007/05/30/war-zone/#comment-52</guid>
		<description>steve what agenda are you referring to? the only agenda i am aware of here is building and riding sustainable &amp; legal trails. Is it totally off base to try and partner with the shooters to resolve future conflict between trail users and shooters?  i did edit my previous comments to take out the word &quot;we&quot; i had no intention to speak for anyone but myself my intention was to suggest some questions that I believe are worth asking. your right it does not feel like a forum with only 3 people talking thanks for speaking up  -Randy</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>steve what agenda are you referring to? the only agenda i am aware of here is building and riding sustainable &amp; legal trails. Is it totally off base to try and partner with the shooters to resolve future conflict between trail users and shooters?  i did edit my previous comments to take out the word &#8220;we&#8221; i had no intention to speak for anyone but myself my intention was to suggest some questions that I believe are worth asking. your right it does not feel like a forum with only 3 people talking thanks for speaking up  -Randy</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: dhreno</title>
		<link>http://www.poedunk.com/war-zone/comment-page-1/#comment-51</link>
		<dc:creator>dhreno</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 03 Jun 2007 01:37:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://poedunk.wordpress.com/2007/05/30/war-zone/#comment-51</guid>
		<description>hmmm .... this doesn&#039;t feel like a forum to me - it feels like the agenda is already set.  What do you think Dale?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>hmmm &#8230;. this doesn&#8217;t feel like a forum to me &#8211; it feels like the agenda is already set.  What do you think Dale?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Wolfy</title>
		<link>http://www.poedunk.com/war-zone/comment-page-1/#comment-50</link>
		<dc:creator>Wolfy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 03 Jun 2007 01:08:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://poedunk.wordpress.com/2007/05/30/war-zone/#comment-50</guid>
		<description>Yeah, That&#039;s why I set the page brake before the letter and put in as many links as I could find.

There&#039;s a lot of interest in getting the shooters a designated place on peavine  to shoot that they can maintain and we can avoid. But there has to be more than a pile of junk to let us know.

By keeping quiet we risk not being part of the discussion. By keeping the discussion private we risk appearing ministerial and secretive.

Poedunks are and continue to be responsible for increased user activity in this area, and I think we should make efforts to keep thinks happy. Things like parking spaces, congested areas, trailheads, and more hikers will just discourage the problem shooters from shooting in bad areas. The rest of the shooters already don&#039;t like to shoot there because it&#039;s congested. If we can coordinate with the good shooters, we can avoid their areas and if we have a strong trail building/maintenance machine we discourage bootlegging in areas that create conflict while creating more trail in areas that are already appropriate. Let&#039;s not forget that we essentially want to restrict MTBers from running amok too. Exactly what we&#039;re asking of the shooters.

I&#039;m going to go to that meeting and make some personal comments. But on behalf of Poedunks (and the fact that I&#039;m writing an article on this issue) I will pick out the fiercest commenter on the other side, walk up to him/her after the meeting, smile, put out a hand and introduce myself.

Thanks for the comment Steve. I think this public forum is a good thing!

-M</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeah, That&#8217;s why I set the page brake before the letter and put in as many links as I could find.</p>
<p>There&#8217;s a lot of interest in getting the shooters a designated place on peavine  to shoot that they can maintain and we can avoid. But there has to be more than a pile of junk to let us know.</p>
<p>By keeping quiet we risk not being part of the discussion. By keeping the discussion private we risk appearing ministerial and secretive.</p>
<p>Poedunks are and continue to be responsible for increased user activity in this area, and I think we should make efforts to keep thinks happy. Things like parking spaces, congested areas, trailheads, and more hikers will just discourage the problem shooters from shooting in bad areas. The rest of the shooters already don&#8217;t like to shoot there because it&#8217;s congested. If we can coordinate with the good shooters, we can avoid their areas and if we have a strong trail building/maintenance machine we discourage bootlegging in areas that create conflict while creating more trail in areas that are already appropriate. Let&#8217;s not forget that we essentially want to restrict MTBers from running amok too. Exactly what we&#8217;re asking of the shooters.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m going to go to that meeting and make some personal comments. But on behalf of Poedunks (and the fact that I&#8217;m writing an article on this issue) I will pick out the fiercest commenter on the other side, walk up to him/her after the meeting, smile, put out a hand and introduce myself.</p>
<p>Thanks for the comment Steve. I think this public forum is a good thing!</p>
<p>-M</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: randog</title>
		<link>http://www.poedunk.com/war-zone/comment-page-1/#comment-49</link>
		<dc:creator>randog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Jun 2007 21:16:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://poedunk.wordpress.com/2007/05/30/war-zone/#comment-49</guid>
		<description>Steve you have a good point and I have to say I agree. However, I feel the intention of this post was not for the Poedunks to take an official stance on this issue but engage in the discussion. Personally I am not anti shooting I am for responsible shooting. While I do have some issues with the letter that was posted I agree that the congested area could be revised and that the current laws should be enforced. I think Mike&#039;s comments clearly show his intent to take a proactive vs. reactionary approach to this issue.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Steve you have a good point and I have to say I agree. However, I feel the intention of this post was not for the Poedunks to take an official stance on this issue but engage in the discussion. Personally I am not anti shooting I am for responsible shooting. While I do have some issues with the letter that was posted I agree that the congested area could be revised and that the current laws should be enforced. I think Mike&#8217;s comments clearly show his intent to take a proactive vs. reactionary approach to this issue.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: dhreno</title>
		<link>http://www.poedunk.com/war-zone/comment-page-1/#comment-48</link>
		<dc:creator>dhreno</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Jun 2007 15:59:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://poedunk.wordpress.com/2007/05/30/war-zone/#comment-48</guid>
		<description>Poedunkers,

I&#039;m very concerned that taking a political stance on issues like this will have a negative effect on our ability to promote trail building on Peavine.  I fully respect the fact that every individual is entitled to their own opinion - I just don&#039;t think that a trail building club is the venue to voice them. We risk too much in alienating fellow mountain bikers, volunteers, land managers, politicians, members of the public, other user groups and club members.

Steve</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Poedunkers,</p>
<p>I&#8217;m very concerned that taking a political stance on issues like this will have a negative effect on our ability to promote trail building on Peavine.  I fully respect the fact that every individual is entitled to their own opinion &#8211; I just don&#8217;t think that a trail building club is the venue to voice them. We risk too much in alienating fellow mountain bikers, volunteers, land managers, politicians, members of the public, other user groups and club members.</p>
<p>Steve</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Wolfy</title>
		<link>http://www.poedunk.com/war-zone/comment-page-1/#comment-47</link>
		<dc:creator>Wolfy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 May 2007 04:26:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://poedunk.wordpress.com/2007/05/30/war-zone/#comment-47</guid>
		<description>I think this goes along with our musings on trailhead facilities for the Hoge Road Access point. Better signage, parking w/o mud, perhapse a toilet.

Having a gateway would definately provide better direction for users. When I go to that meeting I&#039;m going to try to talk to the gun guys. The congested area is probably necessary(maybe just in the basin below Goddess Point (hippy cairn), but we can probably handle a lot of the rest of it ourselves. i.e. Coordinate with the shooters where they want to shoot, show them our map, put their spots on our map and come up with an encounter protocol.

-M</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think this goes along with our musings on trailhead facilities for the Hoge Road Access point. Better signage, parking w/o mud, perhapse a toilet.</p>
<p>Having a gateway would definately provide better direction for users. When I go to that meeting I&#8217;m going to try to talk to the gun guys. The congested area is probably necessary(maybe just in the basin below Goddess Point (hippy cairn), but we can probably handle a lot of the rest of it ourselves. i.e. Coordinate with the shooters where they want to shoot, show them our map, put their spots on our map and come up with an encounter protocol.</p>
<p>-M</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: randog</title>
		<link>http://www.poedunk.com/war-zone/comment-page-1/#comment-46</link>
		<dc:creator>randog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 May 2007 04:13:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://poedunk.wordpress.com/2007/05/30/war-zone/#comment-46</guid>
		<description>How high should the line be drawn? most of “lower peavine” is already part of The Greater Truckee meadows congested area…the problem the trails go up into the middle and sometimes the top. should the congested area should be expanded? To familiarize yourself ck out teh county’s GIS website &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.co.washoe.nv.us/gis&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://www.co.washoe.nv.us/gis&lt;/a&gt; and browse the layers for congested areas. -R</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>How high should the line be drawn? most of “lower peavine” is already part of The Greater Truckee meadows congested area…the problem the trails go up into the middle and sometimes the top. should the congested area should be expanded? To familiarize yourself ck out teh county’s GIS website <a href="http://www.co.washoe.nv.us/gis" rel="nofollow">http://www.co.washoe.nv.us/gis</a> and browse the layers for congested areas. -R</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
