Shane Gibson

In a previous life as an event producer myself, I've run in to these
"friends of" groups a couple of times. I produced a 12 hour Adventure Race
in the Columbia River Gorge in 2005. We put out notice to several groups
of our _approved_ permits to run the race, 3 months prior to the event. 5
days before the event, the "Friends of the Gorge" (who received notice from
us) called to shut down my race, stating that our race course covered
"sensitive terrain", and would require a Ecological Damage Assessment, and
that we did not have the appropriate permits.

Fortunately, we had proof we notified them 3 months prior, and the park
rangers agreed that our permits were fully sufficient to address any
issues, and were properly in place.

I am certain beyond a shadow of a doubt that it was a standard practice to
try and scare and shut down a race. It happened several times to other
event producers in the Gorge with the same exact patterns.

I generally don't want to *believe* evil of people ... but those types of
tactics are cold, calculated, and intentional. Designed to shut down a
race, cause chaos, and incite fear. I classify tactics like that similarly
to "terrorism". Just of a lighter weight nature.

~~shane

On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 5:42 PM, Brian Hart via OBRA
wrote:

> The writer of the VeloNews article (
> http://velonews.competitor.com/2015/01/news/cyclocross/commentary-nationals-disaster_358091)
> goes far to explaining how the CX Nats '15 fiasco unfolded.
>
> I am a cyclist. I love trees. I am not a tree expert, so I defer to the
> opinion of the arborists quoted in that article, and the concerns of the
> Austin Heritage Tree Foundation here seem very reasonable:
> http://www.austinheritagetreefoundation.com/Tree_Alerts.html. However, I
> think the writer in VeloNews is misguided in his effort to absolve that
> group of any responsibility whatsoever, and in so doing, misses one small
> point: where was the Austin Heritage Tree Foundation when the permit was
> issued or when the course was set up?

Rick Johnson

"Trouble with the Trees" indeed!

Rick Johnson
Bend, Oregon

On 1/14/2015 6:19 PM, Dan H via OBRA wrote:
> The oaks can't help their feelings if they like the way they're made....
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JnC88xBPkkc
>
> On Thu, January 15, 2015 7:12 am, Brian Hart via OBRA wrote:
>> The writer of the VeloNews article
>> (http://velonews.competitor.com/2015/01/news/cyclocross/commentary-nation
>> als-disaster_358091) goes far to explaining how the CX Nats '15 fiasco
>> unfolded.
>>
>> I am a cyclist. I love trees. I am not a tree expert, so I defer to the
>> opinion of the arborists quoted in that article, and the concerns of the
>> Austin Heritage Tree Foundation here seem very reasonable:
>> http://www.austinheritagetreefoundation.com/Tree_Alerts.html. However, I
>> think the writer in VeloNews is misguided in his effort to absolve that
>> group of any responsibility whatsoever, and in so doing, misses one small
>> point: where was the Austin Heritage Tree Foundation when the permit was
>> issued or when the course was set up?
>>
>> They presumably had access to the same information we all had long ago:
>> cyclocross nationals 2015 were scheduled for Zilker Park. But from
>> everything I have read, without this group raising its collective voice
>> at the eleventh hour when it did, there would have been no public
>> debacle. No, I am not saying they caused the underlying problem. However,
>> a group with strong, apparently legitimate, and focused interest, local
>> presence, and sufficient clout to generate public action can certainly do
>> better than collectively sit at home on its collective rear end, then
>> suddenly jump up shouting with not so much as a nod to the enormous cost
>> to the participants in the event.
>>
>> I wonder if any of them ever bothered to so much as watch a YouTube CX
>> video beforehand (perhaps the mudhole at Winter Cross 2013 would have
>> been instructive). They did cast aspersions at Hill Abell's Bicycle Shop
>> by noting it as the packet pickup location (which has nothing to do with
>> trees in any case) and to portray racers as devil-may-care thrill-seekers
>> who could better have gotten their buzz just as well on the single-track
>> trails of Walnut Creek Park (did I already ask if any of these folks had
>> ever watched a CX race?). But there are two glaring holes in the
>> organization's own 911 tree alert:
>>
>> 1) There is no mention of any attempt to raise the issue when the permit
>> was issued or even when the course was laid out before the event. Had the
>> folks of the Austin Heritage Tree Foundation been more interested in
>> being constructive, and maybe educated themselves on actual tree
>> management, this 911 tree alert could have been posted weeks before, and
>> it seems to me that the entire mess could have been averted by the
>> relatively minor course adjustments required to avoid the heritage tree
>> critical root zones. 2) There is absolutely no acknowledgement of the
>> enormous cost to the participants.
>>
>> As much as I love trees, both of these omissions make the Austin Heritage
>> Tree Foundation, that might otherwise be very respectable, seem rather
>> picayune and narcissistic. One must be diligent enough to educate oneself
>> on the world around to behave in a proactive, rather than reactive,
>> manner. And it would have been so simple to just acknowledge the cost to
>> the participants. That would have gone a long ways toward making the
>> Austin Heritage Tree Foundation look more legitimate and less apathetic,
>> if not antagonistic, toward our poor junior racers.
>>
>> This is exactly why I stop and talk to every hiker, every equestrian,
>> every hunter, every bird-watcher, every land manager, (and, yes, even
>> other cyclists, on occasion) I pass on the trail. It is real-world
>> contact with real-world folks. I try to come away from every encounter
>> knowing something more of another's experience or point of
>> view--something that may help promote constructive dialogue, if not
>> downright harmony, among user groups. And it sure beats sitting at home
>> awaiting an alert so I can lend my voice to a collective chorus of
>> Kumbaya.
>> _______________________________________________
>> OBRA mailing list
>> obra@list.obra.org http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
>> Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OBRA mailing list
> obra@list.obra.org
> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
> Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org
>

Dan H

The oaks can't help their feelings if they like the way they're made....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JnC88xBPkkc

On Thu, January 15, 2015 7:12 am, Brian Hart via OBRA wrote:
> The writer of the VeloNews article
> (http://velonews.competitor.com/2015/01/news/cyclocross/commentary-nation
> als-disaster_358091) goes far to explaining how the CX Nats '15 fiasco
> unfolded.
>
> I am a cyclist. I love trees. I am not a tree expert, so I defer to the
> opinion of the arborists quoted in that article, and the concerns of the
> Austin Heritage Tree Foundation here seem very reasonable:
> http://www.austinheritagetreefoundation.com/Tree_Alerts.html. However, I
> think the writer in VeloNews is misguided in his effort to absolve that
> group of any responsibility whatsoever, and in so doing, misses one small
> point: where was the Austin Heritage Tree Foundation when the permit was
> issued or when the course was set up?
>
> They presumably had access to the same information we all had long ago:
> cyclocross nationals 2015 were scheduled for Zilker Park. But from
> everything I have read, without this group raising its collective voice
> at the eleventh hour when it did, there would have been no public
> debacle. No, I am not saying they caused the underlying problem. However,
> a group with strong, apparently legitimate, and focused interest, local
> presence, and sufficient clout to generate public action can certainly do
> better than collectively sit at home on its collective rear end, then
> suddenly jump up shouting with not so much as a nod to the enormous cost
> to the participants in the event.
>
> I wonder if any of them ever bothered to so much as watch a YouTube CX
> video beforehand (perhaps the mudhole at Winter Cross 2013 would have
> been instructive). They did cast aspersions at Hill Abell's Bicycle Shop
> by noting it as the packet pickup location (which has nothing to do with
> trees in any case) and to portray racers as devil-may-care thrill-seekers
> who could better have gotten their buzz just as well on the single-track
> trails of Walnut Creek Park (did I already ask if any of these folks had
> ever watched a CX race?). But there are two glaring holes in the
> organization's own 911 tree alert:
>
> 1) There is no mention of any attempt to raise the issue when the permit
> was issued or even when the course was laid out before the event. Had the
> folks of the Austin Heritage Tree Foundation been more interested in
> being constructive, and maybe educated themselves on actual tree
> management, this 911 tree alert could have been posted weeks before, and
> it seems to me that the entire mess could have been averted by the
> relatively minor course adjustments required to avoid the heritage tree
> critical root zones. 2) There is absolutely no acknowledgement of the
> enormous cost to the participants.
>
> As much as I love trees, both of these omissions make the Austin Heritage
> Tree Foundation, that might otherwise be very respectable, seem rather
> picayune and narcissistic. One must be diligent enough to educate oneself
> on the world around to behave in a proactive, rather than reactive,
> manner. And it would have been so simple to just acknowledge the cost to
> the participants. That would have gone a long ways toward making the
> Austin Heritage Tree Foundation look more legitimate and less apathetic,
> if not antagonistic, toward our poor junior racers.
>
> This is exactly why I stop and talk to every hiker, every equestrian,
> every hunter, every bird-watcher, every land manager, (and, yes, even
> other cyclists, on occasion) I pass on the trail. It is real-world
> contact with real-world folks. I try to come away from every encounter
> knowing something more of another's experience or point of
> view--something that may help promote constructive dialogue, if not
> downright harmony, among user groups. And it sure beats sitting at home
> awaiting an alert so I can lend my voice to a collective chorus of
> Kumbaya.
> _______________________________________________
> OBRA mailing list
> obra@list.obra.org http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
> Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org
>
>

Brian Hart

The writer of the VeloNews article (http://velonews.competitor.com/2015/01/news/cyclocross/commentary-nationals-disaster_358091) goes far to explaining how the CX Nats '15 fiasco unfolded.

I am a cyclist. I love trees. I am not a tree expert, so I defer to the opinion of the arborists quoted in that article, and the concerns of the Austin Heritage Tree Foundation here seem very reasonable: http://www.austinheritagetreefoundation.com/Tree_Alerts.html. However, I think the writer in VeloNews is misguided in his effort to absolve that group of any responsibility whatsoever, and in so doing, misses one small point: where was the Austin Heritage Tree Foundation when the permit was issued or when the course was set up?

They presumably had access to the same information we all had long ago: cyclocross nationals 2015 were scheduled for Zilker Park. But from everything I have read, without this group raising its collective voice at the eleventh hour when it did, there would have been no public debacle. No, I am not saying they caused the underlying problem. However, a group with strong, apparently legitimate, and focused interest, local presence, and sufficient clout to generate public action can certainly do better than collectively sit at home on its collective rear end, then suddenly jump up shouting with not so much as a nod to the enormous cost to the participants in the event.

I wonder if any of them ever bothered to so much as watch a YouTube CX video beforehand (perhaps the mudhole at Winter Cross 2013 would have been instructive). They did cast aspersions at Hill Abell's Bicycle Shop by noting it as the packet pickup location (which has nothing to do with trees in any case) and to portray racers as devil-may-care thrill-seekers who could better have gotten their buzz just as well on the single-track trails of Walnut Creek Park (did I already ask if any of these folks had ever watched a CX race?). But there are two glaring holes in the organization's own 911 tree alert:

1) There is no mention of any attempt to raise the issue when the permit was issued or even when the course was laid out before the event. Had the folks of the Austin Heritage Tree Foundation been more interested in being constructive, and maybe educated themselves on actual tree management, this 911 tree alert could have been posted weeks before, and it seems to me that the entire mess could have been averted by the relatively minor course adjustments required to avoid the heritage tree critical root zones.
2) There is absolutely no acknowledgement of the enormous cost to the participants.

As much as I love trees, both of these omissions make the Austin Heritage Tree Foundation, that might otherwise be very respectable, seem rather picayune and narcissistic. One must be diligent enough to educate oneself on the world around to behave in a proactive, rather than reactive, manner. And it would have been so simple to just acknowledge the cost to the participants. That would have gone a long ways toward making the Austin Heritage Tree Foundation look more legitimate and less apathetic, if not antagonistic, toward our poor junior racers.

This is exactly why I stop and talk to every hiker, every equestrian, every hunter, every bird-watcher, every land manager, (and, yes, even other cyclists, on occasion) I pass on the trail. It is real-world contact with real-world folks. I try to come away from every encounter knowing something more of another's experience or point of view--something that may help promote constructive dialogue, if not downright harmony, among user groups. And it sure beats sitting at home awaiting an alert so I can lend my voice to a collective chorus of Kumbaya.