Group wants to ban biking in park - Sentinel & Enterprise

Yeah I'm with this lady, not only ban bikes but hikers too! Anyone who exercises is insane. Just the other day my neice rode her training wheels across the lawn and I freaked right out. I screamed "hey I've spent countless hours on that grass it's mine, mine, mine!". This lady is a D-bag.

Hey is the S & E hiring a proof reader? They should because they could really use one! Spell check works too but not on words like "trials" instead of "trails"...

God forbid someone do something decent!

Fence the entire area off, that way nobody gets access, and nothing gets "ruined"....

wow i agree with fencing it off, save public meetings down the road, because its eventually going to come to that.... sad

From reading "Dumb's' comments, I get the impression he knows Donna Brownell.
"West" is holding its 20th anniversary shindig right now at The Westminster Country Club.

Since when have brook trout become "rare"?

I would like to ban all biking from the road. Also all heavy trucks or anything over two ton. Any vehicle who don,t have a license must be fined and taking off the road.We must start to enforce all laws to this affect. I pay to use the road and should be able to remove all who don,t. Some fools will let anyone on the road.

Although I've never rode in this park I always asumed "recreation area" meant exactly that. Since when does it mean fish sanctuary?

What is so wrong about having hiking trails for hiking only?

There are already a number of trails on the property that are 'hiking only', inlcuding two exsisting parallel routes to the proposed biking trail. Bikers are looking for a single route to pass through the area legally, as we had been for years without any issues, until Mr Brownell took it upon himself to sneakily attempt to rewrite the rules a couple years ago, which gained him a well deserved slap from the selectmen. Biking was listed as an intended use for this area at the time we voted to purchase it, but since that time, the Brownells have made it their mission to subvert the whole idea of recreation and instead treat this area as their own little Aubdobon kingdom.

Mr Brownell's hypocrisy is obvious to anyone that has ever spent any time in the woods here:he had no problem with slapping in what is probably the crappiest hiking trail I've seen in years, complete with rickety bridge, plenty of mud, and a pathetic attempt to throw a bunch of old splintered pieces of creosote soaked RR ties into the mud to keep walkers from sinking up to their ankles. The trail Mr Brownell built also happens to run on RR property. Guess it's only a big deal when someone else does it. Evidenced by some of the photos Mr Brownell brought with him to the meetings on this subject that he intended to show 'biking damage', the Brownells can't tell the difference between the tracks left by a bicycle and those left by an ATV gunning it up a loose embankment. Now they consider themselves experts on the effects of bikes? They actually said in their latest pathetic letter that riding a bike over a stream on a bridge, 15' away from where a railroad passes over the same stream, would potentially raise the temperature of the stream and kill the fish. These people have lost touch with reality and should be ashamed of themselves.

See you on the trails!

WEST really needs to pick there battles more wisely. They are loosing potential supporters every time they fight stuff like this.

Pathetic!

Mr Brownell: Conflict of interest?!

Creosote is a known carcinogen and pollutant. I'm surprised it was allowed for use in the "park". And how can somebody build a trail on property owned by some other party (Railroad)?

WEST seems to be going overboard on the environmental
issues.

LM

Walking or riding bikes on Railroad property is against the law in MA and carries a hefty fine also. Not to mention the liability issue if somebody got hurt on RR
property.

Again, fence the entire area off and make it a nature preserve...

Sheesh...

Manning is correct, by putting creosote coated RR ties into the swamp, is a DEP violation and EPA
violation. In addition, building on someone else's
property (railroad) is illegal also.

Riding a bike 15' from a stream has little if no effect on said stream's temperature. There should be more concerns about fuel/oil leaks from passing trains.

FP

WEST ought to just go away. In 20 years is there anything this group ever approved of? What is wrong with designing a safe trail for bikers to use?

Curious, what Good things has WEST done for the area ?

Resident wrote:

There are already a number of trails on the property that are 'hiking only', inlcuding two exsisting parallel routes to the proposed biking trail. Bikers are looking for a single route to pass through the area legally, as we had been for years without any issues, until Mr Brownell took it upon himself to sneakily attempt to rewrite the rules a couple years ago, which gained him a well deserved slap from the selectmen. Biking was listed as an intended use for this area at the time we voted to purchase it, but since that time, the Brownells have made it their mission to subvert the whole idea of recreation and instead treat this area as their own little Aubdobon kingdom.
Mr Brownell's hypocrisy is obvious to anyone that has ever spent any time in the woods here:he had no problem with slapping in what is probably the crappiest hiking trail I've seen in years, complete with rickety bridge, plenty of mud, and a pathetic attempt to throw a bunch of old splintered pieces of creosote soaked RR ties into the mud to keep walkers from sinking up to their ankles. The trail Mr Brownell built also happens to run on RR property. Guess it's only a big deal when someone else does it. Evidenced by some of the photos Mr Brownell brought with him to the meetings on this subject that he intended to show 'biking damage', the Brownells can't tell the difference between the tracks left by a bicycle and those left by an ATV gunning it up a loose embankment. Now they consider themselves experts on the effects of bikes? They actually said in their latest pathetic letter that riding a bike over a stream on a bridge, 15' away from where a railroad passes over the same stream, would potentially raise the temperature of the stream and kill the fish. These people have lost touch with reality and should be ashamed of themselves.
See you on the trails!

How does 1 person on a board that isn't even one of the co-chairs manage to rewrite the rules without anyone noticing?
I dont think it is the actual mountain biking that would raise the water temp, but the clearing that would have to be done. which would allow more light an run-off to occur.