Why can't we have jumps/features in trails?

JerseyJay

Member
So, I understand that it's a liability to have people getting hurt in trails trying to hit jumps and drops (especially if they aren't skilled enough to be doing such things) but why is such a taboo in NJ? So many other states have trail systems with jumps and drops and most of which have work arounds if you don't want to hit the features. In NJ we have to go to a sanctioned bike park like Mt. Creek. Other states just go out to their local trails and shred for free. Obviously they would encounter the same liability issues but they allow it anyway. Anyone know why NJ seems to be so much more against it than elsewhere?
 
I feel like this is an annual thread, normally around this time of year too, it will be okay, five months till the hill opens.

1. NJ is one of the most densely populated States in the Country, that being said if something gets built, it gets noticed. We also live in a very sue-happy culture. These two combined lead to some pretty serious issues that have closed parks, both sanctioned and unsanctioned. Hence to the destruction of trail features by land managers to avoid being sued or a number of complaints from non riders.

2. I hear ya on the other State issue, but some of the areas we see some of the best big hit stuff built in are out in the middle of nowhere. The people that at hitting the feature (pro athletes) often have insurance for injuries associated with these features. features are usually demoslished after being hit or grow in, as reality states there isn't a line of people waiting to take down a 50 foot gap.

Large areas are also covered under an "attractive nuisance" policy, so if something is built on a large swath of land (although it is usually owned by the government) the law understands there is no way a landowner could police the property for man-made danger he or she did not create, and is therefore exempt from suit (sort of). In NJ this is not the case, things are often spotted, but in reality most builders here don't always use their brain and place features on multi use trails. Let’s face it, you do not see the big names in freeride building hits on a multi-use trail.

Most stuff that is built here is kept quiet, because once the word is out everyone rides it/posts pictures, the land manager comes and destroys it.

Also, let’s not forget, a lot of trails are destroyed annually, as they are pirate trails. The more notable places like the North Shore have only gotten to the point where large donation and volunteer bases have been able to sustain some trails (also helps that on the Shore and Moab these are huge income sources from travelers). With these donations insurance is purchased. But we do not have the same base size of riders willing to donate or do work, and many are not patient for the slow change.

Heck.....Jorba only has 300 members.....there are many more dedicated riders than that.

Most sanctioned trail work events only have a few people show up, which are there to fix & repair work, let alone build stunts solely used by the cycling community (not enough man power or time).

Want these features, Join Jorba, donate, and give your time. Don't build illegal trails in santioned parts, in the long run it hurts what you are trying to accomplish.

Enough from me, there are bigger chiefs that can provide more info.
 
I totally understand all of your points and I guess the sad truth is the sue-happy culture brings down these types of sanctioned trails. I've never built rogue trails nor do I intend to but I feel like it's a miss. I think if we could have more sanctioned trails with features and jumps it would entice more people to come out and dig. I know I'm guilty of not donating my time to help as much I should but I feel like it would be a draw for more people to help out. If all the people that are out there building rogue trails donated time time on legit trail maintenance sessions there would be a lot more people helping out but these are the people that want something bigger to ride. If we were able to build jumps etc during these sessions I'm sure quite a few of them would be more willing to come out. Nobody wants to spend hours carving jumps just to have it town down. I'm not talking about building a full on rampage course but a few jump lines would be awesome.

On the point of it being private land etc it's not always the case. There are quite a few sanctioned trails in Florida (I ride there sometimes because I have family down there) that are legit places to ride. Take a look at Santos or the Grape Fruit Trail on youtube, totally legal and sanctioned trails with all levels of jumps and also beginner friendly with work arounds for those who don't want to jump. I just feel like its a huge part of MTB culture that's being missed here.
 
I will add to the "if we can build it more people will come out" argument. Land managers look at that like your boss would look at an employee saying "if you pay me Steve Jobs salary I will produce Steve Jobs like results".

I can't speak for Florida, but I understand the pain. I was out in Whistler this summer, it was unreal. The back country was unreal. Trails with great feature everywhere.

We do not live in Whistler.
 
From the other end it's basically like saying "here's all the legos you can ever imagine BUT you're not allowed to build what you want to", a lot of people aren't going to respond to that. It really depends which perspective you look at it from. The land mangers clearly have the final say in what goes on tho.

I guess the solution could be move out of NJ.. Whistler sounds like a good choice...
 
Two words.........the lawyers. Also, the Ceres situation made it abundantly clear landowners are not willing to take any liability in this sucky state.
 
Jay, it's a great choice. If I were ten years younger I would get a work Visa and live out there for a few years.

As you drive up 99 from Vancouver Maprieka lights up everywhere. I asked the driver where he rides, when he handed me his phone and all the trails kept popping up as we went up the highway (2 hour drive) I was in awe.

Make it a point to go next year. I can't get to get back, only bummer is they have a short season.
 
Definition for NJ

We have more blood sucking ambulance chasing asshats per capita and losers looking to blame everyone except themselves.

Welcome!
 
Two words.........the lawyers. Also, the Ceres situation made it abundantly clear landowners are not willing to take any liability in this sucky state.

Indeed, but not that it should be on the land owners for other people getting hurt, its the people that are the problem I think.

Jay, it's a great choice. If I were ten years younger I would get a work Visa and live out there for a few years.

As you drive up 99 from Vancouver Maprieka lights up everywhere. I asked the driver where he rides, when he handed me his phone and all the trails kept popping up as we went up the highway (2 hour drive) I was in awe.

Make it a point to go next year. I can't get to get back, only bummer is they have a short season.

I would love to get out there, I haven't been yet but it's definitely on my 'must go' list. I hit Colorado last year for the first time and it was amazing. Trestle is the sickest place to ride and it's surrounded by so many other great trails. I think I'm shooting for a trip to Highland Bike Park next year.

Definition for NJ

We have more blood sucking ambulance chasing asshats per capita and losers looking to blame everyone except themselves.

Welcome!

I couldn't agree more, people take no responsibility when they know they have no business hitting a 6 foot drop but do it anyway.. cry babies these days looking for attention and lawsuits. It's a sad society.. I miss the days when people would get hurt then ride home, get cleaned up, eat dinner then consider going to the hospital if it still hurt after that.
 
Highlands is definitely worth the trip and has been for us the last two years.
 
Most laypeople in NJ have no clue whatsoever that mtbing even occurs in NJ. In their eyes there are no mountains in NJ. (Depending on the definition, they may be right)

So with no mountains or mtbiking, how could it be reasonable to build a mt bike park or jumps on a multi-use system?? It is a tough argument. On state lands consider how tight the state budget has become and how they want to avoid liability at all cost.

It can happen. It will take someone who will work night & day with a park manage and prove liability coverage, trail design and upkeep. You will also need to provide evidence that the need and demand exists. Remember that most park staff are not cyclists and they are more likely to be hikers. (Think about the people who might gravitate toward this profession of park manager).
 
It can happen. It will take someone who will work night & day with a park manage and prove liability coverage, trail design and upkeep. You will also need to provide evidence that the need and demand exists. Remember that most park staff are not cyclists and they are more likely to be hikers. (Think about the people who might gravitate toward this profession of park manager).

Yes this.
Unfortunately NJ does not see the value in outdoor recreation as compared to some other states. Park systems may claim they do value trails but when push comes to shove they are more afraid of liability and find it easier to say no to installing anything new. Not so say it can't happen, the biggest hurdle is convincing landowners to do it. This is usually the struggle of one adament person.

This was really obvious to me when I was in VT mtb'ing the trails at Pinehill just outside of Rutland. It was apparent that a lot of man hours were taken to build this place and maintain it. VT is also a state that embraces outdoor rec. and is more willing to take risks of liability.
 
It should also be mentioned, due to land values in Central NJ, private land owners can find another use that has less of an insurance risk that is able to deliver a higher return than a bike park.
 
Most laypeople in NJ have no clue whatsoever that mtbing even occurs in NJ. In their eyes there are no mountains in NJ. (Depending on the definition, they may be right)

So with no mountains or mtbiking, how could it be reasonable to build a mt bike park or jumps on a multi-use system?? It is a tough argument. On state lands consider how tight the state budget has become and how they want to avoid liability at all cost.

It can happen. It will take someone who will work night & day with a park manage and prove liability coverage, trail design and upkeep. You will also need to provide evidence that the need and demand exists. Remember that most park staff are not cyclists and they are more likely to be hikers. (Think about the people who might gravitate toward this profession of park manager).

Awesome answer, I think an area like six mile or sourlands or jungle habitat have a lot of potential for building features. I understand how land owners wouldn't see it the same way. It's a struggle to get people to understand the MTB world in general, let alone the need for jumps etc. It would be a long struggle I'm sure.
 
Where you from? Glenn park in stroudsburg pa. Has those stunts and also has shuttling certain days. Portlandrider has info for this.

Jumps and thrills for Pocono bikers in 'The Maze': http://youtu.be/NwbbZZJRgk4
 
Last edited:
Where you from? Glenn park in stroudsburg pa. Has those stunts and also has shuttling certain days. Portlandrider has info for this.

Jumps and thrills for Pocono bikers in 'The Maze': http://youtu.be/NwbbZZJRgk4

This place looks pretty cool I'll definitely check it out. I'm in South Plainfield so it's like an hour and a half away according to google maps. I was really curious about local trails because I love hitting those types of features but places like that are all far away, I do try to hit MCBP, Launch and Blue Mtn every year. But I have a 7 month old son so I can't always get a full day of riding. Sometimes that hour and half ride out there is all the time I get for the day.
 
Back
Top Bottom