...and dispel some falsehoods. OK, more than some - a lot.

Have you read the Friends of the Fells home page recently? You should - it's amazing what they're saying.

Go give a little read of the right-hand column on their home page, and come on back: http://www.fells.org

Wasn't that fun? Let's start at the top:

"DCR planning to convert the Fells Reservation into a mountain bike park."

Did you know that? Neither did we. And all along we thought we were lobbying for equitable access. We could have been asking for a whole lot more if we only knew.

At last week's MTB Community Meeting at Mt. Hood, we had a visitor by the name of Carol McKinley. Carol is a member of the Friends of the Fells. She said someone sent her an email about the meeting so she showed up. We did tell her it was a private meeting but decided to give her a few minutes to speak to the group before we started. Dialogue and sharing ideas is important - GB NEMBA is all about that. FoF, not so much. One of the things Carol shared with us, was her visit to Vancouver recently and she discovered that they had mountain bike parks with chairlifts and...that we wanted to turn the Fells into that.

Really? The FoF really believes this. No where has GB NEMBA, DCR - or anyone - ever said anything about turning the Fells into a mountain bike park. All we want is equitable access - just like every other state park.

"DCR Fells Trails Plan re-frames the Fells Forest Reservation as an "urban recreation park"

Maybe no one told them but the Fells is already classified by DCR as an Urban Park.

"Natural features will be destroyed throughout the Fells"

By what? The bulldozers? The skidders? The Fells is going to be paved and painted green? No, none of that. What's the first item on DCR's proposed changes in the draft plan? Close trails and reduce the number and miles of the trail system. What will that do? Increase habitat. Reduce habitat fragmentation. At a meeting with DCR in May, when they previewed this plan privately to stakeholders, this was what they opened with when listing changes. What was the reaction by Mike Ryan, Friends of the Fells' Executive Director? Angry outbursts that they couldn't do it. Increasing habitat is bad? Reducing trail footprint is bad? What are we missing here?

"The biodiversity of birds, wildlife and plants will be threatened"

How? Mountain biking is already in the Fells. Hiking, trail running, skiing, snowshoeing, large, un-permitted groups of off-trail birdwatchers and dogs all are already in the Fells. Guess what? All of these are trail-based activities. That means that all these uses, that are already happening, on trails that, while in fairly good shape (DCR found this to be so), don't get the proper amount of skilled trail maintenance they need, will suddenly impact the ecological stability of the Fells. We've said it many times: mountain biking is not about riding randomly through the woods off-trail. It's good trails that makes it fun. Riding and hiking have the same impact. So what's changing? Nothing. If anything, DCR's changes should cause increases in biodiversity of birds, wildlife and plants.

"Visitors’ ability to safely and quietly enjoy nature will be jeopardized"

One of the things, if you actually read DCR's draft plan (and it's not clear that the FoF has yet) is that DCR spends a lot of time defining expectations. They talk about this in section 3.4. They spend five pages talking about defining user experiences. What can a user expect when they recreate in the Fells? Many things and one of them is, in fact "occasionally finding solitude". But, to quote from the plan:

"However, while the Fells is a wonderful place to observe, explore and discover nature, it is also a popular and well-used urban park. As such, users should expect to encounter other users, and should expect some level of disturbance by others."

Let's also remember that the Fells is on a flight path to and from Logan airport, has a major highway running through it and is in the middle of five major towns. You're pretty lucky if you've found a quiet spot in the Fells. Cherish it, absolutely. But, let's be realistic about the base-level of quiet and solitude at the Fells: not very quiet and it's a high-use, urban park.

"DCR Proposes conversion of these hiking trails to mountain bike use:

• Reservoir Trail - Dark Hollow Pond Trail - ‘Sections’ of Cross Fells Trail and
  
• Crystal Springs Trail – And conversion of nearly all the rest of hiking trails to bike use in the near future"

Yes, they do propose those changes. It's true. Let's see, right now we have 1.6 miles of legal singletrack in the Fells out of a total trail inventory of over 110 miles of trails. These changes add maybe 15 miles of singletrack to legal riding. Does that feel anywhere equitable in the bigger picture? It's a start, but is it truly equitable like pretty much all the other state parks? No way. Somehow, the Fells, a public, taxpayer-funded park, should have a set of rules that benefit a small group of elitist trail users who get to define how this public resource gets to be used by everyone? Really? You bet - and that's exactly what's been happening for the last twenty-plus years.

Since when does anyone get to define how you experience your recreation? Since never - except at the Fells.

"DCR Proposes creating new mountain bike trails through undisturbed woodlands:

• Create three mountain bike trails from Bear Hill to Sheepfold
• Create mountain bike trail from Flynn Rink to south end of Spot Pond"

Also true. However, let's review a few things. Sheepfold to Bear Hill is also known as Dark Hollow Pond (DHP). Dark Hollow Pond is best known for...the place to go if you're a dude looking for another dude in the woods. Nobody goes to DHP for exactly this reason. DHP is a mess of spider-web trails. It's best experienced at speed (on bike or on foot), without looking too carefully off the trail as you go by. This area desperately needs help. GB NEMBA had a plan approved by DCR in April 2009 to rehabilitate Dark Hollow Pond, close down miles of rogue trails and end up with a simplified, sustainable trail system that would draw all trail users into it and displace the illicit use. Friends of the Fells sabotaged this from happening the night before it was to be done on a spurious claim. We had over 100 volunteers lined up ready to go. Feet on the ground, get it done in a day. DCR had to honor the objection, which was subsequently found to be without merit. Are the Friends of the Fells really friends of the Fells? Or are they more interested in ignoring problems and effectively supporting illicit use that prevents the public from enjoying a portion of the park?

Fast forward a bit on DHP. DCR has justifiably postponed any work on Dark Hollow Pond until completion of the trails plan. NEMBA certainly hasn't pushed it. But, if you're Walter Kittredge and the Friends of the Fells these kind of planning thingys don't apply to you. What did they do? They went and took care of Dark Hollow Pond for all of us and re-blazed it. It's all done. Nobody needs to do any more work in Dark Hollow Pond thanks to Walter and the FoF. It's all good now. OK, that's not true. Actually the new signs nailed to and blazes painted on trees was done in the wrong place, following an unsustainable and unregistered shortcut trail that needs to be closed, as well as being done without authorization (also called vandalism).

Now, the trail proposed from Flynn Rink is a new trail. However, this trail is designed at its start to provide universal access to the Fells. A universal access trail allows differently-abled people to get into the woods and enjoy it. FoF is against that? Only hale and hearty people get to enjoy the Fells? In addition, the current complaint is that too many people ride up the sidewalk to get to the legal entrance north of Flynn Rink. This new trail also addresses that complaint. This is typical FoF: complain and don't offer any solution. Or even offer up any alternative solution. Just complain. A lot.

"DCR proposes no enforcement of any of Fells rules and regulations:

• No citations and levying fines for infractions of Fells regulations
• No teaming up with the State Police who are willing and able to do so  
  
• Just ‘two seasonal rangers’ with zero enforcement power can’t police 2500 acres"

Where do they get that? I'm just going to reproduce section 6.7 of the Fells Draft Plan here:

6.7 Enhance Enforcement of Trail Rules and Etiquette
- Increase DCR Ranger presence on trails within the Middlesex Fells trail system. Increase both the number of ranger hours available for the Fells and the number of hours on the trail system, especially at peak times.

- Rangers on the trails will enforce park rules and guidelines including:
•    Stay on Designated Trails. No off-trail activities allowed unless specifically permitted
•    On Trail? On Leash! This includes a leash length of 6 feet and no more than four dogs per walker
•    No Biking on Hiking Only Trails •    Carry In, Carry Out (including “Pick Up
After Your Dog”)

Coordinate more closely with state police and local communities to provide an additional law enforcement presence at trailheads, parking areas, and if possible, on trails.

That reads pretty much like enforcement to me. Anyone else not get that from reading it?

FoF, you should check your facts. Or at least read the Fells Draft Plan. If you had, you could have put some real arguments out there in opposition to items the plan proposes instead of the same, tired, inflammatory, misinformed old diatribes.

The Draft Plan is good for the Fells and good for all users. DCR deserves credit for the huge amount of time and energy spent crafting it. Is it perfect? No. Does everyone get all of what they want from it? No, but it's a lot better than where we are now. Change needs to happen.

There's an old saying, "If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem". Friends of the Fells, you should be part of the solution. Every park needs good friends groups. Its just a little sad that it doesn't seem that you're interested in helping to solve the problems at the Fells.