Letters to the Editor 07/15/2015

To the Editor:

The letters from JoEllyn Loehr, Susie Werts and Isolde Hedemark in the July 1 Nugget were obviously coordinated to try to get the proposed Sisters to Black Butte Trail moved to "the north side of the highway" (per Isolde Hedemark).

Ms. Loehr tries to make the convincing case that there is "already a trail from Sisters that goes all the way to Indian Ford ... where it ties into the Metolius Area recreation trails. It isn't paved, but it could be easily developed as the paved trail that advocates want for ADA reasons."

Ms. Loehr, Ms. Werts, and Ms. Hedemark, do you know that the trail you propose instead of the current route happens to be on the other side of Highway 20 from Black Butte Ranch? Are you all in favor of an ADA-type trail where users are required to cross Highway 20 to get to or from the ranch? Are you saying that this is safe for people in wheelchairs? Are you saying this is safe for children much less adults?

The only thing that is consistent in your letters is that the alternate trail you propose is far away from your properties - "Not in My Back Yard." This despite the majority of Black Butte homeowners and Tollgate homeowners are in favor of a trail that would be convenient for them to use.

We are not talking about building a prison near your properties. The people who use these trails will be either BBR owners/guests and/or Tollgate residents and Sisters residents. We are not felons.

Ken Serkownek

•••

To the Editor:

The need for (a paved) trail supposedly justifies its construction. Need has revolved around several issues - recreation being the priority. In spite of the fact that our forests are riddled with trails, this one has assumed undue importance. True, there is no existing paved trail. But walkers, runners, hikers, and trail bikers don't need pavement. Neither do the disabled; ADA doesn't require that accessible trails be paved. The Forest Service prefers that they not be.

From Janet Zeller, Forest Service national accessibility program manager, on AmericanTrails.org:

"It is accessibility integrated into the outdoors without changing the setting or the outdoor experience. We don't call them accessible trails, which make one think of flat and paved paths. Instead trails that comply with the accessibility guidelines look like other trails that blend into the setting, but with a sustainable firm, stable surface and, where the terrain allows, grades that provide easier passage."

A paved trail does not benefit walkers, runners, hikers, trail bikers, or the disabled, only those with road bikes - by no means justifying the expense and disruption. (A 10-foot-wide trail 7.6 miles long is over 400,000 square feet of asphalt - more than nine acres of it; eight paved football fields in the forest, and benefiting only one demographic.)

My view on this trail has evolved. Until recently I supported a paved trail on the north side of the highway. After further research, I've changed my mind. The existing Sisters Tie Trail goes from just north of the Sisters Forest Service Office to Indian Ford Campground. Designing and building a sustainable firm, stable surface from local materials on that existing trail would take users to a beautiful area; and to existing parking, toilets, picnic tables, maps, and trash receptacles (facilities otherwise having to be provided by Black Butte Ranch). And it would connect to the entire Metolius basin network of roads and trails without a highway crossing.

JoEllyn Loehr

•••

To the Editor:

Black Butte Ranch and the community of Sisters rely on one another. Ranch voters have consistently supported our local option levy for schools, because they understand that strong schools mean better property values. The Ranch is an important job creator, and Sisters youth supply summer labor that BBR can't do without. Sisters residents patronize Ranch restaurants in off seasons. And, of course, the resort is a key draw for visitors, most of whom spend money in our downtown businesses as well.

A bike path between BBR and Sisters would be an excellent new addition to our two, mutually dependent communities. With cycling tourism exploding, new recreation options that cater to people who bike are sure winners. And a bike trail is an amenity that doesn't require any water, a big plus considering the present drought and future water uncertainty.

I just visited Vancouver, BC, and can report that the Seawall bike path that encircles the entire city is among the most popular draws of the city's many attractions. This paved path was constructed on the seashore of Stanley Park, a forested park in the heart of the city. Despite daily, heavy use from dawn to sunset, the trail is free of litter and panhandlers. And there is a friendly spirit among users, all of whom share a mutual goal: get out of the car and enjoy the amazing scenery.

Let's build the trail.

Merry Ann Moore