Jump to content

Big Pete

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Big Pete last won the day on June 29 2018

Big Pete had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

264 Excellent

1 Follower

About Big Pete

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Profile Information

  • Location
    Cornwall, Ont
  • Main Riding Area
    District 1
  • Club
    Riverside Snowmobile
  • Sled
    16 Viper LTX-DX, 07 Phazer FX
  • Previous and/or Other Sleds
    02 Venture 700
  • 17/18 Mileage
  • 16/17 Mileage
  • 15/16 Mileage
  • 14/15 Mileage
  • 13/14 Mileage
  • 12/13 Mileage
  • 11/12 Mileage
  • 10/11 Mileage
  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Big Pete

    Venture Lite / Phazer Reverse

    I have an 07 Phazer. There was a shim kit for the primary and a revised belt that helped the situation but did not cure it. Idle speed and chain tension are also important for shifting. Check out Totallyamaha.com in the Phazer forum for additional help. The link below is for a list of updates for the Phazer. https://ty4stroke.com/threads/updates-to-07s.107506/
  2. Big Pete

    OFSC survey

    In the early days of the Framework For Change discussions, there was an idea floated about a Regional Permit System. The province would be divided into 5 regions with each region retaining the bulk of their respective sales. It was dismissed early on with the reasoning being that the regional boundaries would be too arbitrary and difficult to establish and/or enforce.
  3. Big Pete

    OFSC survey

    The survey has been fixed and the link reposted.
  4. Big Pete

    Green trail =staked lake?

    While I agree generally with your statement, if you know (or in legal-ease should have known) the ice is unsafe you had better have the ice portion of that trail showing as red on the ITG since by our own policy statement the ITG is the sole source of trail status info for the province. As for the A01 form, it can not be completed until the lake is staked. So why would you stake an unsafe lake? Once you stake it and file the A01 the onus is on the club to monitor ice conditions and advise any changes in ice conditions (minimum twice per week). That would include checking thickness and quality of ice at reasonable intervals along the trail.
  5. Big Pete

    Green trail =staked lake?

    It is included in the 2018-2019 Signage Guide Best Practices.
  6. Big Pete

    Green trail =staked lake?

    Until somebody goes through the ice and drowns. And then it absolutely was an OFSC trail. Not talking about speed limits or enforcing permits. Its about risk management.
  7. Big Pete

    Green trail =staked lake?

    Then the club/district should provide the gps data to allow the lake portion to be reported separately. Other wise the whole section must be show as Red.
  8. Big Pete

    Green trail =staked lake?

    Brian, the Signage Guidelines are very clear for lake based trails. A designated Signage Inspector that is signing an A01 Form confirming compliance to signage standards (required in order for trail to be listed as Green/Yellow) when in fact it is not, is taking on huge liability should something happen.
  9. Big Pete

    Green trail =staked lake?

    According to the OFSC Sign Standards any lake that is not staked requires a Trail Ends sign where the land trail terminates.. Otherwise you need the Ice Crossing sign and a single row of stakes on the ice.
  10. Big Pete

    big Storm. how much u gettin?

    I would hope that in these circumstances, the club/district would pony up for the new belt. That would be the right thing to do. The alternative would have been way more expensive and it would send a strong message to our volunteers that that we respect their contributions and don’t want them significantly out of pocket.
  11. Big Pete

    QC puts the hammer down.

    Webdog, there used to be a resource that had little to no cost and was charged with enforcing the MSVA, Tresspass to Property ACT. It supplemented the regular OPP force and provided extra coverage on trail. There was even a concerted effort to get significantly more volunteers trained in what I believe was an increased concern over speeding, other safety issues, permit compliance and off trail riding. It was called STOP. But that program was cancelled without any plan to replace the on trail coverage that was lost. The result was/is a noted increase in permit noncompliance and off trail riding. I dont want to hijack the thread with a discussion over the reasons STOP was cancelled but the OFSC and the OPP both played a role. It will be up to the grass roots clubs to demand a resurrection of STOP through their District Governor and failing that a member resolution at AGM requiring action. As to the theory that we need to bring social pressure to bear to correct the problems. The drinking and driving scenario is quoted as the example. As it was stated it’s been 20 years and we still have problems with impaired driving. I honestly don’t believe we have 20 years to deal with the problem. The sport will be a distant memory by then.
  12. Big Pete

    north of long sault dist 1 feb 2 2019

    The difference between this year and the pic of mine you reposted is that we actually have some frost in the ground this year. The base has held up pretty well but Thursday and Friday will tell the tale for the rest of the season in D1.
  13. Big Pete

    Try Our Trails February 2nd and 3rd!

    The OFSC bylaws were changed st the AGM in 2017. The only members are now the clubs. Individual permit buyers are no longer members.
  14. Big Pete

    Try Our Trails February 2nd and 3rd!

    Here is how the funding model works at a local level. First all permit money stops at the district. No permit dollars go the club level anymore. And all permit dollar eligible expenses are paid by the district. The district funding is based on 1) $53per km of land trail and $15 per km natural corridor 2) $68 per hour of grooming as per the gps tracking system. 3) 10% of gross permit revenue. These 3 items are called the Cost Allowances. Now this is where the slight of hand occurs. District Funds = 10% of Permit Sales + Equalization Funding. Where Equalization Funding is equal to Cost Allowances minus the 10% of Permit Revenue received. So, if a district were to receive say 10 incremental permits (at $190) from riders who wanted to support that district/club. The district/club would receive an incremental $190 (10% of $1900 incremental permit revenue) but the Equalization portion of the funding would be reduced by the same $190. So the district/club is no further ahead. In order to be ahead you (District/club) need to increase trails or increase grooming. Now before everybody starts complaining what the new funding has done. It has allowed the permit dollars to go were there is snow. The assumption being more snow, more grooming. So who has been the beneficiaries of the new funding model. Overall it’s the rider. Districts that have longer seasons receive proportionately more money regardless of their permit sales. The extra benefit is that surplus permit dollars are centralized at the OFSC and have been used to fund the groomer replacement program. I think it’s 60+ new groomers in the last 4 years.
  15. Big Pete

    Try Our Trails February 2nd and 3rd!

    FTS, I agree 100%. But I see that more as an enforcement issue rather than a growth idea. So the question stands, “How do we get more paying riders into our sport? How do we reach the OFSC goal of 120,000 paid permits?