Faceman Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 Volunteers want to stake trail, they want to brush and they want to maintain contact with the landowners and many enjoy groomer maintenance. They really don't want to do groomer coordinating/ logs and the paper shuffle. Club identity does not revolve around a groomer but is fully reflected in the condition of their trails. Does anyone real care who grooms their trails as long as their trails are better than their neighbours (LOL) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soupkids Posted August 8, 2015 Share Posted August 8, 2015 Soupkid, how is the permit money (the 30% retained by STP) allocated to the clubs for eligible trail expenses? Same for the equalization payment. What was the reason for separating the grooming responsibilities from the trail responsibilities? Would it make more senses to have STP take over both grooming and trail accountabilities? I don't know the exact formula (don't really care to be honest) I know each club gets XX $$ for each permit they sell (club outlets) The grooming was separated because of physical boundaries. lakes, rivers, swaps etc Some clubs have a very small trail base but due to water (biggest culprit) that club may need 5 groomers to do 100 kms of trial. With STP looking after grooming one groomer might do 3 or 4 clubs trails. The system really has worked well for us thru the years, with minor tweeks and fiddling it has gotten much better. Biggest complaint from any club is communication with the groomer coordinator/operator. sometimes a groomer is down for whatever reason and it doesn't always get passed on in a timely manor. All in all the system works pretty dam good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greggie Posted August 10, 2015 Share Posted August 10, 2015 If I am right, this week the Agm packages will be send out. It will give the direction OFSC want to go/change. Will be interesting. Thanks Greg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbakernbay Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 I don't know the exact formula (don't really care to be honest) I know each club gets XX $$ for each permit they sell (club outlets) The grooming was separated because of physical boundaries. lakes, rivers, swaps etc Some clubs have a very small trail base but due to water (biggest culprit) that club may need 5 groomers to do 100 kms of trial. With STP looking after grooming one groomer might do 3 or 4 clubs trails. The system really has worked well for us thru the years, with minor tweeks and fiddling it has gotten much better. Biggest complaint from any club is communication with the groomer coordinator/operator. sometimes a groomer is down for whatever reason and it doesn't always get passed on in a timely manor. All in all the system works pretty dam good. Are all STP Operators paid, or none are paid or a combination of some paid and some Volunteers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soupkids Posted August 22, 2015 Share Posted August 22, 2015 Are all STP Operators paid, or none are paid or a combination of some paid and some Volunteers? All Paid It's not a lot trust me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperG Posted August 22, 2015 Share Posted August 22, 2015 Yes at least the clubs are giving them something for their time out there, which is well deserved for them. Although it would be nice for some clubs to start paying some or all gas expenses for the trail patrollers and maybe ORS responders. Some clubs trails cover 200kms or more. If patrollers are out patrolling that all, over time gas expenses build up, as well some ORS responders getting called to go out to accidents on the trails having to take pics of the scene, take gps coordinates, investigate what happened and then doing up the report. It all takes time if you do a thorough job and do up your reports accurately to save the clubs and OFSC's butt in the event someone were to sue. Sometimes getting out to those spots are quite the distance. I know I do that all voluntarily and DONT ever expect to be paid for anything as I do it for the love of the sport and like to see people having fun enjoying our trails safely! But, it would be nice to get at least some gas expenses reimbursed. Just saying Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AkronOrange Posted August 23, 2015 Share Posted August 23, 2015 I don't know the exact formula (don't really care to be honest) I know each club gets XX $$ for each permit they sell (club outlets) The grooming was separated because of physical boundaries. lakes, rivers, swaps etc Some clubs have a very small trail base but due to water (biggest culprit) that club may need 5 groomers to do 100 kms of trial. With STP looking after grooming one groomer might do 3 or 4 clubs trails. The system really has worked well for us thru the years, with minor tweeks and fiddling it has gotten much better. Biggest complaint from any club is communication with the groomer coordinator/operator. sometimes a groomer is down for whatever reason and it doesn't always get passed on in a timely manor. All in all the system works pretty dam good. From my perspective, the system is not working well at all. Trails are shrinking and access to parts of Ontario has been eliminated. If this were a business, and in many senses it is, the forecast should be that the end is near. If you're not growing; you're dying. Everyone can say what they will about volunteers, funding and the rest of the excuses. I think it's the job of the OFSC to figure it out, that what we do every day when we go to work. We encounter a problem and overcome it, if we don't, we fail; and right now the OFSC and the system is failing. There are redundant trails all over portions of Ontario while important trails are being allowed (encouraged) to close. I really don't think it could get any worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbakernbay Posted August 23, 2015 Share Posted August 23, 2015 Akron, "Bigger" is not always better. Ask Target about their $2 billion dollar loss expanding into a new market in Canada. Lots of other examples of Bigger is not always the correct way. Groomers are our number one priority right now and that is what the OFSC is focusing on. I don't necessarily agree that many Districts are capable of taking this task on but we will see what the reaction is at AGM to the Report Recommendations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PISTON LAKE CRUISER Posted August 23, 2015 Share Posted August 23, 2015 From my perspective, the system is not working well at all. Trails are shrinking and access to parts of Ontario has been eliminated. If this were a business, and in many senses it is, the forecast should be that the end is near. If you're not growing; you're dying. Everyone can say what they will about volunteers, funding and the rest of the excuses. I think it's the job of the OFSC to figure it out, that what we do every day when we go to work. We encounter a problem and overcome it, if we don't, we fail; and right now the OFSC and the system is failing. There are redundant trails all over portions of Ontario while important trails are being allowed (encouraged) to close. I really don't think it could get any worse. IMO this is a business albeit using as much volunteer labour as possible. Some associations have handled more money per year than many small businesses do. I know that you are very concerned with the closing of trails in the north but the reality is that as in any business, if you don't get enough return from areas of your business sometimes you have to face the facts and concentrate on the areas where there is a suitable return or in this case, volume of use. I love riding northern Ontario but I understand that when the amount of usage drops combined with lack of labour availability, the tough decisions have to be made. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
02Sled Posted August 24, 2015 Share Posted August 24, 2015 Yes at least the clubs are giving them something for their time out there, which is well deserved for them. Although it would be nice for some clubs to start paying some or all gas expenses for the trail patrollers and maybe ORS responders. Some clubs trails cover 200kms or more. If patrollers are out patrolling that all, over time gas expenses build up, as well some ORS responders getting called to go out to accidents on the trails having to take pics of the scene, take gps coordinates, investigate what happened and then doing up the report. It all takes time if you do a thorough job and do up your reports accurately to save the clubs and OFSC's butt in the event someone were to sue. Sometimes getting out to those spots are quite the distance. I know I do that all voluntarily and DONT ever expect to be paid for anything as I do it for the love of the sport and like to see people having fun enjoying our trails safely! But, it would be nice to get at least some gas expenses reimbursed. Just saying Large numbers of people think that TP are supplied with sleds and gas and paid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
02Sled Posted August 24, 2015 Share Posted August 24, 2015 From my perspective, the system is not working well at all. Trails are shrinking and access to parts of Ontario has been eliminated. If this were a business, and in many senses it is, the forecast should be that the end is near. If you're not growing; you're dying. Everyone can say what they will about volunteers, funding and the rest of the excuses. I think it's the job of the OFSC to figure it out, that what we do every day when we go to work. We encounter a problem and overcome it, if we don't, we fail; and right now the OFSC and the system is failing. There are redundant trails all over portions of Ontario while important trails are being allowed (encouraged) to close. I really don't think it could get any worse. Define important trails encouraged to close. What is an important trail vs unimportant. What would be your solution to keeping open a trail in an area that doesn't have enough volunteers to maintain the trails, doesn't have enough permit buyers to fund the trails and a community that feels they are entitled. No permit buyers = negligible legitimate use. No silver bullet to be found so far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperG Posted August 24, 2015 Share Posted August 24, 2015 Large numbers of people think that TP are supplied with sleds and gas and paid. Well those large numbers of people are WRONG. All T.P, ORS responders, and S.T.O.P officers have to supply their own sleds, own fuel and own Permit. Thats why IMO, that maybe OFSC could at least supply or reimburse some fuel costs to those dedicated members.... Just my two cents on it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
02Sled Posted August 24, 2015 Share Posted August 24, 2015 Well those large numbers of people are WRONG. All T.P, ORS responders, and S.T.O.P officers have to supply their own sleds, own fuel and own Permit. Thats why IMO, that maybe OFSC could at least supply or reimburse some fuel costs to those dedicated members.... Just my two cents on it... I know they are wrong... while out on TP I often get asked if that is the sled they give me to ride and how much am I paid. Reality though when doing TP I am out riding and enjoying the ride as well so I don't really care if I get any fuel supplied or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Pete Posted August 24, 2015 Share Posted August 24, 2015 Not sure why this is an OFSC problem. If your club thinks it is important to be recognizing TPs, STOP, ORS responders for their time and effort then your club should budget accordingly. There is no majic pot of money at the OFSC. If they are going to fund these items centrally then they need funds to do so. That is going to mean less money in the Equalization Fund for grooming and trail maintenance. Personal I am not a fan of these centralized funds as you just add administrative time and costs to run them. Better you have the resources at the club level and let them decided how best to use the resources. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AkronOrange Posted August 25, 2015 Share Posted August 25, 2015 All of this supports my point exactly - figure it out! Doesn't Quebec face the same challenges? Can't I still start in Temiscaming and ride all the way to Gaspe'? Why can't Ontario do the same? I do not have the answer, but I know there is an option. Like the Target analogy that was given; it may not be feasible but it's worth at least a discussion. There does seem to be a model that is working! Examine it, identify how it works and God forbid; ask some one for help! Yes, even Quebec! It truly saddens me to think of the opportunity that Ontario has to attract $$$ to the north with no effort and seemingly desire to exploit the hell out of it. I don't get it. It seems to me as an outsider, and I am an outsider, that Ontario should want to attract people to spend their disposable income in Ontario. There seems to be very little effort to do that. I am here in Western NY and see more advertising about skiing in Vermont and Colorado then I do about Blue Mountain or anywhere else in Ontario. Why is that? If the province could get it's crap together and coordinate the efforts of the OFSC, Ontario Tourism and the MNR involved in finding a solution we might have a future. Seems to me, as an out sider, that everyone is pulling the union mentality and saying "it's not my job". We have had our fill of that here in Western NY with the steel and auto industries. It is a bunch of BS! Either it's a priority or it isn't! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PISTON LAKE CRUISER Posted August 25, 2015 Share Posted August 25, 2015 All of this supports my point exactly - figure it out! Doesn't Quebec face the same challenges? Can't I still start in Temiscaming and ride all the way to Gaspe'? Why can't Ontario do the same? I do not have the answer, but I know there is an option. Like the Target analogy that was given; it may not be feasible but it's worth at least a discussion. There does seem to be a model that is working! Examine it, identify how it works and God forbid; ask some one for help! Yes, even Quebec! It truly saddens me to think of the opportunity that Ontario has to attract $$$ to the north with no effort and seemingly desire to exploit the hell out of it. I don't get it. It seems to me as an outsider, and I am an outsider, that Ontario should want to attract people to spend their disposable income in Ontario. There seems to be very little effort to do that. I am here in Western NY and see more advertising about skiing in Vermont and Colorado then I do about Blue Mountain or anywhere else in Ontario. Why is that? If the province could get it's crap together and coordinate the efforts of the OFSC, Ontario Tourism and the MNR involved in finding a solution we might have a future. Seems to me, as an out sider, that everyone is pulling the union mentality and saying "it's not my job". We have had our fill of that here in Western NY with the steel and auto industries. It is a bunch of BS! Either it's a priority or it isn't! Quebec does not face the same challenges for a few reasons not the least of which is that they receive large amounts of money from the federal government that is not available to other provinces. The last grants that I heard about were to be used to buy groomers.The reason they get that federal funding for snowmobiling and for almost everything else is because the federal gov't has for years given Quebec the lions share of available dollars to try and keep them happy so that they won't separate from Canada and become their own country. I will agree that the Ontario government could do a lot more promoting of tourism in the USA, especially now that the US dollar has such an exchange advantage. Our gay premier is too busy wasting money to do anything that makes sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turbo Doo Posted August 25, 2015 Share Posted August 25, 2015 Really!!!?? Any numbers to back that up. 1000 hrs per year..Nope. The south can trim without affecting trail conditions. The report is similar to what was proposed in 2000 I believe. It needs to happen. Clubs will not lose their identity as many are worried about. We really need to coordinate , new units only grooming 74 km of trail is just wrong. Maximize for efficiency He know's.... Really.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turbo Doo Posted August 25, 2015 Share Posted August 25, 2015 No kidding 1,000 hrs. What? You do not believe him?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperG Posted August 25, 2015 Share Posted August 25, 2015 Not sure why this is an OFSC problem. If your club thinks it is important to be recognizing TPs, STOP, ORS responders for their time and effort then your club should budget accordingly. There is no majic pot of money at the OFSC. If they are going to fund these items centrally then they need funds to do so. That is going to mean less money in the Equalization Fund for grooming and trail maintenance. Personal I am not a fan of these centralized funds as you just add administrative time and costs to run them. Better you have the resources at the club level and let them decided how best to use the resources. Its an OFSC problem as it relates to them getting sued for an accident on trails if ORS responders dont do a good thorough job at the accident scene and write good detailed reports, also OFSC runs and regulates all trails in the province. An yes I understand that it looks like your robbing peter to pay paul, an in a perfect world every club and volunteer would have the money to do with as they please to better our trails but thats not a reality here. As for no magic money pot at the OFSC, thats funny when you watch the big wigs have their end of year boozefest and stay in the GOVERNORS Suite at the holiday inn in barrie On OFSC dime! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Pete Posted August 25, 2015 Share Posted August 25, 2015 SuperG, I would disagree with your assertion that the OFSC runs the trail network in the province. Is it not the club that builds, maintains and grooms the trail. Is it not the club that signs the trail, and decides when it's open or closed. Is it not the club that gets the landowner agreements that permits the trail. In fact the LUP form specifically states the agreement is between the club and the landowner. Yes the OGSC hast certain rules to follow but those rules are there to manage our liability exposure and ensure we can obtain liability insurance at affordable rates. I don't have enough experience with lawsuits to make a blanket assertion but he ones I have seen it has been the club getting sued. The OFSC is not even named in the suit. As to the money I wish too that there was enough money to do everything we wanted but the fact is there isn't. So that means setting priorities and making tough decisions in order to maximize the return. Like I said in the earlier post if recognizing volunteers is that important then you/your club have the ability to make it happen. The scary part of the new organization structure being proposed under "More on the Snow" is that local decision making will all but be removed from the club and if passed I would then agree with your assertion that the OFSC/District will be running everything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperG Posted August 25, 2015 Share Posted August 25, 2015 Yes big Pete. I agree that yes the clubs do all the leg work on everything but what I was getting at was that ultimately/unfortunately OFSC has the final say on anything, especially if that new model comes out. An yes I also agree with you on all points. Priorities are priorities! I merely wasn't saying that we should just more so it would be nice to even get 30$ for gas for the year even rather than them spending money on fancy dinners an hotel rooms where they could have spent that money a little more wisely! As for lawsuits yes it's usually the clubs and OFSC as well any other factors relating to the accident. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Pete Posted August 25, 2015 Share Posted August 25, 2015 SG, I wonder if part of the recruiting/retention of volunteers is exactly what you suggest. You and the vast majority of club volunteers are not expecting to be reimbursed for every penny of out of pocket expenses (but there are a few who do) but a token of appreciation, be it a gas card, a Timmies card or whatever along with a sincere thank you goes a long way in the mind of a volunteer. We do something for our volunteers every year. Nothing large but I think they appreciate if and they keep come back so I think it works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperG Posted August 25, 2015 Share Posted August 25, 2015 Yes BP, My thoughts exactly! let it be a 10$ Tims card even or something along those lines. If all or most clubs adopped that, i think you would see moral up and volunteer retention go up. It's small things like that, that go a long way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbakernbay Posted August 25, 2015 Share Posted August 25, 2015 Mike Clewer of OFSC presented the OFSC's "More on the Snow Report" to District 11 last evening with 2-5 reps attending from each of our Clubs. I thought he was very professional and identified the issues clearly and presented the Recommendations well. I am very pleased to see that Groomers are going to be the Number One priority over the next 5 years. In addition, they are proposing a reorganizing of District and Club responsibilities with each District taking a larger role in Groomer replacement, maintenance and trail grooming. They are proposing a 30% reduction in the total number of Groomers combined with a plan to achieve a goal of no Groomer older than 10 years or 5,000 hours. The goal is to try and have one Groomer for approximately 120 kms of trail. They are proposing an increase of new Groomers this season to 12 to jump start the program. Trail rationalization may be needed in some Districts. There are lots of questions but in my mind they have identified the major issue and proposed a series of moves to achieve that goal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sledjunk Posted August 26, 2015 Share Posted August 26, 2015 Have they planned contingencies for when these moves don't happen? I am concerned that the clubs will wither and die when they have lost control over groomers, grooming, and the majority of revenue and expenses are transferred to district. They seem to be great on making plans in the big picture and then thinking that the job is done. Remember when Framework for Control was rammed down our throats on the basis of "4 key planks" that were mandatory for the plan to go forward? Here it is three years later, and they are still hoping for the increased revenue from the province, and now planning on a doubling of the amount proposed originally. Also what happened to the increased enforcement? The STOP program has now all but died, seeing as the volunteers who trained two years ago have never been sworn in, and there is no news on this since the OFSC disbanded the committees. The Trail Patrol program is being watered down to nothing more than tour guides in the new proposal. Part of proposal seems to recommend that the clubs not be incorporated. I will certainly have serious misgivings about risking my lifetime savings, as meager as they are, to serve as a director for a club that is not incorporated, and has no control when it comes to a lawsuit. We have seen how quick OFSC came to the aid of a club in legal trouble in the past. I have a lot of misgivings about this proposal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.