Discussion: Thanks for Boggs, and an observation

Many thanks to all BAOC volunteers, and especially to Sarah, George, and Leslie Minarik for doing the lion's share of the work and coordinating the rest of the staff. The event turned out to have some quite dramatic points, with a full-blown S&R for multiple unrelated stragglers on Saturday (everyone OK, but I hear some of those lost were ready to camp out there waiting to be rescued at a Sunday's control), and an uncommon and puzzling sudden illness of one of the key volunteers.

The courses were really good. The (wooded) Sprint was technically quite appropriate, despite not being on a proper ISSOM map. The Middle had exactly the right character and the Long had ample route choice. Boggs terrain is not lacking in technical complexity and is not too physical; truly the Harriman of the West. But, I am going to raise an issue of context.

Had one not been at either of the two earlier Boggs events, this year's courses would seem appropriately challenging. But for at least some of those who were at the 2009 Team Trials, it was deja vu all over. Here's the complete Blue tally:

Sprint: 2010 Control 9 was (almost) 2009 Middle Control 18
Middle: 2010 Control 9 was next to 2009 Middle Control 13
Middle: 2010 Leg 9–10 was very similar to 2009 13–14
Middle: 2010 Leg 11–12 was similar (beginning) to 2009 17–18
Middle: 2010 Control 14 was 2010 Sprint Control 10
Long: 2010 Control 5 was 2009 Middle Control 3
Long: 2010 Leg 5–6 had the same beginning as 2009 Middle 3–4
Long: 2010 Control 11 was (almost) 2009 Middle Control 16
Long: 2010 Control 14 was close to 2010 Middle Control 4 (same apch.)

And, the Middle and the Long ran across the same area for a couple kilometers, but in exactly opposite directions—a lot less noticeable. As you can see, quite a bit of terrain reuse, lots of course idea/flow reuse (mostly of the 2009 Middle), some of the exact same feature reuse (with identical approaches) by the different course setters. (There was almost no reuse at the 2009 event of the 2007 terrain/ideas, and no reuse in 2010 of the 2007 stuff that I could notice.) I was surprised that most of the runners I talked to (all of whom were at the 2009 event) didn't think it was that big of a deal, with quite a few of them (including one of the course setters) saying they pretty much forgot the exact details of the 2009 courses already. So, this issue seemingly affects me to a greater extent than others (and it was perhaps relevant that I spent the whole morning of the Middle race looking at the 2009 maps, and also bashed through the woods in 2009 a bit more than others), and is not therefore intended as a complaint, more an observation that can lead to interesting conclusions.

For example, one would instantly think there'd be a value to recycling successful courses, perhaps not as soon as one year later but 3 or more. I'm sure those who had looked at the 1993 Middle ("Short") WOC Final before, and perhaps run it, were still facing an almost-brand-new problem at our rerun in 2009. If there were several events at a venue over the years, just don't say in advance which courses are going to be recycled. That may lead to insightful observations comparing performance over the years. Certainly White through Orange courses are in no danger of "observations" from long-memoried folk like myself, and the decision to recycle these should come easy.

Second, how much terrain reuse is too much? I heard someone say that George thought that yet another return to Boggs in the near future would be unwise, since pretty much all of the terrain has been used at least once, but judging by the competitors' lack of recall, maybe this isn't much of an issue? And to generalize, should we be making that many new maps? Is the value perhaps in concentrating our activities upon a small(er) subset of A-class venues close to the metro centers, holding multiple events a year on maps that have shown consistent high attendance—the likes of Harriman/Fells/Chicago preserves/East Bay parks, and reallocating these funds clubs would spend on the likes of Camp Ripleys towards something else? (whatever that else may be?) Just some thoughts.

Actually T/D if you include all courses over the three year period, there were many more similar legs than you listed. (My guess would be about 60). It would be interesting to plot out all the 500+ legs over three years to see how many closely coincided. (But not interesting enough for me to take the time to do it.).

There were few similarities of the 2007 legs in the 2009 Team Trials event because we kept much of the best terrain in reserve for the TT. But this year it was going to be much harder because most of the great terrain had been used and we lost about 1/6 of the map because of logging and development. So I just let the course setter's loose to construct the best possible courses without worrying too much about what had happened in previous years.

We will not use Boggs Mtn again for an A-meet in the near future. This is sad since it is the best O-terrain in N. Cal. Hopefully it will be put to good use for multiday local events and training opportunities. Generally A-meets need to be held on new maps or 2nd use maps if the terrain is good enough. Most all the A-meet quality terrain within 2 hours of the Bay Area has been mapped or is otherwise restricted by park rules, available parking, etc. So T/D's question is right on. How far afield should we go to map new terrain?

I’m sorry to hear that will be the last Boggs meet for some time, but happy that I was able to attend if that is the case. I love that place. I don’t know if it is the best terrain in Northern CA, but it is high up in my book.

I do understand that the expectation is that A-meet terrain needs to be relatively fresh. Vladimir’s questions are interesting.

Some of the terrain and legs seemed familiar to me, but not that familiar that they weren’t challenging or new enough. I would have thought there were opportunities to do some new stuff there that we haven’t seen yet, and indeed the NE part of the long course was new to me (and fantastic.)

Is it really true that 1/6 of the map is lost, and due to development? What sort? Could it affect more? Conversely, is there any more terrain there that could be mapped?

I know the Harriman of the West has a certain ring to it, but I can only associate Boggs with Harriman in the most abstract sense. Yet another way they differ is in “perishability.” Whereas Harriman maps from WOC 1993 are still quite viable, I can only imagine how Boggs would look after 10 years. Much of the technical interest at Boggs derives from manmade features and man-influenced vegetation. As George noted, some of those are already changing. Also, Some of that stuff is hard to map, but I think Vladimir did a great job.

Anyway, I look forward to getting back to Boggs. Whenever there is an A-event at Boggs or Anza Borrego, I want to be there.

Thanks for a great weekend of events. Plus that free hot food on Saturday (so many of us asked, "For me?"). Also, thanks for prompt posting of Results.

On Sunday walk to Start we passed lots of very open pine forest that I'm pretty sure I haven't orienteered in. Has that area been mapped and used? Or is that one of the 'lost to logging" areas?

Boggs is a ""State Demonstration Forest" , so it is constantly managed by controlled burns and thinning. The terrain is not really gone, but the map is not currently usable. If you look closely, you'll actually notice that the vegetation near the event center is quite different than it was 3 years ago too. Curiously, I noticed that some of the new thinning boundaries followed previously existing distinct vegetation boundaries on the map, suggesting that the foresters are have some well defined long term plans.

Personally I prefer the terrain in the Sierras around Tahoe. There are some new maps under production right now, so I hope they turn out well.

Thanks for a great weekend, and a very fun Night Orienteering event. The Team Trials last spring was the first time I visited Boggs Mountain and really loved the terrain. This weekend I had a challending sprint that I wasn't prepared mentally for :)
A fast but a bit tricky middle, Night O with Big foot growling and roaring in the forest, and a good long course.

The food was really good. And the ice cream with tons of caramel topping was a great conclusion of Saturday's events.

The big reason I like Boggs over places at or near Tahoe is the 5000 feet less altitude. Aside from that, Tahoe has nice stuff.

To clarify we were unable to plan this year's courses on about 1/6 of the map due to planned logging and the development of a new equestrian center. The newly logged areas are still usable for future events. Since the foresters only perform selective logging the map corrections should be manageable. The equestrian center is now complete and it has affected an area much smaller than I was told last fall. This year's model area for the event had been designated by the rangers as part of that horse project, but was left untouched.

As for future A-meets at Boggs. A grassroots campaign from APers would be listened to by the BAOC board.

The BAOC training director is also glad that the Boggs Mountain embargoes are finally over so we can use it to organize training weekends!

I'd also like to see it used for a mountain bike orienteering race. Boggs has one of the best maintained networks of mountain bike trails in California.

Well, I love Boggs and think it is one of the finest areas in North America to train for continental long distance races. And, how awesome is it to drive through Napa both ways and chill in Cobb for a weekend?

Build it, and I will come. That is for sure!

(I can appreciate that Boggs would be great for mountain bike O, also.)

I see enough terrain (mostly on the periphery) for another SML. Modest overlap with 2007, almost no overlap with 2009 or 2010. Can use the logged terrain (with remapping), or not. I don't see enough unused terrain on top of that, not even for a single day.

Hey - question for George - Since we've had such good luck with Boggs has anybody looked into Jackson State Forest in Mendecino? It's also managed by Cal Fire and is supposed to have a lot of redwood forest. Something like 10 or 15 times bigger too.

Could be pretty fun, I think. Probably have better chances with access than Big Basin, and recent advances in lidar have made it a lot easier to map that type of terrain.

I've only driven past Jackson State Forest on CA-1. So I don't know the suitability of the terrain. But this speaks to T/D's question of spending money mapping an area more than 3 hours North of San Francisco. How many people would actually drive up there on a yearly basis? Who would we get to course set? I think we may have hit our distance limits with Tahoe and Boggs.

All the courses (Sprint, Middle, Long) are now available on RouteGadget. Visit http://baoc.org/wiki/RouteGadget for introduction or go directly to http://baoc.org/gadget/cgi/reitti.cgi to draw your route.

To see other RouteGadget events worldwide, visit http://www.routegadget.net

Jackson is 50,000 acres; Boggs is 3500. There's another DSF close by; Soquel is around 2700 acres. It's north of Nisene Marks, with all that implies. (Steep, dense vegetation, redwoods, poison oak, etc.)

There's a DSF in the southern Sierra Nevada that is halfway between the Bay Area and the LA area; maybe BAOC and LAOC could share it. That's Mountain Home DSF, 4800 acres near Porterville. It's probably our best shot at orienteering among giant sequoias.

Soquel DSF is indeed steep, has poison oak. Vegetation is not so bad. The major problem will be the people who "live"/"work" in it.

Also the Night Score-O is now available on RouteGadget. Visit http://baoc.org/wiki/RouteGadget for introduction or go directly to http://baoc.org/gadget/cgi/reitti.cgi to draw your route.

Since this is a Score-O setup with no e-punch, RouteGadget only knows about the Start and Finish locations. All the other control circles are included directly in the map image. When drawing your route be sure to visit the Finish ONLY when you have completed your route. That is, the blue line pointing to the Finish should follow you throughout your route.

You need to enter your name and total time in MMMSS format before drawing your route. For example, 60:52 is entered as 6052.

For the animation, each competitor's speed is averaged out over the whole length of their route. For Score-O this works out just fine as competitors often end up taking very different routes anyway.

To see other RouteGadget events worldwide, visit http://www.routegadget.net

I am currently the map coordinator for LAOC. I've been to Mountain Home State Forest several times. It's a beautiful forest, but more than 4 hours from LA, and very remote from the nearest non-camping accomodations. Those who went would really love it, but the distance and limited type of accomodation would likely limit numbers.

I didn't find that I 'recognized' the control sites or any specific areas while orienteering this weekend. More than 1 visit might make a difference. I'd probably want to wait a couple of years before going back for an A-meet. I don't see a problem with using an area every ~3 years for an A-meet, especially one that is large enough to spread the courses around from event to event.

As for this Jackson place that is supposedly 3 hours away... that doesn't seem too far. People are willing to drive from the Bay Area to Tahoe (I usually even fly into SF instead of Reno), so what's 3 hours? On the other hand, maybe with the Tahoe maps, Boggs, and that other nice place you can just keep up a nice rotation...

OK - so I found some pictures of Mountain Home State Forest here
It looks pretty awesome to me.

So to pose a question - what would be the best barebones orienteering event you could think of holding there. I'm assuming it only gets used one or two times, so you can't afford a full-on field checked mapped. I'm also assuming that the event directors don't want to spend their lives in a car, so the meet setup should be doable in 2-3 weekends. With those constraints, what would your event look like?

Forget about A-meets. I feel like California's got too much stunning terrain to ignore just because it wouldn't work for an A-meet.

I may be wrong but my guess is a non A-meet on a less than professionally checked map, 4-5 hours away from the Bay Area would draw few participants. This would be probably be the case despite otherwise great terrain.

If we're talking mapping areas 5+ hours away, I have pipe dreams about that scrumptious Southern Oregon terrain between Medford and Crater Lake.

George - you have a point. It probably wouldn't draw the current a-meet audience.

But it seems to me that if we need to depend on people to fly from all around the country to attend our events, than something isn't right. On any given weekend, I know 10 or 12 people who are driving to Yosemite or Shasta or some other place like that. The road to Tahoe is crowded with tens of thousands of cars every weekend. A sustainable event would need to tap into that audience.

So I think that provides another constraint on the type of event you would need to design: it must be appealing to casual orienteers. So technical difficulty is probably not a priority. Scenic local, post race festivities, and tall tales of adventure are probably more crucial.

I think that Rex(Terraloco) tried something similar to this with some success at Joshua Tree. So maybe it could work. I'm pretty sure the club would support you if you wanted to do it.

Probably needs lots of lead time to drum up interest.

In reply to Tundra's original post, I ran in both the 2007 and 2009 A meets, and I was certainly very aware of having visited certain areas of the map before. To which extent it aided my navigation is very difficult to judge.

I do consider it poor taste to have repeated controls within the same meet (Middle 2010 Control 14 / 2010 Sprint Control 10). But I didn't run the sprint, so it didn't affect me.