"Blackblade" wrote in message ...

Exactly ... why should bikers specifically behave in
any different way to hikers in terms of protecting trails and the trail
experience ? Do bikers not turn out, in general rather more than hikers,
to maintain trails ? The answer to these questions, of course, is that
they don't and they do.

Edward Dolan wrote:

This business about bikers maintaining trails is the biggest
laugh ever to come down the pike. What bikers do is use that as an excuse so
they can build their own outlaw trails designed for only one thing - biking.

At least they're doing something to protect and maintain the experience for others. You're doing nothing and castigating others, who are prepared to put something in, for unsurprisingly favouring their own activity when doing that work.

Nonsense, I pay my taxes some of which some goes for taking care of parks and trails.

It is wrong to do it on trails used by hikers because
there is
a conflict of purpose among other conflicts. Only
hooligans have no regard for
others.

Then that, clearly, makes you a hooligan by your own
definition. You've stated, again and again, that you don't care one jot
for mountainbikers and rejoice when they are killed and injured.

Well Hells Bells, I am not killing them.

I didn't accuse you of doing so. You said "only hooligans have no regard for others" and then clearly demonstrated that you, yourself, have no regard for a whole section of the trail using population. You are therefore, by your own definition, a hooligan.

Hoist on your own petard.

You must learn how to read properly. Everything I say must be taken in the context of what is being discussed. Those who bike on trails are clearly hooligans. Those who oppose this are as the saints in heaven. All the bikers have to do is stop biking on trails and then, and only then, will I regard them as human beings and not hooligans. However, I do not waste much time having regard for others, but at least I do not trespass where I am not wanted. It is the difference between not having a positive and having a negative perspective.

Your purpose argument was shot down long ago.
You want to ban trail runners simply because they are there for a different
purpose. Your fundamental premise has no logic.

The logic could not be more clear and direct. You are only
entitled to be on trails only if you there for the purpose of appreciating
nature.

Says who ? You ???? !!! I think you will find, if you can be bothered to read, that public spaces are constituted for the public and wildlife.

Too general. Specifically, trails are for hikers and equestrians. There are other public spaces that are used for other things. It is a question of how spaces are managed for various purposes.

So, your restriction on purpose is something you've come up with, to suit your own ends, and which is entirely valueless.

Purpose determines most things in life. Trail destruction by bikers and wildlife disturbance are actually minor issues to most trail users.. Admittedly, you have to have intelligence in order to get your priorities right. I guess this lets you out of deciding of what is important and what is trivial.

The park managers, who you continually castigate, are doing precisely what they are supposed to do; balancing public demand for access and recreation and the protection of the environment and wildlife. There is zero reason why they would ever apply your purpose test ... it's not an objective and nor should it be.

Park managers have been led astray by outside pressures. Bureaucrats are famous worldwide for never having any guts. They are cowards to the core.

The purpose of why you are doing anything cuts to the quick of the problem of what trails are for. They are indeed for recreation, but only of a particular kind. They cannot be all things to all people. The ever increasing conflicts prove this without any doubt whatsoever.

What bikers are doing on trails is entirely different from what hikers are doing on trails. You need to ask yourself what a single track trail is for. If it is not for exactly the same thing that serious hikers think it is for, then you have no business being on it.

Frankly, my hiking days are over for various medical reasons. I can no longer walk all that good. And so the trails are no longer for me. I can accept that. Trails were never meant for bikers. Why can’t you accept that? Because you can’t accept it, you are destroying an experience that has been a rich source of enjoyment for several generations of hikers. Like most folks these days, you only know how to destroy, not how to create.

Mountain bikers are barbarians and have no right to be on any trail used by hikers – unless they want to get off their god damn ****ing bikes and walk like everyone else. When they crash and injure themselves, I rejoice! If and when they manage to kill themselves, I say good riddance to bad rubbish! Death to mountain bikers!

“Tread softly! All the earth is holy ground.”
~ Christina Rossetti (Psalm 24),
from "A Later Life: A Double Sonnet of Sonnets"

Mountain bikes have wheels. Wheels are for roads.

Trails are for walking. What’s the matter? Can’t walk?

Ed Dolan the Great
aka
Saint Edward the Great