Thank you for proving my point. Over time,
usage has changed hence there is absolutely no justification for selecting one
particular period and stating that usage has to be frozen to meet the needs of
that period only.

Yet again, you are forced to concede that there is no
rational justification for your position ... simply your prejudice.

I don't care about the ancient history of trails. It is not
relevant to what is being discussed. It is what trails have been used for since
the establishment of the National Parks (Yellowstone NP in 1872) that interests
me. Prior to that event, there was very little in the way of trekking as a
tourist industry. However the period from the late 1800s to almost 2000
with respect to trails was given over entirely to hikers and equestrians. That
is the way it should remain until the end of time, provided any natural areas
and wilderness can even be preserved. The main danger to all natural areas are
not mountain bikes, but development.

That's right Ed. Bring up a topic, lose the argument that you've started, and then hop off to the next assertion without facts.

There is absolutely NO objective justification for this position. You simply happen to like what pertained during this period ... that's not any kind of basis to allocate PUBLIC resources.

I did ... but since you are irrational about bikes on
trails to little avail. You already conceded that by simply being there a
bike would disturb you. That's not rational !

You want a compromise which is simply a surrender to your
idiocy. I am rational to the core ... and you are a nut!

No, I'm not asking you to surrender ... I'm asking you to at least be honest. The fact that YOUR mind-state is affected negatively by the mere presence of a bike on a trail, irrespective of whether there is any kind of interaction whatsoever, is clearly irrational. Dictionary definition

adjective: irrational

1.not logical or reasonable.
"irrational feelings of hostility"
synonyms: unreasonable, illogical, groundless, baseless, unfounded, unjustifiable, unsound

I was not referencing the entire UK, but only your small
backwater.

My 'backwater' is within a hour's commute of London
! Try again.

England is like New Jersey, only worse.

You know, once in a while, when you lose it might be politic to admit such. I assume that you wouldn't call New Jersey a 'backwater' ? Hence, I assume you concede the point that I am not commenting from the perspective of a 'backwater' as you opined earlier.

You're never going to learn are you ? I suppose
that's because all you have are opinion pieces. Any proper research shows
the true situation ... which doesn't suit your agenda at all.

You are the one with an agenda. I only want what was always
available until very recently.

Why should I care what you want ? You clearly don't care about what I want..

My agenda is that I want 'reasonable' access. Not access everywhere, not mixed use trails everywhere but a reasonable level of access to undertake my preferred activity.

Your agenda is that you want to do what you've always done, everywhere, and to deny everyone who doesn't agree with you any kind of access whatsoever.

You can dress it up any which way you like but this is your fundamental position.

All this blather about "proper research" is pure
baloney. I am presenting reports on what is actually happening in the the real
world. You need to wrap your mind around these reports because they are only
going to grow in number and seriousness.

You are presenting ONLY reports which support your position and, in so doing, presenting a completely biased account of what is going on. Given that the injury and fatality rates are DECLINING what rational basis do you have for declaring that they will grow in number and seriousness ?

The overall statistics show that there are very very few accidents and the tiny handful of reports that you produce have to be compared against the millions of rides happening every day worldwide.

You need to grow up and stop behaving like a spoilt child just presented with a sibling who now wants to share what was, previously, only 'yours'. It never was, just be grateful you had it to yourself for a while and accept that things move on.

Cycling on hiking trails will
eventually be banned because it will be recognized by one and all for the god
damn ****ing nuisance that it is to other trail users.

Hasn't happened yet, unlikely to do so in the future I think. It's not a 'nuisance' ... it's a perfectly valid and healthy use of a public resource.

And the report that you referenced suggests that, in the future, there will be more bikers and less hikers ... so maybe YOU are the nuisance ?