"Blackblade" wrote in message ...

Edward Dolan wrote:

There are plenty of roads everywhere which get little traffic
and are ideal for cycling. Here in Minnesota we have thousands of miles of
gravel roads with little or no traffic on them. It is best to stay off of
highways on a bike unless the highway has a good, broad shoulder. Elementary
my dear Watson!

Thank you. You have just made exactly my point for me. Substitute ‘roads’ for ‘remote trails’ in the above paragraph and you might get it. The reality is that if there is little or no traffic then there is no issue; and that applies to any road/trail/path. So, by your own admission, sharing clearly does work for some circumstances.

Your problem is that you do not know the difference between a road and a trail, most especially their different purposes. That being the case, your point is pointless!

A runner running is not in the same category as a cyclist
speeding downhill on a single track trail. Elementary my dear
Watson!

I didn’t say they were. I simply pointed out that speed differential was not, ex nihilo, a reason to prohibit traffic.

You are arguing a fine point which borders on being just plain stupid.

I don’t like runners using a trail designed for walking. Are
there no athletic tracks for such an activity. But runners are not using any
mechanical contraption, so I would NOT prohibit them.

But, in taking that stance, are you not accepting that RECREATION is a valid use of the trail ?

Contemplation and appreciation of nature is the ONLY valid recreational use of a trail. There are other venues for other recreational uses.

I don’t give a damn about damage to the trails. That is for
Mr. Vandeman. He is the expert on that subject, not mountain bikers like you who only want to justify your desecrations.

Then why raise it as an issue ? You opined that motorcycles could make the same claim as mountainbikes for trail access to support a ‘slippery slope’ type argument. I simply refuted such a conjugation with proof regarding the massive difference. Let’s stay on topic.

You are unable to read between the lines or make any sensible deductions on your own. I am not used to arguing with a childish literally minded mentality. I raised the motorcycle issue not as an example of damage to the trails, but as an example of a totally inappropriate use because it is a mechanical contrivance which goes fast (speed differential) and makes one hell of a lot of noise into the bargain. Bicycles fall into the same category and are only slightly less noisy. Until we agree on what trails are for, there can never be an agreement on anything else.
[...]

Bikers are using a mechanical contrivance, namely a bicycle,
Runners are not using anything other than their two legs. Think of it as fast
walking. Even so runners are there for a stupid reason, the same as cyclists.
Glad I was able to clear that up for you. Elementary my dear
Watson!

And ? So you don’t like runners either, but you wouldn’t ban them.

“Bikers are using a mechanical contrivance, namely a bicycle,
Runners are not using anything other than their two legs. Think of it as fast
walking. Even so runners are there for a stupid reason, the same as cyclists.” - Ed Dolan
[...]

The best solution is understanding of the other person’s point of view and some degree of accommodation. Bikers should, in my opinion, concede that not all trails should be open for mountainbikes; there does need to be space for quiet contemplation of nature and there are areas way too sensitive to permit much access at all. On the other hand, hikers should concede that in most cases mountainbike use is an equitable use of scarce natural resources.

Your argument would only make some sense if there was a shortage of roads. Plenty of fire roads and forestry roads for cyclists to ride.
[...]

You need to check into what mountain biking advocacy organizations are up to.
Better yet, look in on their blogs and their social groups. They are simply
thugs who have more testosterone than they know what to do with. Whenever they
manage to kill themselves cycling on hiking trails, I rejoice. It is good
riddance to bad rubbish!

So, you want to characterise 50m US citizens as ‘thugs’. Nice stereotyping… and complete balderdash.

Most folks who have mountain bikes do not ride them on single track trails. It is only a minority of cretins who do that. And when we hikers object to seeing them on our trails, then they act like the thugs that they are. All hikers should be packing a concealed firearm for their own safety.

On the other hand, if you really wanted to educate yourself,
why not look in on some hiking and equestrian groups. There you will at least
find some signs of intelligence, good breeding and civilization.

I AM a hiker; just one who also mountainbikes.

Land managers everywhere are starting to ban cycling from the
trails they manage in parks and natural areas. Soon mountain biking will be
confined to the least attractive natural areas, the kind that don’t appeal much
to hikers. I would direct mountain bikers to abandoned city dumps, their true
home. There they could consort with the rats and cockroaches, their true
neighbors.

Ah, so that’s why Scotland is now completely open to mountainbikes and Vandeman is doing his nut with the increasing number of areas permitting riding ? /sarcasm

Who knows why Europeans do the things they do? All I know is that it is an issue here in the States that is never going to go away until mountain bikers are severely limited as to where they can commit their desecrations.

Nope, you have aligned yourself with mountain bikers and the
worst kind, those who desecrate hiking trails for their own small amusements.
It’s disgraceful and shameful.

I have aligned myself with no-one. I stand by my comments; there is nothing ‘shameful and disgraceful’ in advocating a rational, equitable approach to SHARING resources.

You want to ’share’ what you have no right to in the first instance. Get your own trails. Hiking trails are for hikers.

Ed Dolan the Great
aka
Saint Edward the Great