On Monday, August 5, 2013 4:44:20 PM UTC+12, Mike Vandeman wrote:
On Sunday, August 4, 2013 6:00:47 PM UTC-7, I love Mike wrote:

On Saturday, August 3, 2013 5:58:19 PM UTC+12, Mike Vandeman wrote:



On Monday, July 22, 2013 4:57:53 PM UTC-7, I love Mike wrote:







See second paragraph below from Vandeman, which was on this group:































Mike Vandeman















Jul 20















On Saturday, June 15, 2013 5:44:12 PM UTC-7,































I love Mike wrote: I have challenged you before to provide peer reviewed scientific evidence that mountain biking in damaging NZs natural environment. You have come up with nothing to support your claims. There are reason for this.































Yeah, the reason is that no one in New Zealand CARES enough to study the negative impacts of mountain biking. All you care about is MONEY! By the way, how are the moa and thylacine doing lately? Learn something about your own endangered species: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/ar...ectid=10797165































As illustrated by Vandeman suggesting the thylacine (or tasmanian tiger) was in New Zealand it is obvious Vandeman is a lightweight when it comes to science and environmental issues. In case you don't know Tasmania is not part of New Zealand. It is in Australia.































More importantly if Vandeman had bothered to read about New Zealand's environmental issues from the scientific community he would quickly discover that the impact of introduced mammals - namely possums, rats, cats and ungulates are the main concerns regarding New Zealand's native biodiversity (I have told of this before numerous times). What's more none of the species in the article Vandeman has provided are directly impacted by mountain biking . Kakapo, for example, are only found in offshore islands which are basically off limits to humans.































Interestingly what Vandeman won't tell you is that there is actually growing support for more mountain biking in New Zealand's natural areas (ie national parks) from environmental groups and recreationists. The rationale behind this is that people want additional recreational experiences and the negative impact of mountain biking is more imagined than real according to research from our Department of Conservation.































To me it is obvious that Vandeman, although he pretends to be a scientist is nothing more than an extremist who clearly believes in his own agenda rather than scientific facts. The unfortunate outcome of Vandeman's extremism and irrationality is that he gives the environmental movement a bad name.







No response but I am not surprised. You just look like an idiot asking me how the thyalcine and moa are going! To repeat my point - Tasmania is not part of New Zealand. It is in Australia. Duhhhhhhhhhhh...............



Non sequitur. Tell us again that whopper about the laws of physics and biology being different in New Zealand from everywhere else (including Australia)!

And finally your argument is also irrelevant as Mountain biking is not allowed in New Zealand's national parks with a few exceptions. For example, you can only mountain bike the Heaphy track during winter. Essentially New Zealands parks are for hikers and hunters - a point who seem to miss in your rants regarding biology and physics.

The redwoods forest park in Rotorua, which you have commented on previously much to the amusement of mountain bike riders in New Zealand is a not a natural area or a national park. It is predominantly a plantation forest that is privately owned and doesn't contain much biodiversity of significance. What's more there are specific tracks for mountain bikers and walkers so the conflicts you mention are more imagined than real.

Are you embarrassed enough old chum?