Ah, at last, we can cut to the chase. The issue has very
little to do with mountainbikes vs hikers ... if there were 17 hikers also on
that trail they would have caused similar levels of erosion.

I note also that this guy concedes that he did not feel threatened
or endangered.

There are always saps in the world who do mind being pushed
aside provided it is done with politeness. Mr. Vandeman is the expert on who
causes what kind of erosion. I am the expert on who should be on a trail in the
first place. It has to do with purpose, not who causes the most erosion.

What expertise do you have Ed ? I see none aside from your own prejudice.

If you don't have an issue on the grounds of erosion, which is what the article is about, and there isn't an issue on the grounds of conflict between users then what, precisely, are you objecting to ?

There is absolutely an issue ... we have to preserve the natural
environment for future generations. My argument with you is that you seem
to believe that hiking is entirely beneficial and mountainbiking harmful.
The facts are that they are both activities which cause similar levels of
erosion and there have to be user limits if we are not to destroy the things we
love.



I suppose you would think that motorcycles and all-terrain
vehicles would also cause "similar" levels of erosion.

No, Ed, the research suggests that hikers and bikers cause similar levels of erosion ... horses and powered vehicles cause far far more.

Mountain bikers are barbarians and have no right to be on any trail used by
hikers - rant snipped

I get it .. you don't like mountainbikers. You don't need to re-post the same text incessantly ... it just makes you look foolish.