The Joys & Pleasures of Cycling on Trails

"Blackblade" wrote in message ...

Edward Dolan wrote:

I am not much for anecdotes either, but when they are all
saying the same thing, you have to sit up and take notice. Note that many of my
reports are not overwhelmingly against bikes on trails. Like you, some of them
believe it is possible to compromise. They are merely reporting their
experiences.

They are indeed ... and, as you say, many are far less extreme than you. However, I refer you to your own point ... what about all the people who DON'T have any negative experiences ? They are just as valid in understanding what is going on BUT they won't write anything will they ?

This is why, to get a real perspective, you have to ask EVERYONE ... or at least a reasonable sample of everyone ... otherwise you are never going to get the broad picture.

It is only necessary to get input from serious hikers and equestrians. The vast majority of people using the trails will never report anything. They are like sheep and will go along to get along. In short, they don’t count. Who counts are those who are protesting the depredations of bikers on trails. There are more than enough of them to count for something serious.

You are so far out of the loop that you simply have no idea what is going on in the arena of trail conflicts. Your ignorance of the issues is abysmal. Why not read the following to get some clues. It relates to the late great state of California and not so to some backwoods area of England where apparently according to you all is tranquility.


To California State Park Director Major General Anthony Jackson,

The California State Park Commissioners,

Resource Directors

PLEASE DO SOMETHING NOW!
MOUNT DIABLO STATE PARK IS WRITING THE ROAD AND TRAIL PLAN AS I WRITE
THIS! *******

Where as:
1. I have a reasonable expectation to feel safe while on a trail in a
California State Park.

Note the difference between Ca. State Parks, Ca. State Recreation
Areas, and Off Road Vehicle Parks.

I should be able to be on a trail in a Ca. State Park and not feel
that a mountain bike rider will be speeding at me around the next
turn, or coming at me from behind. Increased documented accidents
nation wide show this to be a risky mix. Let us risk rattle snakes,
poison oak, steep trails, but NOT reckless behavior from other
people! That should NOT be happening in our State Parks. Lack of law
enforcement to deal with the unlawful bike riders has led to
displacement of other Park users who no longer feel SAFE on the
trails. Bird watching a thing of the past? Elderly folks forced to
dodge mechanical forward motion propelled metal "weapons" with riders
dressed to crash and burn? This is reality and what a shame.
At many of the trail entrances in Ca. State Parks there are signs
cautioning the presence of Rattle Snakes. Park officials must know
that the trails are being over run by renegade mountain bikers, which
is a more likely encounter than a Rattle Snake! They simply act as if
they don't know about this SAFETY HAZARD. If they were to acknowledge
it there would be warning sings cautioning the likely-hood of
engaging a speeding cyclist. By ignoring this safety hazard they are
blatantly setting themselves up for a class action lawsuit.

2. I have a reasonable expectation when I visit a Ca. State Park that
I may enjoy nature in peace and get away from the hustle and bustle.

When I take my family to the Ca. State Parks and we go out on the
trails I expect to be in nature. We want to see wildlife and leave
the tension of the world behind. We want to be able to stop and close
our eyes and listen to the birds singing and smell the fresh sages.
We do not want to worry about a speeding mountain biker coming at us.
We found that ruins the experience. We do not want to keep our guard
up. Ca. State Parks needs to revise their mission statement from
providing recreation to providing wreckreation. They are displacing
the "old fashioned" user groups for this new group that wants extreme
experiences of thrill.

3. I have a reasonable expectation that resources will be protected
in a Ca. State Parks.

Along with providing recreation it is the mission of Ca. State Parks
to protect resources. The land, waters, animals, plants, everything
in Ca. State Parks is supposed to be protected. Recreation should
take a back seat to resource destruction. The health of the parkland
is dependent on good decisions that protect the parks looking seven
generations ahead. State Parks are charged with this important
obligation. Illegal trail building by mountain bikers is common in
the Ca. State Park system. Built often along creeks and other water
ways displaying complete disregard for cut down trees. They build
bridges and jumps. Trails are popping up faster than they can be
recorded. Proper trail maintenance of trails helps with resource
protection. Trail crews should devote their time to maintaining
trails and not covering up the illegally constructed ones. It must be
impossible to keep up with the added work or those illegal trails
would be dealt with. They are not.

4. I have a reasonable expectation that Ca. State Parks Staff Leaders
will look ahead to the future as far as seven generations and make
decisions accordingly.

Do not open up the "flood waters" please. I understand Mount Diablo
State Park is being reviewed for adding more multi use
trails. Mountain Bikes in Ca. State Parks should be kept to dirt
roads. Developing multi use trails will only invite more illegal use
in the back country of parks. There are websites that must be
visited to prove my point. Go to YouTube videos enter Mount Diablo
Downhill, extreme mountain biking. You will see the proof boasted by
the violators themselves. Enter the name of a trail not open to
mountain bikers and watch as wildlife and people run for their lives.
The camera shows cross country riding and bikers flipping off Rangers
in a video or two. Visit STRVA a site dedicated to promote speed
competition. This is happening right now on Ca. State Park trails and
dirt roads. People want to be "King of the Mountain" and be the
fastest recorded using GPS. With this knowledge it would be a huge
mistake to ignore these warnings.The situation is already out of control.
Offer Ca. State Park Recreation Areas to mountain bike enthusiasts
and keep them off the trails in Ca. State Parks.
Stand strong in your mission to keep park visitors safe and resources
protected as you have been charged to do by the people of California.

Sincerely, Sue Schwartz
Please reply back through email



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

"Blackblade" wrote in message ...
[...]
Edward Dolan wrote:

Both facts and logic back me up. As a resource becomes overused
it is destroyed. The parks will frequently close various areas so they can be
renewed by mother nature. Even too many hikers can destroy a resource and make
it not worth hiking.

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.

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. Bikers maintaining trails trails are a huge headache for the park managers. They are essentially nothing but desecrators of trails. Have you not read my many reports which show exactly what bikers are doing with respect to trails?
[...]

You've not made any case to conclude that mountainbiking is simply
wrong. You might believe it, but that doesn't make it true.

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. They are killing themselves through their own willful stupidity. And since you support biking on trails, you are an accessory to the killing. I am as innocent and as pure as a Great Saint – which in fact is what I am! The only hooligan here is you.

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. Clearly, runners and bikers are not there for that purpose. I suggest you leave off on the subject of logic since you seem not to underatnd it at all. Philosophy 101.

Crowded trails, whether by bikers or hikers, are always going to
be an issue that needs to be managed. I think all the statistics suggest
biking is going to continue to grow relative to hiking ...

If bikers grow numerous on trails they will conflict with one
another and that will be the end of it. Hikers seldom if ever conflict with one
another.

Completely untrue. Get too many people, whatever they're doing, in one crowded space and conflicts will arise.

Nope, you can walk down a busy street in London or New York and there is no conflict at all with other walkers. The same goes for trails. On the other hand a bike tour like the Iowa RAGBRAI (some 10,000 cyclists) is on roads and there will frequently be conflicts because they are running into one another. There is much less room for cyclists on trails then there is on roads.

The problem is also yours since all serious hikers think and
feel the way I do.

No, Ed, they don't. A tiny minority of extremists think as
you do ... the majority are much more reasonable. Many people hike and
bike.

Casual hikers hardly know what is happening. Serious hikers
know what is happening and strenuously object. Try to get real!
[...]

Here in Minnesota we have an excellent system of bike trails
based on old railroad beds. You don't need any special bike to ride them and you
can still enjoy a natural environment. All you have to give up is any thought of
off-road and wilderness single track riding. These bike trails are so pleasant
that only a nut case would want to ride off of them.

Way to wander off track there Ed. The point was whether more, or less, trails were becoming open to bikes. In the UK, I can state for a fact that it's more .. I don't have the data for the US but your mate Vandeman was complaining about the amount of new trails being created so I suspect the situation is the same there too. Your point is refuted.

It is a pendulum which is beginning to swing back now. I suggest you practice your walking skills because your biking days on trails are numbered.

As to your point about the trails in Minnesota ... stop being so authoritarian and hubristic. You may believe that these trails are the best thing ever to ride .. they sound fairly boring to me and far too close to a road experience. You don't get to decide what other people enjoy doing.

Only hooligans like you ever want to ride off-road on a single track trail meant for hikers. If you are bored by cycling on a road, then get off your god damn ****ing bike and walk a trail like everyone else, However I suspect that bores you too. Why not stay home and find a hobby that does not bore you. Christ, now I have heard everything ... biking on a road is too boring! When are you ever going to stop being such a jackass! Society has every right to restrict your cycling to roads. Mr. Vandeman and I are working to make that happen.

More bad news from the trenches for idiots like Blackblade who maintain there are no conflicts worth mentioning. Everything to him is just a number (data). Why not try to tell that to this gentleman who now has a broken leg due to a mountain biker.

Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 21:23:14 -0700
Subject: MTBer blamed for injury to horse rider (accident March 25, 2014)
From: Karen Sullivan


http://www.socaltrailriders.org/foru...to-horse-rider

SAN JAUN CAPISTRANO - A 71-year-old man had to be rescued by
helicopter Tuesday after being thrown from a horse while riding in a
remote section of Caspers Wilderness Park.
The man, who wasn't identified, was knocked unconscious and possibly
fractured a femur in the mishap that occurred around 2:40 p.m., said
Orange County Fire Authority Capt. Steve Concialdi.
The horse got spooked by a mountain biker, he said. A woman who was
riding with the man called 911.
An OCFA's helicopter lowered two urban search and rescue firefighters
down to the man. He was then placed on a backboard and in a Stokes
Basket and hoisted to the helicopter, Concialdi said.
The helicopter then picked up two firefighter/paramedics from a nearby
ridge and flew all on board to Mission Hospital in Mission Viejo.
The man underwent surgery at the hospital, but information about his
condition was not available Tuesday night.


http://sanjuancapistrano.patch.com/g...out-of-caspers


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

"Phil W Lee" wrote in message ...
[...]

More likely he's [Ed Dolan] nutty enough to go and provoke some conflict to prove
it happens, just like his hero the convict vandalman did.

There is no point in going over old ground (Mike Vandeman) which has already been gone over many times on these bicycle newsgroups. All trail conflicts are due to bikers being on trails which they have no business being on. Elementary my dear Watson!
[...]

I don't know. He makes a very good case for confining hikers to paved "trails" as
well. Got to protect that wilderness from human damage, after all.

That is an issue that Mr. Vandeman disposed of long ago. My concern is trail conflict among users. Try to get up to speed if that is even remotely possible.

Blackblade wrote:

As to your point about the trails in Minnesota ... stop being so authoritarian and hubristic. You may believe that these trails are the best thing ever to ride .. they sound fairly boring to me and far too close to a road experience. You don't get to decide what other people enjoy doing.

I'm guessing that he refuses to use any of the trails there himself,
as only historical use is acceptable in his eyes, and he is both shod
and of non native American descent.
Although the last point may be uncertain (he'd need to ask potentially
embarrassing questions of his female antecedents to have any chance of
knowing himself), I bet he doesn't hike those trails in moccasins.
And maybe he should remember that it was an Irishman who invented the
pneumatic tyre, not an Englishman. If the brogue fits :-)

You guess wrong as you do about most everything. Historical use means recent usage since the establishment of the National Parks. We need not go back any further than that. The Western world with its trails has been created and organized for Western Man and does not relate even remotely to primitive Indian savages any more than it does to animals on four legs. Biker use of single track trails happened like yesterday and there is no tradition of such usage, which is a good enough reason to keep things the way they were.

The fact is that bikers on trails are interlopers who destroy the traditional trail experience (appreciation of nature) for all. The bikers (and the land managers who permit this desecration) should be brought up before courts of law and administered a good horse whipping for their criminal behavior and thereafter be permanently banned from ever entering into a pristine outdoors environment under any circumstances for the rest of their miserable lives. Let them ride their off-road contraptions in abandoned city dumps where they can consort with their true fellow beings on this earth – rats and cockroaches.

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

This is why, to get a real perspective, you have to
ask EVERYONE ... or at least a reasonable sample of everyone ... otherwise you
are never going to get the broad picture.

It is only necessary to get input from serious hikers and
equestrians.

Very funny ... and totally idiotic. I know, let's ask only pedestrians and cyclists whether cars should be permitted on roads !

You want to ask one small user group only if all user groups should have access ...

The vast majority of people using the trails will never report
anything.

Indeed ... because there are very few conflicts and the vast majority have no problem with sharing. Your small, vocal, minority is just that ... a small minority.

You are so far out of the loop that you simply have no idea
what is going on in the arena of trail conflicts. Your ignorance of the issues
is abysmal.

I'm here liaising with you and asking you to backup your opinions with some real data ... but you can't. As such, I've given you the opportunity to provide convincing argument to refute my position but you can't. You cite thousands of conflicts, then can't back it up. You cite thousands of complaints, then can't back it up.

My personal experience is of no conflict ... and I've ridden twice a week for three years now in this area.

Why not read the following to get some clues.

Because it's one person's opinion.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

Way to wander off track there Ed.* The point was
whether more, or less, trails were becoming open to bikes.* In the UK, I
can state for a fact that it's more .. I don't have the data for the US but your
mate Vandeman was complaining about the amount of new trails being created so I
suspect the situation is the same there too.* Your point is
refuted.

It is a pendulum which is beginning to swing back now. I
suggest you practice your walking skills because your biking days on trails are
numbered.

It's very difficult to predict ... especially the future :-). We will see won't we ?

As to your point about the trails in Minnesota ...
stop being so authoritarian and hubristic.* You may believe that these
trails are the best thing ever to ride .. they sound fairly boring to me and far
too close to a road experience.* You don't get to decide what other people
enjoy doing.

Only hooligans like you ever want to ride off-road on a single
track trail meant for hikers.

Ah, back to ad-hominem again I see. Just because I enjoy riding my bike in a natural environment does not make me a hooligan Ed. Although you may beg to differ.

If you are bored by cycling on a road, then get
off your god damn ****ing bike and walk a trail like everyone else, However I
suspect that bores you too.

Why don't you just walk on pavement in the city then Ed ? Is that the same experience ? I don't think so.

Why not stay home and find a hobby that does not
bore you.

I have many, many hobbies which don't bore me ... including mountainbiking.

Society has every
right to restrict your cycling to roads. Mr. Vandeman and I are working to make
that happen.

Society does, you don't. And society is mostly not comprised by extremists like you and instead rather more moderate people who accept that a public resource cannot simply be annexed solely for their preferred mode of recreation.

As such, I'm pretty confident that your efforts will continue to be in vain, as they have been for the past 20 years.

More bad news from the trenches for idiots like Blackblade who
maintain there are no conflicts worth mentioning. Everything to him is just a
number (data). Why not try to tell that to this gentleman who now has a broken
leg due to a mountain biker.

No, he has a broken leg because an unfortunate co-incidence of mountainbiker and horse occurred. This is not a common occurrence.

On Mon, 14 Apr 2014 17:55:07 +0100, Phil W Lee
wrote:

Blackblade considered Mon, 14 Apr 2014
03:54:39 -0700 (PDT) the perfect time to write:

This is why, to get a real perspective, you have to
ask EVERYONE ... or at least a reasonable sample of everyone ... otherwise you
are never going to get the broad picture.

It is only necessary to get input from serious hikers and
equestrians.

Very funny ... and totally idiotic. I know, let's ask only pedestrians and cyclists whether cars should be permitted on roads !

You want to ask one small user group only if all user groups should have access ...

The vast majority of people using the trails will never report
anything.

Indeed ... because there are very few conflicts and the vast majority have no problem with sharing. Your small, vocal, minority is just that ... a small minority.

You are so far out of the loop that you simply have no idea
what is going on in the arena of trail conflicts. Your ignorance of the issues
is abysmal.

I'm here liaising with you and asking you to backup your opinions with some real data ... but you can't. As such, I've given you the opportunity to provide convincing argument to refute my position but you can't. You cite thousands of conflicts, then can't back it up. You cite thousands of complaints, then can't back it up.

My personal experience is of no conflict ... and I've ridden twice a week for three years now in this area.

Why not read the following to get some clues.

Because it's one person's opinion.

It's good to wind the extremists up though so that their views get
aired and their real agenda exposed.
This has the benefit that no politician (who ultimately decide on such
things as access to the trails) would touch them or their extremist
views with a barge-pole.

After all, the main purpose of a politician is to get re-elected, and
aligning themselves with criminals and extremists almost guarantees
defeat the next time around.

Logic and the bigot :-)
--
Cheers,

John B.

"Blackblade" wrote in message ...

This is why, to get a real perspective, you have to
ask EVERYONE ... or at least a reasonable sample of everyone ... otherwise you
are never going to get the broad picture.

Edward Dolan wrote:

It is only necessary to get input from serious hikers and
equestrians.

Very funny ... and totally idiotic. I know, let's ask only pedestrians and cyclists whether cars should be permitted on roads !

You want to ask one small user group only if all user groups should have access ...

Yes, since all recent groups, such as mountain bikers, are essentially nothing but interlopers and are not welcomed by the traditional users. Extreme democracy is for idiots. It is only serious intellectuals like Mr. Vandeman and Myself that ever need to be asked anything even remotely connected to trails. Mountain bikers should never be asked anything not related to their dumb asses since that is where their brains are located.

The vast majority of people using the trails will never report
anything.

Indeed ... because there are very few conflicts and the vast majority have no problem with sharing. Your small, vocal, minority is just that .... a small minority.

The ONLY minority that counts!

You are so far out of the loop that you simply have no idea
what is going on in the arena of trail conflicts. Your ignorance of the issues
is abysmal.

I'm here liaising with you and asking you to backup your opinions with some real data ... but you can't. As such, I've given you the opportunity to provide convincing argument to refute my position but you can't. You cite thousands of conflicts, then can't back it up. You cite thousands of complaints, then can't back it up.

The conflicts and complaints themselves are the only data that matter to me since it is intelligent data, not dumb data like yours.

My personal experience is of no conflict ... and I've ridden twice a week for three years now in this area.

You are living in a backwater and simply have no clues about what is happening in the real world. California is the state where everything happens first and the rest of the world follows.

Why not read the following to get some clues.

Because it's one person's opinion.

If no one has ever told you that you are an idiot, I am telling you now. No charge! I am telling you what you are out of the goodness of My Great Sainthood.

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

"Phil W Lee" wrote in message ...
[...]

It's good to wind the extremists up though so that their views get
aired and their real agenda exposed.
This has the benefit that no politician (who ultimately decide on such
things as access to the trails) would touch them or their extremist
views with a barge-pole.

After all, the main purpose of a politician is to get re-elected, and
aligning themselves with criminals and extremists almost guarantees
defeat the next time around.

Politicians have a very loose grasp of what is ever happening on the ground. It is the land managers (bureaucrats) who determine almost everything that we can and can’t do. The only criminals and extremists I know about about are mountain bikers.

When land mangers start getting law suits from all sides it will be an eye opener for them. The notion that hikers and bikers can share trails is on the face of it absurd. The real problem is that the land managers are idiots. They will have to be educated ... just as everyone else will have to be educated too.

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

"John B." wrote in message ...

On Mon, 14 Apr 2014 17:55:07 +0100, Phil W Lee
wrote:
[...]

It's good to wind the extremists up though so that their views get
aired and their real agenda exposed.
This has the benefit that no politician (who ultimately decide on such
things as access to the trails) would touch them or their extremist
views with a barge-pole.

After all, the main purpose of a politician is to get re-elected, and
aligning themselves with criminals and extremists almost guarantees
defeat the next time around.

Logic and the bigot :-)

**** you too Asshole!

Post content or get lost. What an Asshole!

Now go **** yourself and quit bothering the honorable members of this noble newsgroup.

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