A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Social Issues
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

The Joys & Pleasures of Cycling on Trails



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old February 1st 14, 11:46 PM posted to rec.bicycles.soc
EdwardDolan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 531
Default The Joys & Pleasures of Cycling on Trails

"Phil W Lee" wrote in message ...

Blackblade considered Fri, 31 Jan 2014
03:20:33 -0800 (PST) the perfect time to write:

I've never met a great saint; no, you don't

qualify.

Nonsense, you have met ME via this newsgroup. You probably
know ME now as well as anybody in this world. And you have to admit, I am no
ordinary saint.


You possess none of the attributes of a saint ...


I wouldn't go that far - he IS dead, at least from the neck up.


Better to be dead from the neck up than totally dead – which is what happens to many mountain bikers who take foolish risks by riding their bikes on hiking trails. Some such mountain bikers deserve to die on the trails because they are willfully ignorant of the danger, but others don’t. In fact, most mountain bikers simply don’t know any better about how dangerous it is to ride their bikes on hiking trails. Frankly, I feel sorry for them – especially for women and kids who don’t have a clue.

Actually, the fatality rate ... derived from data

provided by one M J Vandeman ... is 0.00123 per million miles travelled.
So, much safer than driving.

You are quite right about driving being about the most
dangerous thing any of us can do. However, mountain biking is actually quite
dangerous. For every death there are most likely hundreds if not thousands of
injuries. Is that your idea of recreation - to be risking life and
limb?


Yes, am quite prepared to take a relatively low risk in order to be active and enjoy my life. If I fall off, which I do periodically, then I view it philosophically as the price to be paid.

As it's my life and limb I am fully entitled to do so.


Particularly since the level of risk is determined entirely by you.


No one, not even very expert mountain bikers, entirely know what they are doing when they ride their bikes on hiking trails. Why is that? It is because hiking trails are designed for walking, whether humans walking or horses walking. They are not designed for wheels. It is why cyclists need their own trails specially designed for wheels ... and need to stay the hell off of trails for hikers and equestrians.

More bad news from the trenches:

http://www.bicycleretailer.com/retai...s#.UsInhp3TnIU

Mid-Atlantic trails advocate and racer Scott Scudamore dies

Published December 30, 2013
by BRAIN Staff

CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA (BRAIN) * Scott Scudamore, a
mountain bike athlete, advocate, event organizer
and retail store employee, died Dec. 28 from
complications from a mountain bike accident he suffered in September.

Scudamore was retired from a 20-year Air Force
career and 21 years with Hewlett Packard. Besides
being active in the Mid Atlantic Off-Road
Enthusiasts (MORE), he worked part-time at Blue
Ridge Cyclery in Charlottesville and was a member
of IMBA's Regional Leadership Advisory Council.
He competed in triathlons and XTERRA events.

On Sept. 22, Scudamore crashed while mountain
biking with his wife, son-in-law, granddaughter
and other friends at Bryce Mountain ski resort in
Basye, Virginia. The crash left him paralyzed
below his neck. Although he made progress in
rehab in the fall, in recent weeks he struggled
with infection, delirium, and ultimately
pneumonia, according to a note left by his family
on Scudfries.org, a website set up to support him following the crash.

The family said there be two viewings at Thacker
Brothers Lake Monticello Funeral Home in Palmyra,
Virginia. The first will be Friday from 6-8 p.m.
The second will be Saturday, from 9 a.m – noon.

A funeral service will follow the viewing on
Saturday at 3 p.m. at Grace And Glory Lutheran
Church (683 Thomas Jefferson Parkway, Palmyra, Virginia.)

In lieu of flowers the Scudamores asked friends
to donate to one of Scudamore's favorite
charities, Trails for Youth or the Lake Monticello Volunteer Rescue Squad.”


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


Ads
  #32  
Old February 1st 14, 11:58 PM posted to rec.bicycles.soc
EdwardDolan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 531
Default The Joys & Pleasures of Cycling on Trails

"Blackblade" wrote in message ...
[...]

Edward Dolan wrote:

What difference does it make (to quote our illustrious
Hillary)? BMX and road biking have nothing to do with our issue.


The difference Ed is that you were trying to be misleading ... by selectively quoting very small parts of quite a long report. So, no, the report YOU MENTIONED does not just include Mountain Biking. It includes a whole bunch of information.


I only focused on the part comparing mountain biking with hiking. None of the rest of the crap there interested me. The only one here who is attempting to mislead is you. Try to keep your focus on the issue that is under discussion ... which is that mountain biking can’t compare to hiking in terms of popularity. Mountain biking ranked low on the list.

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

  #33  
Old February 2nd 14, 12:09 AM posted to rec.bicycles.soc
EdwardDolan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 531
Default The Joys & Pleasures of Cycling on Trails

"Blackblade" wrote in message ...

Well, as you have already in this thread caught yourself out by not

bothering to read the report that YOU cited .. I rest my case :-)


Edward Dolan wrote:

I read the pertinent parts. Only idiots read entire reports
that are beside the issue.


And how, do tell me, are you going to figure out what is pertinent unless you bother to read it ? I would have thought that was obvious.


It's very clear that all you did was skim read to the parts that you thought supported your argument and ignored the rest ... blissfully unaware that the report, overall, doesn't support your positions at all.


Is both funny and rather pathetic at the same time.


Mountain biking ranked low on the list compared to hiking in terms of popularity. That is all I was interested in.

You remind me of a bulldog that gets hold of some little thing, however irrelevant, and then wants to hang onto it forever. Notice how I move on, never stumbling over stuff that doesn’t matter.

Where are we right now on this thread? I am proving that mountain biking is not as popular as you think it is and it is also far more dangerous then you think it is. That is the subject of this thread – the so-called “joys & pleasures”, or is satire wasted on you?

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


  #34  
Old February 2nd 14, 12:34 AM posted to rec.bicycles.soc
EdwardDolan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 531
Default The Joys & Pleasures of Cycling on Trails

"Phil W Lee" wrote in message ...

Blackblade considered Fri, 31 Jan 2014
03:16:32 -0800 (PST) the perfect time to write:

Well, as you have already in this thread caught yourself out by not

bothering to read the report that YOU cited .. I rest my case :-)

I read the pertinent parts. Only idiots read entire reports
that are beside the issue.


And how, do tell me, are you going to figure out what is pertinent unless you bother to read it ? I would have thought that was obvious.


He probably used a search engine to find any report or subsection of a

report that makes mention of "conflict", then cut & pasted it - no
mental activity required or utilised.

I am way too lazy to even do that little. Nope, I am just uploading parts of newsletters I get via email from the hiking community. I am at the stage of life now where I never look up anything. **** it ... if I don’t already know it, then it is not worth knowing!

It's very clear that all you did was skim read to the parts that you thought supported your argument and ignored the rest ... blissfully unaware that the report, overall, doesn't support your positions at all.

Is both funny and rather pathetic at the same time.


It's so pathetic that it only acts to weaken the position he claims to

support.

No one here knows what the two of you are blathering about, least of all me.

And at least while he's playing keyboard warrior on here, he's not out

emulating his hero and indulging in criminal acts, even if he supports
them.

For someone who is so concerned about libel you show a lot of disregard for your own skin. I would be careful about labeling others criminal when in fact what you are doing might be construed by some as criminal.

But here is your true criminality being committed everywhere daily by your favorite group of miscreants – mountain bikers:

http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/san...legal-mountain

Panel at UC Santa Cruz to address illegal mountain biking

By Kara Guzman

Santa Cruz Sentinel
Posted: 01/27/2014 07:16:12 PM PST

Mountain biker Sean Andrasik poses by a water tank on UCSC's upper
campus, where biking... ( SCS )

SANTA CRUZ -- UC Santa Cruz's upper campus is home to world-famous
mountain biking trails. The problem is they aren't legal.

Biking is allowed on campus fire roads, but single-track trails are
off-limits. Despite the ban, the trails attract an estimated 1,000
riders per week, said Drew Perkins, trail officer for Mountain Bikers
of Santa Cruz, an advocacy group.

Perkins will be part of a panel of bikers and UCSC students, faculty
and staff to discuss trail use and environmental impacts at 6 p.m.
Wednesday at the Stevenson Event Center at UCSC's Stevenson College.

UCSC has done little to enforce the rule. However, the trails connect
to Henry Cowell State Park and Pogonip, where single-track biking is
largely illegal, and riders have been ticketed along Highway 9, Perkins said.

The illegal status prevents trail maintenance, which increases
bikers' environmental impact. For example, when a tree falls across a
trail, instead of clearing the path, bikers create another route, he said.

"The trails just kind of happen, where whoever initially cut them
decided they wanted to go," Perkins said.

Upper campus includes the 409-acre Campus Natural Reserve used for
teaching and research. Mountain biking in the reserve is not
compatible with the campus' values of conservation and stewardship,
said Alex Jones, campus natural reserve steward.

"Many of these trails are on steep slopes and sandy loam soils, which
has contributed to significant erosion and soil loss," Jones said.

Tim Duane, a UCSC environmental engineering professor, helped study
the effects of mountain biking on the endangered Ohlone tiger beetle,
which is found only in the upper campus and nearby Wilder Ranch.

Fast bikers harm the beetle population, he said, but slowing in
certain areas greatly decreases impact. When bikers knew of their
potential impact, they were willing to change, he said, nothing the
key is to provide an alternative.

"Basically if there's a complete ban on biking, bikers tend not to
understand why and they tend to ignore all restrictions," Duane said.

The status quo is not ideal, said Eric Johnson, founder of
Hilltromper, a website about the Santa Cruz outdoors.

"I think in the long run, things aren't going to last like this,"
Johnson said. "At some point, we could lose this incredible resource
if we don't treat it with respect."

Johnson, who will moderate Wednesday's panel, said parties are
nowhere near finding a solution, but he hopes to start a discussion.”

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


  #35  
Old February 3rd 14, 03:06 PM posted to rec.bicycles.soc
Blackblade[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 218
Default The Joys & Pleasures of Cycling on Trails

Yes, am quite prepared to take a relatively low risk in order to
be active and enjoy my life. If I fall off, which I do periodically, then
I view it philosophically as the price to be paid.

As it's my life and limb I am fully entitled to do so.


If you are knowledgeable about the risks that is one thing,
but most folks are NOT knowledgeable. It is a crime to be promoting mountain
biking on hiking trails without full knowledge of how dangerous it
is.

By the way, if you were to suffer a really serious injury, one
that left you paralyzed for example, I doubt that you would think it was worth
it. Price to be paid - indeed!


Well, clearly, you DON'T understand risk either or you would not have written this.

It is EXTREMELY UNLIKELY that such a fate will befall me ... but not impossible. If you live your life based on worrying about extremely unlikely events then you will end up doing a Howard Hughes and never leaving your house..

However, since the odds of killing or disabling yourself whilst walking down the stairs or taking a shower are also unlikely, but not zero, even there you are not safe.

Mountain biking, measured against other risks, is not at the top of the risk tree ... but it's not at the bottom either. Pay your money and take your choice. As I also enjoy extreme skiing and motorcycle racing I take it you can guess where I draw the line.
  #36  
Old February 4th 14, 01:04 AM posted to rec.bicycles.soc
EdwardDolan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 531
Default The Joys & Pleasures of Cycling on Trails

"Blackblade" wrote in message ...

Yes, am quite prepared to take a relatively low risk in order to

be active and enjoy my life. If I fall off, which I do periodically, then
I view it philosophically as the price to be paid.

As it's my life and limb I am fully entitled to do so.


Edward Dolan wrote:

If you are knowledgeable about the risks that is one thing,
but most folks are NOT knowledgeable. It is a crime to be promoting mountain
biking on hiking trails without full knowledge of how dangerous it
is.

By the way, if you were to suffer a really serious injury, one
that left you paralyzed for example, I doubt that you would think it was worth
it. Price to be paid - indeed!


Well, clearly, you DON'T understand risk either or you would not have written this.


It is EXTREMELY UNLIKELY that such a fate will befall me ... but not impossible. If you live your life based on worrying about extremely unlikely events then you will end up doing a Howard Hughes and never leaving your house.


It is not as unlikely as you think it is. Helmets will not protect you from a paralyzing injury. Bikers who ride their bikes on hiking trails will hit something and go over the handlebars. It is not rare for this to happen. How you land will determine how serious your injuries will be. Why risk any of this?

However, since the odds of killing or disabling yourself whilst walking down the stairs or taking a shower are also unlikely, but not zero, even there you are not safe.


Hikers walking a trail are not in much danger of killing or injuring themselves whereas bikers who do what they do on trails are. Very odd that you would argue anything to the contrary.

Mountain biking, measured against other risks, is not at the top of the risk tree ... but it's not at the bottom either. Pay your money and take your choice. As I also enjoy extreme skiing and motorcycle racing I take it you can guess where I draw the line.


You are risking life and limb doing dangerous things. When the inevitable happens you will have nothing but second thoughts about the risk taking. It is entirely possible to enjoy what the outdoors has to offer without doing anything foolish. I enjoy trekking, but I would never for a moment consider any kind of climbing. Why? It is dangerous and doesn't add to my enjoyment of trekking. Adrenalin rushes are strictly for idiots.

Now that I have got you down for an idiot, at least have the good sense and common decency not to recommend that others go and do what you do. I never do anything that I would not recommend to others. Just part of being a Great Saint!

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


  #37  
Old February 4th 14, 06:20 AM posted to rec.bicycles.soc
EdwardDolan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 531
Default The Joys & Pleasures of Cycling on Trails

Lest any of the remaining numbskulls and other assorted idiots still left on this desultory newsgroup (Blackblade and Phil W Lee) forget what the Great Michael Vandeman has taught us from our infancy, let us review what he has told us from the beginning:
http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/state_parks/permit.html

Why in the world would you want to advertize Minnesota State Parks
with a photo of someone practicing an environmentally destructive sport???

Bicycles should not be allowed in any natural area. They are
inanimate objects and have no rights. There is also no right to
mountain bike. That was settled in federal court in 1996:
http://mjvande.nfshost.com/mtb10.htm . It's dishonest of mountain
bikers to say that they don't have access to trails closed to bikes.
They have EXACTLY the same access as everyone else -- ON FOOT! Why
isn't that good enough for mountain bikers? They are all capable of walking....

A favorite myth of mountain bikers is that mountain biking is no more
harmful to wildlife, people, and the environment than hiking, and
that science supports that view. Of course, it's not true. To settle
the matter once and for all, I read all of the research they cited,
and wrote a review of the research on mountain biking impacts (see
http://mjvande.nfshost.com/scb7.htm ). I found that of the seven
studies they cited, (1) all were written by mountain bikers, and (2)
in every case, the authors misinterpreted their own data, in order to
come to the conclusion that they favored. They also studiously
avoided mentioning another scientific study (Wisdom et al) which did
not favor mountain biking, and came to the opposite conclusions.

Those were all experimental studies. Two other studies (by White et
al and by Jeff Marion) used a survey design, which is inherently
incapable of answering that question (comparing hiking with mountain
biking). I only mention them because mountain bikers often cite them,
but scientifically, they are worthless.

Mountain biking accelerates erosion, creates V-shaped ruts, kills
small animals and plants on and next to the trail, drives wildlife
and other trail users out of the area, and, worst of all, teaches
kids that the rough treatment of nature is okay (it's NOT!). What's
good about THAT?

To see exactly what harm mountain biking does to the land, watch this
5-minute video: http://vimeo.com/48784297.

In addition to all of this, it is extremely dangerous:
http://mjvande.nfshost.com/mtb_dangerous.htm .”

Anyone who wants to dispute any of this needs to go to the links furnished and read for themselves what the facts are. Useless blather about how mountain biking does not conflict with other trail users and does no damage only marks you as the worthless liars and bums that you are.

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


  #38  
Old February 4th 14, 01:07 PM posted to rec.bicycles.soc
John B.[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,554
Default The Joys & Pleasures of Cycling on Trails

On Mon, 3 Feb 2014 23:20:19 -0600, "EdwardDolan"
wrote:

Lest any of the remaining numbskulls and other assorted idiots still left on this desultory newsgroup (Blackblade and Phil W Lee) forget what the Great Michael Vandeman has taught us from our infancy, let us review what he has told us from the beginning:
http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/state_parks/permit.html

Anyone who wants to dispute any of this needs to go to the links furnished and read for themselves what the facts are. Useless blather about how mountain biking does not conflict with other trail users and does no damage only marks you as the worthless liars and bums that you are.

Mountain bikes have wheels. Wheels are for roads.

Trails are for walking. Whats the matter? Cant walk?

Ed Dolan the Great
aka
Saint Edward the Great



Ah Yes. Mr. Blackblade and Mr. Phil W Lee are here posting their
logical, well thought out remarks and the Sainted Dolan has nothing to
say and so posts the remarks of a convicted criminal in response.

It really says something for Dolan's ability to debate the point in
question, or more bluntly, his inability to reply logically.

In short we have a situation where one side posts logical statements
while the other side simply repeats their bigoted comments and in
justification posts the remarks of a convicted criminal.

One might even say, using the vernacular, we got the rational chaps on
one side and a horse's ass on the other.

You'll need to change your signature to Dobbin Dolan.
--
Cheers,

John B.
  #39  
Old February 5th 14, 02:09 AM posted to rec.bicycles.soc
EdwardDolan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 531
Default The Joys & Pleasures of Cycling on Trails

"John B." wrote in message ...

On Mon, 3 Feb 2014 23:20:19 -0600, "EdwardDolan"
wrote:

Lest any of the remaining numbskulls and other assorted idiots still left on this desultory newsgroup (Blackblade and Phil W Lee) forget what the Great Michael Vandeman has taught us from our infancy, let us review what he has told us from the beginning:

http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/state_parks/permit.html

Anyone who wants to dispute any of this needs to go to the links furnished and read for themselves what the facts are. Useless blather about how mountain biking does not conflict with other trail users and does no damage only marks you as the worthless liars and bums that you are.


Ah Yes. Mr. Blackblade and Mr. Phil W Lee are here posting their

logical, well thought out remarks and the Sainted Dolan has nothing to
say and so posts the remarks of a convicted criminal in response.

Mr. Vandeman is a Saint almost on my level. But more to the point he is the world’s foremost expert on the impact of mountain biking on trails. But he is too much the gentleman to suit me. Nope, I got to call out the biker louts as I see them. There is no point in being a gentleman with thugs and hooligans.

It really says something for Dolan's ability to debate the point in

question, or more bluntly, his inability to reply logically.

Every point brought up by anyone has been resolutely refuted. I have even gone to the extra effect of name calling, the one thing that ALL mountain bikers understand to perfection since that is their chief modus operandi.

In short we have a situation where one side posts logical statements

while the other side simply repeats their bigoted comments and in
justification posts the remarks of a convicted criminal.

I have seen nothing posted on this newsgroup (other than my own sacred words of course) that has not been self-serving in the extreme. Logical statements? Surely you jest! Unless and until you get serious I suggest you spend your time more profitably by ****ign yourself. Anyone who calls someone a bigot (the favorite bad word of liberal assholes) deserves a good ****!

One might even say, using the vernacular, we got the rational chaps on

one side and a horse's ass on the other.

Using the vernacular, we have got nothing but assholes on one side and a Great Saint on the other.

You'll need to change your signature to Dobbin Dolan.


If my signature serves the purpose of ****ign you off, I have got it exactly right!

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



  #40  
Old February 5th 14, 02:27 AM posted to rec.bicycles.soc
EdwardDolan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 531
Default The Joys & Pleasures of Cycling on Trails

More bad news from the trenches, something that blackblade, Phil W Lee and John B will not enjoy reading. It of course only confirms what I have been saying from day one, namely, that cycling on trails is a conflict with other trail users. Only the self-serving terminally stupid would claim otherwise.
http://www.denverpost.com/lipsher/ci...#ixzz2sE2qwT62

Lipsher: Conflicts grow over biking in the mountains

By Steve Lipsher
Posted: 02/02/2014 05:00:00 PM MST

Land managers in Colorado have been unable to
keep up with the evolving uses and demands like
biking of mountain trails, writes Steve Lipsher.
(Hyoung Chang, The Denver Post)

Mountain bikers philosophically have been more
aligned with hikers, cross-country skiers and
other "quiet use" types than with snowmobilers, dirt bikers and ATV riders.

But increasingly, the two-wheeled folks are
becoming embroiled in conflicts with other trail
users, and bikers now are finding themselves on
the other side of the philosophical divide and
risking alienating traditional allies.

From a long, unflattering history of creating
illegal, unsustainable trails to a new trend *
winter "fat" bikes that compete with skiers and
snowshoers on snow-covered trails * biking now
represents an intrusive activity that affects others in the woods.

Go to any online outdoor forum these days, and
you'll see lots of chatter about the
compatibility of bikes and other activities,
ranging from allowing bikes on trails in national
parks to whether battery-assisted bikes belong,
well, anywhere. (In Boulder, two distinct camps
have formed over allowing the new breed of
electric moped to share the paved bike paths.)

And the fiercest debate today is over whether the
new breed of winter bikes * which rely on
bulbous, low-pressure tires to float over the
snow * belong on the trails. The fear is they
will gouge out ruts in soft snow, making the skiing treacherous.

On MTBR, a popular mountain-biking chat site,
writers discussed whether fat bikes should be
allowed on specifically groomed cross-country ski
trails, which already prohibit hikers for the sake of keeping the track smooth.

"I tried to ride on a groomed trail once in
Wyoming," wrote one biker. "It was on public open
space land, and the trail was probably 40 inches
wide. I actually thought I was going to be
lynched. I got on my bike in the parking lot and
was surrounded by a bunch of XC skiers. They were
actually shouting two inches from my face."

"Skiers are a testy, testy bunch. Avoid them at all costs," wrote another.

But even in sticking to multi-use trails on
public lands that officially are open to all
users, "fat bikers" are encountering hostility
from unsuspecting snowshoers and skiers, similar
to the complaints that hikers have expressed in
the summer when bikers swarm past on their favorite treks.

Communities, public-lands agencies and user
groups now are grappling with how to keep peace
among the different interests. In Aspen, fat
bikes for the first time this winter are being
allowed on Pitkin County open space groomed by
the Aspen Snowmass Nordic Council as a trial run.
Two years ago, Idaho started hosting a "fat bike
summit" that brings land managers and bikers
together to discuss ways of alleviating
conflicts. And the International Mountain Biking
Association is imploring its members to be sure
that fat bikes are permitted on the lands where they want to ride.

Because the number of fat bikes is doubling every
year, doing nothing is no longer an option, and
some regulation is needed. The problem is that
land managers have been unable to keep up with the evolving uses and demands.

The U.S. Forest Service was slow to recognize the
explosion of summertime mountain biking in the
1980s, and the ensuing user conflicts and braids
of illegal, poorly designed user-created trails
created a management nightmare. Similarly, ATVs
have intruded into untrammeled places, forever altering their character.

Many of those routes have grown so popular that
forest managers begrudgingly have been forced to
include them in their updated trail networks.

Another issue is that bikers, as well as many
other groups, always are looking to expand their
territory, threatening to change the nature of ... well, nature.

This time, it's fat bikes. Next, powered bikes.
Before that, mountain boards. Every new fad and
craze competes for more space, resources,
management on the trail, and each creates its own
bitter divisions on who belongs.”

Since it seems I am now the only one on this newsgroup posting any content, I will treat with appropriate scorn any responders who do not also post some content. Name calling does not work with me as I just love to name call myself. It is part of being a Great Saint.

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

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pleasures of cycling in the Netherlands Partac[_10_] UK 28 May 28th 12 09:10 PM
The joys of cycling in London Simon Mason[_4_] UK 2 November 2nd 11 06:17 PM
The joys of cycling as seen through the eyes of a runner Simon Mason[_4_] UK 0 August 11th 11 08:24 AM
The pleasures of illegal cycling Just zis Guy, you know?[_2_] UK 37 June 2nd 09 03:58 PM
one of the joys of cycling... greggery peccary General 56 March 12th 05 03:46 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:39 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2017 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.