Vandeman helps British Columbia business

"Tom Sherman °_°" wrote in message
...
[...]
Hey Ed,

Your quoting hierarchy is all fouled up again.

The sequence is right provided you read from top to bottom and that is all
that matters. I cannot be responsible for those who post from Google Groups.
Frankly, I am surprised that all ISPs do not provide a newsreader like
Knology (formerly Prairie Wave) does for me.

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

On Nov 7, 7:24*pm, "Edward Dolan" wrote:
"y_p_w" wrote in message

...
On Nov 7, 4:32 pm, "Edward Dolan" wrote:

"y_p_w" wrote in message
My God, the above activities are what mountain bikers do all the time.
They even construct their own trails on public lands. Eventually such
illegal trails are discovered and are removed at public expense. In the
grand scheme of things, hikers do little if any damage to trails
whereas
mountain bikers do major damage. Try to get your priorities in order..

Mr. Vandeman and I are lovers of nature and wilderness. Mountain bikers
do not give a damn about either. All they care about is their god damn
rotten sport. A proper place for it would be urban industrial waste
land
that has already been ruined.
Those activities are also done by hikers building "social trails".

Never heard of it! Just how ****ed-up is California?

Yeah right. Unauthorized trailblazing happens everywhere. Even in
**ahem** Minnesota. How F'ed up is that?

http://www.eskimo.com/~rachford/moun..._eaglemtn.html

**quote**
I missed this turn at first because the overlook is actually a bit off
the trail. I wasn't the only one, as there was a **social trail**
continuing beyond the overlook and then angling back to the summit
trail.
**unquote**

However - I haven't heard of any such activity by the people accosted

by Vandeman. *There would be no need to do so on this fire road. *It's
maintained as a fire break by the University and they've taken a
lazzez *faire attitude regarding the public's use of the trail.

Then why bother to post a no bicycles allowed for that trail. Laws or rules
that are not enforced just breeds contempt for them.

They post "no bicycles" signs as a "cover your ass" precaution. Again
- it's not a singletrack trail per se. It's a fire road. It's wide
enough to drive a truck through there.

http://www.yelp.com/biz/berkeley-fire-trails-berkeley

Again - those cyclists in this case hadn't done anything illegal.

They might have been in violation of an unenforced UC policy, but they
hasn't done anything that they could be arrested for. *Now Vandeman on
the other hand has been witnessed as carrying the tools to perform a
clearly illegal activity (violation of California Penal Code 384a).

It is not CLEARLY illegal at all. Rules or laws that are not enforced are
contemptible and therefore ignorable. Ever heard the expression ... the law
is an ass? It is the criminal idiot-asshole mountain bikers who are ruining
hiking trails and not hikers, who are as pure as the driven snow.

It wasn't designed as a hiking trail. It's clearly meant to be a fire
break in an area subject to potentially intense fires. I personally
witnessed the 1991 Berkeley Hills fire, and know how serious it could
get.

I seriously doubt that Mr. Vandeman did anything illegal. Anyone can get
arrested upon a complaint being filed. A complaint in and of itself doesn't
mean ****. What I know to be a fact is that Mr. Vandeman is a gentleman and
a scholar. Another fact that I know to be true is that ALL mountian bikers
who ride their bikes on hiking trails are the scum of the earth. I say
****'em!

Then what the heck was he doing with a handsaw?

On 11/7/2010 9:23 PM, y_p_w wrote:

Then what the heck was he doing with a handsaw?

He already admitted "contacting" the cyclists with the saw. Obviously
he's not going to claim that he did what he did because he was enforcing
the "no bicycles" rule. Probably he'll claim that he was standing still
with the saw and the cyclists came toward him.

Very surprising that no plea bargain was reached, with dropping of the
felony charge and probation plus a fine for the misdemeanors.

It'll be an interesting trial. I wonder how long it'll take to find a jury.

On Nov 8, 7:00*am, SMS wrote:
On 11/7/2010 9:23 PM, y_p_w wrote:

Then what the heck was he doing with a handsaw?

He already admitted "contacting" the cyclists with the saw. Obviously
he's not going to claim that he did what he did because he was enforcing
the "no bicycles" rule. Probably he'll claim that he was standing still
with the saw and the cyclists came toward him.

Very surprising that no plea bargain was reached, with dropping of the
felony charge and probation plus a fine for the misdemeanors.

It'll be an interesting trial. I wonder how long it'll take to find a jury.

I don't live in Alameda County, although I have received a couple of
jury summons. If I happened to be in that jury box, I'm sure that I
could bring up my previous encounters with MV's internet activity and
get excused.

I'm wondering why nobody's requested a bench trial. I do get the
feeling that MV might be looking at a jury trial in hopes that the
jury will be sympathetic to his anti mountain biking crusade.

In article
,
y_p_w wrote:

On Nov 8, 7:00*am, SMS wrote:
On 11/7/2010 9:23 PM, y_p_w wrote:

Then what the heck was he doing with a handsaw?

He already admitted "contacting" the cyclists with the saw. Obviously
he's not going to claim that he did what he did because he was enforcing
the "no bicycles" rule. Probably he'll claim that he was standing still
with the saw and the cyclists came toward him.

Very surprising that no plea bargain was reached, with dropping of the
felony charge and probation plus a fine for the misdemeanors.

It'll be an interesting trial. I wonder how long it'll take to find a jury.

I don't live in Alameda County, although I have received a couple of
jury summons. If I happened to be in that jury box, I'm sure that I
could bring up my previous encounters with MV's internet activity and
get excused.

I'm wondering why nobody's requested a bench trial. I do get the
feeling that MV might be looking at a jury trial in hopes that the
jury will be sympathetic to his anti mountain biking crusade.

I have been kind of hoping some of the Mountain Bikers in the area of
the trial, would take the time to show up in court and give us a Blow by
Blow of the trial, and the outcome, maybe even in real time, or via
\Skype from a Notebook or Laptop. Now that would be "Way Cool"....

On 11/8/2010 9:07 AM, y_p_w wrote:

I'm wondering why nobody's requested a bench trial.

No way the defense would want that.

I do get the
feeling that MV might be looking at a jury trial in hopes that the
jury will be sympathetic to his anti mountain biking crusade.

Jurors tend to take their responsibility seriously. I don't think he'll
get any sympathy based on the fact that the cyclists were breaking a UC
rule. Certainly his anti-mountain biking crusade will not be brought up
by the defense, and it's probably not admissible by the prosecution.

On 11/8/2010 10:46 AM, you wrote:

I have been kind of hoping some of the Mountain Bikers in the area of
the trial, would take the time to show up in court and give us a Blow by
Blow of the trial, and the outcome, maybe even in real time, or via
\Skype from a Notebook or Laptop. Now that would be "Way Cool"....

These types of trials can go for days because of the difficulty in
selecting a jury.

On Nov 8, 11:25*am, SMS wrote:
On 11/8/2010 9:07 AM, y_p_w wrote:

I'm wondering why nobody's requested a bench trial.

No way the defense would want that.

I do get the
feeling that MV might be looking at a jury trial in hopes that the
jury will be sympathetic to his anti mountain biking crusade.

Jurors tend to take their responsibility seriously. I don't think he'll
get any sympathy based on the fact that the cyclists were breaking a UC
rule. Certainly his anti-mountain biking crusade will not be brought up
by the defense, and it's probably not admissible by the prosecution.

I think all bets are off if either he or his legal counsel make a
claim that he was trying to enforce a campus policy.

Prior history is going to come up. A lot of other stuff is going to
be admissible, such as witnesses who claim that he deliberately
reached for a riders' handlebars and squeezed their brakes to force
them to stop. He's apparently made statements on the spot about what
he thought he was doing via his actions, and there seems to be a
pattern in several incidents reported to UCPD.

http://police.berkeley.edu/crimealer...-050610-34.pdf

"y_p_w" wrote in message
...
On Nov 8, 7:45 pm, "Dr. Brian Leverich"
wrote:
[...]
For many years Sierra Club entities more-or-less
formally maintained many miles of hiking routes
outside the system of dedicated USFS trails.

The PCT segment through the Desert Divide basically
follows a trail hacked by Sam Fink and maintained by
the Hundred Peaks Section. Our highest service award
is named for Sam, in honor of his labors.

We don't formally maintain non-dedicated trails any
more, but we still certainly publish guides to where
they are and it's a pretty safe bet there are still
some folks maintaining those routes. ;-)

Cheers, Wolf.
Sierra Club activist at Section, Chapter, and National

Would have been nice if there was still some maintenance of that spur
trail between the Mt Tallac Trail down to Fallen Leaf Lake. It showed
up on a couple of maps I had. Then I found myself getting my
(uncovered) legs getting scratched up by increasingly narrower paths
covered with manzanita on both sides. I gave up after a half-mile of
that and went back. I then stopped by the Taylor Creek Visitor Center
and inquired about that trail. I was told that it was no longer
maintained and wouldn't show up on any Forest Service map. I was
apparently also welcome to use it, but took any risks of doing so.

I would think that the Sierra Club might be a bigger stickler for
rules, and might ask the local FS offices for written permission to
perform the trail maintenance. I wouldn't guess that Mr Vandeman ever
asked any UC personnel for written permission.

Comparing what hikers do to trails and what mountain bikers do to trails is
like comparing apples to oranges. One is mere enhancement, the other is
total destruction. If you can't tell the difference, then what the hell are
you doing on these newsgroups anyway?

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

On 2010-11-09, y_p_w wrote:

I would think that the Sierra Club might be a bigger stickler for
rules, and might ask the local FS offices for written permission to
perform the trail maintenance. I wouldn't guess that Mr Vandeman ever
asked any UC personnel for written permission.


The contemporary Sierra Club *is* a bigger stickler, which is
why we don't organizationally do anything other than sanctioned
trail maintenance in support of land managers.

Individuals acting without Club sanction may be maintaining
routes that have existed for many decades.

Cheers, Wolf.