A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

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

"Mountain biking is no more damaging than other forms of recreation, including hiking."



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #81  
Old June 18th 06, 06:10 AM posted to rec.bicycles.misc,rec.bicycles.soc,alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent,alt.mountain-bike
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default "Mountain biking is no more damaging than other forms of recreation, including hiking."


"S Curtiss" wrote in message
news:F5Ykg.6583$FR1.4103@dukeread05...

"Edward Dolan" wrote in message
...

"SMS" wrote in message
...
S Curtiss wrote:

Sure - No worried! Since your OPINIONS have been ignored, and you
offer no corroboration from review or comment on your opinions by
accredited persons, and cooperation has prevailed state to state and by
federal agencies, and mountain biking continues to grow, and you
continue to present to a handful of other "presenters" at conferences
you don't even reference until they are over, and you insist on your
definitions and generalizations... No worries at all for those of us
who live in reality!

That's the bottom line. Since no study has ever shown that mountain
biking is any more damaging than hiking, people like MV have to resort
to the type of lies that they have become infamous for. He still has
never produced any citations or references for his position, because
none exits.

At this point, everyone basically agrees that mountain biking and hiking
are about equal in trail and wildlife impact. Despite this, many hikers
still would prefer that they have exclusive use to trails and to the
back country, and it's understandable why. But they should be honest
about the reasons, rather than trying to use false rationalizations like
MV and ED. No one would think any worse of them if they would simply
say, "we find it annoying to have to share trails with other users," and
it would be a breath of fresh air from a pathological liar like MV.


My point of view from the outset has been that I do not want to share
hiking trails with bikers. For me it all has to do with the different
mental attitudes that the two groups bring to recreation in the out of
doors. These attitudes are not reconcilable. They are as different as
night and day. That is the MAIN reason I do not want bikers on hiking
trails. I do not believe I can say it any clearer than that.


So why not just say that? Why all this "my sacred trails" and mysticism
and pure souls and such? You have the option of hiking in many places
without bikes. You also have the knowledge that shared use areas may have
cyclists. Choose your environment.


My main point which I like to make over and over is that bikers and hikers
do not get along at all well on hiking trails. It does not have so much to
do with impacts on the trail itself or even on wildlife, but rather on the
kind of attitudes we bring to nature and to wilderness.

I have noticed mountain bikers like to travel in groups and are into fun and
games for the most part. They treat nature like it is a playground. We
hikers are not constituted that way. The fact that you have so little grasp
of the hiker mentality tells me all I will ever have to know about you. I
called you soulless once before and I meant it.

Regards,

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


Ads
  #82  
Old June 18th 06, 01:54 PM posted to rec.bicycles.misc,rec.bicycles.soc,alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent,alt.mountain-bike
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default "Mountain biking is no more damaging than other forms of recreation, including hiking."

On Sun, 18 Jun 2006 00:10:24 -0500, "Edward Dolan"
wrote:


"S Curtiss" wrote in message
news:F5Ykg.6583$FR1.4103@dukeread05...

"Edward Dolan" wrote in message
...

"SMS" wrote in message
...
S Curtiss wrote:

Sure - No worried! Since your OPINIONS have been ignored, and you
offer no corroboration from review or comment on your opinions by
accredited persons, and cooperation has prevailed state to state and by
federal agencies, and mountain biking continues to grow, and you
continue to present to a handful of other "presenters" at conferences
you don't even reference until they are over, and you insist on your
definitions and generalizations... No worries at all for those of us
who live in reality!

That's the bottom line. Since no study has ever shown that mountain
biking is any more damaging than hiking, people like MV have to resort
to the type of lies that they have become infamous for. He still has
never produced any citations or references for his position, because
none exits.

At this point, everyone basically agrees that mountain biking and hiking
are about equal in trail and wildlife impact. Despite this, many hikers
still would prefer that they have exclusive use to trails and to the
back country, and it's understandable why. But they should be honest
about the reasons, rather than trying to use false rationalizations like
MV and ED. No one would think any worse of them if they would simply
say, "we find it annoying to have to share trails with other users," and
it would be a breath of fresh air from a pathological liar like MV.

My point of view from the outset has been that I do not want to share
hiking trails with bikers. For me it all has to do with the different
mental attitudes that the two groups bring to recreation in the out of
doors. These attitudes are not reconcilable. They are as different as
night and day. That is the MAIN reason I do not want bikers on hiking
trails. I do not believe I can say it any clearer than that.


So why not just say that? Why all this "my sacred trails" and mysticism
and pure souls and such? You have the option of hiking in many places
without bikes. You also have the knowledge that shared use areas may have
cyclists. Choose your environment.


My main point which I like to make over and over is that bikers and hikers
do not get along at all well on hiking trails. It does not have so much to
do with impacts on the trail itself or even on wildlife, but rather on the
kind of attitudes we bring to nature and to wilderness.

I have noticed mountain bikers like to travel in groups and are into fun and
games for the most part. They treat nature like it is a playground. We
hikers are not constituted that way. The fact that you have so little grasp
of the hiker mentality tells me all I will ever have to know about you. I
called you soulless once before and I meant it.


Mountain bikers try to claim that they are just "hikers on wheels",
but we know better. They are more like THUGS on wheels.

Another funny phrase is "human-powered", as though that is supposed to
make them benign. A switchblade is human powered. So are a butcher
knife, brass knuckles, a baseball bat, a battering ram, mace, and
sarin gas. That is the sense in which they are "human-powered".

Regards,

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

===
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande
  #83  
Old June 18th 06, 01:58 PM posted to rec.bicycles.misc,rec.bicycles.soc,alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent,alt.mountain-bike
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default "Mountain biking is no more damaging than other forms of recreation, including hiking."

On Sun, 18 Jun 2006 00:10:24 -0500, "Edward Dolan"
wrote:


"S Curtiss" wrote in message
news:F5Ykg.6583$FR1.4103@dukeread05...

"Edward Dolan" wrote in message
...

"SMS" wrote in message
...
S Curtiss wrote:

Sure - No worried! Since your OPINIONS have been ignored, and you
offer no corroboration from review or comment on your opinions by
accredited persons, and cooperation has prevailed state to state and by
federal agencies, and mountain biking continues to grow, and you
continue to present to a handful of other "presenters" at conferences
you don't even reference until they are over, and you insist on your
definitions and generalizations... No worries at all for those of us
who live in reality!

That's the bottom line. Since no study has ever shown that mountain
biking is any more damaging than hiking, people like MV have to resort
to the type of lies that they have become infamous for. He still has
never produced any citations or references for his position, because
none exits.

At this point, everyone basically agrees that mountain biking and hiking
are about equal in trail and wildlife impact. Despite this, many hikers
still would prefer that they have exclusive use to trails and to the
back country, and it's understandable why. But they should be honest
about the reasons, rather than trying to use false rationalizations like
MV and ED. No one would think any worse of them if they would simply
say, "we find it annoying to have to share trails with other users," and
it would be a breath of fresh air from a pathological liar like MV.

My point of view from the outset has been that I do not want to share
hiking trails with bikers. For me it all has to do with the different
mental attitudes that the two groups bring to recreation in the out of
doors. These attitudes are not reconcilable. They are as different as
night and day. That is the MAIN reason I do not want bikers on hiking
trails. I do not believe I can say it any clearer than that.


So why not just say that? Why all this "my sacred trails" and mysticism
and pure souls and such? You have the option of hiking in many places
without bikes. You also have the knowledge that shared use areas may have
cyclists. Choose your environment.


My main point which I like to make over and over is that bikers and hikers
do not get along at all well on hiking trails. It does not have so much to
do with impacts on the trail itself or even on wildlife, but rather on the
kind of attitudes we bring to nature and to wilderness.


True, but without wildlife (living things), there would be nowhere
worth hiking. That is the long view.

I have noticed mountain bikers like to travel in groups and are into fun and
games for the most part. They treat nature like it is a playground. We
hikers are not constituted that way. The fact that you have so little grasp
of the hiker mentality tells me all I will ever have to know about you. I
called you soulless once before and I meant it.

Regards,

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

===
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande
  #84  
Old June 18th 06, 02:24 PM posted to rec.bicycles.misc,rec.bicycles.soc,alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent,alt.mountain-bike
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default "Mountain biking is no more damaging than other forms of recreation,including hiking."

Mike Vandeman wrote:

My qualifications are just as good as yours are.



Ah, I see that you hesitate to state your qualifications.... We know
what that means: they are BS. Come on, tell us what they are, oh
Shifty One.


In case you missed it mikey and I can see how you can, it was only in
plain English. I said mine were as good as yours are.

I am as qualified as you are to talk about the environment and any
damage caused to it by hikers, horses, atv, mtn bikes, etc.

We both can only give opinions and not any real science I have no degree
and yours is on some useless subject regarding how people taste foods
differently or some such nonsense. Certainly nothing that qualifies you
to talk on the environment.

If I'm wrong please post where I can find more information on your
degree which qualifies you to talk about the environment, and no you
can't say your own website. I want a real URL with information on you
and your Phd, perhaps from whatever university you got it from.
  #85  
Old June 18th 06, 05:35 PM posted to rec.bicycles.soc,alt.mountain-bike
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default "Mountain biking is no more damaging than other forms of recreation, including hiking."


"Mike Vandeman" wrote in message
...

[newsgroups trimmed]

On Sun, 18 Jun 2006 00:10:24 -0500, "Edward Dolan"
wrote:

[...]
My main point which I like to make over and over is that bikers and hikers
do not get along at all well on hiking trails. It does not have so much to
do with impacts on the trail itself or even on wildlife, but rather on the
kind of attitudes we bring to nature and to wilderness.

I have noticed mountain bikers like to travel in groups and are into fun
and
games for the most part. They treat nature like it is a playground. We
hikers are not constituted that way. The fact that you [Curtiss] have so
little grasp
of the hiker mentality tells me all I will ever have to know about you. I
called you soulless once before and I meant it.


Mountain bikers try to claim that they are just "hikers on wheels",
but we know better. They are more like THUGS on wheels.

Another funny phrase is "human-powered", as though that is supposed to
make them benign. A switchblade is human powered. So are a butcher
knife, brass knuckles, a baseball bat, a battering ram, mace, and
sarin gas. That is the sense in which they are "human-powered".


Yes, the "human-powered' thing is a distraction and has no bearing on the
purpose of hiking trails.

I am learning a few things from you that I never knew before. Keep up the
good work. Mountain bikers have unusually thick skulls, but you are getting
through to some of them at least.

I am trimming ARBR and RBM from these threads as those groups are made up
strictly of Freds who have no interest in the subject whatsoever.

Regards,

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


  #86  
Old June 18th 06, 05:43 PM posted to rec.bicycles.soc,alt.mountain-bike
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default "Mountain biking is no more damaging than other forms of recreation, including hiking."


"Mike Vandeman" wrote in message
...

[newsgroups trimmed]

On Sun, 18 Jun 2006 00:10:24 -0500, "Edward Dolan"
wrote:

[...]
My main point which I like to make over and over is that bikers and hikers
do not get along at all well on hiking trails. It does not have so much to
do with impacts on the trail itself or even on wildlife, but rather on the
kind of attitudes we bring to nature and to wilderness.


True, but without wildlife (living things), there would be nowhere
worth hiking. That is the long view.


Yes, you are quite right about that. I have been on many a long hike in the
wilderness where I never saw any wild creatures at all. I am more into plant
life than I am animal life, but to never see any wild animals is on outrage
and we should be ashamed of ourselves for having eliminated so much of their
habitat.
[...]

Regards,

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


  #87  
Old June 18th 06, 05:57 PM posted to rec.bicycles.soc,alt.mountain-bike
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default "Mountain biking is no more damaging than other forms of recreation, including hiking."


"jason" wrote in message
. ..

[newsgroups trimmed]

Mike Vandeman wrote:

My qualifications are just as good as yours are.



Ah, I see that you hesitate to state your qualifications.... We know
what that means: they are BS. Come on, tell us what they are, oh
Shifty One.


In case you missed it mikey and I can see how you can, it was only in
plain English. I said mine were as good as yours are.

I am as qualified as you are to talk about the environment and any damage
caused to it by hikers, horses, atv, mtn bikes, etc.

We both can only give opinions and not any real science I have no degree
and yours is on some useless subject regarding how people taste foods
differently or some such nonsense. Certainly nothing that qualifies you to
talk on the environment.

If I'm wrong please post where I can find more information on your degree
which qualifies you to talk about the environment, and no you can't say
your own website. I want a real URL with information on you and your Phd,
perhaps from whatever university you got it from.


A Ph.D degree is primarily a research degree. By attaining that degree you
are thereby qualified to undertake any research on any subject you choose.
The average person will not know how to do research. We will know how to do
a search, but not research. They are two different things entirely. You
would be wise to defer to Mr. Vandeman in this matter of trail damage and
damage to wild life done by mountain bikes as it appears he has done
considerable research on the subject.

Regards,

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


  #88  
Old June 18th 06, 08:51 PM posted to rec.bicycles.soc,alt.mountain-bike
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default "Mountain biking is no more damaging than other forms of recreation, including hiking."

On Sun, 18 Jun 2006 11:43:25 -0500, "Edward Dolan"
wrote:


"Mike Vandeman" wrote in message
.. .

[newsgroups trimmed]

On Sun, 18 Jun 2006 00:10:24 -0500, "Edward Dolan"
wrote:

[...]
My main point which I like to make over and over is that bikers and hikers
do not get along at all well on hiking trails. It does not have so much to
do with impacts on the trail itself or even on wildlife, but rather on the
kind of attitudes we bring to nature and to wilderness.


True, but without wildlife (living things), there would be nowhere
worth hiking. That is the long view.


Yes, you are quite right about that. I have been on many a long hike in the
wilderness where I never saw any wild creatures at all. I am more into plant
life than I am animal life, but to never see any wild animals is on outrage
and we should be ashamed of ourselves for having eliminated so much of their
habitat.
[...]


Yes. I have 3, no, 4 criteria for a successful hike: (1) see and try
an edible plant, (2) see a wild animal (common ones like insects and
birds don't count, UNLESS, SADLY, THERE IS NOTHING ELSE), (3) go to
some high place and get a wide view to see the lay of the land, (4)
don't see any bikes (I just added this one, which I used to be able to
take for granted ...).

Regards,

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

===
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande
  #89  
Old June 18th 06, 09:05 PM posted to rec.bicycles.misc,rec.bicycles.soc,alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent,alt.mountain-bike
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default "Mountain biking is no more damaging than other forms of recreation, including hiking."

On Sun, 18 Jun 2006 13:24:10 GMT, jason
wrote:

Mike Vandeman wrote:

My qualifications are just as good as yours are.



Ah, I see that you hesitate to state your qualifications.... We know
what that means: they are BS. Come on, tell us what they are, oh
Shifty One.


In case you missed it mikey and I can see how you can, it was only in
plain English. I said mine were as good as yours are.

I am as qualified as you are to talk about the environment and any
damage caused to it by hikers, horses, atv, mtn bikes, etc.

We both can only give opinions and not any real science I have no degree


There you go: you have no qualifications whatsoever (at least that you
are willing to talk about)!

and yours is on some useless subject regarding how people taste foods
differently or some such nonsense. Certainly nothing that qualifies you
to talk on the environment.


I see. Since you don't have a Ph.D., you don't understand what you are
missing. A Ph.D. is a RESEARCH degree, and qualifies one to do
research OR CRITIQUE RESEARCH, which is exactly what I have done. It
also demonstrates that one can do LIBRARY RESEARCH and learn new
subjects (DOZENS of them, over the course of university instruction).
Only someone extremely dense (or extremely biased) judges one purely
on the basis of official credentials. Since there ARE no official
credentials in the science of mountain biking impacts, you have to
judge using other criteria, such as HONESTY (all mountain bikers
disqualify themselves based on this criterion), intelligence, and
results. Being asked to present papers at NUMEROUS INTERNATIONAL
SCIENTIFIC CONFERENCES (including the science of recreation impacts)
indicates that the people who matter and know best (scientists) judge
me as qualified to judge the impacts of mountain biking. You (and
other mountain bikers) will never even be in the audience, much less
be asked to give such a paper.

If I'm wrong please post where I can find more information on your
degree which qualifies you to talk about the environment, and no you
can't say your own website. I want a real URL with information on you
and your Phd, perhaps from whatever university you got it from.


===
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande
  #90  
Old June 19th 06, 01:19 AM posted to rec.bicycles.misc,rec.bicycles.soc,alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent,alt.mountain-bike
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default "Mountain biking is no more damaging than other forms of recreation, including hiking."


"Mike Vandeman" wrote in message
...
[...]
I see. Since you don't have a Ph.D., you don't understand what you are
missing. A Ph.D. is a RESEARCH degree, and qualifies one to do
research OR CRITIQUE RESEARCH, which is exactly what I have done. It
also demonstrates that one can do LIBRARY RESEARCH and learn new
subjects (DOZENS of them, over the course of university instruction).
Only someone extremely dense (or extremely biased) judges one purely
on the basis of official credentials. Since there ARE no official
credentials in the science of mountain biking impacts, you have to
judge using other criteria, such as HONESTY (all mountain bikers
disqualify themselves based on this criterion), intelligence, and
results. Being asked to present papers at NUMEROUS INTERNATIONAL
SCIENTIFIC CONFERENCES (including the science of recreation impacts)
indicates that the people who matter and know best (scientists) judge
me as qualified to judge the impacts of mountain biking. You (and
other mountain bikers) will never even be in the audience, much less
be asked to give such a paper.


Mike, there are very few folks who have not proceeded to the Ph.D. degree
who will know what you are talking about, but I can assure you that those of
us like myself who have been on the periphery of Graduate Schools (I was a
college librarian) will know what you are capable of. Do not waste too much
breath trying to explain to the hoi polloi what research is all about. They
will never get it in a million years. They simply have no conception of
rigor when it comes to the mental disciplines.

Regards,

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


 




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
"Mountain biking is no more damaging than other forms of recreation, including hiking." Edward Dolan General 147 July 24th 06 07:03 PM
Science Proves Mountain Biking Is More Harmful Than Hiking Stephen Baker Mountain Biking 18 July 16th 04 04:28 AM
Frequently Asked Questions about Mountain Biking BB Mountain Biking 31 July 4th 04 02:35 AM
EFFECTS OF OFF-ROAD RECREATION (Including Mountain Biking) ON MULE DEER AND ELK Mike Vandeman Social Issues 1 May 5th 04 03:40 AM
EFFECTS OF OFF-ROAD RECREATION (Including Mountain Biking) ON MULE DEER AND ELK BB Mountain Biking 1 April 27th 04 07:05 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:55 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.