"Bicycles Should Not be Allowed on Footpaths"

On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 10:44:24 -0700 (PDT), Siskuwihane
wrote:

On Jul 17, 1:07*pm, Bruce Jensen wrote:
On Jul 17, 8:07*am, Siskuwihane wrote:

NO animal should be used as a vehicle for a human, a point you seem to
be avoiding, that's not surprising considering your documented habit
of avoiding the TRUTH. *A horse doesn't ask to carry around a human,
dummy.

Wildlife doesn't want what is "better" for selfish people, they want
what's BEST for them and that means not having their lives interupted
or habitat destroyed by *people who have to bring huge animals into
their environment for their own pleasure.-

Epithets aside, I'm with you - but I don't like bikes on footpaths
either.


I do not like bikes on them either, especially when I am on a "hiking
only" trail. I am perfectly willing to let them have their own trails
or share the trail on "multi-use" paths, in which case, I have a
choice to be there and share or go somewhere else.


FWIW, I will be purchasing a mountain-bike (as soon as my 'bent is
sold) in the future. NOTHING Michael J. Vandeman has written will
dissuade that descision, in fact, he has had the opposite affect on me
due to his extreme narrow views and inabilty to have a rational
debate. I would tend to think he has that affect on more people than
he realizes.

Break a leg.
--
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.)

Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of!

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande

"Siskuwihane" wrote in message
...
On Jul 16, 11:35 pm, Mike Vandeman wrote:
From: [a Marin County resident]
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2008 15:40:54 -0700
Subject: Mt.bikes on trails

I have lived in Marin County for 50 years, seeing firsthand the rise
of, and impact from, mountain bicycling. I am an equestrian and
hiker.

Animals should not be used as vehicles, especially when people can
always WALK! I have yet to meet ANYONE who cleans up after their horse
deficates in the middle of a path or trail. Why are people so SELFISH,
making an animal carry them?


JS
Please tell us you are expressing an extreme view to make a point.


/JS

"Siskuwihane" wrote in message
...
On Jul 17, 10:28 am, Mike Vandeman wrote:
On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 06:20:35 -0700 (PDT), Siskuwihane

wrote:
On Jul 16, 11:35 pm, Mike Vandeman wrote:
From: [a Marin County resident]
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2008 15:40:54 -0700
Subject: Mt.bikes on trails

I have lived in Marin County for 50 years, seeing firsthand the rise
of, and impact from, mountain bicycling. I am an equestrian and
hiker.

Animals should not be used as vehicles, especially when people can
always WALK! I have yet to meet ANYONE who cleans up after their horse
deficates in the middle of a path or trail. Why are people so SELFISH,
making an animal carry them?

It's better than using motor vehicles or mountain bikes. For people
with disabilities, it may be their only access to wilderness.

Wrong.

NO animal should be used as a vehicle for a human, a point you seem to
be avoiding, that's not surprising considering your documented habit
of avoiding the TRUTH. A horse doesn't ask to carry around a human,
dummy.

Wildlife doesn't want what is "better" for selfish people, they want
what's BEST for them and that means not having their lives interupted
or habitat destroyed by people who have to bring huge animals into
their environment for their own pleasure.




JS
You, my friend, are a refreshing breath of fresh air.

Finally, somebody that outshines Vandeman as a pure idiot.

/JS

"Siskuwihane" wrote in message
...
On Jul 17, 1:07 pm, Bruce Jensen wrote:
On Jul 17, 8:07 am, Siskuwihane wrote:

NO animal should be used as a vehicle for a human, a point you seem to
be avoiding, that's not surprising considering your documented habit
of avoiding the TRUTH. A horse doesn't ask to carry around a human,
dummy.

Wildlife doesn't want what is "better" for selfish people, they want
what's BEST for them and that means not having their lives interupted
or habitat destroyed by people who have to bring huge animals into
their environment for their own pleasure.-

Epithets aside, I'm with you - but I don't like bikes on footpaths
either.


I do not like bikes on them either, especially when I am on a "hiking
only" trail. I am perfectly willing to let them have their own trails
or share the trail on "multi-use" paths, in which case, I have a
choice to be there and share or go somewhere else.


FWIW, I will be purchasing a mountain-bike (as soon as my 'bent is
sold) in the future. NOTHING Michael J. Vandeman has written will
dissuade that descision, in fact, he has had the opposite affect on me
due to his extreme narrow views and inabilty to have a rational
debate. I would tend to think he has that affect on more people than
he realizes.

On Jul 17, 8:41*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote:
On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 08:07:25 -0700 (PDT), Siskuwihane





wrote:
On Jul 17, 10:28*am, Mike Vandeman wrote:
On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 06:20:35 -0700 (PDT), Siskuwihane

wrote:
On Jul 16, 11:35*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote:
From: [a Marin County resident]
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2008 15:40:54 -0700
Subject: Mt.bikes on trails

I have lived in Marin County for 50 years, seeing firsthand the rise
of, and impact from, mountain bicycling. *I am an equestrian and
hiker. *

Animals should not be used as vehicles, especially when people can
always WALK! I have yet to meet ANYONE who cleans up after their horse
deficates in the middle of a path or trail. Why are people so SELFISH,
making an animal carry them?

It's better than using motor vehicles or mountain bikes. For people
with disabilities, it may be their only access to wilderness.

Wrong.

NO animal should be used as a vehicle for a human, a point you seem to
be avoiding, that's not surprising considering your documented habit
of avoiding the TRUTH. *A horse doesn't ask to carry around a human,
dummy.

Wildlife doesn't want what is "better" for selfish people,

There isn't much that's more selfish than working in the airline
industry. Or denying people with disabilities the right to visit the
wilderness they pay for.

But you want to deny them that right when they want to use a bicycle.
Not everyone can afford a horse so a bicycle would be a viable
alternative for them. So which is it Mike, deny disabled people only
if on a bike but not deny those on horses?

This is the advice Michael J. Vandeman gave a disabled woman who
wanted to use a bicycle...

"Get a wheelchair. And don't expect us to sacrifice wildlife, just so
you
can use their home as your personal physical therapist. Just because
you
hurt yourself in a car accident, that is no reason for the public to
sacrifice wildlife for you. Stop being such a bad role model for your
grandchildren! If you REALLY "loved nature" you wouldn't destroy it
for
your own pleasure."








*they want

what's BEST for them and that means not having their lives interupted
or habitat destroyed by *people who have to bring huge animals into
their environment for their own pleasure.

Horses are domesticated animals, not wildlife.

No one said otherwise, dummy. Try to comprehend what is being
discussed.

On Jul 17, 9:03*pm, "Jeff Strickland" wrote:
"Siskuwihane" wrote in message

...
On Jul 17, 10:28 am, Mike Vandeman wrote:





On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 06:20:35 -0700 (PDT), Siskuwihane

wrote:
On Jul 16, 11:35 pm, Mike Vandeman wrote:
From: [a Marin County resident]
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2008 15:40:54 -0700
Subject: Mt.bikes on trails

I have lived in Marin County for 50 years, seeing firsthand the rise
of, and impact from, mountain bicycling. I am an equestrian and
hiker.

Animals should not be used as vehicles, especially when people can
always WALK! I have yet to meet ANYONE who cleans up after their horse
deficates in the middle of a path or trail. Why are people so SELFISH,
making an animal carry them?

It's better than using motor vehicles or mountain bikes. For people
with disabilities, it may be their only access to wilderness.

Wrong.

NO animal should be used as a vehicle for a human, a point you seem to
be avoiding, that's not surprising considering your documented habit
of avoiding the TRUTH. *A horse doesn't ask to carry around a human,
dummy.

Wildlife doesn't want what is "better" for selfish people, they want
what's BEST for them and that means not having their lives interupted
or habitat destroyed by *people who have to bring huge animals into
their environment for their own pleasure.

JS
You, my friend, are a refreshing breath of fresh air.

Finally, somebody that outshines Vandeman as a pure idiot.

/JS- Hide quoted text -


In time, you too will be able to tell a post that is using
"Vandelogic".

On Jul 17, 9:01*pm, "Jeff Strickland" wrote:
"Siskuwihane" wrote in message

...
On Jul 16, 11:35 pm, Mike Vandeman wrote:

From: [a Marin County resident]
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2008 15:40:54 -0700
Subject: Mt.bikes on trails

I have lived in Marin County for 50 years, seeing firsthand the rise
of, and impact from, mountain bicycling. I am an equestrian and
hiker.

Animals should not be used as vehicles, especially when people can
always WALK! I have yet to meet ANYONE who cleans up after their horse
deficates in the middle of a path or trail. Why are people so SELFISH,
making an animal carry them?

JS
Please tell us you are expressing an extreme view to make a point.

/JS


I'm using "Vandelogic" to make a point.

Vandelogic is extreme. Vandelogic is narrow. Vandelogic uses capital
letters on certain words like WALK, SELFISH, ANYONE, etc to add
dramatic effect.

And above all, Vandelogic is illogical!

On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 19:38:31 -0500, Tom Sherman
wrote:

wrote:
On Jul 17, 9:20 am, Siskuwihane wrote:
Animals should not be used as vehicles, especially when people can
always WALK! I have yet to meet ANYONE who cleans up after their horse
deficates in the middle of a path or trail. Why are people so SELFISH,
making an animal carry them?

I find the ankle twisting hoof prints to be more of a pain than the
droppings, myself.

Yes, both the above are correct - horses cause much more trail damage
than either hikers or cyclists.

In addition, the horse is much more dangerous to other users than a
bicycle. A panicked, rearing horse can easily kill someone.

So can a fast-moving bicycle. A bike going downhill fast is MUCH more
dangerous than a horse. What do you think CAUSES panic in horses? Only
bikes coming too fast around blind turns. Without bikes around, horses
aren't dangerous at all.
--
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.)

Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of!

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande

On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 19:23:06 -0700 (PDT), Siskuwihane
wrote:

On Jul 17, 8:41*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote:
On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 08:07:25 -0700 (PDT), Siskuwihane





wrote:
On Jul 17, 10:28*am, Mike Vandeman wrote:
On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 06:20:35 -0700 (PDT), Siskuwihane

wrote:
On Jul 16, 11:35*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote:
From: [a Marin County resident]
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2008 15:40:54 -0700
Subject: Mt.bikes on trails

I have lived in Marin County for 50 years, seeing firsthand the rise
of, and impact from, mountain bicycling. *I am an equestrian and
hiker. *

Animals should not be used as vehicles, especially when people can
always WALK! I have yet to meet ANYONE who cleans up after their horse
deficates in the middle of a path or trail. Why are people so SELFISH,
making an animal carry them?

It's better than using motor vehicles or mountain bikes. For people
with disabilities, it may be their only access to wilderness.

Wrong.

NO animal should be used as a vehicle for a human, a point you seem to
be avoiding, that's not surprising considering your documented habit
of avoiding the TRUTH. *A horse doesn't ask to carry around a human,
dummy.

Wildlife doesn't want what is "better" for selfish people,

There isn't much that's more selfish than working in the airline
industry. Or denying people with disabilities the right to visit the
wilderness they pay for.

But you want to deny them that right when they want to use a bicycle.

Disabled people can't use bikes, because you have to be able to walk
hime, in case you get a flat.

Not everyone can afford a horse so a bicycle would be a viable
alternative for them. So which is it Mike, deny disabled people only
if on a bike but not deny those on horses?

This is the advice Michael J. Vandeman gave a disabled woman who
wanted to use a bicycle...

"Get a wheelchair. And don't expect us to sacrifice wildlife, just so
you
can use their home as your personal physical therapist. Just because
you
hurt yourself in a car accident, that is no reason for the public to
sacrifice wildlife for you. Stop being such a bad role model for your
grandchildren! If you REALLY "loved nature" you wouldn't destroy it
for
your own pleasure."

hat is a good example of PRETENDING to be disabled, in order to
promote mountain biking. Mountain biking actually CREATES disablement
in many people.
--
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.)

Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of!

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande

On Jul 18, 11:23*am, Mike Vandeman wrote:
On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 19:23:06 -0700 (PDT), Siskuwihane





wrote:
On Jul 17, 8:41*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote:
On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 08:07:25 -0700 (PDT), Siskuwihane

wrote:
On Jul 17, 10:28*am, Mike Vandeman wrote:
On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 06:20:35 -0700 (PDT), Siskuwihane

wrote:
On Jul 16, 11:35*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote:
From: [a Marin County resident]
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2008 15:40:54 -0700
Subject: Mt.bikes on trails

I have lived in Marin County for 50 years, seeing firsthand the rise
of, and impact from, mountain bicycling. *I am an equestrian and
hiker. *

Animals should not be used as vehicles, especially when people can
always WALK! I have yet to meet ANYONE who cleans up after their horse
deficates in the middle of a path or trail. Why are people so SELFISH,
making an animal carry them?

It's better than using motor vehicles or mountain bikes. For people
with disabilities, it may be their only access to wilderness.

Wrong.

NO animal should be used as a vehicle for a human, a point you seem to
be avoiding, that's not surprising considering your documented habit
of avoiding the TRUTH. *A horse doesn't ask to carry around a human,
dummy.

Wildlife doesn't want what is "better" for selfish people,

There isn't much that's more selfish than working in the airline
industry. Or denying people with disabilities the right to visit the
wilderness they pay for.

But you want to deny them that right when they want to use a bicycle.

Disabled people can't use bikes, because you have to be able to walk
hime, in case you get a flat.

Another Michael J. Vandeman LIE.

Spare tubes, patches, pumps. All are carried by most cyclists. Stop
lying to make a point, it makes you lose what little credibility you
may have had.



Not everyone can afford a horse so a bicycle would be a viable
alternative for them. So which is it Mike, deny disabled people only
if on a bike but not deny those on horses?

This is the advice Michael J. Vandeman gave a disabled woman who
wanted to use a bicycle...

"Get a wheelchair. And don't expect us to sacrifice wildlife, just so
you
can use their home as your personal physical therapist. Just because
you
hurt yourself in a car accident, that is no reason for the public to
sacrifice wildlife for you. Stop being such a bad role model for your
grandchildren! If you REALLY "loved nature" you wouldn't destroy it
for
your own pleasure."

hat is a good example of PRETENDING to be disabled, in order to
promote mountain biking. Mountain biking actually CREATES disablement
in many people.

Please show us proof that the person mentioned is pretending, I am
sure that someone making that sort of accusation has 100% proof,
otherwise that is LYING and libel.