|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Mountain Bikers Lobby to Get Bikes Allowed in Wilderness!
Jim Hasenauer teaches Rhetoric -- the art of effective lying.... Not
too effective, huh? Mike Vol. 35 No. 4 | March 3, 2003 Essay Printable Version Let bikers in, and we'll stand behind wilderness by Jim Hasenaur I'm a mountain bicyclist. The pleasure of my life is pedaling through wild places, experiencing the views, the changing colors and textures of the plant life, the occasional animal sightings. On the trail, I'm renewed, and my commitment to public-land preservation is strengthened. I think that's the way most mountain bikers feel, and historically, we've been eager to back conservation efforts. We're troubled, though, that designated wilderness, the highest level of protection, is encumbered with regulations that ban bicycling. Across the country, wilderness advocates are advancing new proposals while mountain bicyclists struggle to find a meaningful place at the table. It's a wedge issue with a capital W. The 1964 Wilderness Act is a remarkable tool. Once Congress acts, wilderness areas are protected in perpetuity for their own sake and for the recreational and spiritual sustenance they provide visitors. Wilderness recreation offers adventure, discovery, solitude and awe - exactly the kinds of exxperience most valued by bicyclists like me. But wilderness advocates, like kids with a jackknife, are inclined to use the tool at hand. They mark their accomplishments in acres designated and their losses as anything less than wilderness as proposed. Though bicyclists should be natural allies of the wilderness movement, because of the bike ban we're understandably reluctant to embrace proposals that would kick us off cherished trails. It would certainly be easier for cyclists to oppose wilderness outright, but that's not who we are. We value wild places. We've endorsed preservation of all roadless areas as the foundation of real resource protection. We try to support wilderness where possible, and when proposals include significant bicycle trails, we work to find ways to protect the land and still preserve the riding. These tools include boundary adjustments, cherry-stem trails and land designations that provide wilderness-like protection from roads, motors and extraction, but still allow bikes. Unfortunately, many wilderness advocates see these measures as losses, discounting alternatives as "wilderness-lite." They characterize bicyclists as selfish and uncooperative. The cost of this infighting has been acrimony, poisoned relationships and lost time, energy and trust. Meanwhile, the Blue Ribbon Coalition and other anti-wilderness groups court cyclists. The 46 million U.S. mountain bicyclists are a giant constituency of public-land enthusiasts. They're increasingly committed to wild land protection, but they're understandably wary of wilderness designations. That's why it's clear to me that there ought to be a way to work for wilderness protection that doesn't ban bicycles. If the regulation were changed, and bikes were allowed on some trails in some wilderness, the entire nature of this debate would shift. Most wilderness advocates are astonished to learn that the Wilderness Act did not ban bicycles. It banned "mechanized transport," which was defined in Forest Service regulation as "powered by a nonliving power source." Bicycles were allowed and ridden in some wilderness until 1984, when a ban first introduced in 1977 was made final. This is significant because it means the bike ban is regulatory, not statutory. It was imposed 20 years after the Wilderness Act by folks who mistook mountain bikes for motorcycles. It's time to get past this. Bikes are muscle-powered, human-scale, quiet and nonpolluting. The tradition and history of bicycle use on the wild lands of the West goes back to the 1880s. Bicycling is trail-based recreation. We may range as far as horses and runners, but our impacts on the trails and on plants and animals have been shown to be similar to those of hikers. Yes, bikes do provide a mechanical advantage, but it's only a degree of difference from oarlocks, suspension poles, skis and the high-tech alloys and composites associated with other outdoor equipment. I believe that if mountain bikers were allowed on some wilderness trails, cyclists would overwhelmingly endorse new wilderness. Rest assured: Trails would never swarm with bikes; most would still be earmarked for hikers. Yet in the same way that backpackers cherish wilderness regardless of whether they ever visit it, mountain bikers would support more wilderness, both in principle and at the ballot box. It's time to make a niche for mountain biking in the push to preserve wild places. Cyclists, with their commitment, passion and numbers, could swell the ranks of a new, more inclusive movement. The only difference between wilderness now and wilderness future would be the presence of bicycles on some trails and much, much more wilderness. Jim Hasenauer is a contributor to Writers on the Range, a service of High Country News in Paonia, Colorado. He is a professor of communication studies at California State University at Northridge and a board member of the International Mountain Bicycling Association, though his opinions are his own. © copyright 2002 High Country News High Country News* Box 1090 * Paonia, CO 81428 * 1-800-905-1155 To receive two free copies of High Country News, call 1-800-905-1155 -- 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 |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Mountain Bikers Lobby to Get Bikes Allowed in Wilderness!
On Mar 25, 11:41*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote:
Michael J. Vandeman How gay. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Mountain Bikers Lobby to Get Bikes Allowed in Wilderness!
I think you are on the wrong side of this one Vandeman. The author makes
several valid points about you and he having common goals, but because you are a crybaby you shut him out of the table where the common ground can be leveraged to arrive at a conservation plan that works for all. There is plenty of room in the wilderness for transient visitors of all types. What wilderness can not sustain is any form of permanant encampment. But, you're an idiot that refuses to look at facts in any sort of rational manner. Speaking of the fine art of lying, did I mention that when you point out a lie it's a bit of the pot calling the kettle black? You should try embracing allies instead of alienating them. It's the whole catch-more-bees-with-honey thing ... "Mike Vandeman" wrote in message ... Jim Hasenauer teaches Rhetoric -- the art of effective lying.... Not too effective, huh? Mike Vol. 35 No. 4 | March 3, 2003 Essay Printable Version Let bikers in, and we'll stand behind wilderness by Jim Hasenaur I'm a mountain bicyclist. The pleasure of my life is pedaling through wild places, experiencing the views, the changing colors and textures of the plant life, the occasional animal sightings. On the trail, I'm renewed, and my commitment to public-land preservation is strengthened. I think that's the way most mountain bikers feel, and historically, we've been eager to back conservation efforts. We're troubled, though, that designated wilderness, the highest level of protection, is encumbered with regulations that ban bicycling. Across the country, wilderness advocates are advancing new proposals while mountain bicyclists struggle to find a meaningful place at the table. It's a wedge issue with a capital W. The 1964 Wilderness Act is a remarkable tool. Once Congress acts, wilderness areas are protected in perpetuity for their own sake and for the recreational and spiritual sustenance they provide visitors. Wilderness recreation offers adventure, discovery, solitude and awe - exactly the kinds of exxperience most valued by bicyclists like me. But wilderness advocates, like kids with a jackknife, are inclined to use the tool at hand. They mark their accomplishments in acres designated and their losses as anything less than wilderness as proposed. Though bicyclists should be natural allies of the wilderness movement, because of the bike ban we're understandably reluctant to embrace proposals that would kick us off cherished trails. It would certainly be easier for cyclists to oppose wilderness outright, but that's not who we are. We value wild places. We've endorsed preservation of all roadless areas as the foundation of real resource protection. We try to support wilderness where possible, and when proposals include significant bicycle trails, we work to find ways to protect the land and still preserve the riding. These tools include boundary adjustments, cherry-stem trails and land designations that provide wilderness-like protection from roads, motors and extraction, but still allow bikes. Unfortunately, many wilderness advocates see these measures as losses, discounting alternatives as "wilderness-lite." They characterize bicyclists as selfish and uncooperative. The cost of this infighting has been acrimony, poisoned relationships and lost time, energy and trust. Meanwhile, the Blue Ribbon Coalition and other anti-wilderness groups court cyclists. The 46 million U.S. mountain bicyclists are a giant constituency of public-land enthusiasts. They're increasingly committed to wild land protection, but they're understandably wary of wilderness designations. That's why it's clear to me that there ought to be a way to work for wilderness protection that doesn't ban bicycles. If the regulation were changed, and bikes were allowed on some trails in some wilderness, the entire nature of this debate would shift. Most wilderness advocates are astonished to learn that the Wilderness Act did not ban bicycles. It banned "mechanized transport," which was defined in Forest Service regulation as "powered by a nonliving power source." Bicycles were allowed and ridden in some wilderness until 1984, when a ban first introduced in 1977 was made final. This is significant because it means the bike ban is regulatory, not statutory. It was imposed 20 years after the Wilderness Act by folks who mistook mountain bikes for motorcycles. It's time to get past this. Bikes are muscle-powered, human-scale, quiet and nonpolluting. The tradition and history of bicycle use on the wild lands of the West goes back to the 1880s. Bicycling is trail-based recreation. We may range as far as horses and runners, but our impacts on the trails and on plants and animals have been shown to be similar to those of hikers. Yes, bikes do provide a mechanical advantage, but it's only a degree of difference from oarlocks, suspension poles, skis and the high-tech alloys and composites associated with other outdoor equipment. I believe that if mountain bikers were allowed on some wilderness trails, cyclists would overwhelmingly endorse new wilderness. Rest assured: Trails would never swarm with bikes; most would still be earmarked for hikers. Yet in the same way that backpackers cherish wilderness regardless of whether they ever visit it, mountain bikers would support more wilderness, both in principle and at the ballot box. It's time to make a niche for mountain biking in the push to preserve wild places. Cyclists, with their commitment, passion and numbers, could swell the ranks of a new, more inclusive movement. The only difference between wilderness now and wilderness future would be the presence of bicycles on some trails and much, much more wilderness. Jim Hasenauer is a contributor to Writers on the Range, a service of High Country News in Paonia, Colorado. He is a professor of communication studies at California State University at Northridge and a board member of the International Mountain Bicycling Association, though his opinions are his own. © copyright 2002 High Country News High Country News* Box 1090 * Paonia, CO 81428 * 1-800-905-1155 To receive two free copies of High Country News, call 1-800-905-1155 -- 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 |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Mountain Bikers Lobby to Get Bikes Allowed in Wilderness!
Jeff, I also don't think he can grasp that he is isolating the very
folks that will do the needed trail maintenance and policing. There are enough responsible folks in any group that will 'stand behind the Wilderness' to weed out the idiots or to at least report the idiots and make them feel very unwelcome. It's the same with any off roading or 'wilderness' related group. Folks like the snowmobile clubs get right ****ed if 'others' wreck their trails by misuse and they will turn in any such person in a quick second. Like our RAMJ+W groups that looked after some trails, once we are involved, we do tend to 'police' the trails to a certain extent and are more likely to report someone who littered 'our' trails or went nuts off trail, etc.... It's too bad Mikey can't get focused to the reality of the world in 2008, he is persistent enough to actually do some good instead of chasing windmills. Mike Jeff Strickland wrote: I think you are on the wrong side of this one Vandeman. The author makes several valid points about you and he having common goals, but because you are a crybaby you shut him out of the table where the common ground can be leveraged to arrive at a conservation plan that works for all. There is plenty of room in the wilderness for transient visitors of all types. What wilderness can not sustain is any form of permanant encampment. But, you're an idiot that refuses to look at facts in any sort of rational manner. Speaking of the fine art of lying, did I mention that when you point out a lie it's a bit of the pot calling the kettle black? You should try embracing allies instead of alienating them. It's the whole catch-more-bees-with-honey thing ... "Mike Vandeman" wrote in message ... Jim Hasenauer teaches Rhetoric -- the art of effective lying.... Not too effective, huh? Mike Vol. 35 No. 4 | March 3, 2003 Essay Printable Version Let bikers in, and we'll stand behind wilderness by Jim Hasenaur |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Mountain Bikers Lobby to Get Bikes Allowed in Wilderness!
On Wed, 26 Mar 2008 16:01:30 GMT, "Jeff Strickland"
wrote: I think you are on the wrong side of this one Vandeman. The author makes several valid points about you and he having common goals, but because you are a crybaby you shut him out of the table where the common ground can be leveraged to arrive at a conservation plan that works for all. We already have that: Wilderness allows mountain bikers to hike,JUST LIKE EVERYONE ELSE. There is plenty of room in the wilderness for transient visitors of all types. What wilderness can not sustain is any form of permanant encampment. Or erosion-causing, wildlife-killing mountain biking. But, you're an idiot that refuses to look at facts in any sort of rational manner. I wrote the book on mountain biking impacts. That's the most rational thing ever written about it. Speaking of the fine art of lying, did I mention that when you point out a lie it's a bit of the pot calling the kettle black? You should try embracing allies instead of alienating them. It's the whole catch-more-bees-with-honey thing ... Mountain bikers are ALREADY welcome in Wilderness. They are just too LAZY to hike, like other 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 |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Mountain Bikers Lobby to Get Bikes Allowed in Wilderness!
"Mike Vandeman" wrote in message ... I wrote the book on mountain biking impacts. That's the most rational thing ever written about it. It is difficult to use rational and anything you have ever said in the same sentence. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Mountain Bikers Lobby to Get Bikes Allowed in Wilderness!
On Wed, 26 Mar 2008 14:26:26 -0400, Mike Romain
wrote: Jeff, I also don't think he can grasp that he is isolating the very folks that will do the needed trail maintenance and policing. BS. We don't need their crappy "trail maintenance", which is designed only to provide thrills for mountain bikers. And they don't police their own peers NOW. What makes you think they will suddenly start doing it, if they get bike access to wilderness? You are very naive. There are enough responsible folks in any group that will 'stand behind the Wilderness' to weed out the idiots or to at least report the idiots and make them feel very unwelcome. BS. They SUPPORT those very idiots NOW. It's the same with any off roading or 'wilderness' related group. Folks like the snowmobile clubs get right ****ed if 'others' wreck their trails by misuse BS. Trail misuse is their middle name. and they will turn in any such person in a quick second. Like our RAMJ+W groups that looked after some trails, once we are involved, we do tend to 'police' the trails to a certain extent and are more likely to report someone who littered 'our' trails or went nuts off trail, etc.... It's too bad Mikey can't get focused to the reality of the world in 2008, he is persistent enough to actually do some good instead of chasing windmills. Mike Since you don't understand, let me spell it out for you: the mountain bikers are saying "Let me destroy the Wilderness, so I can help you protect it." NOW do you get it? -- 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 |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Mountain Bikers Lobby to Get Bikes Allowed in Wilderness!
Thanks for giving his compelling arguments wider distribution!
But you forgot to slander him. -- is Joshua Putnam http://www.phred.org/~josh/ Braze your own bicycle frames. See http://www.phred.org/~josh/build/build.html |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Mountain Bikers Lobby to Get Bikes Allowed in Wilderness!
In article MpDGj.9051$Oj5.2296@trnddc06, says...
"Mike Vandeman" wrote in message ... I wrote the book on mountain biking impacts. That's the most rational thing ever written about it. It is difficult to use rational and anything you have ever said in the same sentence. That's what the word "not" is for. -- is Joshua Putnam http://www.phred.org/~josh/ Braze your own bicycle frames. See http://www.phred.org/~josh/build/build.html |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Mountain Bikers Lobby to Get Bikes Allowed in Wilderness!
On Mar 26, 10:08*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote:
I wrote the book on mountain biking impacts. That's the most rational thing ever written about it. What's the title of said book and the Library of Congress Control Number? |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Mountain Bikers Lobby to Get Bikes Allowed in Wilderness! | Mike Vandeman | Mountain Biking | 103 | April 11th 08 10:31 PM |
Typical Mountain Bikers: Irked that They Aren't Allowed to Trespass! | Mike Vandeman | Mountain Biking | 1 | July 27th 07 09:33 PM |
Typical Mountain Bikers: Irked that They Aren't Allowed to Trespass! | Mike Vandeman | Social Issues | 1 | July 27th 07 09:33 PM |
Why Mountain Bikers Oppose Wilderness Designation | small change | Mountain Biking | 0 | March 13th 05 12:08 AM |
Mountain bikers unite to oppose wilderness plan | Jerry Bone Jr | Mountain Biking | 4 | June 30th 04 04:30 PM |