Time to Ban Equestrians from Trails

On 8/23/2011 10:38 AM, jcdill wrote:
On 23/08/11 9:27 AM, Jonz wrote:
On 8/22/2011 11:27 PM, jcdill wrote:
On 22/08/11 7:09 PM, Jonz wrote:
On 8/22/2011 3:43 PM, jcdill wrote:


The manure horses leave on the trail becomes fertilizer for the park.

Eventually. But before it does, it is a disgusting, ugly mess that
horse
riders should be forced to clean up.

That's one person's opinion. People who live in glass houses shouldn't
throw stones. When you gripe about horses, you just open up the
conversation to gripes back about bikes, and you KNOW that there are bad
actors in the bike group and to have others pointing out the bad
behaviors of those bad actors doesn't endear people to bikes.


This sounds like:

Mommy, they do it too, so it must be OK.

No, that's not what it is at all.

It's a form of the Streisand effect. It's not a good idea to try to get
more people looking at how people act uncaringly towards other park
users when your own group is the group that most often generates
complaints about uncaring behavior towards other park users. It's about
the risk of one group with a public relations problem that also has a
fair percent of members who flout rules (poaching etc.) griping about
the behavior of other groups. You run the risk of having the magnifying
glass turned right back on your own group's problems.

If you want people to focus back on bad riding behaviors, go right ahead
and complain about horses. You will get all the attention you want (and
more that you don't want) about trail issues regarding bikes. It
definitely will NOT end up with any expanded trail access for bikes.


Spin it however you want. However, like I said before, b-b-but they do
it too.

You would be in a much better position if your group set an example
rather than point fingers.

Jonz

On 8/23/2011 10:42 AM, jcdill wrote:
On 23/08/11 9:27 AM, Jonz wrote:
On 8/22/2011 11:27 PM, jcdill wrote:
On 22/08/11 7:09 PM, Jonz wrote:
On 8/22/2011 3:43 PM, jcdill wrote:


The manure horses leave on the trail becomes fertilizer for the park.

Eventually. But before it does, it is a disgusting, ugly mess that
horse
riders should be forced to clean up.

BTW, this is a lot like people who move next to an airport then complain
about the noise. While we (society) can't keep people from moving next
to an airport, we (society) CAN keep bikes from legally using trails by
refusing to expand existing and new trails to use by bikes, or by
banning bikes from trails they have already been given permission to
ride. So if your goal is to ensure that more and more people show up to
argue against allowing bikes on the trails, just go ahead and complain
about the horses. The horses were there first, and they will mobilize to
prevent bikes from being allowed on trails if the bikes aren't going to
respect the way things have been working well for trail users (hikers
and equestrians) when they are granted biking access to trails.


Heh... Sounds like... I was here first so I get to make up the rules.

Sorry, It doesn't work that way.

Jonz

On 8/23/2011 9:27 AM, Jonz wrote:

Mommy, they do it too, so it must be OK.

One of the reviews I read on the Dias Ridge trail mentioned that the
mountain bikers helped to pack down mud which made it easier walking for
hikers. That's the first time I'd ever seen such a claim, but it does
have some merit.

On 23/08/11 12:36 PM, Jonz wrote:

Heh... Sounds like... I was here first so I get to make up the rules.

No. It's more like "You wouldn't HAVE these parks if the hikers and
equestrians hadn't fought to establish them many years ago, so please
respect their efforts as you work to become part of the solution, rather
than the problem."

Sorry, It doesn't work that way.

I don't think you have the foggiest idea how it works.

Like too many spokeheads, you hide behind an anonymous handle and bogus
email address, and make threats about anyone who doesn't see things your
way 100% of the time. You are part of the problem, and those who know
better how to get along with other trail users, and how to share trails
in a civilized fashion (which means compromise, recognizing and
understanding the needs of other trail users) despair that they will
never make any progress given how much they have to fight with the guys
who are supposed to be on their own team, before they can present a
civilized and unified front to help craft rules that benefit everyone.
Every time they make some progress, some hothead starts flaming and
generates increased opposition to bikes on trails, and they are pushed
back to square one.

So, go ahead, keep on agitating and help ensure that the opposition
stays very active to fight any attempt to expand trail access to bikes
given that bikers (like you) obviously don't know how to get along, and
don't care to get along, and don't care about anyone or anything except
their own selfish selves. You will continue to be part of the problem
and be a perfect poster-boy for everyone who wants to restrict bike
access on trails.

jc

On 8/20/2011 9:52 PM, SMS wrote:
We hiked the new Dias Ridge Trail
http://www.ridgetrail.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=71&It emid=72
in Marin County today.

Hikers, bicycles, and horses are all allowed. Four mountain bikers
passed us, all riding responsibly. The new trail is very nice _except_
for all the horse manure everywhere. It's disgusting, and a hassle to
keep stepping around. In some places it covers the whole width of the
trail. We then took the Miwok trail and Redwood Creek trails back to
Muir Beach. They were even worse in terms of horse manure because they
are narrower.

Why can't equestrians be forced to clean up after themselves? They are
so inconsiderate of other trail users. Equestrians should buy land to
create their own trail system separate from self-powered hikers and
bicyclists that don't leave a huge mess behind.

Require horse diapers: http://www.equisan.com.au/.

Or like dog owners, equestrians could pack out their pet's feces in a
plastic bag for proper disposal.

Of course, the horses still tear up the trail surface much more than
even a very aggressively ridden mountain bike. Heck, even 4-wheelers
would likely do less damage.

--
Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731°N, 83.985007°W
I am a vehicular cyclist.

On 8/22/2011 9:09 PM, Jonz wrote:
On 8/22/2011 3:43 PM, jcdill wrote:
On 21/08/11 5:57 PM, Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:

A reasonably-truthful argument can be made that

bicycles (as a group) do a LOT more damage to the trails, especially
when riding on the trails during the rainy season. Unless you want to
start seeing signs banning bikes from all the single track in many parks
for the entire rainy season (which happens quite a bit for horse riders)
you might want to get off that "high horse" about damage to the trails.
It can come back to bite the biking community very hard.


Ooooh... Sounds like a threat to me.

The manure horses leave on the trail becomes fertilizer for the park.

Eventually. But before it does, it is a disgusting, ugly mess that horse
riders should be forced to clean up.

Sounds like this touched a nerve.

Jonz

Has a bicycle ever panicked and killed an innocent bystander?

Do bicycles ever aim kicks with deadly force at head height as part of play?

--
Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731°N, 83.985007°W
I am a vehicular cyclist.

On 8/23/2011 2:36 PM, Jonz wrote:
On 8/23/2011 10:42 AM, jcdill wrote:
On 23/08/11 9:27 AM, Jonz wrote:
On 8/22/2011 11:27 PM, jcdill wrote:
On 22/08/11 7:09 PM, Jonz wrote:
On 8/22/2011 3:43 PM, jcdill wrote:


The manure horses leave on the trail becomes fertilizer for the park.

Eventually. But before it does, it is a disgusting, ugly mess that
horse
riders should be forced to clean up.

BTW, this is a lot like people who move next to an airport then complain
about the noise. While we (society) can't keep people from moving next
to an airport, we (society) CAN keep bikes from legally using trails by
refusing to expand existing and new trails to use by bikes, or by
banning bikes from trails they have already been given permission to
ride. So if your goal is to ensure that more and more people show up to
argue against allowing bikes on the trails, just go ahead and complain
about the horses. The horses were there first, and they will mobilize to
prevent bikes from being allowed on trails if the bikes aren't going to
respect the way things have been working well for trail users (hikers
and equestrians) when they are granted biking access to trails.


Heh... Sounds like... I was here first so I get to make up the rules.

Sorry, It doesn't work that way.

Jonz

Horses do have the advantage of being much more nutritious and tasty
than bicycles.

--
Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731°N, 83.985007°W
I am a vehicular cyclist.

On 8/23/2011 11:50 PM, jcdill wrote:
On 23/08/11 12:36 PM, Jonz wrote:

Heh... Sounds like... I was here first so I get to make up the rules.

No. It's more like "You wouldn't HAVE these parks if the hikers and
equestrians hadn't fought to establish them many years ago, so please
respect their efforts as you work to become part of the solution, rather
than the problem."

Sorry, It doesn't work that way.

I don't think you have the foggiest idea how it works.

Like too many spokeheads, you hide behind an anonymous handle and bogus
email address, and make threats about anyone who doesn't see things your
way 100% of the time. You are part of the problem, and those who know
better how to get along with other trail users, and how to share trails
in a civilized fashion (which means compromise, recognizing and
understanding the needs of other trail users) despair that they will
never make any progress given how much they have to fight with the guys
who are supposed to be on their own team, before they can present a
civilized and unified front to help craft rules that benefit everyone.
Every time they make some progress, some hothead starts flaming and
generates increased opposition to bikes on trails, and they are pushed
back to square one.

So, go ahead, keep on agitating and help ensure that the opposition
stays very active to fight any attempt to expand trail access to bikes
given that bikers (like you) obviously don't know how to get along, and
don't care to get along, and don't care about anyone or anything except
their own selfish selves. You will continue to be part of the problem
and be a perfect poster-boy for everyone who wants to restrict bike
access on trails.

jc

We do have a poster-boy for the anti-mountain bike crowd: Michael J.
Vandeman, PhD.

--
Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731°N, 83.985007°W
I am a vehicular cyclist.

On 23/08/11 10:40 PM, "T°m [email protected]" wrote:

Has a bicycle ever panicked and killed an innocent bystander?

It doesn't take panicking - bicycle riders riding irresponsibly can and
do kill innocent bystanders (pedestrians).

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/baycitynews/a/2011/08/11/pedestrian11.DTL

A day after that article ran, I was driving on Embarcadero in SF, and a
bicycle passed me on the right (in the bike lane) and then proceeded to
blow thru a red light without so much as slowing down. Later that same
day, while I was stopped on Market at Spear, a bike ran thru the red
light, almost mowing down a pedestrian (who had the light) that was
crossing Market.

jc

On 8/23/2011 10:42 PM, "T°m [email protected]" wrote:
On 8/23/2011 2:36 PM, Jonz wrote:
On 8/23/2011 10:42 AM, jcdill wrote:
On 23/08/11 9:27 AM, Jonz wrote:
On 8/22/2011 11:27 PM, jcdill wrote:
On 22/08/11 7:09 PM, Jonz wrote:
On 8/22/2011 3:43 PM, jcdill wrote:


The manure horses leave on the trail becomes fertilizer for the
park.

Eventually. But before it does, it is a disgusting, ugly mess that
horse
riders should be forced to clean up.

BTW, this is a lot like people who move next to an airport then complain
about the noise. While we (society) can't keep people from moving next
to an airport, we (society) CAN keep bikes from legally using trails by
refusing to expand existing and new trails to use by bikes, or by
banning bikes from trails they have already been given permission to
ride. So if your goal is to ensure that more and more people show up to
argue against allowing bikes on the trails, just go ahead and complain
about the horses. The horses were there first, and they will mobilize to
prevent bikes from being allowed on trails if the bikes aren't going to
respect the way things have been working well for trail users (hikers
and equestrians) when they are granted biking access to trails.


Heh... Sounds like... I was here first so I get to make up the rules.

Sorry, It doesn't work that way.

Jonz

Horses do have the advantage of being much more nutritious and tasty
than bicycles.


That brings up a rather pressing question... what wine do you serve with it?

--
__
(oO) www.cosmoslair.com
/||\ Cthulhu Saves!!! (In case he needs a midnight snack)