Mike Vandeman
April 27th 04, 07:06 AM
On 26 Apr 2004 14:28:49 GMT, BB > wrote:
..On Sun, 25 Apr 2004 20:17:30 -0400, S Curtiss wrote:
..
..> So what makes this study any more valid, scientific or honest than the
..> information from the "Don Weir" article? (previous thread) Is it simply that
..> portions of it weigh in favor of your views?
..
..Experienced mountain bikers learn that if you want to get a good look at
..wildlife, DON'T stop. Its been discussed here numerous times. So what does
..this "valid" study do? Have everybody stop for up to a minute.
Because that's exactly what mountain bikers do. DUH!
..Anyway, as Jeff quoted from the studies, the difference of movement rates
..was only 2 yards per MINUTE for elk, and "mule deer showed less change in
..movement rates". And in the afternoon, when many riders in this are ride
..(and many hikers hike), the impact was greater for hiking (but again, only
..slightly). Add this to the long list of data that Mike will pretend
..doesn't exist.
You justt don't want to admit that it didn't go the way you had hoped.
..> Perhaps it would be worth a laugh if you even had a shred of
..> credibility left. Mule deer are actively hunted by single hunters and
..> organized multi-person trips and you are presenting some evidence that
..> implies cyclists may frighten them a little bit more than hikers....?
..
..There are a LOT of people where I work who make the drive out to eastern
..Oregon (where the study was done) to shoot elk & mule deer. Only a troll
..would think that occasionally spooking them is worse than shooting them.
No one is advocating hunting. We are advocating banning BIKES. DUH!
===
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
..On Sun, 25 Apr 2004 20:17:30 -0400, S Curtiss wrote:
..
..> So what makes this study any more valid, scientific or honest than the
..> information from the "Don Weir" article? (previous thread) Is it simply that
..> portions of it weigh in favor of your views?
..
..Experienced mountain bikers learn that if you want to get a good look at
..wildlife, DON'T stop. Its been discussed here numerous times. So what does
..this "valid" study do? Have everybody stop for up to a minute.
Because that's exactly what mountain bikers do. DUH!
..Anyway, as Jeff quoted from the studies, the difference of movement rates
..was only 2 yards per MINUTE for elk, and "mule deer showed less change in
..movement rates". And in the afternoon, when many riders in this are ride
..(and many hikers hike), the impact was greater for hiking (but again, only
..slightly). Add this to the long list of data that Mike will pretend
..doesn't exist.
You justt don't want to admit that it didn't go the way you had hoped.
..> Perhaps it would be worth a laugh if you even had a shred of
..> credibility left. Mule deer are actively hunted by single hunters and
..> organized multi-person trips and you are presenting some evidence that
..> implies cyclists may frighten them a little bit more than hikers....?
..
..There are a LOT of people where I work who make the drive out to eastern
..Oregon (where the study was done) to shoot elk & mule deer. Only a troll
..would think that occasionally spooking them is worse than shooting them.
No one is advocating hunting. We are advocating banning BIKES. DUH!
===
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