On Fri, 09 Jun 2006 19:43:25 -0700, cc wrote:

Mike Vandeman wrote:
On Fri, 9 Jun 2006 06:42:40 -0500, "Edward Dolan"
wrote:


"SMS" wrote in message
.. .

S Curtiss wrote:


People need to adjust to other people. Consideration for other people,
regardless of activity, is the priority.

Well-stated.

It's not a question of who was there first. Nor, as some mountain bikers
might desire, a question of which users there are more of.

Since everyone agrees that trail and wildlife impact is no worse for
bicyclists than hikers, you cannot argue for access of one group over
another based on impact. You could argue to not allow equestrians, since
they have a much bigger impact on trails and wildlife than hikers and
cyclists.

There is not only the question of the impact on trails and wildlife, but the
impact on other users. Hikers and equestrians do not seem to conflict as
much as hikers and bikers. It is all about mental attitudes and how one
views wilderness. Vandeman concentrates on the impact issue with regard to
trails and wildlife whereas I am mostly concerned about the mental and
spiritual dimensions of how different users view wilderness.


I care about that, too, but I know that if I try to talk about it, it
will be over the mountain bikers' heads.


or completely irrelevant.

So people's feelings are irrelevant? What planet do you come 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