|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#151
|
|||
|
|||
habitat
"mike fee" wrote in message ... In article 50367bd2-7526-4804-a802-dcb1435b23f2 @x19g2000prc.googlegroups.com, says... BS. It's ALL dark side. There's NOTHING good about mountain biking, even for the mountain bikers themselves. They are all PRETENDING to be having fun, as they break bones or even DIE. The heavy breathing, the dark helmet, the evil intent, it's all explained now....Darth Vader is a mountain biker!!!! At least he doesn't wear one of those ghastly Primal jerseys. |
Ads |
#152
|
|||
|
|||
habitat
On Jul 21, 2:31*am, RobertH wrote:
On Jul 20, 7:13 am, James wrote: On Jul 20, 4:54 pm, RobertH wrote: If we're going to be really honest with ourselves, and I don't suppose we are, we'll have to admit that the trail itself is an unholy unnatural gash through the wilderness. Wild animals make and use "game trails" all the time. *Domestic animals do the same. *Just look at sheep tracks around hillsides. Yes.. but a man-made trail or trail associated with humans will cause disruption even if nobody is on it. Certain species incl. birds will alter their natural migration patterns to avoid the trail entirely. I have observed many animals, including some birds, _using_ man made trails. Kangaroos, wallabies, wombats, dingos, deer, pigs, goats, emus (a bird), foxes, etc. -- JS. |
#153
|
|||
|
|||
habitat
On Jul 21, 4:54*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote:
On Jul 19, 11:54*pm, RobertH wrote: If you really care about wildlife, destroy the trail entirely, then keep your animal-terrorizing self at home and out of the wilderness.. I agree, I have been saying that for 15 years. Where have you been? You don't practice what you preach? -- JS. |
#154
|
|||
|
|||
habitat
On 7/21/2011 3:34 AM, Ronsonic wrote:
Shall we release some wolves into England and tell the locals it's okay, they belong there. That's being done in the US. |
#155
|
|||
|
|||
habitat
On Jul 21, 12:00*am, RobertH wrote:
On Jul 20, 4:49 pm, Michael Press wrote: Besides that, horses evolved in North America, and hence arguably have the right to go wherever they want to. Horses were introduced to N. America by the Spanish in the 1500s. Both are true statements. Well it's complicated isn't it. The 'horses' that evolved in 'N. America' evolved in a very different climate -- wasn't so-called N. America down near the equator tens of millions of years ago? And then didn't those horses become extinct in an evolutionary process as time went on and 'N. America' changed? So arguably the timeline of horse development in 'n. america' proves even further that Mother Nature doesnt actually want them here. They are introduced species. That is, unless the early horses were hunted to extinction by early man, then all bets are off. Anyway Vandemort's point is a non-starter. Horses almost never get to 'go wherever they want to go.' I love horses and that would be fine with me, but the reality is they are fenced into pens and parcels then directed along a very narrow path by their riders, thus destroying the surface of that path. But since they have the right to go wherever they want to, that's not a problem. Bikes, on the other hand, have NO rights. |
#156
|
|||
|
|||
habitat
On Jul 21, 12:17*am, RobertH wrote:
On Jul 20, 11:20 am, AMuzi wrote: meh. Both natural flora and fauna kill humans too: Yes but not often enough to make any real positve difference. In all seriousness, the mountains can be deadly in many unexpected ways. A few weeks ago a father and daughter, both experienced hikers, were killed when a blast of wind blew them off of a trail above timberline. The same weekend, on a different mountain in the vicinity, someone was crushed by a boulder they were hiding under during a storm. Neither were killed due to doing something stupid, as mountain bikers are. Mountain biking is INHERENTLY stupid and predictably dangerous. |
#157
|
|||
|
|||
habitat
On Jul 21, 12:34*am, "Ronsonic" wrote:
"Mike Vandeman" wrote in message ... On Jul 15, 10:03 am, "Ronsonic" wrote: "Mike Vandeman" wrote in message .... On Jul 14, 1:02 pm, Peter Cole wrote: Can't you read? "horses evolved in North America, and hence arguably have the right to go wherever they want to". Did you flunk grade school English, as well? I read what you wrote. Horses were extinct in North America until introduced some 500 years ago. Now if you want to argue that they were re-introduced, you could, but you'd have to explain the differences between the fossil record and the horses that are out there now. Why? We just returned something that should never have been killed in the first place. Shall we release some wolves into England and tell the locals it's okay, they belong there. Yes, of course. I agree with you on a philosophic basis, bikes are indeed inanimate and if I ever see one out on a trail on its own, I'll order it off the trail. There is no right to bring a bike onto a trail. Why ever do you say such a silly thing. I have every right to ride the trails. BS. There is no "right" to mountain bike. That was settled by a federal court in 1994: http://mjvande.nfshost.com/mtb10.htm. |
#158
|
|||
|
|||
habitat
Peter Cole writes:
On 7/21/2011 3:34 AM, Ronsonic wrote: Shall we release some wolves into England and tell the locals it's okay, they belong there. That's being done in the US. And beavers have been reintroduced in Scotland, after being gone hundreds of years. -- |
#159
|
|||
|
|||
habitat
On 7/21/2011 12:17 AM, RobertH wrote:
On Jul 20, 11:20 am, wrote: meh. Both natural flora and fauna kill humans too: Yes but not often enough to make any real positve difference. In all seriousness, the mountains can be deadly in many unexpected ways. A few weeks ago a father and daughter, both experienced hikers, were killed when a blast of wind blew them off of a trail above timberline. The same weekend, on a different mountain in the vicinity, someone was crushed by a boulder they were hiding under during a storm. There are tragic accidents for both hikers and cyclists, as well as non-accidents caused by doing something stupid. Look what happened at Yosemite a couple of days ago to two hikers. Tragic, but it should not reflect on all hikers. If you're just looking at the impact of various activities upon habitat, all the studies and evidence have proven that there is basically no difference between cyclists and hikers, but that horses have a far greater negative impact. For disturbing wildlife, cyclists have the least impact of the three activities. It's immaterial as to a) when horses came to North America, or b) when mountain bikes were invented. This is not a debate on who was here first, it's a debate on who is creating the most negative impact on habitat and who is damaging trails the most. In that respect, our favorite troll has absolutely no scientific evidence to back his position. |
#160
|
|||
|
|||
habitat
-snip snip-
Ronsonic wrote: Shall we release some wolves into England and tell the locals it's okay, they belong there. You may have meant that as hyperbole. Assholes did exactly that to us in Wisconsin. Really. -- Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org/ Open every day since 1 April, 1971 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Cyclist Bashed | Craig Strong | Australia | 21 | January 31st 07 04:58 AM |
Bush bashed by bike | Grazza | Australia | 0 | February 28th 06 02:43 AM |
McEwen bashed by thugs at Indy | Shabby | Australia | 14 | October 26th 05 12:23 AM |