|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
[OT] habitat
On 7/6/2011 2:45 PM, James wrote:
Marvelous how habitat grows back. I see it regularly in bush camping areas. "This area is closed for revegetation." It goes beyond that as well. Every single study on impact to trails has shown that hikers and mountain bikers have similar levels of impact--the impacts are slightly different, but similar level. Hikers have a much greater impact on wildlife because they move through an area more slowly and hence are there for a much longer time. Both hikers and cyclists cause trail erosion and damage in different ways. Horses of course have been shown to do much greater damage to trails than any other user, besides having the most impact on wildlife. The reason why some hikers are opposed to mountain bikes has absolutely nothing to do with impact on trails or habitat, that's a smokescren. The real reason is that they just prefer to hike without the additional trail users in what they believe to be space that they are entitled to. I don't blame them. I find it unpleasant to be hiking on a trail and have bicycles zoom by too, but I don't go around making up stories to try and justify why bicycles should be banned. The reason you see these incredible stories being fabricated (and MV is by no means alone in doing this) is because the argument of "we were here before there were any mountain bikes so we should have exclusive use" is so weak. If MV was really concerned about habitat or trail damage he'd be spending his efforts toward banning equestrians on trails, not cyclists. But of course it's clear that he actually has no concern about either of those. |
Ads |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
[OT] habitat
"SMS" wrote in message ... On 7/6/2011 2:45 PM, James wrote: Marvelous how habitat grows back. I see it regularly in bush camping areas. "This area is closed for revegetation." It goes beyond that as well. Every single study on impact to trails has shown that hikers and mountain bikers have similar levels of impact--the impacts are slightly different, but similar level. Hikers have a much greater impact on wildlife because they move through an area more slowly and hence are there for a much longer time. Both hikers and cyclists cause trail erosion and damage in different ways. Horses of course have been shown to do much greater damage to trails than any other user, besides having the most impact on wildlife. The reason why some hikers are opposed to mountain bikes has absolutely nothing to do with impact on trails or habitat, that's a smokescren. The real reason is that they just prefer to hike without the additional trail users in what they believe to be space that they are entitled to. I don't blame them. I find it unpleasant to be hiking on a trail and have bicycles zoom by too, but I don't go around making up stories to try and justify why bicycles should be banned. The reason you see these incredible stories being fabricated (and MV is by no means alone in doing this) is because the argument of "we were here before there were any mountain bikes so we should have exclusive use" is so weak. I have the good fortune to live in an area that sees off road cycling as a client base and contributor to the trail system, not a foe. We have our trails that we build and maintain that are open to hikers and that are closed when riding would be damaging, the hikers have foot traffic only trails and there are trails that are open to horses. We alter the trails when they start to become too permanent so that regrowth is a continual process. The trails that are open to cyclists are clearly marked as such and everybody mostly gets along very nicely. None of them have formed factions. Our enemies are common, wild pigs at the top with varying degrees of rudeness being anathema to all. Yep, there are jerk mountain bikers, they are rude to other riders as well. Nobody is rude to the horses, it doesn't pay. |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
Solution to Bashed Chainrings?
On 7/12/2011 11:40 AM, Convicted Criminal Mike "Handsaw" Vandeman wrote:
On Jul 11, 5:07 pm, Mike wrote: On Jul 10, 11:17 pm, Tºm Shermªn °_°""twshermanREMOVE\"@THI $southslope.net" wrote: On 7/11/2011 1:02 AM, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Jul 10, 6:24 pm, T m Sherm n _""twshermanREMOVE\"@THI $southslope.net" wrote: On 7/10/2011 7:40 PM, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Jul 10, 7:23 am, wrote: On Jul 10, 2:19 am, Mike wrote: snip Just remember this - judges are much harder on *repeat* offenders and probation violators. Since I don't have any violations, I can't have any repeat violations. DUH! You were convicted of 3 counts and you are on probation for the next 3 (well 2 1/2 now) years. This is a matter of public record. Stop living in denial. It isn't healthy. You are the one in denial. A conviction, based on lies, is worthless. It proves NOTHING. Thanks for demonstrating just how ignorant you are. All you are proving is that mountain bikers wanted to see me punished, and were willing to commit PERJURY, in order to make that happen. The joke is on them. Mountain bikers are their own worst enemies. All they ever do is prove to the world how scummy and dishonest they are. Does your probation officer read these posts? No early release for Mikey with this attitude. Ed is right: you are unteachable. I don't have a probation officer. Why would you want to establish a reputation as a liar and an unreliable source of information. Everything that comes out of your mouth is WORTHLESS, as you are WORTHLESS. Not sure which is more ridiculous: - Lying about not having a probation officer, I'm not lyng, but you are. Tell me who my "probation officer" is, smart ass. I know you can't. You are 100% FAKE.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Cat got your tongue suddenly, Tommy Sherman? Can't answer my question? Can't prove you aren't a FAKE? Having given Mikey V. enough rope to hang himself, I see no need to pile on further. -- Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731°N, 83.985007°W I am a vehicular cyclist. |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
[OT] habitat
On 13/07/2011 3:46 AM, SMS wrote:
On 7/6/2011 2:45 PM, James wrote: Marvelous how habitat grows back. I see it regularly in bush camping areas. "This area is closed for revegetation." It goes beyond that as well. Every single study on impact to trails has shown that hikers and mountain bikers have similar levels of impact--the impacts are slightly different, but similar level. Hikers have a much greater impact on wildlife because they move through an area more slowly and hence are there for a much longer time. I have done both hiking and ridden the mountain bike on trails. I can guarantee that I can walk passed an animal with less disturbance and I would normally ride passed. Often I walk so quietly the animals barely notice me, or just stand and look. On a bike they hear more and see more rapid motion and take flight in alarm far more frequently. Realise that I am also a hunter, and as such am practised in the arts of moving quietly and inconspicuously through the bush. Both hikers and cyclists cause trail erosion and damage in different ways. Horses of course have been shown to do much greater damage to trails than any other user, besides having the most impact on wildlife. Horses also leave lots of manure that may contain foreign seeds, and it is said heavy hooves damage delicate soil structures, in this country. The reason why some hikers are opposed to mountain bikes has absolutely nothing to do with impact on trails or habitat, that's a smokescren. The real reason is that they just prefer to hike without the additional trail users in what they believe to be space that they are entitled to. I don't blame them. I find it unpleasant to be hiking on a trail and have bicycles zoom by too, but I don't go around making up stories to try and justify why bicycles should be banned. I think they might feel cheated that the bicyclist covered a distance in 2 hours what took them half a day. -- JS. |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
[OT] habitat
On 7/12/2011 12:46 PM, SMS aka Steven M. Scharf wrote:
On 7/6/2011 2:45 PM, James wrote: Marvelous how habitat grows back. I see it regularly in bush camping areas. "This area is closed for revegetation." It goes beyond that as well. Every single study on impact to trails has shown that hikers and mountain bikers have similar levels of impact--the impacts are slightly different, but similar level. Hikers have a much greater impact on wildlife because they move through an area more slowly and hence are there for a much longer time. Both hikers and cyclists cause trail erosion and damage in different ways. Horses of course have been shown to do much greater damage to trails than any other user, besides having the most impact on wildlife.[...] Like a stopped analog clock, every once in a while, Scharf is correct. -- Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731°N, 83.985007°W I am a vehicular cyclist. |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
Solution to Bashed Chainrings?
On Jul 12, 4:00*pm, Tºm Shermªn °_° ""twshermanREMOVE\"@THI
$southslope.net" wrote: On 7/12/2011 11:40 AM, Convicted Criminal Mike "Handsaw" Vandeman wrote: On Jul 11, 5:07 pm, Mike *wrote: On Jul 10, 11:17 pm, Tºm Shermªn °_°""twshermanREMOVE\"@THI $southslope.net" *wrote: On 7/11/2011 1:02 AM, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Jul 10, 6:24 pm, T m Sherm n _""twshermanREMOVE\"@THI $southslope.net" * *wrote: On 7/10/2011 7:40 PM, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Jul 10, 7:23 am, * * wrote: On Jul 10, 2:19 am, Mike * * wrote: snip Just remember this - judges are much harder on *repeat* offenders and probation violators. Since I don't have any violations, I can't have any repeat violations. DUH! You were convicted of 3 counts and you are on probation for the next 3 (well 2 1/2 now) years. This is a matter of public record. Stop living in denial. It isn't healthy. You are the one in denial. A conviction, based on lies, is worthless. It proves NOTHING. Thanks for demonstrating just how ignorant you are. All you are proving is that mountain bikers wanted to see me punished, and were willing to commit PERJURY, in order to make that happen. The joke is on them. Mountain bikers are their own worst enemies. All they ever do is prove to the world how scummy and dishonest they are. Does your probation officer read these posts? No early release for Mikey with this attitude. Ed is right: you are unteachable. I don't have a probation officer. Why would you want to establish a reputation as a liar and an unreliable source of information. Everything that comes out of your mouth is WORTHLESS, as you are WORTHLESS. Not sure which is more ridiculous: - Lying about not having a probation officer, I'm not lyng, but you are. Tell me who my "probation officer" is, smart ass. I know you can't. You are 100% FAKE.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Cat got your tongue suddenly, Tommy Sherman? Can't answer my question? Can't prove you aren't a FAKE? Having given Mikey V. enough rope to hang himself, I see no need to pile on further. Especially since you have been caught in a lie several times, and can't figure out how to continue ignoring the fact. Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731°N, 83.985007°W I am a vehicular cyclist. |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
habitat
On Jul 12, 8:27*pm, Tºm Shermªn ""twshermanREMOVE\"@THI
$southslope.net" wrote: On 7/12/2011 12:46 PM, SMS aka Steven M. Scharf wrote: On 7/6/2011 2:45 PM, James wrote: Marvelous how habitat grows back. I see it regularly in bush camping areas. "This area is closed for revegetation." It goes beyond that as well. Every single study on impact to trails has shown that hikers and mountain bikers have similar levels of impact--the impacts are slightly different, but similar level. Hikers have a much greater impact on wildlife because they move through an area more slowly and hence are there for a much longer time. Both hikers and cyclists cause trail erosion and damage in different ways. Horses of course have been shown to do much greater damage to trails than any other user, besides having the most impact on wildlife.[...] Like a stopped analog clock, every once in a while, Scharf is correct. No, he isn't. Not even close. He obviously hasn't actually READ the research. Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731°N, 83.985007°W I am a vehicular cyclist. |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
habitat
Mike Vandeman wrote:
Tà¸*m Shermลn wrote Steven M. Scharf wrote: It goes beyond that as well. Every single study on impact to trails has shown that hikers and mountain bikers have similar levels of impact--the impacts are slightly different, but similar level. Hikers have a much greater impact on wildlife because they move through an area more slowly and hence are there for a much longer time. Both hikers and cyclists cause trail erosion and damage in different ways. Horses of course have been shown to do much greater damage to trails than any other user, besides having the most impact on wildlife.[...] Like a stopped analog clock, every once in a while, Scharf is correct. No, he isn't. Not even close. He obviously hasn't actually READ the research. Mr Vandeman, You have demonstrated yourself to the point of absurdity to be an unreliable and uncorrectable "expert" on this topic. I suggest you retire from the discussion both here and elsewhere, for your own benefit. Cooler heads than yours will carry on from here. Chalo |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
[OT] habitat
On 7/12/2011 11:27 PM, Tºm Shermªn wrote:
On 7/12/2011 12:46 PM, SMS aka Steven M. Scharf wrote: On 7/6/2011 2:45 PM, James wrote: Marvelous how habitat grows back. I see it regularly in bush camping areas. "This area is closed for revegetation." It goes beyond that as well. Every single study on impact to trails has shown that hikers and mountain bikers have similar levels of impact--the impacts are slightly different, but similar level. Hikers have a much greater impact on wildlife because they move through an area more slowly and hence are there for a much longer time. Both hikers and cyclists cause trail erosion and damage in different ways. Horses of course have been shown to do much greater damage to trails than any other user, besides having the most impact on wildlife.[...] Like a stopped analog clock, every once in a while, Scharf is correct. As long as he limits his posts to two a day he's infallible. |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
Why is Tom Sherman such a graceless, sleazy liar? was Solution toBashed Chainrings?
Vandeman: I don't have a probation officer.
Sherman: Lying about not having a probation officer, Vandeman: Tell me who my "probation officer" is, smart ass. Sherman: [Dead silence] Vandeman: Cat got your tongue suddenly, Tommy Sherman? Can't answer my question? Can't prove you aren't a FAKE? Sherman: Having given Mikey V. enough rope to hang himself, I see no need to pile on further. *** This is an admission that you lied, Tom Sherman. It is also your statement that you, Tom Sherman, don't intend to apologize for your sleazy lie. You're a liar, Tom Sherman. You have no grace, Tom Sherman. You're scum. Andre Jute Keen observer of the human race |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Cyclist Bashed | Craig Strong | Australia | 21 | January 31st 07 03:58 AM |
Bush bashed by bike | Grazza | Australia | 0 | February 28th 06 01:43 AM |
McEwen bashed by thugs at Indy | Shabby | Australia | 14 | October 26th 05 12:23 AM |