A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Techniques
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

[OT] habitat



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old July 12th 11, 06:46 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,alt.mountain-bike,alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent
SMS
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,477
Default [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
  #2  
Old July 12th 11, 07:29 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,alt.mountain-bike,alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent
RonSonic
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,658
Default [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.



  #3  
Old July 13th 11, 01:08 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,alt.mountain-bike,alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent
James[_8_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,153
Default [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.
  #4  
Old July 13th 11, 04:27 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,alt.mountain-bike,alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent
Tºm Shermªn
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 18
Default [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.
  #5  
Old July 13th 11, 08:31 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,alt.mountain-bike,alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent
Mike Vandeman[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,755
Default habitat

On Jul 12, 8:27*pm, Tm Shermn ""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.

Tm Shermn - 42.435731N, 83.985007W
I am a vehicular cyclist.


  #6  
Old July 13th 11, 08:50 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,alt.mountain-bike,alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent
Chalo
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,093
Default habitat

Mike Vandeman wrote:

T*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
  #7  
Old July 13th 11, 11:46 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,alt.mountain-bike,alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent
Peter Cole[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,572
Default [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.
  #8  
Old July 13th 11, 07:02 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,alt.mountain-bike,alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent
Mike Vandeman[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,755
Default habitat

On Jul 13, 12:50*am, Chalo wrote:
Mike Vandeman wrote:

T*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.


BS. I am the world expert on the harm that mountain biking does.
Witness scientific papers presented at more than a dozen scientific
conferences. I didn't see YOU on the agenda. ONE mountain biker tried
to present a paper after me, but after I shot holes in his paper
before he gave it, he was left with nothing to say! Mountain bikers
are all FRAUDS.

*I suggest you
retire from the discussion both here and elsewhere, for your own
benefit. *Cooler heads than yours will carry on from here.


You have said exactly NOTHING on the topic. Mountain bikers can only
BLUFF, as you did.
  #9  
Old July 13th 11, 08:45 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,alt.mountain-bike,alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent
Chalo
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,093
Default habitat

Mike Vandeman wrote:
Chalo wrote:

Mr Vandeman,

You have demonstrated yourself to the point of absurdity to be an
unreliable and uncorrectable "expert" on this topic. [cycling's effects on trails and wilderness]


BS. I am the world expert on the harm that mountain biking does.
Witness scientific papers presented at more than a dozen scientific
conferences. I didn't see YOU on the agenda. ONE mountain biker tried
to present a paper after me, but after I shot holes in his paper
before he gave it, he was left with nothing to say! Mountain bikers
are all FRAUDS.

*I suggest you
retire from the discussion both here and elsewhere, for your own
benefit. *Cooler heads than yours will carry on from here.


You have said exactly NOTHING on the topic. Mountain bikers can only
BLUFF, as you did.


I rest my case.
  #10  
Old July 14th 11, 03:48 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,alt.mountain-bike,alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent
SMS
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,477
Default [OT] habitat

On 7/12/2011 5:08 PM, James wrote:

Horses also leave lots of manure that may contain foreign seeds, and it
is said heavy hooves damage delicate soil structures, in this country.


MV is probably very opposed to horses as well but since one of his only
supporters is a real estate agent that bills herself as a "Horse
Property Specialist," he feels obligated to not publicly oppose them.

This is a shame since if he could be educated to direct his efforts
against the trail users that cause the most damage he would give up on
mountain bikes and concentrate on equestrians.


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
BIKE HABITAT kolldata Techniques 2 March 7th 11 12:52 AM
Wildlife Need Habitat Off-Limits to Humans! Mike Vandeman Social Issues 7 August 31st 08 05:15 AM
Wildlife Need Habitat Off-Limits to Humans! Mike Vandeman Mountain Biking 17 July 31st 08 02:15 AM
Wildlife Need Habitat Off-Limits to Humans! Mike Vandeman Social Issues 17 July 31st 08 02:15 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:24 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2022 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.