02-15-2007, 08:11 PM
|
#10 (permalink)
|
| | Re: Vandeman one post closer to death
On Thu, 15 Feb 2007 08:36:10 -0800, cc <cc@nospam.edu> wrote:
>Mike Vandeman wrote:
>> On 13 Feb 2007 07:35:33 -0800, "Kernix" <jimkernicky@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Feb 13, 12:41 am, cc <c...@nospam.edu> wrote:
>>>> Mike Vandeman wrote:
>>>>> \On Mon, 12 Feb 2007 09:26:43 -0700, "GeeDubb" <geed...@qwest.net>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> Some of you might remember me talking about the new Black Canyon Trail
>>>>>> system going in North of Phoenix. We had another great turnout of people on
>>>>>> Saturday cutting in another half mile or more of trail through some pretty
>>>>>> tough terrain. For a few pictures, a short write-up and links to more
>>>>>> photos and the BCT website click below
>>>>>> http://www.spokejunkies.com/forum/in...showtopic=5095
>>>>> Disgusting. Where do you get the right to destroy wildlife habitat,
>>>>> especially for cheap thrills like mountain biking? And you want to
>>>>> call yourselves "environmentalists"?!
>>>> Doesn't it burn you up? How
>>>> about knowing you're
>>>> absolutely powerless to stop
>>>> it? How about knowing the
>>>> world laughs at you?
>>> Wait a minute - how is a hiking trail any different?
>>
>> It's narrower. Hikers can pass each other in less space than two
>> bikers can pass each other (due to the handlebars).
>
>This is just incorrect. I've
>been on countless biking and
>hiking trails, and the
>difference is negligible.
So you admit that there is a difference -- as I said! QED
Some
>of the tightest trails I've
>been on were for bikers and
>hikers.
>
>>
>> You're talking
>>> about a trail that is not that wide is such a large area? I'm a hiker,
>>> mtn biker, canoer, orienteer, camper and soon to be sailor - why can't
>>> bikers enjoy the outdoors.
>>
>> They CAN -- just like everyone else: on foot!
>
>Mike, it's about time you
>stopped posting this bull****
>semantic argument. If you ban
>the bikes, you ban mountain
>bikers. When I'm on the trail
>without my bike, I'm a hiker.
>Douchebag.
>
>>
>> I mean the Appalachian Mountain Club
>>> maintains the miles of trail every year - each year debris or erosion
>>> has to be cleared/fixed, as well as trimming back of weeds, branches,
>>> bushes, etc. How is this any different?
>>>
>>> Now you can come back with an argument that some mtn bikers will make
>>> new paths for challenges - true - some who don't think about the
>>> impact, idiots - I personally wouldn't veer off the trails - but
>>> that's right up there with campers/hikers who leave trash or cut down
>>> trees.
>>>
>>> And I'd rather see a THIN (in comparison to the entire park/area),
>>> DEFINED bike trail than no trail at all - at least with a defined
>>> trail, the majority of bikers will stick to the trail - as opposed to
>>> no trail and every biker making there own trail and thus doing much
>>> more overall damage.
>>>
>>> You guys have to get a clue - it's just not your wilderness!
>>
>> You make no sense whatsoever. How does a bike ban keep mountain bikers
>> out??????????????????????????????????? Idiot.
>
>Mike, it's about time you
>stopped posting this bull****
>semantic argument. If you ban
>the bikes, you ban mountain
>bikers. When I'm on the trail
>without my bike, I'm a hiker.
>Douchebag.
===
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.)
Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of!
http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande
|
|
|  |