Bikes on pavement only?

"J. Muir" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Mike, I've seen some badly damaged trails due to mountain bikes, so I can understand why you want
to keep them on roads. But why just paved roads? There are lots of dirt roads in rural areas that
would seem fine for bikes. Besides, car traffic is almost always less on these roads, so it's
safer for the cyclists. You're not against bikes on dirt roads (that are open to cars), are you?

jm

No feeding the troll.

"J. Muir" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Mike Vandeman wrote: <<Just looking for places to ride that are in the area and <<would be
challenging. Any suggestions would be helpful.

<Anywhere, as long as you stay on the pavement.

Mike, I've seen some badly damaged trails due to mountain bikes,

No you haven't. Learn from the NRA, people kill people. Same deal here, mtn bikes don't damage
trails, idiots ON mountain bikes SOMETIMES damage trails. But then, in all honesty, so do idiots
ON hiking boots, sneakers, heels (yep, I've seen that mess before my very pOpping eyeballs),
etc. And never forget, IF you can grasp this: the trails were made BY people, FOR people, and
just like the britches you wear, the car you drive, the house you live in, the body you travel
in, all of these suffer wear and tear, and require upkeep and maintenance. I accept the
responsibility to do exactly that to the abovementioned things as they need it, just as I do my
part to maintain my trailsystems. I do my best not to damage any of them more than is necessary
for them to serve their assigned purpose. Anything else is foolish to varying degrees...
Vandepants notwithstanding...

Quoted message said:

so I can understand why you want to keep them on roads.

No, I don't think you can understand, that and many other things seem to be beyond you.

Quoted message said:

But why just paved roads? There are lots of dirt roads in rural areas that would seem fine for
bikes. Besides, car traffic is almost always less on these roads, so it's safer for the cyclists.
You're not against bikes on dirt roads (that are open to cars), are you?

Go feed the mountain lions, will you? You definitely belong in trollsville.
--
D N I E T S Off to R the M __, D H

Reply to group. (Detestible spammers!)

On 14 Jan 2004 13:19:01 -0800, [email hidden] (J. Muir) wrote:

.Mike Vandeman wrote:
. <<Just looking for places to ride that are in the area and
. <<would be challenging. Any suggestions would be helpful. . .<Anywhere, as long as you stay on
the pavement. . .Mike, I've seen some badly damaged trails due to mountain bikes, so I .can
understand why you want to keep them on roads. But why just paved .roads? There are lots of dirt
roads in rural areas that would seem .fine for bikes.

Do I have to explain EVERYTHING to you idiots? The laws of physics and biology are the same on dirt
roads & dirt trails.

Besides, car traffic is almost always less on these .roads, so it's safer for the cyclists. You're
not against bikes on .dirt roads (that are open to cars), are you?

Yes, I want them closed to all vehicles.

.jm

===
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.)

home.pacbell.netmjvandeOpen ↗

Quoted message said:

. .<Anywhere, as long as you stay on the pavement. . .Mike, I've seen some badly damaged trails
due to mountain bikes, so I .can understand why you want to keep them on roads. But why just paved
.roads? There are lots of dirt roads in rural areas that would seem .fine for bikes.

Do I have to explain EVERYTHING to you idiots? The laws of physics and biology are the same on
dirt roads & dirt trails.

Besides, car traffic is almost always less on these .roads, so it's safer for the cyclists.
You're not against bikes on .dirt roads (that are open to cars), are you?

Yes, I want them closed to all vehicles.

Why not just pave them?

Quoted message said:

Do I have to explain EVERYTHING to you idiots? The laws of physics and biology are the same on
dirt roads & dirt trails.

Yes, please explain. A bulldozer goes through the area and gouges out a road. Now you're
opposing cars and bikes on the road because they might damage it? What exactly are they
damaging, at this point?

And why does paving the road suddenly make it "ok" to use?

Quoted message said:

Besides, car traffic is almost always less on these .roads, so it's safer for the cyclists.
You're not against bikes on .dirt roads (that are open to cars), are you?

Yes, I want them closed to all vehicles.

Stephen Baker said:

How does riding a bike on a road (which has already ruined the environment it uses) differ from
riding on a trail that MV thinks has already ruined it's environment?

Huh?

Huh, indeed!

Bill "when bad sentences happen to {mostly} good people" S.

PS: nice apostrophe ;-)

On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 22:27:41 -0500, "D H" <[email hidden]> wrote:

."J. Muir" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
."]news:[email hidden]... .> Mike Vandeman wrote: .> <<Just looking
for places to ride that are in the area and .> <<would be challenging. Any suggestions would be
helpful. .> .> <Anywhere, as long as you stay on the pavement. .> .> Mike, I've seen some badly
damaged trails due to mountain bikes, .
. No you haven't.
. Learn from the NRA, people kill people. Same deal here, mtn bikes don't .damage trails, idiots
ON mountain bikes SOMETIMES damage trails.

BS. They ALWAYS damage trails. Just look at their tires!

But then, .in all honesty, so do idiots ON hiking boots, sneakers, heels (yep, I've .seen that mess
before my very pOpping eyeballs), etc.
. And never forget, IF you can grasp this: the trails were made BY people, .FOR people, and just
like the britches you wear, the car you drive, the .house you live in, the body you travel in,
all of these suffer wear and .tear, and require upkeep and maintenance.

Before mountain biking came along, hiking trails hardy ever needed "maintenance".

I accept the responsibility to do .exactly that to the abovementioned things as they need it, just
as I do my .part to maintain my trailsystems. I do my best not to damage any of them .more than is
necessary for them to serve their assigned purpose. Anything .else is foolish to varying degrees...
Vandepants notwithstanding...

Your responsibility is to not damage them in the first place. That damage can't be mitigated, any
more than dead animals can be brought back to life.

.> so I .> can understand why you want to keep them on roads. .
. No, I don't think you can understand, that and many other things seem to .be beyond you. . .>
But why just paved .> roads? There are lots of dirt roads in rural areas that would seem .>
fine for bikes. Besides, car traffic is almost always less on these .> roads, so it's safer for
the cyclists. You're not against bikes on .> dirt roads (that are open to cars), are you? .
. Go feed the mountain lions, will you? You definitely belong in .trollsville.

===
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.)

home.pacbell.netmjvandeOpen ↗

On 15 Jan 2004 18:30:07 GMT, [email hidden] (Stephen Baker) wrote:

.How does riding a bike on a road (which has already ruined the environment it .uses) differ from
riding on a trail that MV thinks has already ruined it's .environment?

On a trail you will kill a lot more animals & plants. Of course, that is OBVIOUS to everyone but
mountain bikers. On pavement you are also much farther from wildlife habitat & calse less erosion.
Etc. Are you really THAT stupid?

.Huh?

===
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.)

home.pacbell.netmjvandeOpen ↗

On Thu, 15 Jan 2004 09:26:52 -0600, kantspel <[email hidden]> wrote:

.> . .> .<Anywhere, as long as you stay on the pavement. .> . .> .Mike, I've seen some badly damaged
trails due to mountain bikes, so I .> .can understand why you want to keep them on roads. But why
just paved .> .roads? There are lots of dirt roads in rural areas that would seem .> .fine for
bikes. .> .> Do I have to explain EVERYTHING to you idiots? The laws of physics and biology .> are
the same on dirt roads & dirt trails. .> .> Besides, car traffic is almost always less on these .>
.roads, so it's safer for the cyclists. You're not against bikes on .> .dirt roads (that are open to
cars), are you? .> .> Yes, I want them closed to all vehicles. .> . .Why not just pave them?

I'm against paving.
===
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.)

home.pacbell.netmjvandeOpen ↗

On 15 Jan 2004 08:46:03 -0800, [email hidden] (J. Muir) wrote:

.> Do I have to explain EVERYTHING to you idiots? The laws of physics and .> biology are the same on
dirt roads & dirt trails. . .Yes, please explain. A bulldozer goes through the area and gouges out
.a road. Now you're opposing cars and bikes on the road because they .might damage it? What exactly
are they damaging, at this point?

Killing animals & plants & causing erosion, as well as driving animals out of their habitat. Do I
have to explain EVERYTHING for you idiots?

.And why does paving the road suddenly make it "ok" to use?

Because those things don't happen.

.> Besides, car traffic is almost always less on these .> .roads, so it's safer for the cyclists.
You're not against bikes on .> .dirt roads (that are open to cars), are you? .> .> Yes, I want them
closed to all vehicles.

===
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.)

home.pacbell.netmjvandeOpen ↗

"Mike Vandeman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On 15 Jan 2004 18:30:07 GMT, [email hidden] (Stephen Baker)

Quoted message said:

.How does riding a bike on a road (which has already ruined the

environment it

Quoted message said:

.uses) differ from riding on a trail that MV thinks has already ruined

it's

Quoted message said:

.environment?

On a trail you will kill a lot more animals & plants. Of course, that is

OBVIOUS

Quoted message said:

to everyone but mountain bikers. On pavement you are also much farther

from

Quoted message said:

wildlife habitat & calse less erosion. Etc. Are you really THAT stupid?

Mikey, your mommy should have explained to you "where" roads come from. You have animal paths (
where animals walk through the woods), then you have human paths, where they walk over the animal
path and make it bigger and more cleared out by their traffic on it ( note it is still quite safe
for animal passage) , and if some group decides they like this path, and want to pave it, then they
clear out a huge swath of vegetation on both sides of the path, sometimes hundreds of feet on both
sides, meaning a major de-forestation, and once the asphalt road has gone in, it becomes a mindless
killing machine for small and large wildlife alike, as cars indiscriminately run over and crush the
forest fauna in their attempts to travel along what used to be "their" path.

Mike, relatively speaking, hikers and mountain bikers could be an environmental system "blemish",
but roads and Real Estate developers in the same system, are like e-bola. You try to act like you
are some kind of a cure, but your actions make you more of a "festering sore" on the environmental
movement. No Regards, Dan V

Quoted message said:

On a trail you will kill a lot more animals & plants.

This is patently false. It is entirely likely that one can ride on a trail for years and NEVER kill
a single animal or plant. This is obvious to everybody but you. Are you REALLY that stupid?

Arguing with Mikey is a total waste of time. Do not feed the troll!

--
Bob Burns Mill Hall PA

Dan Volker said:

Mikey, your mommy should have explained to you "where" roads come from.

And Danny, your English teacher should have explained to you "what" quotation marks are for.

Bill "you sound like Austin Powers" S.

In article <[email hidden]>,

Jeff Strickland said:

Quoted message said:

On a trail you will kill a lot more animals & plants.

This is patently false. It is entirely likely that one can ride on a trail for years and NEVER
kill a single animal or plant. This is obvious to everybody but you. Are you REALLY that stupid?

Why argue with him?

The truth means nothing to him.

Dave in Minnesota

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

On a trail you will kill a lot more animals & plants.

This is patently false. It is entirely likely that one can ride on a trail for years and NEVER
kill a single animal or plant. This is obvious to everybody but you. Are you REALLY that stupid?

mikey advocates paving over animals and habitat for their protection.
--
_________________________
Chris Phillipo - Cape Breton, Nova Scotia ramsays-online.comramsays-online.comOpen ↗

"Chris Phillipo" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

On a trail you will kill a lot more animals & plants.

This is patently false. It is entirely likely that one can ride on a

trail

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

for years and NEVER kill a single animal or plant. This is obvious to everybody but you. Are you
REALLY that stupid?

mikey advocates paving over animals and habitat for their protection.
--

More accurately, Mike advocates protecting the environment by putting measures in place that have no
chance of protecting the habitat.

I have pointed out to him that his protection efforts if 100% effective would save less than 0.004%
of any habitat affected by a bike route.

I go biking on trails all the time I have never seen any animals, or have i ever damaged anything in
the woods or on trails, on the other hand i take my dogs out there and they dig and chase animals
would you like to ban those as well? bears tear down trees and cause all types of damage would you
like to ban them?

"Mike Vandeman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 22:27:41 -0500, "D H" <[email hidden]> wrote:

."J. Muir" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
."]news:[email hidden]... .> Mike Vandeman wrote: .> <<Just looking
for places to ride that are in the area and .> <<would be challenging. Any suggestions would be
helpful. .> .> <Anywhere, as long as you stay on the pavement. .> .> Mike, I've seen some badly
damaged trails due to mountain bikes, .
. No you haven't.
. Learn from the NRA, people kill people. Same deal here, mtn bikes

don't

Quoted message said:

.damage trails, idiots ON mountain bikes SOMETIMES damage trails.

BS. They ALWAYS damage trails. Just look at their tires!

But then, .in all honesty, so do idiots ON hiking boots, sneakers, heels (yep, I've .seen that
mess before my very pOpping eyeballs), etc.
. And never forget, IF you can grasp this: the trails were made BY

people,

Quoted message said:

.FOR people, and just like the britches you wear, the car you drive, the .house you live in, the
body you travel in, all of these suffer wear and .tear, and require upkeep and maintenance.

Before mountain biking came along, hiking trails hardy ever needed "maintenance".

I accept the responsibility to do .exactly that to the abovementioned things as they need it,
just as I do

my

Quoted message said:

.part to maintain my trailsystems. I do my best not to damage any of them .more than is necessary
for them to serve their assigned purpose. Anything .else is foolish to varying degrees...
Vandepants notwithstanding...

Your responsibility is to not damage them in the first place. That damage

can't

Quoted message said:

be mitigated, any more than dead animals can be brought back to life.

.> so I .> can understand why you want to keep them on roads. .
. No, I don't think you can understand, that and many other things seem

to

Quoted message said:

.be beyond you. . .> But why just paved .> roads? There are lots of dirt roads in rural areas that
would seem .> fine for bikes. Besides, car traffic is almost always less on these .> roads, so
it's safer for the cyclists. You're not against bikes on .> dirt roads (that are open to cars),
are you? .
. Go feed the mountain lions, will you? You definitely belong in .trollsville.

===
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.)

home.pacbell.netmjvandeOpen ↗

Mike Vandeman said:

On 14 Jan 2004 13:19:01 -0800, [email hidden] (J. Muir) wrote:

.Mike Vandeman wrote:
. <<Just looking for places to ride that are in the area and
. <<would be challenging. Any suggestions would be helpful. . .<Anywhere, as long as you stay on
the pavement.

Holy @#$. Are we forgetting what it takes to PAVE a trail Mikey and what paving land does to the
environment? It might not be 'wilderness' but paving destroys the habitat for the animals, etc. that
live there, but you have the appearance of advocation paving v.s. leaving trails and roads and dirt.

Quoted message said:

Do I have to explain EVERYTHING to you idiots? The laws of physics and biology are the same on
dirt roads & dirt trails.

Besides, car traffic is almost always less on these .roads, so it's safer for the cyclists.
You're not against bikes on .dirt roads (that are open to cars), are you?

Yes, I want them closed to all vehicles.

Careful what you ask for MV, you'll get every dirt road and trial paved.

RS