MV Agrees

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

Quoted message said:

On Fri, 09 Apr 2004 14:00:27 -0400, Steve Curtiss
<[email hidden]> wrote:

. . .Mike Vandeman wrote: . .> On Tue, 6 Apr 2004 17:09:01
-0400, "S Curtiss" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

.> .> . .> ."Mike Vandeman" <[email hidden]> wrote in
message .>
."]news:[email hidden]... .> .>
On Sun, 4 Apr 2004 17:14:23 -0400, "S Curtiss"

<[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

.> .wrote: .> .> .> .> . .> .> .> Sure. But they are not
being denied access to the trails as

claimed.

Quoted message said:

.> .> .> .> .> .Their claim, as you say, is access for the
purpose of off road

cycling.

Quoted message said:

.> .You .> .> .can pick apart their phrasing all you want.
What the "mt bikers"

are up

Quoted message said:

.> .> .against is biased attitudes and false perceptions
of shared access

for

Quoted message said:

.> .> .hiking and off road cycling. .> .> .> .> Lie all
you want, but the reasons for banning bikes are VALID:

documented

Quoted message said:

.> .danger .> .> to wildlife and other trail users.. .> .
.> .Lie all YOU want. Studies show your "reasons" are
based on false

perceptions

Quoted message said:

.> .and myths being put forth by a small majority who
claim to speak for .> .wildlife. Moutain bikes are not
killing wildlife. .> .> That is pure fabrication. They
kill plants, insects, and other animals

every tme

Quoted message said:

.> they ride. That is obvious. .> . .How convenient! You
snipped the content that specifically addresses your

stated

Quoted message said:

.concerns (8 years - auto dependence - road
construction...) so you could

take

Quoted message said:

.another shot with your exaggerated claim of ultimate
destruction by mt

bikes. Why

Quoted message said:

.didn't you address the rest of the content: ."Urban
sprawl, new construction (especially when existing
structures are

vacant and

Quoted message said:

.plentiful) and excess limber clearing is destroying
habitat which IS

stressing

Quoted message said:

.wildlife to death. Why is it so difficult to actually
cooperate with

everyone

Quoted message said:

.interested in keeping these areas from destruction
instead of continually .splintering groups against each
other which ultimately solves nothing." .As far as your
statement: "They kill plants, insects, and other animals

every time

Quoted message said:

.they ride. That is obvious" .Hikers step on insects and
plants and disturb wildlife every time they

walk. That is

Quoted message said:

.obvious.

Bikers travel several times as far, so kill several
times as much

wildlife. DUH!

Quoted message said:

Hikers are also able to step over animals & plants. Bikers
can't. They

sim[ly

Quoted message said:

sqush them.

and hikers never venture off trail. All hikers are virtuous
and all mt bikers are liars... How much you want for that
bridge over the bay?

Quoted message said:

So don't play "holier than thou" because you hike, Mr.
Double Standard. .Address the real concerns that ALL OF
US are worried about.

There are plenty of people working on stopping sprawl.

Ignorance is bliss, MR V... so blissfull, apparently, you
would rather go after a group who shares many of the same
views as you while bulldozers are clearing trees for another
WalMart.... Sleep well.

Quoted message said:

===
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 Fri, 9 Apr 2004 23:24:29 -0400, "S Curtiss" <[email hidden]> wrote:

. ."Mike Vandeman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
."]news:[email hidden]... .> On
Fri, 09 Apr 2004 14:00:27 -0400, Steve Curtiss
<[email hidden]> .> wrote: .> .> . .> . .> .Mike
Vandeman wrote: .> . .> .> On Tue, 6 Apr 2004 17:09:01 -
0400, "S Curtiss" <[email hidden]> .wrote: .> .> .>
.> . .> .> ."Mike Vandeman" <[email hidden]> wrote in
message .> .>
."]news:[email hidden]... .> .> .>
On Sun, 4 Apr 2004 17:14:23 -0400, "S Curtiss"
.<[email hidden]> .> .> .wrote: .> .> .> .> .> .> .
.> .> .> .> Sure. But they are not being denied access to
the trails as .claimed. .> .> .> .> .> .> .> .Their claim,
as you say, is access for the purpose of off road .cycling.
.> .> .You .> .> .> .can pick apart their phrasing all you
want. What the "mt bikers" .are up .> .> .> .against is
biased attitudes and false perceptions of shared access .for
.> .> .> .hiking and off road cycling. .> .> .> .> .> .> Lie
all you want, but the reasons for banning bikes are VALID:
.documented .> .> .danger .> .> .> to wildlife and other
trail users.. .> .> . .> .> .Lie all YOU want. Studies show
your "reasons" are based on false .perceptions .> .> .and
myths being put forth by a small majority who claim to speak
for .> .> .wildlife. Moutain bikes are not killing wildlife.
.> .> .> .> That is pure fabrication. They kill plants,
insects, and other animals .every tme .> .> they ride. That
is obvious. .> .> .> . .> .How convenient! You snipped the
content that specifically addresses your .stated .>
.concerns (8 years - auto dependence - road construction...)
so you could .take .> .another shot with your exaggerated
claim of ultimate destruction by mt .bikes. Why .> .didn't
you address the rest of the content: .> ."Urban sprawl, new
construction (especially when existing structures are
.vacant and .> .plentiful) and excess limber clearing is
destroying habitat which IS .stressing .> .wildlife to
death. Why is it so difficult to actually cooperate with
.everyone .> .interested in keeping these areas from
destruction instead of continually .> .splintering groups
against each other which ultimately solves nothing." .> .As
far as your statement: "They kill plants, insects, and other
animals .every time .> .they ride. That is obvious" .>
.Hikers step on insects and plants and disturb wildlife
every time they .walk. That is .> .obvious. .> .> Bikers
travel several times as far, so kill several times as much
.wildlife. DUH! .> Hikers are also able to step over animals
& plants. Bikers can't. They .sim[ly .> sqush them. .> .and
hikers never venture off trail. All hikers are virtuous

I never said that, liar.

and all mt .bikers are liars...

You just conveniently demonstrated that.

.How much you want for that bridge over the bay? . .> So
don't play "holier than thou" because you hike, Mr. Double
Standard. .> .Address the real concerns that ALL OF US are
worried about. .> .> There are plenty of people working on
stopping sprawl. . .Ignorance is bliss, MR V... so
blissfull, apparently, you would rather go .after a group
who shares many of the same views as you

Name ONE view that mountain bikers share (and actively
promote) with me and other REAL conservationists.

while bulldozers are .clearing trees for another
WalMart.... Sleep well. .> === .> 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 ↗ .

===
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 Fri, 9 Apr 2004 23:24:29 -0400, "S Curtiss"
<[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

. ."Mike Vandeman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
."]news:[email hidden]... .> On
Fri, 09 Apr 2004 14:00:27 -0400, Steve Curtiss

<[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

.> wrote: .> .> . .> . .> .Mike Vandeman wrote: .> . .> .>
On Tue, 6 Apr 2004 17:09:01 -0400, "S Curtiss"

<[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

.wrote: .> .> .> .> . .> .> ."Mike Vandeman"
<[email hidden]> wrote in message .> .>
."]news:[email hidden]... .>
.> .> On Sun, 4 Apr 2004 17:14:23 -0400, "S Curtiss"
.<[email hidden]> .> .> .wrote: .> .> .> .> .>
.> . .> .> .> .> Sure. But they are not being denied
access to the trails as .claimed. .> .> .> .> .> .> .>
.Their claim, as you say, is access for the purpose of
off road .cycling. .> .> .You .> .> .> .can pick apart
their phrasing all you want. What the "mt bikers" .are
up .> .> .> .against is biased attitudes and false
perceptions of shared

access

Quoted message said:

.for .> .> .> .hiking and off road cycling. .> .> .> .> .>
.> Lie all you want, but the reasons for banning bikes are
VALID: .documented .> .> .danger .> .> .> to wildlife and
other trail users.. .> .> . .> .> .Lie all YOU want.
Studies show your "reasons" are based on false
.perceptions .> .> .and myths being put forth by a small
majority who claim to speak

for

Quoted message said:

.> .> .wildlife. Moutain bikes are not killing wildlife.
.> .> .> .> That is pure fabrication. They kill plants,
insects, and other

animals

Quoted message said:

.every tme .> .> they ride. That is obvious. .> .> .> . .>
.How convenient! You snipped the content that specifically
addresses

your

Quoted message said:

.stated .> .concerns (8 years - auto dependence - road
construction...) so you

could

Quoted message said:

.take .> .another shot with your exaggerated claim of
ultimate destruction by mt .bikes. Why .> .didn't you
address the rest of the content: .> ."Urban sprawl, new
construction (especially when existing structures

are

Quoted message said:

.vacant and .> .plentiful) and excess limber clearing is
destroying habitat which IS .stressing .> .wildlife to
death. Why is it so difficult to actually cooperate with
.everyone .> .interested in keeping these areas from
destruction instead of

continually

Quoted message said:

.> .splintering groups against each other which
ultimately solves

nothing."

Quoted message said:

.> .As far as your statement: "They kill plants, insects,
and other

animals

Quoted message said:

.every time .> .they ride. That is obvious" .> .Hikers
step on insects and plants and disturb wildlife every time
they .walk. That is .> .obvious. .> .> Bikers travel
several times as far, so kill several times as much
.wildlife. DUH! .> Hikers are also able to step over
animals & plants. Bikers can't. They .sim[ly .> sqush
them. .> .and hikers never venture off trail. All hikers
are virtuous

I never said that, liar.

and all mt .bikers are liars...

You just conveniently demonstrated that.

.How much you want for that bridge over the bay? . .> So
don't play "holier than thou" because you hike, Mr. Double

Standard.

Quoted message said:

.> .Address the real concerns that ALL OF US are worried
about. .> .> There are plenty of people working on
stopping sprawl. . .Ignorance is bliss, MR V... so
blissfull, apparently, you would rather

go

Quoted message said:

.after a group who shares many of the same views as you

Name ONE view that mountain bikers share (and actively
promote) with me

and

Quoted message said:

other REAL conservationists.

I did... you again avoided it so you could take a jab at mt
bike enthusiasts. Here... I'll say it again in words you can
grasp. Hikers, Mt bikers, conservationists (as you say) are
all interested in keeping green areas safe from
construction. Habitat (which you say you value) is being
targeted for concrete and pavement every day. Mt bikers are
among the people trying to keep that from happening. It
destroys the habitat (you claim to cherish) AND takes away
places to ride and hike. Mt bikers stand with many groups to
oppose this unneeded construction. You only drive a wedge
into the mix to get these groups fighting each other. You do
more harm than good. Concerning your reply to this: "and
hikers never venture off trail. All hikers are virtuous"

Quoted message said:

I never said that, liar.

I never said you said it. But the way you attribute
ecological damage to all mt bikers and leave all hikers
unchallenged always seems to demonstrate your bias.

Quoted message said:

while bulldozers are .clearing trees for another
WalMart.... Sleep well. .> === .> 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 ↗ .

===
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 Sat, 10 Apr 2004 15:19:36 -0400, "S Curtiss" <[email hidden]> wrote:

. ."Mike Vandeman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
."]news:[email hidden]... .> On
Fri, 9 Apr 2004 23:24:29 -0400, "S Curtiss"
<[email hidden]> .wrote: .> .> . .> ."Mike Vandeman"
<[email hidden]> wrote in message .>
."]news:[email hidden]... .> .> On
Fri, 09 Apr 2004 14:00:27 -0400, Steve Curtiss
.<[email hidden]> .> .> wrote: .> .> .> .> . .> .> .
.> .> .Mike Vandeman wrote: .> .> . .> .> .> On Tue, 6 Apr
2004 17:09:01 -0400, "S Curtiss" .<[email hidden]>
.> .wrote: .> .> .> .> .> .> . .> .> .> ."Mike Vandeman"
<[email hidden]> wrote in message .> .> .>
."]news:[email hidden]... .> .> .>
.> On Sun, 4 Apr 2004 17:14:23 -0400, "S Curtiss" .>
.<[email hidden]> .> .> .> .wrote: .> .> .> .> .> .>
.> .> . .> .> .> .> .> Sure. But they are not being denied
access to the trails as .> .claimed. .> .> .> .> .> .> .> .>
.> .Their claim, as you say, is access for the purpose of
off road .> .cycling. .> .> .> .You .> .> .> .> .can pick
apart their phrasing all you want. What the "mt bikers" .>
.are up .> .> .> .> .against is biased attitudes and false
perceptions of shared .access .> .for .> .> .> .> .hiking
and off road cycling. .> .> .> .> .> .> .> .> Lie all you
want, but the reasons for banning bikes are VALID: .>
.documented .> .> .> .danger .> .> .> .> to wildlife and
other trail users.. .> .> .> . .> .> .> .Lie all YOU want.
Studies show your "reasons" are based on false .>
.perceptions .> .> .> .and myths being put forth by a small
majority who claim to speak .for .> .> .> .wildlife. Moutain
bikes are not killing wildlife. .> .> .> .> .> .> That is
pure fabrication. They kill plants, insects, and other
.animals .> .every tme .> .> .> they ride. That is obvious.
.> .> .> .> .> . .> .> .How convenient! You snipped the
content that specifically addresses .your .> .stated .> .>
.concerns (8 years - auto dependence - road construction...)
so you .could .> .take .> .> .another shot with your
exaggerated claim of ultimate destruction by mt .> .bikes.
Why .> .> .didn't you address the rest of the content: .> .>
."Urban sprawl, new construction (especially when existing
structures .are .> .vacant and .> .> .plentiful) and excess
limber clearing is destroying habitat which IS .> .stressing
.> .> .wildlife to death. Why is it so difficult to actually
cooperate with .> .everyone .> .> .interested in keeping
these areas from destruction instead of .continually .> .>
.splintering groups against each other which ultimately
solves .nothing." .> .> .As far as your statement: "They
kill plants, insects, and other .animals .> .every time .>
.> .they ride. That is obvious" .> .> .Hikers step on
insects and plants and disturb wildlife every time they .>
.walk. That is .> .> .obvious. .> .> .> .> Bikers travel
several times as far, so kill several times as much .>
.wildlife. DUH! .> .> Hikers are also able to step over
animals & plants. Bikers can't. They .> .sim[ly .> .> sqush
them. .> .> .> .and hikers never venture off trail. All
hikers are virtuous .> .> I never said that, liar. .> .> and
all mt .> .bikers are liars... .> .> You just conveniently
demonstrated that. .> .> .How much you want for that bridge
over the bay? .> . .> .> So don't play "holier than thou"
because you hike, Mr. Double .Standard. .> .> .Address the
real concerns that ALL OF US are worried about. .> .> .> .>
There are plenty of people working on stopping sprawl. .> .
.> .Ignorance is bliss, MR V... so blissfull, apparently,
you would rather .go .> .after a group who shares many of
the same views as you .> .> Name ONE view that mountain
bikers share (and actively promote) with me .and .> other
REAL conservationists. .> .I did... you again avoided it so
you could take a jab at mt bike .enthusiasts. Here... I'll
say it again in words you can grasp. Hikers, Mt .bikers,
conservationists (as you say) are all interested in keeping
green .areas safe from construction. Habitat (which you say
you value) is being .targeted for concrete and pavement
every day. Mt bikers are among the people .trying to keep
that from happening.

BS. I spent 8 years working on stopping highway
construction, and NOT ONE mountain biker showed up at any
hearing to help. But they always show up to beg for more
mountain biking access.

It destroys the habitat (you claim to .cherish) AND takes
away places to ride and hike. Mt bikers stand with many
.groups to oppose this unneeded construction. You only
drive a wedge into the .mix to get these groups fighting
each other. You do more harm than good. .Concerning your
reply to this: ."and hikers never venture off trail. All
hikers are virtuous" .> .> I never said that, liar. .I
never said you said it. But the way you attribute
ecological damage to all .mt bikers and leave all hikers
unchallenged always seems to demonstrate your .bias.

BS. I advocate human-free habitat, which includes hikers.
YOU don't.

.> while bulldozers are .> .clearing trees for another
WalMart.... Sleep well. .> .> === .> .> 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 ↗ .> . .> .> === .> 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 ↗ .

===
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 Sat, 10 Apr 2004 15:19:36 -0400, "S Curtiss"
<[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

. ."Mike Vandeman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
."]news:[email hidden]... .> On
Fri, 9 Apr 2004 23:24:29 -0400, "S Curtiss"
<[email hidden]> .wrote: .> .> . .> ."Mike
Vandeman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message .>
."]news:[email hidden]... .> .>
On Fri, 09 Apr 2004 14:00:27 -0400, Steve Curtiss
.<[email hidden]> .> .> wrote: .> .> .> .> . .> .>
. .> .> .Mike Vandeman wrote: .> .> . .> .> .> On Tue, 6
Apr 2004 17:09:01 -0400, "S Curtiss"
.<[email hidden]> .> .wrote: .> .> .> .> .> .> .
.> .> .> ."Mike Vandeman" <[email hidden]> wrote in
message .> .> .>
."]news:[email hidden]... .> .>
.> .> On Sun, 4 Apr 2004 17:14:23 -0400, "S Curtiss" .>
.<[email hidden]> .> .> .> .wrote: .> .> .> .> .>
.> .> .> . .> .> .> .> .> Sure. But they are not being
denied access to the trails as .> .claimed. .> .> .> .> .>
.> .> .> .> .Their claim, as you say, is access for the
purpose of off

road

Quoted message said:

.> .cycling. .> .> .> .You .> .> .> .> .can pick apart
their phrasing all you want. What the "mt

bikers"

Quoted message said:

.> .are up .> .> .> .> .against is biased attitudes and
false perceptions of shared .access .> .for .> .> .> .>
.hiking and off road cycling. .> .> .> .> .> .> .> .> Lie
all you want, but the reasons for banning bikes are
VALID: .> .documented .> .> .> .danger .> .> .> .> to
wildlife and other trail users.. .> .> .> . .> .> .> .Lie
all YOU want. Studies show your "reasons" are based on
false .> .perceptions .> .> .> .and myths being put forth
by a small majority who claim to speak .for .> .> .>
.wildlife. Moutain bikes are not killing wildlife. .> .>
.> .> .> .> That is pure fabrication. They kill plants,
insects, and other .animals .> .every tme .> .> .> they
ride. That is obvious. .> .> .> .> .> . .> .> .How
convenient! You snipped the content that specifically
addresses .your .> .stated .> .> .concerns (8 years -
auto dependence - road construction...) so you .could .>
.take .> .> .another shot with your exaggerated claim of
ultimate destruction by

mt

Quoted message said:

.> .bikes. Why .> .> .didn't you address the rest of the
content: .> .> ."Urban sprawl, new construction
(especially when existing

structures

Quoted message said:

.are .> .vacant and .> .> .plentiful) and excess limber
clearing is destroying habitat which

IS

Quoted message said:

.> .stressing .> .> .wildlife to death. Why is it so
difficult to actually cooperate

with

Quoted message said:

.> .everyone .> .> .interested in keeping these areas from
destruction instead of .continually .> .> .splintering
groups against each other which ultimately solves
.nothing." .> .> .As far as your statement: "They kill
plants, insects, and other .animals .> .every time .> .>
.they ride. That is obvious" .> .> .Hikers step on insects
and plants and disturb wildlife every time

they

Quoted message said:

.> .walk. That is .> .> .obvious. .> .> .> .> Bikers
travel several times as far, so kill several times as much
.> .wildlife. DUH! .> .> Hikers are also able to step over
animals & plants. Bikers can't.

They

Quoted message said:

.> .sim[ly .> .> sqush them. .> .> .> .and hikers never
venture off trail. All hikers are virtuous .> .> I never
said that, liar. .> .> and all mt .> .bikers are liars...
.> .> You just conveniently demonstrated that. .> .> .How
much you want for that bridge over the bay? .> . .> .> So
don't play "holier than thou" because you hike, Mr. Double
.Standard. .> .> .Address the real concerns that ALL OF US
are worried about. .> .> .> .> There are plenty of people
working on stopping sprawl. .> . .> .Ignorance is bliss,
MR V... so blissfull, apparently, you would

rather

Quoted message said:

.go .> .after a group who shares many of the same views as
you .> .> Name ONE view that mountain bikers share (and
actively promote) with me .and .> other REAL
conservationists. .> .I did... you again avoided it so you
could take a jab at mt bike .enthusiasts. Here... I'll say
it again in words you can grasp. Hikers,

Mt

Quoted message said:

.bikers, conservationists (as you say) are all interested
in keeping green .areas safe from construction. Habitat
(which you say you value) is being .targeted for concrete
and pavement every day. Mt bikers are among the

people

Quoted message said:

.trying to keep that from happening.

BS. I spent 8 years working on stopping highway
construction, and NOT ONE mountain biker showed up at any
hearing to help. But they always show up

to beg

Quoted message said:

for more mountain biking access.

It destroys the habitat (you claim to .cherish) AND takes
away places to ride and hike. Mt bikers stand with

many

Quoted message said:

.groups to oppose this unneeded construction. You only
drive a wedge into

the

Quoted message said:

.mix to get these groups fighting each other. You do more
harm than good. .Concerning your reply to this: ."and
hikers never venture off trail. All hikers are virtuous"
.> .> I never said that, liar. .I never said you said it.
But the way you attribute ecological damage to

all

Quoted message said:

.mt bikers and leave all hikers unchallenged always seems
to demonstrate

your

Quoted message said:

.bias.

BS. I advocate human-free habitat, which includes hikers.
YOU don't.

Actually... I advocate the use of bicycles on public lands
designated as multi-use. There are miles and miles of trails
and fire roads that can be shared by all interested. This
includes offroad cyclists. Your "human free habitat" is a
lofty goal, but is an external argument to the point of
bicycle access in multi-use public land planning. btw...
Here in VA there are miles upon miles of mountain areas that
are quite difficult to get to. Trails only go so far (the
App Trail may be an exception, which IS off limits to bikes)
and fire roads or power line cuts are distantly seperated.
By default, most trails systems are close in to existing
roads and population areas. However, newer access
possibilities are created whenever construction expands.
Close by, there is a large development cutting into a once
green mountainside even with much public input against it.
Driving from my residence to that point, there are several
vacant offices and buildings. I simply wonder why groups who
enjoy venturing outdoors must point there fingers at each
other instead of this type of useless construction. I also
fail to understand why your comments are so combative. Does
that really help anything?

Quoted message said:

.> while bulldozers are .> .clearing trees for another
WalMart.... Sleep well. .> .> === .> .> 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 ↗
.> . .> .> === .> 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 ↗ .

===
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 Sun, 11 Apr 2004 12:12:08 -0400, "S Curtiss" <[email hidden]> wrote:

. ."Mike Vandeman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
."]news:[email hidden]... .> On
Sat, 10 Apr 2004 15:19:36 -0400, "S Curtiss"
<[email hidden]> .wrote: .> .> . .> ."Mike Vandeman"
<[email hidden]> wrote in message .>
."]news:[email hidden]... .> .> On
Fri, 9 Apr 2004 23:24:29 -0400, "S Curtiss"
<[email hidden]> .> .wrote: .> .> .> .> . .> .>
."Mike Vandeman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message .>
.> ."]news:[email hidden]... .> .>
.> On Fri, 09 Apr 2004 14:00:27 -0400, Steve Curtiss .>
.<[email hidden]> .> .> .> wrote: .> .> .> .> .> .>
. .> .> .> . .> .> .> .Mike Vandeman wrote: .> .> .> . .> .>
.> .> On Tue, 6 Apr 2004 17:09:01 -0400, "S Curtiss" .>
.<[email hidden]> .> .> .wrote: .> .> .> .> .> .> .>
.> . .> .> .> .> ."Mike Vandeman" <[email hidden]>
wrote in message .> .> .> .>
."]news:[email hidden]... .> .> .>
.> .> On Sun, 4 Apr 2004 17:14:23 -0400, "S Curtiss" .> .>
.<[email hidden]> .> .> .> .> .wrote: .> .> .> .> .>
.> .> .> .> .> . .> .> .> .> .> .> Sure. But they are not
being denied access to the trails as .> .> .claimed. .> .>
.> .> .> .> .> .> .> .> .> .Their claim, as you say, is
access for the purpose of off .road .> .> .cycling. .> .> .>
.> .You .> .> .> .> .> .can pick apart their phrasing all
you want. What the "mt .bikers" .> .> .are up .> .> .> .> .>
.against is biased attitudes and false perceptions of shared
.> .access .> .> .for .> .> .> .> .> .hiking and off road
cycling. .> .> .> .> .> .> .> .> .> .> Lie all you want, but
the reasons for banning bikes are VALID: .> .> .documented
.> .> .> .> .danger .> .> .> .> .> to wildlife and other
trail users.. .> .> .> .> . .> .> .> .> .Lie all YOU want.
Studies show your "reasons" are based on false .> .>
.perceptions .> .> .> .> .and myths being put forth by a
small majority who claim to speak .> .for .> .> .> .>
.wildlife. Moutain bikes are not killing wildlife. .> .> .>
.> .> .> .> .> That is pure fabrication. They kill plants,
insects, and other .> .animals .> .> .every tme .> .> .> .>
they ride. That is obvious. .> .> .> .> .> .> .> . .> .> .>
.How convenient! You snipped the content that specifically
addresses .> .your .> .> .stated .> .> .> .concerns (8 years
- auto dependence - road construction...) so you .> .could
.> .> .take .> .> .> .another shot with your exaggerated
claim of ultimate destruction by .mt .> .> .bikes. Why .> .>
.> .didn't you address the rest of the content: .> .> .>
."Urban sprawl, new construction (especially when existing
.structures .> .are .> .> .vacant and .> .> .> .plentiful)
and excess limber clearing is destroying habitat which .IS
.> .> .stressing .> .> .> .wildlife to death. Why is it so
difficult to actually cooperate .with .> .> .everyone .> .>
.> .interested in keeping these areas from destruction
instead of .> .continually .> .> .> .splintering groups
against each other which ultimately solves .> .nothing." .>
.> .> .As far as your statement: "They kill plants, insects,
and other .> .animals .> .> .every time .> .> .> .they ride.
That is obvious" .> .> .> .Hikers step on insects and plants
and disturb wildlife every time .they .> .> .walk. That is
.> .> .> .obvious. .> .> .> .> .> .> Bikers travel several
times as far, so kill several times as much .> .> .wildlife.
DUH! .> .> .> Hikers are also able to step over animals &
plants. Bikers can't. .They .> .> .sim[ly .> .> .> sqush
them. .> .> .> .> .> .and hikers never venture off trail.
All hikers are virtuous .> .> .> .> I never said that, liar.
.> .> .> .> and all mt .> .> .bikers are liars... .> .> .>
.> You just conveniently demonstrated that. .> .> .> .> .How
much you want for that bridge over the bay? .> .> . .> .> .>
So don't play "holier than thou" because you hike, Mr.
Double .> .Standard. .> .> .> .Address the real concerns
that ALL OF US are worried about. .> .> .> .> .> .> There
are plenty of people working on stopping sprawl. .> .> . .>
.> .Ignorance is bliss, MR V... so blissfull, apparently,
you would .rather .> .go .> .> .after a group who shares
many of the same views as you .> .> .> .> Name ONE view that
mountain bikers share (and actively promote) with me .> .and
.> .> other REAL conservationists. .> .> .> .I did... you
again avoided it so you could take a jab at mt bike .>
.enthusiasts. Here... I'll say it again in words you can
grasp. Hikers, .Mt .> .bikers, conservationists (as you say)
are all interested in keeping green .> .areas safe from
construction. Habitat (which you say you value) is being .>
.targeted for concrete and pavement every day. Mt bikers are
among the .people .> .trying to keep that from happening. .>
.> BS. I spent 8 years working on stopping highway
construction, and NOT ONE .> mountain biker showed up at any
hearing to help. But they always show up .to beg .> for more
mountain biking access. .> .> It destroys the habitat (you
claim to .> .cherish) AND takes away places to ride and
hike. Mt bikers stand with .many .> .groups to oppose this
unneeded construction. You only drive a wedge into .the .>
.mix to get these groups fighting each other. You do more
harm than good. .> .Concerning your reply to this: .> ."and
hikers never venture off trail. All hikers are virtuous" .>
.> .> .> I never said that, liar. .> .I never said you said
it. But the way you attribute ecological damage to .all .>
.mt bikers and leave all hikers unchallenged always seems to
demonstrate .your .> .bias. .> .> BS. I advocate human-free
habitat, which includes hikers. YOU don't. .> .Actually... I
advocate the use of bicycles on public lands designated as
.multi-use.

So you complain about what hikers do, but instead of doing
something to STOP it, as I do, you beg for the right to join
them in destroying habitat! f There are miles and miles of
trails and fire roads that can be .shared by all interested.
This includes offroad cyclists. Your "human free .habitat"
is a lofty goal, but is an external argument to the point of
.bicycle access in multi-use public land planning. btw...
Here in VA there .are miles upon miles of mountain areas
that are quite difficult to get to. .Trails only go so far
(the App Trail may be an exception, which IS off .limits to
bikes) and fire roads or power line cuts are distantly
seperated. .By default, most trails systems are close in to
existing roads and .population areas. However, newer access
possibilities are created whenever .construction expands.
Close by, there is a large development cutting into a .once
green mountainside even with much public input against it.
Driving from .my residence to that point, there are several
vacant offices and buildings. .I simply wonder why groups
who enjoy venturing outdoors must point there .fingers at
each other instead of this type of useless construction. I
also .fail to understand why your comments are so combative.
Does that really help .anything?

I just tell the truth. Call it whatever you like.
===
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 ↗

"S Curtiss" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:w7eec.3048$kM2.2003@lakeread05...

Quoted message said:

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

<snip>

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

BS. I advocate human-free habitat, which includes
hikers. YOU don't.

Actually... I advocate the use of bicycles on public lands
designated as multi-use. There are miles and miles of
trails and fire roads that can be shared by all
interested. This includes offroad cyclists.

Then you should have no problem with Mike.

Quoted message said:

Your "human free habitat" is a lofty goal, but is an
external argument to the point of bicycle access in multi-
use public land planning. btw... Here in VA there are
miles upon miles of mountain areas that are quite
difficult to get to.

The point is not use of public land, but reserving SOME
portion of it for flora and fauna preservation. The fact is
that modern technology is not very good for the ecology and
most animals do not do well confronted by technology and
general disturbance. If we wish to pass on the possibility
of preservation of natural habitat, we will have to make
some sacrifices and it is true that roadless habitat is
probably necessary to do this, just as areas of ocean should
be kept free of fishing pressure to allow recovery of
natural stocks. Perhaps if you discussed "how much" land
needs to be preserved in isolation, you and Mike could reach
an amicable debate based on scientific assessments.

Quoted message said:

Trails only go so far (the App Trail may be an exception,
which IS off limits to bikes) and fire roads or power line
cuts are distantly

seperated.

Quoted message said:

By default, most trails systems are close in to existing
roads and population areas. However, newer access
possibilities are created whenever construction expands.
Close by, there is a large development cutting into

a

Quoted message said:

once green mountainside even with much public input
against it. Driving

from

Quoted message said:

my residence to that point, there are several vacant
offices and

buildings.

Quoted message said:

I simply wonder why groups who enjoy venturing outdoors
must point there fingers at each other instead of this
type of useless construction. I also fail to understand
why your comments are so combative. Does that really

help

Quoted message said:

anything?

Try listening to the mountain biker posts for a while. You
would get a bit combative yourself when confronted by
"permanently uninformed denial". You cannot even make a
simple correction of a false claim without enduring endless
debate that ignores the fault or claims that it is 'not
representative' when in fact it is published in their
mainstream media and defended by the majority of those
mountain bike enthusiasts posting here.

I will agree that a 'positive spin' is helpful but a bit
difficult. Mountain biking seems to appeal to a rather young
( or young thinking ) and self centered crowd. Of course,
this is my third party observation. I am neither a hiker nor
a biker at the moment, though I am relatively 'countrified'
having grown up in a small town in the Muskoka, Ontario
region and having spent years helping to run isolated fly in
fishing/hunting lodges. Most of the small lakes were
accessable by trail and I defy any mountain biker to travel
them ( slippery and slanted rocks, moss, etc ). In fact, I
find mountain biking a bit of an 'artificial' sport
requiring prepared trails and without much 'nature' in the
equation. The biker is just too busy keeping his balance and
reading the road. Road bikers are much more interested in
scenery but are restricted to prepared surfaces, not really
of much interest to MBrs. It is much better to be limited to
artificial terrain prepared for the purpose. The issue of
using public land seems to be more of an 'ego thing' than a
real need.

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

Quoted message said:

On Sun, 11 Apr 2004 12:12:08 -0400, "S Curtiss"
<[email hidden]>

wrote: <snip>

Quoted message said:

I just tell the truth. Call it whatever you like.

Mike. You tell *a* truth, no more. You have no more truth
than any other so you might skip the arrogance.

Quoted message said:

===
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 ↗

Ian St. John said:

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

Quoted message said:

On Sun, 11 Apr 2004 12:12:08 -0400, "S Curtiss"

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I just tell the truth. Call it whatever you like.

Mike. You tell *a* truth, no more. You have no more truth
than any other so you might skip the arrogance.

There's a first time for everything.

Bill "except that, probably" S.

S o r n i said:

Ian St. John said:

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

Quoted message said:

On Sun, 11 Apr 2004 12:12:08 -0400, "S Curtiss"

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I just tell the truth. Call it whatever you like.

Mike. You tell *a* truth, no more. You have no more truth
than any other so you might skip the arrogance.

There's a first time for everything.

Bill "except that, probably" S.

I am waiting for the kosher pigs to fly by the window.

Happy trails, Gary (net.yogi.bear)
------------------------------------------------
at the 51st percentile of ursine intelligence

Gary D. Schwartz, Needham, MA, USA Please reply to:
garyDOTschwartzATpoboxDOTcom

Wow. I think this is a record for 'waste of electrons'. I
can see that you have more important things to do like a
good [censored] so why don't you?

"S o r n i" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Ian St. John said:

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

Quoted message said:

On Sun, 11 Apr 2004 12:12:08 -0400, "S Curtiss"

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I just tell the truth. Call it whatever you like.

Mike. You tell *a* truth, no more. You have no more
truth than any other so you might skip the arrogance.

There's a first time for everything.

Bill "except that, probably" S.

On Sun, 11 Apr 2004 15:00:39 -0400, "Ian St. John" <[email hidden]> wrote:

. ."Mike Vandeman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
."]news:[email hidden]... .> On
Sun, 11 Apr 2004 12:12:08 -0400, "S Curtiss"
<[email hidden]> .wrote: .<snip> .> .> I just tell
the truth. Call it whatever you like. . .Mike. You tell *a*
truth, no more. You have no more truth than any other so
.you might skip the arrogance.

That's what I just said. There's no arrogance involved. I
just notice a lot of lying among mountain bikers, who don't
know any other way to defend their indefensible,
destructive sport.
===
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 Sun, 11 Apr 2004 15:00:39 -0400, "Ian St. John"
<[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

. ."Mike Vandeman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
."]news:[email hidden]... .> On
Sun, 11 Apr 2004 12:12:08 -0400, "S Curtiss"

<[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

.wrote: .<snip> .> .> I just tell the truth. Call it
whatever you like. . .Mike. You tell *a* truth, no more.
You have no more truth than any other

so

Quoted message said:

.you might skip the arrogance.

That's what I just said. There's no arrogance involved. I
just notice a

lot of

Quoted message said:

lying among mountain bikers, who don't know any other way
to defend their indefensible, destructive sport.

Pointing out a lie among the statements is truth. This sort
of blanket smear is an unjust and meaningless lie.

Quoted message said:

.Ignorance is bliss, MR V... so blissfull, apparently, you
would rather

go

Quoted message said:

.after a group who shares many of the same views as you

Name ONE view that mountain bikers share (and actively
promote) with me

and

Quoted message said:

other REAL conservationists.

while bulldozers are .clearing trees for another
WalMart.... Sleep well.

I venture to suggest that mountain bike riders are
interested in environmental protection, much as you are.
They, contrary to you, realize that they consume less than
one half of one percent of habitat with their sport and the
routes they use for thier sport are shared with dozens of
other outdoor recreationalists, while the development plans
of Sam Walton and his company (and thousands of other
companies that build homes and industrial parks and retail
shopping centers, etc. ad naseum) are consuming habitat at
an astounding rate.

Your stated goal, even if 100% successful, would protect
virtually nothing in the grand scheme of things. That is the
ignorance that is so blissful. Sleep well.

On Mon, 12 Apr 2004 09:45:58 -0400, "Ian St. John" <[email hidden]> wrote:

. ."Mike Vandeman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
."]news:[email hidden]... .> On
Sun, 11 Apr 2004 15:00:39 -0400, "Ian St. John"
<[email hidden]> .wrote: .> .> . .> ."Mike Vandeman"
<[email hidden]> wrote in message .>
."]news:[email hidden]... .> .> On
Sun, 11 Apr 2004 12:12:08 -0400, "S Curtiss"
.<[email hidden]> .> .wrote: .> .<snip> .> .> .> .>
I just tell the truth. Call it whatever you like. .> . .>
.Mike. You tell *a* truth, no more. You have no more truth
than any other .so .> .you might skip the arrogance. .> .>
That's what I just said. There's no arrogance involved. I
just notice a .lot of .> lying among mountain bikers, who
don't know any other way to defend their .> indefensible,
destructive sport. . .Pointing out a lie among the
statements is truth. This sort of blanket smear .is an
unjust and meaningless lie. .

BS. It is so far 100% of my sample (mountain bikers who
lie).
===
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 9 Apr 2004 20:30:19 GMT, BB
<[email hidden]> wrote:

.On Fri, 09 Apr 2004 16:03:27 GMT, S o r n i wrote: .>
Mike Vandeman wrote: .>> .>> That is pure fabrication.
They kill plants, insects, and other .>> animals every tme
they ride. That is obvious. .> .> You forgot the "Duh!" .
.And lets face it, the backcountry is SO lacking in
insects...

Oh, so they are expendable, as far as mountain bikers are
concerned. Thanks for demonstrating my point: mountain
bikers don't care about wildlife.
==

In India, the religious Jains wear a face-mask to avoid
injuring gnats and mites by inadvertantly inhaling them, and
carry a broom to gently sweep insects from their path.
Perhaps you should go to India and join their temple.

RK said:

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

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Oh, so they are expendable, as far as mountain bikers are
concerned. Thanks for demonstrating my point: mountain
bikers don't care about wildlife. ==

In India, the religious Jains wear a face-mask to avoid
injuring gnats and mites by inadvertantly inhaling them,
and carry a broom to gently sweep insects from their path.
Perhaps you should go to India and join their temple.

Hmmm. So maybe my role as "sweeper" on most rides is noble
after all!

Bill "sweeper sounds better than anchor" S.

S o r n i said:

RK wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

In India, the religious Jains wear a face-mask to avoid
injuring gnats and mites by inadvertantly inhaling them,
and carry a broom to gently sweep insects from their
path. Perhaps you should go to India and join their
temple.

Hmmm. So maybe my role as "sweeper" on most rides is noble
after all!

No kidding. Last weekend, I had to stop and take a big gulp
from the 'bak to choke down a bug - it was too far down to
go the other way! One less gnat to bother the fisherpeople.

--
-BB- To reply to me, drop the attitude (from my e-mail
address, at least)

(RK) said:

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

Quoted message said:

On 9 Apr 2004 20:30:19 GMT, BB
<[email hidden]> wrote:

.On Fri, 09 Apr 2004 16:03:27 GMT, S o r n i wrote: .>
Mike Vandeman wrote: .>> .>> That is pure fabrication.
They kill plants, insects, and other .>> animals every
tme they ride. That is obvious. .> .> You forgot the
"Duh!" . .And lets face it, the backcountry is SO lacking
in insects...

Oh, so they are expendable, as far as mountain bikers are
concerned. Thanks for demonstrating my point: mountain
bikers don't care about wildlife.
==

In India, the religious Jains wear a face-mask to avoid
injuring gnats and mites by inadvertantly inhaling them,
and carry a broom to gently sweep insects from their path.
Perhaps you should go to India and join their temple.

I guess this means that Mikey has never used an insecticide
or bug repellant in his life, or even slapped a mosquito or
black fly biting him.

If he was actually a hiker, rather than walking in parks,
and if he had a normal sense of priorities, that perhaps
human life is slightly more significant than the life of one
individual insect, he might have something in common with
other people here.

But he is more extreme than any PETA member, and more
contemptuous of humans.

Happy trails, Gary (net.yogi.bear)
------------------------------------------------
at the 51st percentile of ursine intelligence

Gary D. Schwartz, Needham, MA, USA Please reply to:
garyDOTschwartzATpoboxDOTcom