At 04:47 PM 11/20/04 -0800 said:Hi Michael,
Quoted message said:First off, I am a mountainbiker, and I found your webpage and articles
very interesting and thought provoking.
I respect your EXTREMELY RARE (among mountain bikers) honesty and politeness!
Quoted message said:I wonder would you be interested in exchanging some ideas on how the
needs of wildlife and the needs of people to be in nature can be
balanced.
I am always happy to discuss that -- one of my favorite topics. But truthfully,
there isn't much to talk about. All you have to do is look at things from the
wildlife's point of view! Then you should be able to deduce what is needed,
yourself. That's all I did (plus read the research on the topic).
Quoted message said:Here are some ideas I would greatly appreciate your thoughts on;
Quoted message said:Mankind's relationship with nature and the natural environment is about
excitement and challenge as well as appreciating its flora and fauna.
You saying that nature is a place to test yourself. That is purely a human
concept, and leaves wildlife totally out of the picture! To make it easier to
see, how would you feel if the wildlife felt the same about the inside of your
house? See the point? You wouldn't like your home being used for thrills by
spiders, mosquitoes, rats, mice, squirrels, raccoons, bed bugs, etc. It all
comes down to the Golden Rule. Environmentalism is nothing but the extension of
the Golden Rule to other species.
Quoted message said:When I go with my family to Muir woods I do not feel the my son is
being exposed to the full breath of experience as we stroll peacefully
on the boardwalk among the spectacular annotated trees, I look forward
to sharing the thrill of nature with him too, whether playing in the
surf, hiking to a hilltop or rolling along a trail on our bikes.
A good, tough hike or backpack can do the same thing, and do it MUCH BETTER.
When you hike, you end up feeling better about yourself (increase your
self-confidence & self-respect) because you are able to accomplish something
difficult and pleasurable. When you mountain bike, you can't do that because (1)
you are destroying wildlife habitat and driving other trail users out of the
parks -- not something you can be proud of!!! (2) the bike is doing all the hard
part -- taking all the beating -- especially on the downhill portion. For the
same reason, motorcycling and auto driving can't do much for your self-esteem
Quoted message said:If we
ignore man's need to be thrilled and challenged by nature then less and
less people will feel they have anything to loose when public lands are
threatened.
Getting "thrilled and challenged" doesn't increase your respect for nature. It
has next to nothing to do with nature, except as an OBSTACLE. If you still can't
see that, look at people. What if you used PEOPLE to get "thrilled and
challenged", e.g. try to see how many sexual conquests you can collect? People
who respect nature don't USE it. They ENJOY it as it is, and try to learn as
much as they can about it. If you were getting "thrilled and challenged" by
something that isn't DESTRUCTIVE, I and others would have no objection
whatsoever.
Quoted message said:We certainly need to protect and insulate huge areas of nature from
human activity, but is it appropriate to fight this hard-line battle in
the parklands of urban areas. If a large, diverse constituency doesnt
use our parklands
What's to prevent the mountain bikers from HIKING there????? As far as I can
see, nothing but their own laziness and lack of interest in nature. If they were
really a constituency for nature, instead of a constituency for selfish
exploitation, they would be working to protect the parks even if bikes were
banned.
Quoted message said:there will come a day when there is a job crisis, a
war, something huge and important that will make people say, well
forest is pretty but we need jobs! this is a city not yosemite! If we
have resposible use
That's just the point: mountain biking is NOT a "responsible use".
Quoted message said:and many people have a relationship with the
parklands, not just a small minority then we have half a chance of
keeping them for many generations. - Which is better? wisely and widely
used land OR land with nobody to care or fight it's battle when
unforseen threats emerge. What if parks somehow became enmeshed in this
endless 'war on terror' we face.
Mountain bikers don't work to protect the parks, even when they are allowed to
ride. At most, they do "trail maintenance", which is, from the point of view of
the wildlife, just as destructive as trail construction.
Quoted message said:A park ranger told me last weekend about an individual who is suing the
county for allowing bikers to use the wagon wheel section of
tamarancho. According to this ranger the person suing lives on the road
up to tamarancho. I find it hard to understand someone protesting the
impact of mountain bike tires on a trail who has graded a huge chunk
out of the mountain to live there and who's daily activity, sewerage,
commuting, etc. must be comparable in impact to a large percentage of
the total bike traffic in the area.
I doubt that they built the road. Mountain biking is an ADDITIONAL impact.
Banning bikes REDUCES impacts.
Quoted message said:I believe that if we had completely
unbiased means of evaluating each person's impact on nature that
mountain bikers would not emerge as the primary villian.
Irrelevant. Banning bikes still reduces total impacts. Bikers DRIVE to the
trails, using those freeways, ofteh from as far as San Jose!
Quoted message said:Freeways,
Housing, Industrial, commercial property, these are who we should be
fighting, not people who are making their way across hilltops,
breathing ocean air, powered by their own hard work.
Then why don't they WALK? That would retain their access to the hilltops and
fresh air, WITHOUT all the extra damage.
Quoted message said:People who rail against bikers should ask themselves what impact they
themselves are having.
We DO.
Quoted message said:If we dont examine ourselves as critically as
others then is it any surprise that the right has been successful in
painting the environmentally conscious as hypocritical tree-huggers?
Adding an ADDITIONAL source of damage is not beneficial, OBVIOUSLY!
Quoted message said:I routinely ride from my home in the mission district of SF out across
the bridge and up the the summit of mount tam. When I descend the
mountain fire road I always slow for hikers on the trial, the majority
of interactions are friendly, but sometimes I will get a scowl. A 'I
was hiking in the wilds and along come you on your bike' type of scowl.
Try to see it from their point of view. They KNOW that you are destroying
wildlife habitat, if not there, then on other trails. Also, hikers go to nature
to get AWAY from machinery like bikes. Also, someone on a fast-moving, heavy
piece of machinery is SCARY. There is no way for a hiker to protect
himself/herself from a biker.
Quoted message said:It is safe to say that many of these angry people have driven to the
trailhead and had no problem sharing the roads with me on my pollution
free way across the city. I dont like having cars drive past me with
their fumes and shocking death toll, but maybe those people are going
to pick up a heavy load or drop 6 kids off at a party, those drivers
are using the road for a different purpose than me. I wish people didnt
drive, it would make my life more pleasant, but thats the trouble with
sharing, you have to share.
BS. I don't like the cars, either, But I feel no obligation whatsoever to
"share" with them. Nature and the environment are more important. We should both
be working together to reduce auto dependence, instead of fighting over mountain
biking. But we aren't going to allow our parks and wildlife habitat to be
destroyed, just to make mountain bikers happy. They are just NOT that valuable
an "ally". In fact, they aren't allies AT ALL! They are working very hard to
prevent more lands from becoming Wildernesses.
Quoted message said:I would love to hear your thoughts on these ideas, so far I have not
had a chance to talk with anybody who could progress my thinking on
these.
I hope I have been able to do so. There is a lot more information on my web
site.
Quoted message said:respectfully, and with the goal of learning and sharing different
points of view,
Quoted message said:Marcus Gosling
===
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.)