Thu, 30 Dec 1999: |
I don't mind if someone wants to introduce restrictions on land use in
the name of preservation.
I wish cyclists weren't included in the restrictions; we are capable of
using the land gently. Unfortunately, we often don't. Impacts around
Moab demonstrate quite clearly that cyclists are not much better at
getting the "Tread Lightly" message than motorzied users.
If there is an undiscovered "prime riding area" out there in Utah, it's
best left that way. Any place that becomes another Moab will be trashed
by cyclists--who usually show up in overpowered, gas-guzzling SUVs,
which they often drive in as far as mechanically possilbe.
The desert looks indestructible; it is not. Impacts that would vanish
in a month in a wet climate last for decades here. Sometimes their
effects are permanent.
Wilderness advocates are not evil.
Ron Georg
Moab
Thu, 30 Dec 1999:
Along with my forest destroying mountain bike I also own an off road 454 GMC 4x4, a snowmobile, a 2 stoke dirt bike and one extra large chain saw (no muffler) . I also fish and hunt. Just thought I would make you day
Tue, 28 Dec 1999:
I suppose helmetless riders do have a potential effect on access.
I guess too many years of riding on BLM land have left me with a
wild-west attitude; people die on their bikes around here (although 1999
was a safe and happy year after last season's two deaths on Moab's
Portal Trail), and we still get to ride the trails.
Sat, 25 Dec 1999 18:50:30 -0600, Mikel Wyatt <mikel@arkansas.net> wrote:
.Vandeman you are a friggin prick!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Thu, 23 Dec 1999:
Subject: Re: National Forest - KEEP OUT
aah well, its a good job i dont give a flying fuck what mr clinton has to
say, he has no control over me what so ever :-)
Wed, 22 Dec 1999:
I think there are two paths to take:
1) In the early 80s the definition of Wilderness was changed from the
original "motorized use" to the current "mechanized use." It was THIS
change that eliminated our activity from Wilderness areas. We should lobby
for a designation for Roadless Areas that provides for protection without
limitting mechanized access.
2) Lobby for a change in the Wilderness Act back to the original language.
Mon, 20 Dec 1999:
Mountain biking is extremely destructive to trails, and does have
significant impact on some types of plant and animal life.
I DON'T CARE!
We are 5 billion years away from our sun becoming a red giant and
taking our puny planet out of existence forever. We are 1,000 years
away from a life-extinguishing asteroid impact. We are 100 years away
from a major geothermal catacylsm in the Sierras that will spread ash
over 2/3 of the North American continent. We are 75 years away from
exhaustion of our fossil fuels. We are 10 years away from irritated
space aliens kicking our ass for polluting deep space with broadcasts
like "Felicity."
LET'S HAVE FUN WITH THE LITTLE TIME WE HAVE LEFT!
Wed, 01 Dec 1999:
Fuck you you hypocritical fanatic. I suppose you levitate when you walk, thus not "killing" any microorganisms. Right Buddy, go mentally masturbate yourself.
Fri, 10 Dec 1999:
you are the right man!! ... I WANT FUN... Trails are there to be damaged
( = used )
Fri, 10 Dec 1999:
I think a veteran bicyclist needs to respond to all this verbal abuse. This
newsgroup "should" be for the mountain bike rider. Why do so many people
persist in writing messages about the destruction of trails.
Go to trail.preservation.freak newsgroup or something.
I want to read about riding, components, and stories here. I do not want to
be insulted because I ride on dirt trails. By the way, I know I am a
destructive to wildlife, especially when I am riding at night and scare deer
onto the road and they get hit. This happened just last week. Plus I also
ride illegally on equestrian trails. Do you think I am going to stop riding
?
Tue, 7 Dec 1999:
It's pointless to deny that trails cause erosion, promote invasive
plant intrusion, increase human presence in back country, etc, and that human
trail use can elevate stress levels in nearby wildlife, increase the
emergency response load for public agencies as well as the maintenance load.
Mon, 6 Dec 1999:
I ride in any weather, stuff it if you dont like it.
Thu, 18 Nov 1999:
Subject: Wildlife Need Habitat
I guess humans should stop reproducing, pitch tents, and tip toe around so
as to not destroy one organism ! Even better, we should all just commit
suicide so that wildlife will rule the earth. You need to get off that
Ph.D. of yours and get a life ! I'm going mountain biking this Saturday,
and there's not a damn thing you can do about it, Mr. Ph.D!
Mon, 25 Oct 1999:
Subject: Illegal Trailbuilding
Dear ROMP Leadership,
I just received my November newsletter and want to respond to the article
by the President regarding illegal trailbuilding.
I request that the ROMP leadership take a public stance against illegal
trailbuilding BUT TAKE NO FURTHER ACTION OTHER THAN THAT PUBLIC STATEMENT.
Of course ROMP as an organization cannot endorse illegal trailbuilding and
must therefore take a position against it. However, as a ROMP member, I do
not want an organization I support actively going against those individuals
in the mountain biking community who may have a difference of opinion on
the matter. If I see ROMP taking active action opposing illegal
trailbuilding, I will cease membership in the organization. I am sure other
will do the same, thus causing an unnecessary rift in an already non-active
community.
When I think of ROMP and my membership in it, I first think of advocacy for
new mountain biking access (ORGANIZED). Secondarily, I think of other
aspects of the organization such as participating in trail maintenance and
trail education stations (RESPONSIBLE). I support that aspect of being
"Responsible", but I do not support any of the following:
- headhunting
- naturalizing of existing trail (even if built illegally)
- assisting in the search and identification of illegal trails
- expenditure of funds to discourage illegal trailbuilding
Again, to me, ROMP is about access not enforcement. Please don't make me
choose to ROMP or not to ROMP.
Date: October 21, 1999:
Since the list has been so quite for a couple of weeks I decided
to tell a bike story.
3-4 weeks ago I was taking my customary noon time ride and was
out on the Indian Creek bike path south of Corporate Woods.
I was clipping along around 15 mph having a good day, when
suddenly I saw a brown furry shape moving in the grass
next to the path about 5 feet ahead of me. It looked to be
a squirrel.
I started to slow when I saw it moving into the path. Then
the squirrel accelerated and it was on course with my front
wheel. I hardly had any time to react -- I continued to slow
and visions of a mangled squirrel in my font wheel and a sudden
endo flashed though my brain.
>From the time I saw the squirrel moving to the acceleration towards
the wheel a little over 1 second had transpired.
Just as it seemed the squirrel/spoke collision was happening the
brown furry squirrel was on the opposite side of the path.
I looked back with bewilderment. The squirrel was running in to the
brush on the opposite side, chattering loudly and was apparently
not hurt.
The only conclusion that made sense was that the squirrel ran
BETWEEN the front and the back wheel, right under the spinning
crank arms and the bottom bracket -- while the bike was moving
at 13-15 miles an hour!
I rode on, thankfully neither I or the squirrel was hurt.
I was amazed that the squirrel did that stunt.
"Potential Squirrel Killer"
Date: 1999/09/06
We rode through many creeks along the way. We rode through some more creeks. After passing under a tourist
filled chairlift, the trail climbs like a screaming warthog to our destination. We GUed and drank. I looked up and saw
a Nikon strapped family running aimlessly down a hill. "What are they doing?", Randy marveled. I said that they had
no idea what they were doing, and turned my bike around.
I looked down the hill and sighed. Time to hang on. I let the bike go, and was unsteady as usual at the beginning.
In no time I was moving fast and secure. I rode until the trail went up. I had passed a few people, but I hardly had to
slow down. They had either seen, or heard me coming in advance, and jumped off of the trail.
…'s ears were wet. He looked like a crazed character out of a bad horror movie. I don't know if I could call it a
smile. All he said was, "Now that was worth a flight from California". I laughed, we had so much more to go and it
only got better.
I hit the creek and hammered granny up the other side. I up-shifted to middle ring, and plowed headlong into the rock
garden. I up-shifted once again, and then twice. I glanced ahead and saw two people walking. I crushed on the
pedals and hit every rock. I gave out a few war cries, and blasted forth. The two riders had pulled aside and I hardly
saw them as I passed. One of them told … as he passed them, "You have got a lot of riding to do to catch that
guy".
The trail is getting more familiar now. I am starting to push the limits. I scream back to … about the turns to
come. I take a few breaths and flick the bike into the turns. Right,
left...rig..left...riigghhtt....down..... 30...35....40...No looker air if you want it. Rocky landing, and more speed into a
steeper, sloping right. Gotta watch the tire slippage here. 2.25 required for hair-splitting speed. Hit the brakes hard,
leave the bike in top gear, negotiate the wooden cattle gate, and jump on for the rest. Speed builds fast into more
crazy switchbacks.
The trail is tight with aspen trees, but the roots must be jumped at speed. One after the other. It is very important to
look ahead and keep the bike landing straight. More switchbacks. We never stop. We cleared the easy tree drop
one, two, three. The boyz were riding well. I was happy the trail was hiker free. Our speed would have scared Mike
Tyson and/or Janet Reno. (?)
I came to the sloping launch down into the gully of the Castle Creek run-off. I had already shifted up. I glanced up,
and upon seeing not a soul on the trail below, I blasted down the slope and pedaled hard. All at once, both my
shoes got jolted out of the pedals. I had checked a nice size rock with the right pedal. I was lucky. Good thing it
did not happen on the grazing turn above.
I lost some speed but clipped back in. The trail is somewhat level here, but up. After 30 miles and thousands of feet
of elevation gain, it just seems right to go all out at the end. I approached the best jump on the trail, and spied a
woman on a bike at it's apex. I could already smell her perfume. I thought about being a bear or a gorilla. That
woman is the first one I would eat, or maul, or beat around like a toy. It just stands to reason. I did not slow, and we
jumped one after the other, oblivious to her paralytic fear. I wondered what the mountain lion thought of paralytic
fear. Common courtesy is one thing, but I have my lines of sanity. We passed Mr. Homely without slowing. He was
happy and smiling.
Every step closer to the finish, I gained energy. I never felt bad, but now I felt better. We crossed the bridge and
pedaled up the wide trail to the golf course.
Miles: many
Altitude gain: thousands
Hours: lots
Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999:
Subject: Re: Is There Such A Thing As Responsible Mountain Biking???
> > What I am having trouble understanding is your contempt for
> cyclists.
>
> I don't have contempt for people, and certainly nof for cyclists! I
> have contempt for certain BEHAVIOR, such as destroying wildlife and
> wildlife habitat.
How can a mountainbiker destroy wildlife more than a hiker does when
they use the same trails? Ever tried to ride a bike straight THROUGH a
forest? Impossible. You shouldn't talk abozt something you not tried
yourself! Mountainbikers have to stay on trails because that's the only
way to ride a bike in the woods!
> I
> >believe it's a friendly & healthy alternative to other modes of
> >transportation and recreation.
>
> Yes, IF it is a replacement for use of a motor vehicle. But off-road,
> biking is a replacement for HIKING, and thus is a big step backwards.
Who puts you in the position to judge that? What you think about
equestrians by the way?
> > Aren't there bigger evils out there than a handful of uneducated,
> >unresponsible mtn. bikers? Like maybe oil companies, the forestry
> industry,
> >car manufacturers, etc just to name a few.
>
> Of course. But there are millions of mountain bikers, so they are a
> very significant threat to wildlife. There are plenty of people
> working on those other issues. I choose to address mountain biking
> because hardly anyone else is doing so, and because most people have
> the mistaken belief that bikes are used only for good.
hmm.... show me a study that shows mountainbiking destroys environment
and wildlife more than hiking does... otherwise you are just talking
about YOUR opinion. It is ok when you dislike mountainbiking. But then
say just it and don't blame us for things we just don't do.
I know there has been a study here in germany that had the result that
mountainbiking is NOT a bigger threat than hiking.
> > I believe it is totally possible for a mtn biker to ride
> responsibly and
> >share the trail in a way that everyone can enjoy.
>
> By "everyone", you are obviously excluding wildlife and non-bikers.
> Having to share a narrow trail with speeding mountain bikers, or even
> slow mountain bikers, is no fun. I go to parks to GET AWAY FROM
> machinery and other aspects of city life!!!
hmm.... you know.. I never caused any problems to hikers as far as I
know... because when I see a hiker I will sure brake down to a
reasonable speed. But I came in to very dangerous situations because
hikers taking their dogs into the woods and not having them with a lash.
Although it is LAW. But nobody of those hikers with dogs seem to care
about the laws. And I can tell you most of the bikers do care for
laws... because they know they have a bad reputation (For absolutley no
reason!). Now how is the threat for whom??
> You make it sound like
> >every cyclist has no regard for any other trail user.
>
> Many don't. But even if they do, it doesn't change the fact that they
> destroy the experience of nature that wildlife and hikers are
> expecting.
You know... you sound like it is YOUR nature und wildlife.. and only the
way you like to experience it is the right way. But you are not alone on
this planet and different people have different views of things... and
you have to get along with it.
> You obviously have
> >never met me on a trail before. I'm am always polite, and always
> yield the
> >trail to other users. I think we can all use the trail if we just
> have a
> >little respect for each other.
>
> Not when you destroy the trail and crush or scare away wildlife. There
> is no such thing as responsible off-road biking. It is irresonsible by
> its very nature!
Wow..... how does a bike tire destroy the trail.... it is not a fucking
motorcylce... You are very narrow minded by YOUR nature!
> > Don't you think maybe you could be more constructive by
> encouraging
> >people to ride responsibly, and by educating people about
> >trail/environmental ethics?
>
> That is exactly what I AM doing! I expect bicyclists to stick to paved
> roads, where they belong, and where they won't do much harm.
Who says we belong there? You? Who are you to say that?.... I mean on
the other hand I could say, stay in the city hikers!... you don't belong
in the woods...
You know, here in germany it is legal for everybody at a certain time to
collect mushrooms in the woods. At that time, all those "woldlife -
loving" hikers leave the trails, go "though" the woods, damaging
everything just to get some stupid mushrooms. Most of you hikers only
claim to protect the nature as a means to keep other people away from
the woods.
> If you just rant on about how evil a group of
> >people are,
>
> You are fantasizing. I have never said any such thing.
sure you said that. We are a threat to nature and wildlife, we destroy
the trails and we annoy hikers.... that's what you said, right?
> do you think they will listen to you or change? Unlikely. They
> >will just be offended, and have that much more resentment for any
> advice or
> >information you may have to offer, no matter how valid it may be.
> > I find it unfortunate that someone as dedicated and educated as
> yourself
> >lacks the social skills to share the knowledge and educate others in
> your
> >area of expertise.
>
> I do it all the time. But mountain bikers are not open to information
> about the harm they are doing.
You really are very narrow minded. Your menatality seems to be "I am
right, you are wrong".... but with that nobody will listen to you....
> I find it horrifying to hear of people "booby trapping"
> >trails and things like this. (Are you so arrogant that YOUR way is
> the
> >correct way, that you will stoop to vigilante justice to stop anyone
> who
> >doesn't conform to your beliefs?)
>
> You aren't talking about me. You must be thinking about someone else.
I hope you are not one of these persons... but from what you said.. or
better.. from the attitude you seem to have I could imagine you are one
of them. Atleast people that talk like you encourage others by saying
"Mountainbikers are a threat to wildlife".. and there are radicals that
think it is ok to hurt a human being to "protect" nature... but the
problem is, they are attacking the wrong persons...
> Mr. Vandeman, your postings shock and
> >alarm me,
>
> These days, someone who tells the truth is rare, huh?
Is it the truth? I don't think so.. it is something you thought about in
your small narrow minded brain.... It is your opinion, but you try to
make it SOUND like the truth. It is ok if YOU personally don't like
mountainbikers... but you will have to live with them. And if you don't
like them, say it. Don't blame us for things we just are not responsible
of. At least not more responsible than all the other people enjoying
nature, including the hikers.
> and I sincerely hope that in the future you can channel your
> >efforts into something constructive and beneficial to EVERYONE.
>
> Banning off-road biking IS beneficial to everyone. Especially
> wildlife.
Banning anything never is good.. because people won't stop doing it...
and will do it where it is illegal and really damaging to nature.. is
that what you want? an mountainbike underground scene?... as long as we
are allowed to use the "official" trails, there is no need to find or
even build other trails....
Date: Wed, 29 Sep 1999 22:11:38 -0700
DEAR MICHAEL,
Someone left your diatribe about mountain bikes pinned to my door,
probably as a joke. I am suprised that you could get a Ph.D with such
poor writing skills and such a lack of scientific logical thought.
I don't have the time or care enough to specify my arguments with
your conclusions, but let me say that I think you are really obsessed
with your antisocial, finger-pointing, political views without even
seeing what the real problem is.
The problem is not that people want to dominate nature. I have never
heard another person ever express that desire, it is a total 19th
century concept. The problem is simply this: too many people. People
have to go somewhere and do something. Six billion of them use a lot of
resources. Only reducing the population of the planet can solve most of
the major problems, including yours and others like resource
availability and neighborhood crowding. Less people puts less pressure
on all commodities and resources. The oceans are not overfished because
some Republican lawmaker wants to sell the ocean to Standard Oil, it is
because there are so many hungry people all over the world and they
provide a market for fish. No one will catch those fish if there is no
one to buy them. If you want to preserve your beloved planet, convince
everybody you personally know not to reproduce. Do not attempt to stop
them from copulating, just conceiving and/or delivering. Living simply
sounds cute and cuddly, but 30 billion people living simply and doing
tai chi instead of snowmobiling and jet skiing is still going to be a
crowded and miserable place. Every inch of the land will be covered, by
necessity, not choice. Reducing the population does not necessarily
cause better behavior among the remaining population, so since human
beings are basically assholes, I would still expect behavioral problems,
but with less people, it would be easier for people like you to get away
from the glut.
Do not expect to win this fight, you cannot put an end to outdoor
fun. I surf and mountain bike almost every day and will continue to do
so no matter what you consider politcally necessary because I want to be
strong and healthy. I will be riding very fast. Look out and keep your
ears open. Horses cause much more erosion on trails than mountain bikes,
but I still love horses. I don't ride them, but what gives a human like
you the right to decide where a horse and his human slave should go for
a walk. Humans and horses and dogs are part of nature. The planet is
evolving. You can do nothing to turn back the clock and the world will
be an unimaginably complicated and different place after we are gone.
Species always come and go and the big ball of matter that is the earth
does not care if people or spotted owls survive. It is likely that there
will be eons after ours, perhaps very different. You have such a limited
idea of what is natural and even possible that you overlook the largest
facts and whimper about some silly side issue. The world is changing,
don't expect is to go back to what we remember as children, and most
people do not agree with you on these issues or what to do about them.
You should try surfing sometime, that will show you how
insignificant you are to the earth, much less the universe. Almost
drowning time after time and finally getting to ride on a giant wall of
water teaches you how transitory life is and how you can go from the top
to the bottom or die in no time. Lighten up and get a bike, go tear up
some poison oak and non native species like people from back east!
Leaving pieces of yourself on the rocks after crashing feeds the insects
and then larger animals. Go get eaten by wild pigs if you really want to
do something positve for nature. Many species love the taste of
vegetarians. Just don't try to tell me where and when I ride or surf. I
will do what I want, where I want; ignoring laws, rules, rangers or you
and your kind. Live with it. You cannot stop me, for I am a free human
being, and I only can decide my own ecological policy. Since I don't
wear a helmet you may feel that I may also become food for the pigs, yet
I am not afraid. But sorry, I win and you lose. I'm riding tomorrow
unless the surf gets bigger. And the next day. I will drive my car even
though I live walking distance to the beach, just for you. You cannot
stop me, but show me a better way by the way you live, not by some
wandering, illogical intenet piece.
Good luck in telling the rest of us what we may and may not do.
September 07, 1999:
Posted by Dave K:
In Reply to: POACH SINGLETRACK EVERYWHERE posted by Brew on September 07, 1999 at 15:03:43:
You ride trails that you KNOW you aren't supposed to be on and the ones that you are allowed will be closed to bikers as well. It's not just about you're little world
and whether you can afford the $100 ticket. So for the benefit of the other riders in your area, if you are gonna poach the trail, do it at nite or early in the morning.
Yes I have poached some trails. Mostly at nite in November.
September 07, 1999:
Posted by Brew
In Reply to: As a reformed poacher... posted by Magic Matt on September 07, 1999 at 14:31:28:
First of all, even though the trail is closed, its very rarely used by anyone other than riders. Yeah, the bottom mile or so gets its fair share of hikers, but up top?
Forget about it. And trail enforcement here is quite weak, if nonexistent.
You "law and order" types make me laugh. I bet you call the cops whenever you see kids skateboarding in your favorite strip mall's parking lot.
The way I see it, Ive poached that trail over 20 times. Assuming a $100 ticket if it ever comes down to that, thats $5 per ride. Cheaper and much more entertaining
than a movie.
September 07, 1999:
Posted by Joe
In Reply to: As a reformed poacher... posted by Magic Matt on September 07, 1999 at 14:31:28:
A couple weeks ago my roommate, a formerly aggressive poacher, was caught on some forbidden singletrack he had ridden many times and nary seen a hiker. The
ranger wrote a ticket, and promised something in the mail. Last Thurs. BOOM $270 ticket in the mail. Don't do the crime if you can't do the time, but $270 is a bit
ridiculous for a 1st offense. I rarely poach, but there is a time and most definately the places.-namely Grizzly Peak above Bizerkley.
September 07, 1999:
Posted by Zaphod
In Reply to: As a reformed poacher... posted by Magic Matt on September 07, 1999 at 14:31:28:
The reasons for the trail closure is because of selfish hiker/equestrians and has little to do with trail erosion or any rational reason. However, it is rather unwise to ride
illegal trails on weekends where hikers are frequently present.
I won't say which illegal trails I ride ALL THE TIME on weekends but I will say that I've only once seen a group of hikers and they were kickin' back locals who
had only good mojo and friendly greetings for us.
No matter what trails you do ride, legal, illegal, singletrack, fireroad, *always* ride with respect to hikers. I always make special effort not to startle hikers and greet
them with a friendly word as I pass by.
Clearly I'm preaching to the choir here but the differences in erosion/wear between the user groups is, in the big picture, immateral. The key damage to the
environment is the actual trail cutting itself. The rest is just so small. Looking at the even bigger picture, all the trails created all over the world adds up to less damage
than a single strip mall. If all the user groups aligned their energies there would be more trails for all of us.
September 08, 1999:
Posted by Grommit
In Reply to: As a reformed poacher... posted by Magic Matt on September 07, 1999 at 14:31:28:
Seems to me that some of you are too ready to roll over and play dead on this issue. If the reasons for trail closure are weak, then get organised. Individuals will
always get caught and booked, but how about 200 riders on a daylight continuous trespass! You may all get booked but it would certainly make the local papers
and give a chance to open a debate.
It took thousands of ordinary walkers on mass trespasses in England before access rights were won to huge areas of the country. They called it 'de-facto access' -
sounds better than 'poaching' which implies you think you are doing something wrong. It has worked before, it could work again...
September 07, 1999:
Posted by david
In Reply to: Poachers: What do you say?? posted by Brew on September 07, 1999 at 13:46:42:
yeah i poached this hiking trail last week. when i came acrros hikers that cared i just told them i made a wrong turn and asked how to get bakc to the bike trail, they
were usually helpful
September 07, 1999:
Posted by Magic Matt
In Reply to: Poachers: What do you say?? posted by Brew on September 07, 1999 at 13:46:42:
I'd say the idea was pretty dumb. Even at the height of my poaching, I almost always poached at night or very early in the morning. And NEVER on a holiday
weekend. Why do it? You know you're being an a$$hole, and you're doing it in front of a crowd - people that may influence closure of other trails. And for what?
The thrill of riding a particular trail? *IS* the ride really worth the risk?
September 07, 1999:
Posted by Brew
last weekend, some pals and I were feeling a little brazen and decided to ride a trail thats technically closed to bikes. Yeah, it wasnt the smartest thing to do on a
holiday weekend.
Anyway, we encountered the inevitable hikers on the bottom third of the descent. Most were cool (as are we -- we dismount and look sheepish) but some said
"Hey, dont you know the trail is closed?" or something to that effect.
My one pal uttered the traditional lame, untrue response "We didnt see any sign at the top," but near the bottom another pal said:
"Yes, we know its illegal, but the ride is worth the risk."
I thot that was an excellent response, as well as the truth. I was wondering what other responses riders have given.