Mountain Biker Caught Riding Illegally in a RAMSAR Heritage Wetland Site!



M

Mike Vandeman

Guest
Burns Bog is a RAMSAR heritage wetland site! What was a mountain
biker doing there anyhow?

Mike


Biker rescued from Burns Bog
October 11, 2006 - 9:24 am
By: Treena Wood

DELTA (NEWS1130) - A biker in Delta has a story to tell this morning
after being rescued from waist deep water and mud in Burns Bog.
He was out riding just before 8:00 when he went off the trail, got
lost and ended up in the drink. He called the police, but lost his
cell connection.
The biker was only wearing shorts and a T-shirt, and rescue crews were
worried he'd get hypothermia. Luckily he had a flashlight and was
able to signal the RCMP helicopter with it.
He was pulled out of the muck and taken to Delta Hospital for
observation


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Vancouver Province and Victoria Times Colonist Newpapers had the
story that began with:


Biker rescued from Burns Bog
A mountain biker had a close call in Burns Bog after he fell into
waist-deep mud and then got lost in the dark. (I do not subscribe to
these two newspapers, so this was all I could get)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cyclist gets bogged down at risky Burns spot
Nicholas Read
Vancouver Sun


Thursday, October 12, 2006


DELTA - A 35-year-old Delta cyclist learned the hard way Tuesday
evening that Burns Bog can be a dangerous place to ride a bike.

The man, whose name has not been released, was rescued just before 10
p.m. by Delta police and firefighters after being stranded in the cold
and wet for almost 90 minutes.

At one point, he was waist-deep in mud and water, said police Const.
Rick Peeler.

Burns Bog has several riding and hiking trails in it, but the man was
riding in a part that is privately owned and closed to the public.
Much of the bog is treacherous and, if you put a foot wrong, it is
easy to get sucked into it.

The man, who was dressed only in a T-shirt and shorts when he set out
for his ride, did have the presence of mind to bring a cellphone and
flashlight with him, and that's what saved him, Peeler said.

He called police on his cell around 8 p.m. Tuesday, to report that he
was lost. When police couldn't find him, a search-and-rescue
helicopter was able to pick him out of the dark when he shone his
flashlight.

"He was very cold and wet," Peeler said. "They took him to the
hospital for observation, but he was released later."
===
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of!

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande
 
Published 07/11/02 in issue #23 of The Hook

BY COURTENEY STUART

[email protected]

There's a lesson to be learned from the dust-up over the Rivanna Trail:
don't mess with property rights.

As reported in last week's cover story, "Trail Nix," the Rivanna Trails
Foundation, whose nearly accomplished goal is marking and clearing a
continuous 20-mile trail around the City of Charlottesville, failed to
obtain permission from long-time Bland Circle resident Shirley Presley and
her neighbors when it added the stretch of trail that starts near the VFW
Lodge on River Road nearly seven years ago.

Though some neighbors welcome the trail across the Rivanna River flood-plain
portions of their property, Presley says she now feels threatened by the
hikers, bikers, and dog walkers-- some of whom she claims are vandalizing
her property and trespassing farther up on her land.

City land records indicate that Presley has lived on the property since
1970. But in late June, she erected a bulky blockade of brush, spray-painted
it yellow, and added multiple No Trespassing signs. In doing so, she touched
off the tempers of some outdoorsy types-- many of whom had come to see the
popular pathway as public domain.

Indeed, before the blockade had been up for two weeks, a hiker dismantled it
in a fit of rage witnessed by a Hook staffer who arrived during the
destruction.

"It's a dangerous situation," says Presley's attorney Frederick Payne,
expressing outrage that "a so-called public interest group" would
"encourage" trespassing.

The Foundation's failure to secure permission before placing that stretch of
trail on its map was an "oversight," says Foundation board member and former
president John Conover.

"We're concerned that she gets what she wants," says Conover, who dropped a
letter by The Hook offices earlier this week.

"Ms. Presley has the right to her land," Conover's letter states. "We never
claimed otherwise. If our map was misleading, we apologize in public as we
have done in private."

And the solution to the dispute? At least for now it's not a hefty payment
that could open the floodgates to other claims and result in the demise of
the non-profit Foundation.

"We will maintain the continuous nature of the trail at the expense of
leaving the waterway," Conover writes. "As soon as possible, we will open a
detour through the City parkland bordering Meadowcreek, along Locust Avenue
and River Road, and returning to the trail on the Rivanna by the VFW Lodge.
For the next month or so, there will be no through trail. Sorry."

(Ironically, some of he land the detoured Trail will now traverse is owned
by Stan Tatum, the developer who enraged the neighborhood association three
years ago with a short-lived plan to build on City park land.)

So is Presley satisfied? Her lawyer, Payne, says he can't respond to the
letter since he hasn't yet been contacted directly by Conover or the
Foundation.

"We're gathering information," says Payne. "We're not in a position to say
what Mrs. Presley will do long-term."

To that end, he says Presley is having her property resurveyed so that she
can be sure exactly where her land begins and ends.

Payne says he'd like to remind people that anyone who walks on that trail is
"committing a crime." And he hopes the Foundation will do everything in its
power to undo the problems it has caused. "You disseminated the
misinformation," he says of the Foundation, "you can disseminate the correct
information."

Whether the steps the Foundation has taken and those it plans to take are
enough to satisfy Presley long term remains to be seen.

For those considering vigilante justice against Presley or any other
property owners who might object to the trail, Conover's letter leaves no
doubt about where the Foundation stands on the issue: "Respect the trail.
Respect the owners. If you have questions, please call us at 923-XXXX."

But Conover also makes it clear he'd love to bring the trail off the asphalt
and return it to the banks of the Rivanna River. "If she changes her mind,"
he says of Presley, "we'll put it back."
 
On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 10:42:14 GMT, "Roberto Baggio"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>LOL!
>
>This Vandeman character doesn't read very well for a guy with a "PhD". But
>he must have thick skin to be getting shot down so frequently.
>
>"Joshua Putnam" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> In article <[email protected]>,
>> [email protected] says...
>>
>>> Burns Bog has several

illegal

>>riding and hiking trails in it
>>
>> Guess that answers your question.
>>
>
===
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of!

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande
 
On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 10:42:14 GMT, "Roberto Baggio"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>LOL!
>
>This Vandeman character doesn't read very well for a guy with a "PhD". But
>he must have thick skin to be getting shot down so frequently.

YOU can't read:

"Burns Bog has several riding and hiking trails in it, but the man was
riding in a part that is privately owned and closed to the public."

Mountain biker Joshua Putnam DELIBERATELY QUOTED THAT OUT OF CONTEXT,
and you obviously didn't bother to read it. AS USUAL. Idiot.

>"Joshua Putnam" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> In article <[email protected]>,
>> [email protected] says...
>>
>>> Burns Bog has several riding and hiking trails in it
>>
>> Guess that answers your question.
>>
>
===
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of!

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande
 
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
> On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 10:42:14 GMT, "Roberto Baggio"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >LOL!
> >
> >This Vandeman character doesn't read very well for a guy with a "PhD". But
> >he must have thick skin to be getting shot down so frequently.
>
> YOU can't read:
>
> "Burns Bog has several riding and hiking trails in it,

Which answers your question about what a mountain biker was doing in the
bog.

> but the man was
> riding in a part that is privately owned and closed to the public."

Which has nothing to do with your question about what a mountain biker
was doing in the bog. Perhaps the question you meant to ask isn't the
one you actually asked? After all, your writings aren't known for being
either clear or intellectually honest.

--
[email protected] is Joshua Putnam
<http://www.phred.org/~josh/>
Updated Infrared Photography Gallery:
<http://www.phred.org/~josh/photo/ir.html>
 
The article, which you posted, specifically states:
"Burns Bog has several riding and hiking trails in it,..."

Below you state "illegal", yet the article does not.

Either you do not ready very well for a guy with a "PhD", or you are once
again lying.

I have to laugh and shake my head at what you are trying to do. It is funny
in a sad, sick way.

"Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 10:42:14 GMT, "Roberto Baggio"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>LOL!
>>
>>This Vandeman character doesn't read very well for a guy with a "PhD".
>>But
>>he must have thick skin to be getting shot down so frequently.
>>
>>"Joshua Putnam" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>news:[email protected]...
>>> In article <[email protected]>,
>>> [email protected] says...
>>>
>>>> Burns Bog has several
>
> illegal
>
>>>riding and hiking trails in it
>>>
>>> Guess that answers your question.
>>>
>>
 
"Roberto Baggio" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:OMmYg.145773$R63.102378@pd7urf1no...
> The article, which you posted, specifically states:
> "Burns Bog has several riding and hiking trails in it,..."
>
> Below you state "illegal", yet the article does not.
>
> Either you do not ready very well for a guy with a "PhD", or you are once
> again lying.
>
> I have to laugh and shake my head at what you are trying to do. It is
funny
> in a sad, sick way.
>
> "Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 10:42:14 GMT, "Roberto Baggio"
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >>LOL!
> >>
> >>This Vandeman character doesn't read very well for a guy with a "PhD".
> >>But
> >>he must have thick skin to be getting shot down so frequently.
> >>
> >>"Joshua Putnam" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >>news:[email protected]...
> >>> In article <[email protected]>,
> >>> [email protected] says...
> >>>
> >>>> Burns Bog has several
> >
> > illegal
> >
> >>>riding and hiking trails in it
> >>>
> >>> Guess that answers your question.
> >>>
> >>
>
"The purchased area is protected by a Land Covenant and is an Ecological
Conservancy Area where the primary goal is that of conservation and not
human access. The GVRD is developing a long-term (100 year) management plan
and will be releasing their report in March 2006.** All access to the
central portion of the bog is currently closed. Until the release of the
long term management plan, the purchased area of Burns Bog is strictly off
limits."
http://www.burnsbog.org/about/
 
A little research beyond the agenda of targeting and labeling off-road
cycling as the single largest threat to everything natural would reveal real
and immediate threats to the Burns Bog area. Instead, MV grasps onto a news
story about an unfortunate cyclist riding on private land.
No mention of the dumping in the bog (the main garbage dump for Vancouver
with an expanding landfill). No mention of corporate intrusion and
development shrinking further the real natural areas (Proposed golf course
with access roads into previous roadless areas). No mention of private
landowner issues and useage around the same area. Some posted, some not.
Some cooperating with preservation issues, some not.
The fact that cycling IS legal in areas of Burns Bog is overlooked so a
cyclist trespassing on privately held land can be highlighted. It is this
very issue of private land surrounding the bog, with owners often
maintaining the zoning development rights to their land, that is further
threatening preservation efforts.
If anything, MV should be thanking the cyclist for bringing more scrutiny
onto the issue of ownership and development around the bog.
Should the cyclist be trespassing? Of course not. Did he ignore postings?
Was he lost? Did he know he was on private land? There is no mention in the
newsbrief posted. However, the loose organization of members of Earth First
have often demonstrated on private land around the bog to highlight the
issue. The cyclist, by simply causing an unfortunate incident of needing
assistance, has accomplished the same attention.
Again and again, MV goes out of his way to focus on his anti-cycling agenda
and ignoring the very real threats to existing natural areas.
 
On Sun, 15 Oct 2006 00:04:56 -0700, Joshua Putnam <[email protected]>
wrote:

>In article <[email protected]>,
>[email protected] says...
>> On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 10:42:14 GMT, "Roberto Baggio"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> >LOL!
>> >
>> >This Vandeman character doesn't read very well for a guy with a "PhD". But
>> >he must have thick skin to be getting shot down so frequently.
>>
>> YOU can't read:
>>
>> "Burns Bog has several riding and hiking trails in it,
>
>Which answers your question about what a mountain biker was doing in the
>bog.
>
>> but the man was
>> riding in a part that is privately owned and closed to the public."
>
>Which has nothing to do with your question about what a mountain biker
>was doing in the bog. Perhaps the question you meant to ask isn't the
>one you actually asked? After all, your writings aren't known for being
>either clear or intellectually honest.

It's perfectly clear to everyone but mountain bikers: "Mountain Biker
Caught Riding Illegally in a RAMSAR Heritage Wetland Site!" But you
KNEW that, which is why you tried to hide the end of the sentence:
"the man was riding in a part that is privately owned and closed to
the public." Mountain bikers' middle name is "Dishonest to the Core".
===
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of!

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande
 
On Sun, 15 Oct 2006 09:00:30 GMT, "Roberto Baggio"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>The article, which you posted, specifically states:
>"Burns Bog has several riding and hiking trails in it,..."

It's obvious that you tried to hide the fact that the end of the
sentence is "the man was riding in a part that is privately owned and
closed to the public." If you don't know the meaning of "closed to the
public", ask your mommy for help. He was obviously riding illegally --
mountain bikers' favorite pastime.

>Below you state "illegal", yet the article does not.
>
>Either you do not ready very well for a guy with a "PhD", or you are once
>again lying.
>
>I have to laugh and shake my head at what you are trying to do. It is funny
>in a sad, sick way.
>
>"Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 10:42:14 GMT, "Roberto Baggio"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>LOL!
>>>
>>>This Vandeman character doesn't read very well for a guy with a "PhD".
>>>But
>>>he must have thick skin to be getting shot down so frequently.
>>>
>>>"Joshua Putnam" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>news:[email protected]...
>>>> In article <[email protected]>,
>>>> [email protected] says...
>>>>
>>>>> Burns Bog has several
>>
>> illegal
>>
>>>>riding and hiking trails in it
>>>>
>>>> Guess that answers your question.
>>>>
>>>
>
===
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of!

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande
 
On Sun, 15 Oct 2006 06:41:13 -0400, "Fole Haafstra"
<reply.to.group.not.me> wrote:

>
>"Roberto Baggio" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:OMmYg.145773$R63.102378@pd7urf1no...
>> The article, which you posted, specifically states:
>> "Burns Bog has several riding and hiking trails in it,..."
>>
>> Below you state "illegal", yet the article does not.
>>
>> Either you do not ready very well for a guy with a "PhD", or you are once
>> again lying.
>>
>> I have to laugh and shake my head at what you are trying to do. It is
>funny
>> in a sad, sick way.
>>
>> "Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>> > On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 10:42:14 GMT, "Roberto Baggio"
>> > <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >
>> >>LOL!
>> >>
>> >>This Vandeman character doesn't read very well for a guy with a "PhD".
>> >>But
>> >>he must have thick skin to be getting shot down so frequently.
>> >>
>> >>"Joshua Putnam" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> >>news:[email protected]...
>> >>> In article <[email protected]>,
>> >>> [email protected] says...
>> >>>
>> >>>> Burns Bog has several
>> >
>> > illegal
>> >
>> >>>riding and hiking trails in it
>> >>>
>> >>> Guess that answers your question.
>> >>>
>> >>
>>
>"The purchased area is protected by a Land Covenant and is an Ecological
>Conservancy Area where the primary goal is that of conservation and not
>human access. The GVRD is developing a long-term (100 year) management plan
>and will be releasing their report in March 2006.** All access to the
>central portion of the bog is currently closed. Until the release of the
>long term management plan, the purchased area of Burns Bog is strictly off
>limits."
>http://www.burnsbog.org/about/

The problem is that this is written using words of more than one
syl-la-ble, so that mountain bikers can't read it.
===
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of!

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande
 
On Sun, 15 Oct 2006 11:28:42 -0400, "S Curtiss" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>A little research beyond the agenda of targeting and labeling off-road
>cycling as the single largest threat to everything natural would reveal real
>and immediate threats to the Burns Bog area. Instead, MV grasps onto a news
>story about an unfortunate cyclist riding on private land.
>No mention of the dumping in the bog (the main garbage dump for Vancouver
>with an expanding landfill). No mention of corporate intrusion and
>development shrinking further the real natural areas (Proposed golf course
>with access roads into previous roadless areas). No mention of private
>landowner issues and useage around the same area. Some posted, some not.
>Some cooperating with preservation issues, some not.
>The fact that cycling IS legal in areas of Burns Bog is overlooked so a
>cyclist trespassing on privately held land can be highlighted. It is this
>very issue of private land surrounding the bog, with owners often
>maintaining the zoning development rights to their land, that is further
>threatening preservation efforts.
>If anything, MV should be thanking the cyclist for bringing more scrutiny
>onto the issue of ownership and development around the bog.
>Should the cyclist be trespassing? Of course not. Did he ignore postings?
>Was he lost? Did he know he was on private land? There is no mention in the
>newsbrief posted. However, the loose organization of members of Earth First
>have often demonstrated on private land around the bog to highlight the
>issue. The cyclist, by simply causing an unfortunate incident of needing
>assistance, has accomplished the same attention.
>Again and again, MV goes out of his way to focus on his anti-cycling agenda
>and ignoring the very real threats to existing natural areas.
>

Are you kidding? Mountain bikers grow up to be developers. They have
identical mentalities. The only difference is that developers at least
obey the law.
===
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of!

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande
 
"Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Sun, 15 Oct 2006 11:28:42 -0400, "S Curtiss" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>>A little research beyond the agenda of targeting and labeling off-road
>>cycling as the single largest threat to everything natural would reveal
>>real
>>and immediate threats to the Burns Bog area. Instead, MV grasps onto a
>>news
>>story about an unfortunate cyclist riding on private land.
>>No mention of the dumping in the bog (the main garbage dump for Vancouver
>>with an expanding landfill). No mention of corporate intrusion and
>>development shrinking further the real natural areas (Proposed golf course
>>with access roads into previous roadless areas). No mention of private
>>landowner issues and useage around the same area. Some posted, some not.
>>Some cooperating with preservation issues, some not.
>>The fact that cycling IS legal in areas of Burns Bog is overlooked so a
>>cyclist trespassing on privately held land can be highlighted. It is this
>>very issue of private land surrounding the bog, with owners often
>>maintaining the zoning development rights to their land, that is further
>>threatening preservation efforts.
>>If anything, MV should be thanking the cyclist for bringing more scrutiny
>>onto the issue of ownership and development around the bog.
>>Should the cyclist be trespassing? Of course not. Did he ignore postings?
>>Was he lost? Did he know he was on private land? There is no mention in
>>the
>>newsbrief posted. However, the loose organization of members of Earth
>>First
>>have often demonstrated on private land around the bog to highlight the
>>issue. The cyclist, by simply causing an unfortunate incident of needing
>>assistance, has accomplished the same attention.
>>Again and again, MV goes out of his way to focus on his anti-cycling
>>agenda
>>and ignoring the very real threats to existing natural areas.
>>
>
> Are you kidding? Mountain bikers grow up to be developers. They have
> identical mentalities. The only difference is that developers at least
> obey the law.
> ===
????????????
LOL
How you so obviously contradict yourself! Illegal mountain bikers grow up to
be law-abiding land developers...? You mean the same mountain bikers that
organize with other advocates to speak out against sprawl, development and
wholesale destruction of natural land for profit? Do you mean it is legal
for bribes, tax evasion and market manipulation to gain contracts on land
for development...?
You want to say that mountain bikers grow up to be developers who obey the
law....? You now want to imply that land development is OK with the letter
of the law intact...? You want to imply that mountain biking is not legal,
despite the rule of law that allows the activity?
You want to apply inclusive, blanket statements that all mountain biking is
illegal and all land development is done legally...?
You just dug a few more shovel fulls of dirt out of that hole in your logic
you so often find yourself standing in.
 
"Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Sun, 15 Oct 2006 00:04:56 -0700, Joshua Putnam <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>>In article <[email protected]>,
>>[email protected] says...
>>> On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 10:42:14 GMT, "Roberto Baggio"
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> >LOL!
>>> >
>>> >This Vandeman character doesn't read very well for a guy with a "PhD".
>>> >But
>>> >he must have thick skin to be getting shot down so frequently.
>>>
>>> YOU can't read:
>>>
>>> "Burns Bog has several riding and hiking trails in it,
>>
>>Which answers your question about what a mountain biker was doing in the
>>bog.
>>
>>> but the man was
>>> riding in a part that is privately owned and closed to the public."
>>
>>Which has nothing to do with your question about what a mountain biker
>>was doing in the bog. Perhaps the question you meant to ask isn't the
>>one you actually asked? After all, your writings aren't known for being
>>either clear or intellectually honest.
>
> It's perfectly clear to everyone but mountain bikers: "Mountain Biker
> Caught Riding Illegally in a RAMSAR Heritage Wetland Site!" But you
> KNEW that, which is why you tried to hide the end of the sentence:
> "the man was riding in a part that is privately owned and closed to
> the public." Mountain bikers' middle name is "Dishonest to the Core".
> ===
Were you being dishonest by not including the real threats of development
and dumping as being paramount to residents and advocates in the area? Or
did you simply latch onto another cycling story and post it in yet another
attempt to patch the failing foundation of your agenda?
Honesty is unimportant to your goals. That has been established time again.
A Google Groups search of your postings and replies reveals that.
 
S Curtiss wrote:
> "Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > On Sun, 15 Oct 2006 00:04:56 -0700, Joshua Putnam <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> >
> >>In article <[email protected]>,
> >>[email protected] says...
> >>> On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 10:42:14 GMT, "Roberto Baggio"
> >>> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> >LOL!
> >>> >
> >>> >This Vandeman character doesn't read very well for a guy with a "PhD".
> >>> >But
> >>> >he must have thick skin to be getting shot down so frequently.
> >>>
> >>> YOU can't read:
> >>>
> >>> "Burns Bog has several riding and hiking trails in it,
> >>
> >>Which answers your question about what a mountain biker was doing in the
> >>bog.
> >>
> >>> but the man was
> >>> riding in a part that is privately owned and closed to the public."
> >>
> >>Which has nothing to do with your question about what a mountain biker
> >>was doing in the bog. Perhaps the question you meant to ask isn't the
> >>one you actually asked? After all, your writings aren't known for being
> >>either clear or intellectually honest.
> >
> > It's perfectly clear to everyone but mountain bikers: "Mountain Biker
> > Caught Riding Illegally in a RAMSAR Heritage Wetland Site!" But you
> > KNEW that, which is why you tried to hide the end of the sentence:
> > "the man was riding in a part that is privately owned and closed to
> > the public." Mountain bikers' middle name is "Dishonest to the Core".
> > ===
> Were you being dishonest by not including the real threats of development
> and dumping as being paramount to residents and advocates in the area? Or
> did you simply latch onto another cycling story and post it in yet another
> attempt to patch the failing foundation of your agenda?
> Honesty is unimportant to your goals. That has been established time again.
> A Google Groups search of your postings and replies reveals that.
 
His "research" is utter nonsense and full of lies.
His arguments are grade school quality.
And he will not accept any info he hasn't made up by himself.

Want to communicate with MV?
Post a respnse to his trash.

"Duh. Yawn. Liar. Did you say something?" (Pick One)

Communicateion complete.
 
On Mon, 16 Oct 2006 13:03:20 GMT, "JP" <[email protected]> wrote:

>His "research" is utter nonsense and full of lies.
>His arguments are grade school quality.
>And he will not accept any info he hasn't made up by himself.
>
>Want to communicate with MV?
>Post a respnse to his trash.
>
>"Duh. Yawn. Liar. Did you say something?" (Pick One)
>
>Communicateion complete.

Just what we would expect from someone afraid to use his real name.
===
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of!

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
Mountain Biker Caught With Red Apple In Hands
Replies
1
Views
312
Mountain Bikes
Dave W
D
B
Beginner Mountain Biker Help!
Replies
1
Views
1K
Mountain Bikes
alfeng
alfeng
L
beginning mountain biker - looking for advice on buying a bike
Replies
2
Views
4K
Mountain Bikes
stevegreer
stevegreer
M
Australia's "Best Mountain Biker" Is A CRIMINAL!
Replies
2
Views
9K
Mountain Bikes
Mike Vandeman
M
M
Mountain Biker Admits He Doesn't See Wildlife When Biking
Replies
14
Views
2K
Mountain Bikes
Mike Vandeman
M
Top Bottom Back