Mountain Biker Tries to Claim that Hikers Do More Damage

Discussion in 'Mountain Bikes' started by Mike Vandeman, Jun 22, 2003.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. "Cyclists travel a much longer distance on a day trip in these Tahoe National Forest areas in a
    single day trip than some backpackers will cover in three nights."

    Thanks for admitting that mountain bikers travel farther than hikers. But you conveniently ignore
    the impacts that that travel has on the wildlife, such as killing small animals and plants on and
    next to the trail, and driving animals away from the resources they need.

    It's easy to find individual hikers who do more damage than individual mountain bikers, but that
    proves nothing.The REAL question is how much damage does someone do as a biker than they would do as
    a hiker. Clearly, with a bike, you do more damage than you would do as a hiker, including travelling
    several times as far. Such a test controls for all other variables. Try honesty for a change.

    Mike

    From: Paul Nam <[email protected]> Subject: [ROMP] Trailwork / singletrack access Date: Sun, 22 Jun
    2003 10:48:32 -0700 (PDT)

    ROMP,

    It's a beautiful day for a ride.

    Trailwork scheduling:

    There has been some discussion about the time of day trailwork shifts should take place.
    Traditionally the workers have assembled in the morning, which enables the volunteers to get off
    early enough to pursue other activities in the afternoon and evening.

    A suggestion has been made to stagger two shifts on the same day. The second shift would have a
    later start time to accomodate those with a different sleep schedule.

    This may be a good idea, as it could increase productivity on a given day. One challenge is to find
    extra crew leaders to manage the second shift, or stagger the shifts enough so that the same leaders
    could mange both shifts, leaders willing, of course.

    Seeing as our earthmoving trailwork season is passed we won't have near-term opportunities to
    experiment with this schedule, but we should keep this in mind for the next season.

    A good reason for working in the morning, as Berry mentioned, is that it is cooler. I am going to
    schedule a brushing trailwork weekend out at Coe again this summer to work on the Lost Spring
    Trail's overgrowth. Because of the seasonal heat and the difficulty of the work and it's
    remoteness I won't expect a lot of volunteers. This workday will be on a Sunday morning, with a
    set up for the work done on Saturday from the Manzanita Point base camp. If anyone is interested
    in this let me know.

    Single track access:

    The fate of our access in the Tahoe National forest to such trails as the Grouse Ridge area and
    areas proximate to Downieville and Nevada City is under intense scrutiny. I have been reading many
    of the posts on the IMBA email digest, and I recommend this resource. If you ride up there
    occassionally you know how wonderful it is, and why it is worth defending our access. There is a
    poll at Backpacker magazine's website which you should vote on too [whether bikes should be
    permitted on "hiking trails"].

    Something that I notice when riding through areas we share with backpackers (I am a back packer
    too) is that the campers do more intense damage to localized camp areas than cyclists. Cyclists
    travel a much longer distance on a day trip in these Tahoe National Forest areas in a single day
    trip than some backpackers will cover in three nights. Cyclists, bottom line have a lower impact on
    the ecosystem. We do not set up camps in traditional social locations. This camping activity
    involves sanitation issues, firewood scavenging, camp site "furniture construction", tree
    graffitti, extensive trampling, and miles of fishing tacle trash (tangled line, lost lures, dead
    undersized catch and release fish), and the formation of an aggregate of miles and miles of
    unregulated social trails.

    The Tahoe National Forest and it's neighboring wilderness areas such as Desolation Wilderness have
    extensive damage from campers, on foot and 4WD.

    For the hiking community to get upset with cyclists is wrong, for the wrong reasons. All trail users
    have equal potential to screw things up. All trail users can love and revere the land. All of us can
    improve. We all need to learn and respect more about each other, and the land we love.

    End of rant.

    - Paul
    ===
    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.)

    http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande
     
    Tags:


  2. Michaelr

    Michaelr Guest

    So whats your point?

    Mike Vandeman wrote:

    > "Cyclists travel a much longer distance on a day trip in these Tahoe National Forest areas in a
    > single day trip than some backpackers will cover in three nights."
    >
    > Thanks for admitting that mountain bikers travel farther than hikers. But you conveniently ignore
    > the impacts that that travel has on the wildlife, such as killing small animals and plants on and
    > next to the trail, and driving animals away from the resources they need.
    >
    > It's easy to find individual hikers who do more damage than individual mountain bikers, but
    > that proves nothing.The REAL question is how much damage does someone do as a biker than they
    > would do as a hiker. Clearly, with a bike, you do more damage than you would do as a hiker,
    > including travelling several times as far. Such a test controls for all other variables. Try
    > honesty for a change.
    >
    > Mike
     
  3. Doug Haxton

    Doug Haxton Guest

    On Sun, 22 Jun 2003 23:12:08 GMT, Mike Vandeman <[email protected]> wrote:

    >It's easy to find individual hikers who do more damage than individual mountain bikers, but
    >that proves nothing.The REAL question is how much damage does someone do as a biker than they
    >would do as a hiker. Clearly, with a bike, you do more damage than you would do as a hiker,
    >including travelling several times as far. Such a test controls for all other variables. Try
    >honesty for a change.

    Here's another real question: Given that neither the hiker nor the mountain biker do enough damage
    to the environment to worry about....who cares?

    Doug
     
  4. "Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > "Cyclists travel a much longer distance on a day trip in these Tahoe
    National
    > Forest areas in a single day trip than some backpackers will cover in
    three
    > nights."
    >
    > Thanks for admitting that mountain bikers travel farther than hikers. But
    you
    > conveniently ignore the impacts that that travel has on the wildlife,

    <qoute from MV>"such as
    > killing small animals and plants on and next to the trail, and driving
    animals
    > away from the resources they need.
    >

    This is false. The only small aminals that might be killed are insects, and there are no insects
    that will live where only one or two will live, they tend to breed by the thousands and cover a
    wide area. Animals are not driven from resources they need as a result of bicycles. They may be
    driven from these resources by visitors, but I don't even think that is true for more than the
    time it takes for th evisitors to vacate the area. I have seen dozens of animals of various sizes
    simply standby and wait for us to pass, they don't care that we were there, they only care if we
    do not leave.

    > It's easy to find individual hikers who do more damage than individual
    mountain
    > bikers, but that proves nothing.The REAL question is how much damage does someone do as a biker
    > than they would do as a hiker. Clearly, with a bike,
    you
    > do more damage than you would do as a hiker, including travelling several
    times
    > as far. Such a test controls for all other variables. Try honesty for a
    change.
    >

    The real question is, whaqt is the impact per mile of route traveled, not how many instances of
    "harm" are done. If a hiker does harm at the rate of two instances per mile, and he goes one mile,
    then he has two instances of harm. If a biker travels ten miles and has two instances of harm, he
    has harmed at the rate of .2 per mile. He may have experienced the same two instances of harm as the
    hiker during the first (or any) mile, and no other instances in his trip, so he would have the same
    two-per-mile in that single mile, but he has 8 additional miles with no instance of harm at all. I
    would have to suggest that in this scenario, the biker would be doing less harm than the hiker. Of
    course, you will dispute this with your lies and inuendo.

    <snip>
    >
    > The Tahoe National Forest and it's neighboring wilderness areas such as Desolation Wilderness have
    > extensive damage from campers, on foot and 4WD.
    >
    > For the hiking community to get upset with cyclists is wrong, for the
    wrong
    > reasons. All trail users have equal potential to screw things up. All
    trail
    > users can love and revere the land. All of us can improve. We all need to
    learn
    > and respect more about each other, and the land we love.
    >

    Here is an opportunity to work together for the benefit of the habitat and recreational pursuits,
    and you, MV, insist on alienating even further people with the same goals as you have. The
    difference in your goal and theirs is that you can't stand sharing, and they insist on sharing
    and helping.
     
  5. Dashi Toshii

    Dashi Toshii Guest

    "Jeff Strickland" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
    >
    > "Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]... This is false. The only small aminals that
    > might be killed are insects,
    and
    > there are no insects that will live where only one or two will live, they tend to breed by the
    > thousands and cover a wide area.

    Small animals that I have seen killed or injured by bicycles are snake and chipmunks.

    Dashii
     
  6. Doug Haxton

    Doug Haxton Guest

    On Tue, 24 Jun 2003 00:40:41 GMT, "Dashi Toshii" <[email protected]> wrote:
    >> This is false. The only small aminals that might be killed are insects,
    >and
    >> there are no insects that will live where only one or two will live, they tend to breed by the
    >> thousands and cover a wide area.
    >
    >Small animals that I have seen killed or injured by bicycles are snake and chipmunks.

    To which one might quite rightly point out, "So what?"

    Doug
     
  7. "Dashi Toshii" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
    >
    > "Jeff Strickland" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
    > >
    > > "Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > > news:[email protected]... This is false. The only small aminals that
    > > might be killed are insects,
    > and
    > > there are no insects that will live where only one or two will live,
    they
    > > tend to breed by the thousands and cover a wide area.
    >
    > Small animals that I have seen killed or injured by bicycles are snake and chipmunks.
    >

    I have never seen a chipmunk or squirl that was too slow to get out of the way, but I have seen
    snakes that are dead and near the trail. To the squirls, I wonder why they are a big concern, there
    are litaraly millions of them and they are hardly an endangered species. Snakes are another matter,
    but in 35 years of driving on forest roads and trails, I can't remember seeing a dead animal that
    was killed by the visitors. I know I am only one person, and I generally visit the same areas that
    are nearby my home, so what happens in the rest of the world can not be illustrated perfectly by my
    experiences.

    I think that responsible visitors can and should enjoy the backcountry areas no matter how they get
    there. We have serious problems with irresponsible visitors from very class, hiking, biking,
    motorized vehicle, but we ought not lump all users of a particular travel mode into a group for the
    purposes of denying that group reasonable access.
     
  8. Dashi Toshii

    Dashi Toshii Guest

    "Doug Haxton" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > On Tue, 24 Jun 2003 00:40:41 GMT, "Dashi Toshii" <[email protected]> wrote:
    > >> This is false. The only small aminals that might be killed are insects,
    > >and
    > >> there are no insects that will live where only one or two will live,
    they
    > >> tend to breed by the thousands and cover a wide area.
    > >
    > >Small animals that I have seen killed or injured by bicycles are snake
    and
    > >chipmunks.
    >
    > To which one might quite rightly point out, "So what?"
    >
    > Doug

    Snakes are beneficial in that they keep the rodent population in check, chipmunks are cute!

    Dashii
     
  9. Peter H

    Peter H Guest

    Dashi Toshii wrote:

    >"Doug Haxton" <[email protected]> wrote in
    >
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>Small animals that I have seen killed or injured by bicycles are snake
    >>>
    >>>
    >and
    >
    >
    >>>chipmunks.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>To which one might quite rightly point out, "So what?"
    >>
    >>Doug
    >>
    >>
    >
    >Snakes are beneficial in that they keep the rodent population in check, chipmunks are cute!
    >
    >Dashii
    >
    >
    >
    Since *some* snakes eat rodents, and your *cute* chipmunk is a rodent.......

    Incidentally, cuteness is not an environmental attribute.

    Pete H

    --
    The universe is largely unexplored. NPR News item
     
  10. Dashi Toshii

    Dashi Toshii Guest

    "Peter H" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
    > Dashi Toshii wrote:
    >
    > >"Doug Haxton" <[email protected]> wrote in
    > >
    > >>>>
    > >>>>
    > >>>Small animals that I have seen killed or injured by bicycles are snake
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >and
    > >
    > >
    > >>>chipmunks.
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>To which one might quite rightly point out, "So what?"
    > >>
    > >>Doug
    > >>
    > >>
    > >
    > >Snakes are beneficial in that they keep the rodent population in check, chipmunks are cute!
    > >
    > >Dashii
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > Since *some* snakes eat rodents, and your *cute* chipmunk is a
    rodent.......
    >
    > Incidentally, cuteness is not an environmental attribute.
    >
    > Pete H

    Neither is a lack of a sense of humor!

    Dashii
     
  11. Peter H

    Peter H Guest

    Dashi Toshii wrote:

    >"Peter H" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
    >
    >
    >>Dashi Toshii wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>>"Doug Haxton" <[email protected]> wrote in
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>Small animals that I have seen killed or injured by bicycles are snake
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>and
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>chipmunks.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>To which one might quite rightly point out, "So what?"
    >>>>
    >>>>Doug
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>Snakes are beneficial in that they keep the rodent population in check, chipmunks are cute!
    >>>
    >>>Dashii
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>Since *some* snakes eat rodents, and your *cute* chipmunk is a
    >>
    >>
    >rodent.......
    >
    >
    >>Incidentally, cuteness is not an environmental attribute.
    >>
    >>Pete H
    >>
    >>
    >
    >Neither is a lack of a sense of humor!
    >
    >Dashii
    >
    >
    >
    >
    So? Given that my sense of humor is wryer than thine.....

    --
    The universe is largely unexplored. NPR News item
     
  12. Dashi Toshii

    Dashi Toshii Guest

    "Peter H" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
    > Dashi Toshii wrote:
    >
    > >"Peter H" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
    > >
    > >
    > >>Dashi Toshii wrote:
    > >>
    > >>
    > >>
    > >>>"Doug Haxton" <[email protected]> wrote in
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>>>>
    > >>>>>>
    > >>>>>Small animals that I have seen killed or injured by bicycles are
    snake
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>>
    > >>>and
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>>>chipmunks.
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>To which one might quite rightly point out, "So what?"
    > >>>>
    > >>>>Doug
    > >>>>
    > >>>>
    > >>>>
    > >>>>
    > >>>Snakes are beneficial in that they keep the rodent population in check, chipmunks are cute!
    > >>>
    > >>>Dashii
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>Since *some* snakes eat rodents, and your *cute* chipmunk is a
    > >>
    > >>
    > >rodent.......
    > >
    > >
    > >>Incidentally, cuteness is not an environmental attribute.
    > >>
    > >>Pete H
    > >>
    > >>
    > >
    > >Neither is a lack of a sense of humor!
    > >
    > >Dashii
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > So? Given that my sense of humor is wryer than thine.....

    Oh, from the UK are you...

    Dashii
     
  13. Peter H

    Peter H Guest

    Dashi Toshii wrote:

    >"Peter H" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
    >
    >
    >>Given that my sense of humor is wryer than thine.....
    >>
    >>
    >
    >Oh, from the UK are you...
    >
    >Dashii
    >
    >
    >
    >
    No.

    --
    The universe is largely unexplored. NPR News item
     
  14. Dashi Toshii

    Dashi Toshii Guest

    "Peter H" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
    > Dashi Toshii wrote:
    >
    > >"Peter H" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
    > >
    > >
    > >>Given that my sense of humor is wryer than thine.....
    > >>
    > >>
    > >
    > >Oh, from the UK are you...
    > >
    > >Dashii
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > No.

    Glad to hear that. I like the British humor and you seem like a jerk.

    *PLONK

    Dashii
     
  15. Shaun Rimmer

    Shaun Rimmer Guest

    Dashi Toshii <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    >
    > "Peter H" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
    > > Dashi Toshii wrote:
    > >
    > > >"Peter H" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
    > > >
    > > >
    > > >>Given that my sense of humor is wryer than thine.....
    > > >>
    > > >>
    > > >
    > > >Oh, from the UK are you...
    > > >
    > > >Dashii
    > > >
    > > >
    > > No.
    >
    > Glad to hear that. I like the British humor and you seem like a jerk.

    'British' humour sucks, generally, and very much. Northern English humour on the other hand, is
    soooo fine. See? - I made you laugh already. Ahem.

    > *PLONK

    There's only one thing I know of that makes that sound, and I want to know how you got your hands on
    it, without getting beaten up and/or arrested.

    > Dashii

    Slow down.

    Shaun aRe - Speed kills. It's not as nice as cocaine, either.
     
  16. *Plonk*

    *Plonk* Guest

    "Dashi Toshii" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    >
    > Glad to hear that. I like the British humor and you seem like a jerk.
    >
    > *PLONK
    >

    What? You called?

    > Dashii
    >
    >

    *plonk*
     
  17. Shaun Rimmer

    Shaun Rimmer Guest

  18. On Mon, 23 Jun 2003 17:25:13 -0700, "Jeff Strickland" <[email protected]> wrote:

    . ."Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    .news:[email protected]... .> "Cyclists travel a much longer distance on a
    day trip in these Tahoe .National .> Forest areas in a single day trip than some backpackers will
    cover in .three .> nights." .> .> Thanks for admitting that mountain bikers travel farther than
    hikers. But .you .> conveniently ignore the impacts that that travel has on the wildlife, . .<qoute
    from MV>"such as .> killing small animals and plants on and next to the trail, and driving .animals
    .> away from the resources they need. .> . .This is false. The only small aminals that might be
    killed are insects,

    BS. And snakes and lizards and salamanders etc. Thanks for demonstrating just how utterly CLUELESS
    mountain bikers are regarding wildlife.

    and .there are no insects that will live where only one or two will live, they .tend to breed by the
    thousands and cover a wide area.

    So what? Dead is dead.

    Animals are not driven .from resources they need as a result of bicycles. They may be driven from
    .these resources by visitors, but I don't even think that is true for more .than the time it takes
    for th evisitors to vacate the area.

    BS. The more people there, the less attractive the area is to them. And it is a waste of precious
    energy to "vacate the area".

    I have seen .dozens of animals of various sizes simply standby and wait for us to pass, .they don't
    care that we were there, they only care if we do not leave.

    You can't tell from that.

    .> It's easy to find individual hikers who do more damage than individual .mountain .> bikers, but
    that proves nothing.The REAL question is how much damage does .> someone do as a biker than they
    would do as a hiker. Clearly, with a bike, .you .> do more damage than you would do as a hiker,
    including travelling several .times .> as far. Such a test controls for all other variables. Try
    honesty for a .change. .> . .The real question is, whaqt is the impact per mile of route traveled,
    not .how many instances of "harm" are done.

    BS. The longer you are there, the greater the harm. That is like saying that murders aren't
    important, only the rate of murders per day.... Are you guys really THAT stupid???????

    If a hiker does harm at the rate of .two instances per mile, and he goes one mile, then he has two
    instances of .harm. If a biker travels ten miles and has two instances of harm, he has .harmed at
    the rate of .2 per mile.

    If he goes 10 times as far, he does 10 times as much damage.

    He may have experienced the same two .instances of harm as the hiker during the first (or any)
    mile, and no other .instances in his trip, so he would have the same two-per-mile in that single
    .mile, but he has 8 additional miles with no instance of harm at all.

    BS.

    I would .have to suggest that in this scenario, the biker would be doing less harm .than the hiker.
    Of course, you will dispute this with your lies and inuendo. . . . .<snip> .> .> The Tahoe National
    Forest and it's neighboring wilderness areas such as .> Desolation Wilderness have extensive damage
    from campers, on foot and 4WD. .> .> For the hiking community to get upset with cyclists is wrong,
    for the .wrong .> reasons. All trail users have equal potential to screw things up. All .trail .>
    users can love and revere the land. All of us can improve. We all need to .learn .> and respect
    more about each other, and the land we love. .> . .Here is an opportunity to work together for the
    benefit of the habitat and .recreational pursuits, and you, MV, insist on alienating even further
    people .with the same goals as you have. The difference in your goal and theirs is .that you can't
    stand sharing, and they insist on sharing and helping.

    BS. I am happy to share trails with mountain bikers -- but not bikes.

    ===
    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.)

    http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande
     
  19. On Tue, 24 Jun 2003 02:14:29 GMT, Doug Haxton <[email protected]> wrote:

    .On Tue, 24 Jun 2003 00:40:41 GMT, "Dashi Toshii" <[email protected]> .wrote: .>> This is false. The
    only small aminals that might be killed are insects, .>and .>> there are no insects that will live
    where only one or two will live, they .>> tend to breed by the thousands and cover a wide area. .>
    .>Small animals that I have seen killed or injured by bicycles are snake and .>chipmunks. . .To
    which one might quite rightly point out, "So what?"

    Same as when mountain bikers get killed mountain biking.
    ===
    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.)

    http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande
     
  20. On Mon, 23 Jun 2003 19:51:24 -0700, "Jeff Strickland" <[email protected]> wrote:

    . ."Dashi Toshii" <[email protected]> wrote in message .news:[email protected]... .> .>
    "Jeff Strickland" <[email protected]> wrote in message .> news:[email protected]... .>
    > .> > "Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message .> >
    news:[email protected]... .> > This is false. The only small aminals that
    might be killed are insects, .> and .> > there are no insects that will live where only one or two
    will live, .they .> > tend to breed by the thousands and cover a wide area. .> .> Small animals that
    I have seen killed or injured by bicycles are snake and .> chipmunks. .> . .I have never seen a
    chipmunk or squirl that was too slow to get out of the .way, but I have seen snakes that are dead
    and near the trail. To the .squirls, I wonder why they are a big concern, there are litaraly
    millions of .them and they are hardly an endangered species.

    So what? Killing them is still harm. Are you really THAT dense?

    Snakes are another matter, .but in 35 years of driving on forest roads and trails, I can't remember
    .seeing a dead animal that was killed by the visitors.

    Ever hear of vultures? DUH!

    I know I am only one .person, and I generally visit the same areas that are nearby my home, so
    .what happens in the rest of the world can not be illustrated perfectly by my .experiences. . .I
    think that responsible visitors can and should enjoy the backcountry areas .no matter how they get
    there. We have serious problems with irresponsible .visitors from very class, hiking, biking,
    motorized vehicle, but we ought .not lump all users of a particular travel mode into a group for
    the purposes .of denying that group reasonable access.

    You are LYING again. Mountain bikers (nor other groups) have NEVER been "denied access". Only BIKES
    and other vehicles have been denied access.
    ===
    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.)

    http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...