Back by popular demand....
August 11,
1997 Juan
Antonio
Samaranch
President,
Internation-
al Olympic
Committee
Chateau de
Vidy 1007
Lausanne,
Switzerland
Katia Mascagni Stivachtis, Chief, Section of Environmental
Affairs Department of International Cooperation and Public
Information International Olympic Committee Chateau de Vidy
1007 Lausanne, Switzerland
Gentlepersons:
I was delighted to learn (from your web page) that
protection of the environment (after sports and
culture) is now one of the main goals of the
Olympics. The visibility and prestige of the
Olympics give you enormous responsibility,
especially toward young people, who will be strongly
influenced by what they see. As you well know,
nonverbal learning is very powerful, and is for many
people (e.g. preliterate children) the primary means
by which the Olympics teaches them about sports,
culture, and the environment. People, especially
children, assume that what they see on television,
especially in the Olympics, is proper.
Therefore, I was shocked, saddened, and embarrassed
when I discovered that mountain biking has been
accepted as an Olympic sport. I am enclosing several
papers in which I explain in detail the harm that
mountain biking inflicts on wildlife. But I will try
to summarize that information here.
We are in the midst of a worldwide extinction
crisis. According to the IUCN (International Union
for the Conservation of Nature and Natural
Resources), one fourth of all of the world's animals
are threatened with extinction. The primary threat
is loss of habitat. Such loss includes obvious,
outright destruction, such as clearcutting and open-
pit mining, but also the excessive presence of
humans, which often causes wildlife to abandon their
preferred habitat. In either case, the wildlife lose
access to important resources, such as certain food
sources and potential mates. When judging effects on
wildlife, it is essential to look at the situation
from their point of view, not ours. If they abandon
an area, the habitat is effectively destroyed for
them, regardless of what we think.
The primary reason why mountain biking is harmful to
wildlife, thus, is that it makes it much easier for
people to get into wildlife habitat. Mountain bikers
don't just show up at the Olympics to race. They
have to spend many hours training. And where do they
prefer to ride? In wilderness (wildlife habitat).
And what kind of trail do they prefer to ride on?
"Single-track" trails, which are primarily in
wilderness, or at least the most natural part of any
area. That is also, of course, the area preferred by
wildlife. The Olympics are a powerful motivator.
When people see a sport in the Olympics, they
identify with the athletes and want to participate
in the sport. Thus, by simply including mountain
biking in the Olympics, you unleash a tidal wave of
people buying mountain bikes, flooding parks and
wilderness areas, and participating in races. As is
usual when there is an increase in recreation,
wildlife lose more and more of their (already
dangerously dwindling) habitat.
The bicycle is a wonderful tool, but like any
technological aid, it can be used for good (e.g.
to replace auto travel) or evil (e.g. to expand
man's domination of wildlife habitat). Similar
damage arises from the use of the use of other
technologies, such as climbing aids (extending
man's reach onto cliffs), rafts (giving people
access to the entire length of a river), night-
vision goggles (making night-time access to
habitat easier), etc. Throughout our evolution,
technological aids (e.g. guns, the internal
combustion engine, etc.) have given us vastly
more power than any other species, and the more
we have wielded them, the more damage we have
done. You had the right idea when you banned
sports that "depend essentially on mechanical
propulsion". Technological aids have no place (or
at most a minor place) in Olympic sports, which
are based on simple physical activities like
walking and swimming that measure the physical
(e.g. strength and health) and spiritual (e.g.
sportsmanship) dimensions of a human being, not
of his or her tools.
Many mountain bikers also lack sportsmanship. They
insist on riding even when their enjoyment conflicts
with that of wildlife and other people. Elderly
hikers are being driven off of hiking trails they
have enjoyed all their lives. Threatened species
have been killed by bikers, who then try to pretend
that it didn't happen or was insignificant. Anyone
who speaks out against mountain biking is attacked
viciously, as I have been and continue to be. My
physical safety and that of my family have been
threatened, for simply telling the truth about the
effects of mountain biking on wildlife. Many
mountain bikers seem to see their goal as conquering
anything and anyone in their path. I haven't seen
such a lack of sportsmanship in any other sport
(with the exception of professional wrestling and
one infamous instance in ice skating).
Mountain biking also destroys vast numbers of
organisms that live in and on soil, creating
devastating erosion. One Olympic hopeful, for
example, trained in Brown's Woods, DesMoines, Iowa,
where habitat destruction was so bad that the county
was forced to close the park to bikes. The knobby
tires used by virtually all mountain bikers are
perfectly designed to rip up the soil and kill the
plants and animals that live there. They insist on
using those tires even though they don't need that
much traction unless they are traveling at excessive
speed, or riding on steep slopes or wet ground where
biking is inappropriate.
The Earth's environmental problems are so huge
that they will not be solved without all of us
doing our part. I appreciate that you are striving
to do your part, and are re-examining the Olympics
with the environment in mind. I hope you will
consider dropping mountain biking as an Olympic
sport, and take another look at all the other
sports (e.g. canoeing, which also intrudes into
important wildlife habitat) from the point of view
of wildlife.
Sincerely,
Michael J.
Vandeman,
Ph.D.
P.S. A larger issue, of course, is whether an activity that
requires the long-distance travel of thousands of
people can ever be sustainable. I suggest that you
recognize that the Earth's oil supplies will soon be
exhausted (estimated by the experts at about 2040), and
create a committee to begin planning for it. (E.g., how
do we want to make use of the oil that is left? Burn it
up?!). Every organization should have such a committee!
References:
Ehrlich, Paul and Anne, Extinction: The Causes and
Consequences of the Disappearance of Species. c.1981.
Knight, Richard L. and Kevin J. Gutzwiller, eds.
Wildlife and Recreationists. Covelo, California: Island
Press, c.1995.
Phillips, Kathryn, Tracking the Vanishing Frogs: An
Ecological Mystery. New York: St. Martin's Press, 1994.
Stebbins, Robert, personal communication.
Vandeman, Michael J., Ph.D.
imaja.commvarticlesOpen ↗
===
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.)