Vandeman's ramblings published in Backpacker magazine



Status
Not open for further replies.
R

Richard Watts

Guest
MV's same old tirade has been published in the September 2003 issue of Backpacker magazine. Page 26
asks the question: Should mountain bikes be allowed on hiking trails? Of course MV says no. His
argument against bikes is the same as always; only the bikes are banned, not the bikers Mountain
bikes run over animals, etc..

Seems to me he would put his somewhat prolific pen to work in support of something that really makes
a difference to the planet. The rampant consumption of oil causes more environmental damage in a
week than all the mountain bikes in the world have since their invention. Oh well, he probably
drives a Hummer....

The credit for his editorial lists him as Former Chair, Wildlife Committee, San Fransisco Bay
Chapter of the Sierra Club. I think maybe I'll let my Sierra Club membership elapse after seeing
that one. I wonder what George Dubya's position on mountain biking is?

BTW, Backpacker magazine is published by Rodale Press, the same people that publish
Bicycling magazine.

Seriously though Mike, I do respect your dedication and your work toward a cause you apparently
believe in. But have you ever heard of the Pareto principle? The "vital few?" For the benefit of
some readers that may not have, the Pareto principle states that the vast majority of problems are
caused by a vital few causes, all the remaining causes are the trivial many. When looking at
environmental concerns, surely mountain biking must be in the trivial many when there are millions
of cars on our highways and plenty of coal fired power plants.
 
On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 02:33:19 GMT, "Richard Watts" <[email protected]> wrote:

.MV's same old tirade has been published in the September 2003 issue of .Backpacker magazine. Page
26 asks the question: Should mountain bikes be .allowed on hiking trails? Of course MV says no. His
argument against bikes .is the same as always; only the bikes are banned, not the bikers Mountain
.bikes run over animals, etc.. . .Seems to me he would put his somewhat prolific pen to work in
support of .something that really makes a difference to the planet. The rampant .consumption of oil
causes more environmental damage in a week than all the .mountain bikes in the world have since
their invention. Oh well, he .probably drives a Hummer.... . .The credit for his editorial lists him
as Former Chair, Wildlife Committee, .San Fransisco Bay Chapter of the Sierra Club. I think maybe
I'll let my .Sierra Club membership elapse after seeing that one. I wonder what George .Dubya's
position on mountain biking is? . .BTW, Backpacker magazine is published by Rodale Press, the same
people that .publish Bicycling magazine. . .Seriously though Mike, I do respect your dedication and
your work toward a .cause you apparently believe in. But have you ever heard of the Pareto
.principle? The "vital few?" For the benefit of some readers that may not .have, the Pareto
principle states that the vast majority of problems are .caused by a vital few causes, all the
remaining causes are the trivial many. .When looking at environmental concerns, surely mountain
biking must be in .the trivial many when there are millions of cars on our highways and plenty .of
coal fired power plants.

Compared to murder, burglary is "trivial". So I guess we should ignore burglary. Idiot.
===
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
 
On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 04:02:53 GMT, Mike Vandeman <[email protected]> wrote:

>On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 02:33:19 GMT, "Richard Watts" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>.MV's same old tirade has been published in the September 2003 issue of .Backpacker magazine. Page
>26 asks the question: Should mountain bikes be .allowed on hiking trails? Of course MV says no.
>His argument against bikes .is the same as always; only the bikes are banned, not the bikers
>Mountain .bikes run over animals, etc.. . .The credit for his editorial lists him as Former Chair,
>Wildlife Committee, .San Fransisco Bay Chapter of the Sierra Club. I think maybe I'll let my
>.Sierra Club membership elapse after seeing that one. I wonder what George .Dubya's position on
>mountain biking is? .
Considering that he was removed from that position by his local chapter of the SC for "Breach of
Leadership Trust", and the national Board of the Sierra Club has banned him from holding elective or
appointive office in the Sierra Club, I am not certain that his using that title is appropriate. It
would be if he had retired gracefully.

Technically correct in a narrow sense, but not appropriate to use a "former" title when one has been
removed from that position for cause.

Happy trails, Gary (net.yogi.bear)
------------------------------------------------
at the 51st percentile of ursine intelligence

Gary D. Schwartz, Needham, MA, USA Please reply to: garyDOTschwartzATpoboxDOTcom
 
Last I heard, hikers cause alot of damage too. Just look at the damage caused by them in some public areas.
 
"Richard Watts" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:p[email protected]...
> MV's same old tirade has been published in the September 2003 issue of Backpacker magazine. Page
> 26 asks the question: Should mountain bikes be allowed on hiking trails? Of course MV says no. His
> argument against
bikes
> is the same as always; only the bikes are banned, not the bikers Mountain bikes run over
> animals, etc..

Well really if magazines would deal with the issue instead of trying to create a story, things
really get pretty simple. If they(magazines) like to catagorize everything, why even ask the
questions? A hiking trail is a trail for hiking. A biking trails is a trail for biking. A horse
trail is a trail for people on horses. A multi-use trail is a trail for multi-use. And if
Dr.Duh can't figure that out, then who is the idiot?
 
"Richard Watts" <[email protected]> wrote in news:p[email protected]:

> MV's same old tirade has been published in the September 2003 issue of Backpacker magazine. Page
> 26 asks the question: Should mountain bikes be allowed on hiking trails?

Hey, How about this! Should hikers be allowed on mountain bike trails! They are usually the ones
responsible for most bike/pedestrian related accedents. I've been taken down by some idiot who side
stepped right in front of me while I was riding by. Next time I going to run them down. Maybe that
will teach them a lesson.

<treehugger **** snipped
 
On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 02:33:19 +0000, Richard Watts did issue forth:

> The credit for his editorial lists him as Former Chair, Wildlife Committee, San Fransisco Bay
> Chapter of the Sierra Club. I think maybe I'll let my Sierra Club membership elapse after seeing
> that one. I wonder what George Dubya's position on mountain biking is?

I wouldn't worry too much. Apparently the Sierra Club weren't that fond of him either.

http://www.sierraclub.org/bod/minutes/2003/me20030307.pdf
http://www.sierraclub.org/bod/minutes/2003/mb20030222.pdf

Huw
 
Mr. E. Mann wrote:

> "Richard Watts" <[email protected]> wrote in news:p[email protected]:
>
>
>>MV's same old tirade has been published in the September 2003 issue of Backpacker magazine. Page
>>26 asks the question: Should mountain bikes be allowed on hiking trails?
>
>
> Hey, How about this! Should hikers be allowed on mountain bike trails! They are usually the ones
> responsible for most bike/pedestrian related accedents. I've been taken down by some idiot who
> side stepped right in front of me while I was riding by. Next time I going to run them down. Maybe
> that will teach them a lesson.

Did you make sure that they knew that you were there? If so, then it's on them; if not, then the
problem's yours.

David
 
David Kunz wrote:

[people stepping out in front of a bike]

> Did you make sure that they knew that you were there? If so, then it's on them; if not, then the
> problem's yours.

Some hikers can be strange. They seem to think the sound of a "ding ding" from a bike bell, or even
a "good morning" is an immediate threat to their saftey. They'll jump this way or that. My personal
favorite are the guys who will immediately grab their female hiking partner by the arms, and *move*
them one way or the other. Often the wrong way.

I already give them plenty of room ... extra because I've seen things like that so often.
 
> I wouldn't worry too much. Apparently the Sierra Club weren't that fond of him either.
>
> http://www.sierraclub.org/bod/minutes/2003/me20030307.pdf
> http://www.sierraclub.org/bod/minutes/2003/mb20030222.pdf
>
> Huw

Too funny! The ball-less hermaphrodite can't even play with it's own.

"2. Bay Chapter BoLT Issue

MSC (Dobson-O'Connell) The ExCom requests the Organizational Effectiveness Committee to investigate
additional issues that arose during the Breach of Leadership Trust (BoLT) investigation, in order to
determine whether Mr. Vandeman's Sierra Club membership should be revoked.

Passed unanimously Absent: Larry Fahn"
 
"Slacker" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Too funny! The ball-less hermaphrodite can't even play with it's own.

28. Bay Chapter BoLT Issue MSC (McGrady-Aumen) The Board of Directors permanently bars Michael
Vandeman from holding any elective or appointive leadership positions within the Sierra Club. In
addition, Mr. Vandeman is not to represent the Sierra Club, or any of its entities, in any
manner or on any issue, explicitly or implicitly. Passed unanimously.

Wouldn't listing himself as a Former Chair of Sierra Club in that article in 'Backpacker' constitute
implicity or explicity him representing the Sierra Club? Has he breached the boards mandate already?
Maybe they'd want to add that to their list? Then again, it sounds like they've already got their
hands full. Who's the idiot now? ROTFLMAO!
--
Westie
 
On Sat, 06 Sep 2003 08:53:46 GMT, "Mr. E. Mann" <[email protected]> wrote:

."Richard Watts" <[email protected]> wrote in .news:p[email protected]: .
.> MV's same old tirade has been published in the September 2003 issue of .> Backpacker magazine.
Page 26 asks the question: Should mountain bikes .> be allowed on hiking trails? . .Hey, How about
this! Should hikers be allowed on mountain bike trails! They .are usually the ones responsible for
most bike/pedestrian related .accedents.

BS. If you weren't on a bike, there would have been no accident.

I've been taken down by some idiot who side stepped right in .front of me while I was riding
by. Next time I going to run them down. .Maybe that will teach them a lesson. . . .<treehugger
**** snipped>

===
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
 
On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 04:36:13 GMT, Gary S. <Idontwantspam@net> wrote:

.On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 04:02:53 GMT, Mike Vandeman <[email protected]> .wrote: . .>On Thu, 04 Sep
2003 02:33:19 GMT, "Richard Watts" <[email protected]> wrote: .> .>.MV's same old tirade has been
published in the September 2003 issue of .>.Backpacker magazine. Page 26 asks the question: Should
mountain bikes be .>.allowed on hiking trails? Of course MV says no. His argument against bikes
.>.is the same as always; only the bikes are banned, not the bikers Mountain .>.bikes run over
animals, etc.. .>. .>.The credit for his editorial lists him as Former Chair, Wildlife Committee,
.>.San Fransisco Bay Chapter of the Sierra Club. I think maybe I'll let my .>.Sierra Club membership
elapse after seeing that one. I wonder what George .>.Dubya's position on mountain biking is? .>.
.Considering that he was removed from that position by his local .chapter of the SC for "Breach of
Leadership Trust", and the national .Board of the Sierra Club has banned him from holding elective
or .appointive office in the Sierra Club, I am not certain that his using .that title is
appropriate. It would be if he had retired gracefully. . .Technically correct in a narrow sense, but
not appropriate to use a ."former" title when one has been removed from that position for cause.

You are LYING. The Board was required to drop that charge, for missing their own deadline. And it
was NOT "for cause", but for telling the truth.
===
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
 
On 4 Sep 2003 15:43:16 +0950, psycho- <[email protected]> wrote:

.Last I heard, hikers cause alot of damage too. Just look at the damage .caused by them in some
public areas.

Of course. So what? That doesn't excuse mountain biking. DUH!
===
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
 
On Sat, 06 Sep 2003 15:47:06 GMT, "Lefty" <[email protected]> wrote:

.David Kunz wrote: . .[people stepping out in front of a bike] . .> Did you make sure that they knew
that you were there? If so, then .> it's on them; if not, then the problem's yours. . .Some hikers
can be strange. They seem to think the sound of a "ding .ding" from a bike bell, or even a "good
morning" is an immediate threat .to their saftey. They'll jump this way or that. My personal
favorite .are the guys who will immediately grab their female hiking partner by .the arms, and
*move* them one way or the other. Often the wrong way. . .I already give them plenty of room ...
extra because I've seen things .like that so often.

A bell says NOTHING, except maybe "get out of my way". People who use bells are idiots.

===
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
 
On Sun, 7 Sep 2003 12:59:47 +1200, "Westie" <[email protected]> wrote:

. ."Slacker" <[email protected]> wrote in message
.news:[email protected]... .> Too funny! The ball-less hermaphrodite can't
even play with it's own. . .28. Bay Chapter BoLT Issue .MSC (McGrady-Aumen) .The Board of Directors
permanently bars Michael Vandeman from holding any .elective .or appointive leadership positions
within the Sierra Club. In addition, Mr. .Vandeman is .not to represent the Sierra Club, or any of
its entities, in any manner or .on any issue, .explicitly or implicitly. .Passed unanimously. .
.Wouldn't listing himself as a Former Chair of Sierra Club in that article in .'Backpacker'
constitute implicity or explicity him representing the Sierra .Club? Has he breached the boards
mandate already? Maybe they'd want to add .that to their list? Then again, it sounds like they've
already got their .hands full. .Who's the idiot now? ROTFLMAO!

Too bad they are so incompetent that they had to drop their complaint due to missing their own
deadline. :)
===
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
 
"Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 04:36:13 GMT, Gary S. <Idontwantspam@net> wrote:
>
> .On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 04:02:53 GMT, Mike Vandeman <[email protected]> .wrote: . .>On Thu, 04 Sep
> 2003 02:33:19 GMT, "Richard Watts" <[email protected]>
wrote:
> .> .>.MV's same old tirade has been published in the September 2003 issue of .>.Backpacker
> magazine. Page 26 asks the question: Should mountain bikes
be
> .>.allowed on hiking trails? Of course MV says no. His argument against
bikes
> .>.is the same as always; only the bikes are banned, not the bikers
Mountain
> .>.bikes run over animals, etc.. .>. .>.The credit for his editorial lists him as Former Chair,
> Wildlife
Committee,
> .>.San Fransisco Bay Chapter of the Sierra Club. I think maybe I'll let
my
> .>.Sierra Club membership elapse after seeing that one. I wonder what
George
> .>.Dubya's position on mountain biking is? .>. .Considering that he was removed from that position
> by his local .chapter of the SC for "Breach of Leadership Trust", and the national .Board of the
> Sierra Club has banned him from holding elective or .appointive office in the Sierra Club, I am
> not certain that his using .that title is appropriate. It would be if he had retired gracefully. .
> .Technically correct in a narrow sense, but not appropriate to use a ."former" title when one has
> been removed from that position for cause.
>
> You are LYING. The Board was required to drop that charge, for missing
their own
> deadline. And it was NOT "for cause", but for telling the truth.
> ===
> 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

Mike, Your website contains the statement "It is probably impossible to understand my web page,
if you own a car. Or a mountain bike." I find 2 things interesting: (1) that you put it at the
bottom of your site and (2) that you said it all. Surely you know that such arrogance is seen as
nothing more than self-serving and idiotic. I own a car and a mountain bike. I understand your
views and I know you will lose the argument because you do not, in spite of your education,
understand fundamental human nature. You don't get people to listen, much less cooperate, by
slapping them in the face.

PSWatch those sentence fragments!
 
On Sun, 21 Sep 2003 07:50:40 -0400, "MLL" <reply.to.the.group.not.me> wrote:

."Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
.news:[email protected]... .> On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 04:36:13 GMT, Gary S.
<Idontwantspam@net> wrote: .> .> .On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 04:02:53 GMT, Mike Vandeman
<[email protected]> .> .wrote: .> . .> .>On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 02:33:19 GMT, "Richard Watts"
<[email protected]> .wrote: .> .> .> .>.MV's same old tirade has been published in the September
2003 issue of .> .>.Backpacker magazine. Page 26 asks the question: Should mountain bikes .be .>
.>.allowed on hiking trails? Of course MV says no. His argument against .bikes .> .>.is the same as
always; only the bikes are banned, not the bikers .Mountain .> .>.bikes run over animals, etc.. .>
.>. .> .>.The credit for his editorial lists him as Former Chair, Wildlife .Committee, .> .>.San
Fransisco Bay Chapter of the Sierra Club. I think maybe I'll let .my .> .>.Sierra Club membership
elapse after seeing that one. I wonder what .George .> .>.Dubya's position on mountain biking is? .>
.>. .> .Considering that he was removed from that position by his local .> .chapter of the SC for
"Breach of Leadership Trust", and the national .> .Board of the Sierra Club has banned him from
holding elective or .> .appointive office in the Sierra Club, I am not certain that his using .>
.that title is appropriate. It would be if he had retired gracefully. .> . .> .Technically correct
in a narrow sense, but not appropriate to use a .> ."former" title when one has been removed from
that position for cause. .> .> You are LYING. The Board was required to drop that charge, for
missing .their own .> deadline. And it was NOT "for cause", but for telling the truth. .> === .> 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 . .Mike, .Your website contains the statement "It is probably
impossible to understand .my web page, if you own a car. .Or a mountain bike." I find 2 things
interesting: (1) that you put it at .the bottom of your site and (2) that you said it all. Surely
you know that .such arrogance is seen as nothing more than self-serving and idiotic. I own .a car
and a mountain bike. I understand your views

If you think so, then tell me what they are. This should be good!

and I know you will lose .the argument because you do not, in spite of your education, understand
.fundamental human nature. You don't get people to listen, much less .cooperate, by slapping them
in the face.

How have I "slapped you in the face"? You obviously lack some understanding, since you believe you
have been slapped in the face. In reality, I only tell the truth. That's what mountain bikers
consider a slap in the face. :)

.PS .Watch those sentence fragments!

Which ones?
===
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
 
"Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Sun, 21 Sep 2003 07:50:40 -0400, "MLL" <reply.to.the.group.not.me>
wrote:
>
> ."Mike Vandeman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> .news:[email protected]... .> On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 04:36:13 GMT, Gary S.
> <Idontwantspam@net> wrote: .> .> .On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 04:02:53 GMT, Mike Vandeman
> <[email protected]> .> .wrote: .> . .> .>On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 02:33:19 GMT, "Richard Watts"
> <[email protected]> .wrote: .> .> .> .>.MV's same old tirade has been published in the September
> 2003 issue
of
> .> .>.Backpacker magazine. Page 26 asks the question: Should mountain
bikes
> .be .> .>.allowed on hiking trails? Of course MV says no. His argument
against
> .bikes .> .>.is the same as always; only the bikes are banned, not the bikers .Mountain .>
> .>.bikes run over animals, etc.. .> .>. .> .>.The credit for his editorial lists him as Former
> Chair, Wildlife .Committee, .> .>.San Fransisco Bay Chapter of the Sierra Club. I think maybe I'll
let
> .my .> .>.Sierra Club membership elapse after seeing that one. I wonder what .George .> .>.Dubya's
> position on mountain biking is? .> .>. .> .Considering that he was removed from that position by
> his local .> .chapter of the SC for "Breach of Leadership Trust", and the national .> .Board of
> the Sierra Club has banned him from holding elective or .> .appointive office in the Sierra Club,
> I am not certain that his using .> .that title is appropriate. It would be if he had retired
> gracefully. .> . .> .Technically correct in a narrow sense, but not appropriate to use a .>
> ."former" title when one has been removed from that position for cause. .> .> You are LYING. The
> Board was required to drop that charge, for missing .their own .> deadline. And it was NOT "for
> cause", but for telling the truth. .> === .> 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 . .Mike, .Your
> website contains the statement "It is probably impossible to
understand
> .my web page, if you own a car. .Or a mountain bike." I find 2 things interesting: (1) that you
> put it at .the bottom of your site and (2) that you said it all. Surely you know
that
> .such arrogance is seen as nothing more than self-serving and idiotic. I
own
> .a car and a mountain bike. I understand your views
>
> If you think so, then tell me what they are. This should be good!
>
> and I know you will lose .the argument because you do not, in spite of your education, understand
> .fundamental human nature. You don't get people to listen, much less .cooperate, by slapping them
> in the face.
>
> How have I "slapped you in the face"? You obviously lack some
understanding,
> since you believe you have been slapped in the face. In reality, I only
tell the
> truth. That's what mountain bikers consider a slap in the face. :)
>
> .PS .Watch those sentence fragments!
>
> Which ones?
> ===
> 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

Mike, You're right. I own a car so I couldn't possibly understand your web site. Furthermore, I own
a mountain bike and one who owns such a vehicle couldn't possibly understand your website. If I rid
myself of the car and bike will I understand your website?

Thanks for the chuckles.
 
Mike Vandeman <[email protected]> wrote in news:[email protected]:

> On Sat, 06 Sep 2003 08:53:46 GMT, "Mr. E. Mann" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> ."Richard Watts" <[email protected]> wrote in .news:p[email protected]: .
> .> MV's same old tirade has been published in the September 2003 issue of .> Backpacker magazine.
> Page 26 asks the question: Should mountain bikes .> be allowed on hiking trails? . .Hey, How about
> this! Should hikers be allowed on mountain bike trails! They .are usually the ones responsible for
> most bike/pedestrian related .accedents.
>
> BS. If you weren't on a bike, there would have been no accident.

HAhahahahahaha! You got kicked out of the Sierra Club. HAhahahahahahahaha! Pthththththtt!

> I've been taken down by some idiot who side stepped right in .front of me while I was riding by.
> Next time I going to run them down. .Maybe that will teach them a lesson. . . .<treehugger ****
> snipped>
>
>===
> 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
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads