Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Mountain Biker Demonstrates How They Justify Poaching

0 views
Skip to first unread message

Mike Vandeman

unread,
Dec 17, 2009, 11:39:43 AM12/17/09
to
This email demonstrates exactly how they (don't) think:
1. We "own" the national forests, so we can do whatever we want to
there.
2. Some of us occasionally help maintain the trails, so we should be
able to ride them.
3. Manners aren't important -- it's easy to get away with any
transgression, since enforcement is difficult.
4. Horses "damage" the trails, so we should be allowed to do the same.

Mike


Wed, 16 Dec 2009:
To: raymondtrai...@yahoogroups.com
Cc: mountain bike <bbtcm...@yahoogroups.com>
From: raymond hobi <raymondtrai...@yahoo.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:bbtcmembers...@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: What trails?

Well, this message board gets pretty bland in the Winter, so I guess
it's up to me to "stir
the pot". Every time I get my monthly mag from IMBA, I can't help but
think, "Yeah, it's
O.K. what they're doing for mtn. biking and all, but why in the hell
do we need an "inter-
national organization" to (mainly) fight for trail access rights. I
mean, don't we already
own the national forests? Who has the right to say that certain trails
can only be used
for this and that, but not the other? It doesn't make sense when you
think about it. Even
on the trails that allow mtn biking, who ends up doing all the
clearing of treefall every Spring? It certainly isn't the forest
service (not that I've seen, anyway!). I liked it better in
the "old days". When I started mtn biking, there was no such thing as
an "off limit" trail.
There simply was a trail, and you rode it. And there was non of this
"trail manners" either.
You just blew by hikers like they were standing still. By the time
they knew what hit them,
you were long gone! You know this trail access issue is mostly
political whe they allow
horses on trails but not bicycles. I mean, have you ever riden a
popular horse trail during
the rainy season (like now). Those hoves put divits in the mud that
are 3-6" deep, over and
over. Not to mention trying to ride around the "piles". As far as I
know, (most) mtn bikers
don't crap in the middle of the trail. And they don't weigh 600-1,000
pounds. I just got through writing an e mail to IMBA. I said the
solution to trail access is easy. I'll just do
what we've been doing for 25 years, which is to put on the night gear
and go out at 2am.
Never had a problem!

Jeff Strickland

unread,
Dec 17, 2009, 1:10:41 PM12/17/09
to

"Mike Vandeman" <mike.v...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:8d5cd388-418d-431f...@o9g2000prg.googlegroups.com...

> This email demonstrates exactly how they (don't) think:
> 1. We "own" the national forests, so we can do whatever we want to
> there.

Generally speaking, this is correct. We all believe there are rules and
regulations in the national parks and forests, like there are rules and
regulations on the streets and highways.

Your agenda is to close the parks and forests because you don't like the
activity, but the fact is there are lots of places within the parks and
forest lands that the activity you do not like are perfectly acceptable for
the activity you elect to not be a part of. Just because you elect to not
take part does not mean nobody should be allowed to take part.

> 2. Some of us occasionally help maintain the trails, so we should be
> able to ride them.

This is also true. People that actively take part in park and forest
maintenance should be permitted to use the parks and forests. Indeed, the
park and forest service seeks out Adopt-A-Trail participants to maintain the
trails that they use. These participants perform a HUGE service in
conjunction with park and forest rangers, and they keep the costs down for
the park and forest services.

> 3. Manners aren't important -- it's easy to get away with any
> transgression, since enforcement is difficult.

Only a dolt like you would think that manners aren't important.

climber

unread,
Dec 19, 2009, 6:48:55 PM12/19/09
to
On Dec 17, 9:39 am, Mike Vandeman <mike.vande...@gmail.com> wrote:
> This email demonstrates exactly how they (don't) think:
> 1. We "own" the national forests, so we can do whatever we want to
> there.
> 2. Some of us occasionally help maintain the trails, so we should be
> able to ride them.
> 3. Manners aren't important -- it's easy to get away with any
> transgression, since enforcement is difficult.
> 4. Horses "damage" the trails, so we should be allowed to do the same.
>
> Mike
>
> Wed, 16 Dec 2009:
> To: raymondtrainerironm...@yahoogroups.com
> Cc: mountain bike <bbtcmemb...@yahoogroups.com>
> From: raymond hobi <raymondtrainerironm...@yahoo.com>
> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:bbtcmembers-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com>

If there is a problem with environmentally damaging mtn.biking then
take stewardship of the land then you can use heavy wire at correct
height so as not to injure rider. Yes, it is illegal and I suggest
that you do not commit illegal acts. Another method would be to place
in areas being violated posters warning stringent methods to be taken.
If they ignored then you could take stringent measures. Just don't
do anything illegal. (Maybe we could clone a couple of those mountain
boy to hose abusive riders) Concealed tire spikes an typical parking
areas. On, and on.

climber

ATV'ers who ride off the trails are another case.

Jeff Strickland

unread,
Dec 19, 2009, 2:42:25 PM12/19/09
to

"Mike Vandeman" <mike.v...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:8d5cd388-418d-431f...@o9g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> This email demonstrates exactly how they (don't) think:
> 1. We "own" the national forests, so we can do whatever we want to
> there.
> 2. Some of us occasionally help maintain the trails, so we should be
> able to ride them.
> 3. Manners aren't important -- it's easy to get away with any
> transgression, since enforcement is difficult.
> 4. Horses "damage" the trails, so we should be allowed to do the same.
>
> Mike
>

You are a lying sack of shit, Michael Vandeman, and you have no clue how to
properly post to a newsgroup. Not only do you lie constantly and
voraciously, you are a stupid son-of-a-bitch to boot.

If you feel like carrying on a conversation, do it on the newsgroup where
the whole world can see your lies and deceit. Do not converse privately.

Jeff Strickland

unread,
Dec 19, 2009, 8:24:28 PM12/19/09
to

"climber" <coled...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:e16b7346-d7f4-47dd...@m38g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...

<JS>
You're too late, Mike is already onboard with stringing wire and setting
branches at angles where a person can become impailed.
I'd never suggest that Mike actually does this, but he's posted in the past
that it happens, and he agrees with those that do it.

</JS>

Mike Vandeman

unread,
Dec 20, 2009, 3:44:04 AM12/20/09
to
On Dec 19, 5:24 pm, "Jeff Strickland" <crwlrj...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> "climber" <coledenk...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> </JS>- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

To quote a famous person, "You are a lying bag of shit". And you KNOW
IT.

Jeff Strickland

unread,
Dec 20, 2009, 12:01:28 PM12/20/09
to

"Mike Vandeman" <mike.v...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1dfb89ff-a086-493f...@a32g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...


<JS>
You're the one that posted articles of people stringing piano wire across
the trail, and setting sharpened branches at angles specifically meant to
cause harm to passing riders, and supported the actions.

As for the quote from the "famous person," that was me -- except that I'm
not famous. You're a lying sack of shit, and you know it.


</JS>


Mike Vandeman

unread,
Dec 23, 2009, 12:51:37 AM12/23/09
to
On Dec 20, 9:01 am, "Jeff Strickland" <crwlrj...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> "Mike Vandeman" <mike.vande...@gmail.com> wrote in message

Your nose is growing....

> As for the quote from the "famous person," that was me -- except that I'm
> not famous. You're a lying sack of shit, and you know it.
>

0 new messages