Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
1 - 20 of 94 Posts

·
bi-winning
Joined
·
11,109 Posts
Intrigued I am.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
332 Posts
that video was cool at first, then got sad and a bit angry...hah
 

·
humber river advocate
Joined
·
6,395 Posts
good old mv...
"we can't have this no no no... i hate you... so arrogant..." now where did i hear that before?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
640 Posts
Shades of Gray

Wow that was a great video Endura.
Is the stuff in that video something you would like to see in your local forest?
That would be an interesting discussion.
Not much in this world is Black or White, right or wrong, but for me if the area is use by lots of other people then hucksters I would say very dark grey, almost black, wrong please don't build it.
One mans art is another mans trash.
Suppose a hiker likes to erect sculptures of male chickens, big ones, everywhere.
I like the idea of nice little trails to view and enjoy what is already there, nature.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
151 Posts
From where I sit anyone who uses the same trails should be a friend.

At some point the bulldozers will show up to put in a golf course, shopping mall, etc...

Would you rather more or fewer people be on your side?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
497 Posts
if you watch in the video the one guy saying he hates mtbikers is just talking about walking along a regular path, this is very single minded and I can't believe that people think that way. I am very intrigued to see the whole movie now to see if they show any compromises and multi use trails that are working well. I know on our local trails we see a lot of trail runners and dog walkers we are quite nice to each other sharing the same trail etiquette.

I will be disappointed if it is an hour plus of black and white these are our trails and there is no answer, but I don't think this is the case.
 

·
Evil Jr.
Joined
·
6,859 Posts
On the one hand, I'm not a big fan of getting run down by riders when I'm out for a hike.

On the other hand, I'm always amazed at how limited people's scope can be in terms of "destruction". One good flood, forest fire, mud slide or earth quake would have a far greater impact on the landscape than a few huckers. You only have to watch a couple of episodes of Destroyed in Second to understand that. Heck, after the next glaciation, nothing will be the same! :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
332 Posts
Bio makes a great point imo...sooner or later they are gonna throw in a condo, or a mall or some other ****, shouldn't we all get the use out of the system that we can while its there?

I mean, i ride in the seaton tract all the time out in pickering and i bring my flopack for hydration, and in the last two weeks i have seen 3 or 4 tim hortons iced cap cups tossed all on the trails..

hope they dont tear a forest down for a drive-thru...
 

·
humber river advocate
Joined
·
6,395 Posts
the biggest threat is development. all you have to do is follow the money... we are better building bridges with every stakeholder then carve out our own little fifedoms
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
640 Posts
Natural View For Everyone?

"From where I sit anyone who uses the same trails should be a friend."
I think the point is that some people who are using the same trail have also made the choice to change the look and feel of the area by building walls/jumps. That is a whole lot different then just using the trail. They have made the choice to change the area for everyone.

"At some point the bulldozers will show up to put in a golf course, shopping mall, etc... "
Allot of the places we ride are protected areas and they will be even more needed as true nature places when more shopping malls are built. We should do our best to keep it natural.

"Would you rather more or fewer people be on your side?"
Good question ... I do not want the forest to be full of unnatural STUFF but of course I do understand that people like it and will build it. Racing should not take place every where, even the FAST people should understand that. Stunts should not be built every where and I would like to see some rational talk about that. I am not saying BLACK no stunts, Black no racing. Understand that our view and actions are directly related to bikes being banned.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,232 Posts
Phat Tyred said:
"From where I sit anyone who uses the same trails should be a friend."
I think the point is that some people who are using the same trail have also made the choice to change the look and feel of the area by building walls/jumps. That is a whole lot different then just using the trail. They have made the choice to change the area for everyone.

"At some point the bulldozers will show up to put in a golf course, shopping mall, etc... "
Allot of the places we ride are protected areas and they will be even more needed as true nature places when more shopping malls are built. We should do our best to keep it natural.

"Would you rather more or fewer people be on your side?"
Good question ... I do not want the forest to be full of unnatural STUFF but of course I do understand that people like it and will build it. Racing should not take place every where, even the FAST people should understand that. Stunts should not be built every where and I would like to see some rational talk about that. I am not saying BLACK no stunts, Black no racing. Understand that our view and actions are directly related to bikes being banned.
:thumbsup: +1
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
151 Posts
People just need to be reasonable and curteous to eachother on the trails.

At some point, whether the land is "protected" or not, use of it will be challenged. I don't know if that will happen in 2 yrs, 10 yrs or 50, but it will happen.

And when it does, you'll need everyone who enjoys the trail - riding, dog walking, burdwatching, etc, on one side.

And in my experience things are only protected until they are not anymore. Twenty years ago there was fantastic riding at Mt Tremblant. Now there's fantastic golfing.
 

·
Misfit Psycles
Joined
·
2,772 Posts
Phat Tyred said:
I do not want the forest to be full of unnatural STUFF but of course I do understand that people like it and will build it. Racing should not take place every where, even the FAST people should understand that. Stunts should not be built every where and I would like to see some rational talk about that. I am not saying BLACK no stunts, Black no racing. Understand that our view and actions are directly related to bikes being banned.
bingo.
events, races need to take place in conjunction with the land owners and property stakeholders. these parties need to be certain (and accountable) for the short and long term impact on the properties and there needs to be contingency plans in place in the event things fall apart.

trails chosen for events shouldn't just be able to survive a best case, the trails should be considered for viability and repairability under worst case scenarios as well.

it should be expected that an event organizer contribute more than just $ to a venue to host an event, race...the organizer should be expected to leave the venue in a better state (this will be subjective as we have seen in much of the albion re-working).

stunts, features and the like are no different in terms of impact...the goal is the same, they bring people out to enjoy the woods...shared access.

the real trouble with features is that they are much more VISIBLE to other trail (less open) users...where as (still disliked by many) single track fades into the background.

i would propose there is more 'illegal' singletrack in ANY given town then there are 'illegal' stunts...one only needs to follow kids enroute to the variety store...trails are EVERYWHERE...in most cases it's either excused by or unknown to the general public.

this is why the question continues to arise over the proud accomplishments of sprocket...he is vague and cryptic in terms of the locations and (confirmation of) appropriate permissions...sure this makes for great Jerry Springer, but there is more at stake than pomp and circumstance.

he can bandstand and claim NIMBY towards any that question him, THAT isn't the issue...this isn't about US versus THEM, the issue is simple.
HIS actions (like OURS) have a direct impact on the public perception of cyclists, on cycling and on OUR ability to secure and maintain trails.

THIS (whatever this is) IS MORE A PROPAGANDA BATTLE THEN ANYTHING ELSE.

when i see large metallic S&M fixtures being shown off with plans to 'incorporate' it into something new, i shutter...if installed unplanned, unauthorized, you and i KNOW it will have a deeply damming impact on the acceptance and incorporation of cycling on public lands, EVERYWHERE.

we don't need adbuster indocterined hollywood protesters driving around in their SUV's 'building in the name of all that is equitable' giving cyclists a bad name.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
640 Posts
Nice

nogearshere ... i wish i could have wrote something that explained what i was thinking so well, i am glad you were able to do it for me. Thanks

"At some point, whether the land is "protected" or not, use of it will be challenged. I don't know if that will happen in 2 yrs, 10 yrs or 50, but it will happen."

How old is Stanley Park BC or Central Park NY? They are very important places. The public will want these places more as time goes by.
 

·
humber river advocate
Joined
·
6,395 Posts
Biobanker said:
People just need to be reasonable and curteous to eachother on the trails.

At some point, whether the land is "protected" or not, use of it will be challenged. I don't know if that will happen in 2 yrs, 10 yrs or 50, but it will happen.

And when it does, you'll need everyone who enjoys the trail - riding, dog walking, burdwatching, etc, on one side.

And in my experience things are only protected until they are not anymore. Twenty years ago there was fantastic riding at Mt Tremblant. Now there's fantastic golfing.
bingo, all one has to do is look at the development/politics in the gta over the past 50 years...
 
1 - 20 of 94 Posts
Top