Moderator: HAZ - Moderators
So far as the effect on the environment is concerned, I don't see that much difference between the rubber on my soles, a bike, or a tire. It's different in size, coverage, speed, and volume--that's all. The only reason I separate motorized vehicles out is that it's demonstrably more likely that a person who walks their ass or pedals their ass into the wilderness has a much higher chance of being a disciplined and responsible appreciator of the wilderness than someone on an ATV, motor bike, or 4x4. The barrier of entry is so low, trashy people will always come out and prove their name. No offense to trashy people--I'm just trying to save myself some time by not having to clean up after you. (If you're a 4x4er who doesn't treat the outdoors as your personal garbage can, I'm not talking to you )CannondaleKid wrote:I'd be interested to know why you feel that way toward motorized vehicles.
While not knowing your answer, I'd still ask, couldn't you use similar logic why it should be any different for mountain bikes?
I'm pretty sure you just listed all the reasons why they are more damaging...nathanbrisk wrote:It's different in size, coverage, speed, and volume--that's all.
True, that's why the feds have it-- because it is for all of us and needs to be protected from those who are irresponsible and from environmentally destructive industries who trick people into believing that regulating corporations is the same thing as infringing on the rights of citizens.nathanbrisk wrote:On one hand, no one owns the wilderness. It's for everyone.