What Harm Does Mountain Biking Do?

[mjvande]

Bicycles should not be allowed in any natural area. They are inanimate objects and have no rights. There is also no right to mountain bike. That was settled in federal court in 1996: http://mjvande.nfshost.com/mtb10.htm . It's dishonest of mountain bikers to say that they don't have access to trails closed to bikes. They have EXACTLY the same access as everyone else -- ON FOOT! Why isn't that good enough for mountain bikers? They are all capable of walking....

A favorite myth of mountain bikers is that mountain biking is no more harmful to wildlife, people, and the environment than hiking, and that science supports that view. Of course, it's not true. To settle the matter once and for all, I read all of the research they cited, and wrote a review of the research on mountain biking impacts (see http://mjvande.nfshost.com/scb7.htm ). I found that of the seven studies they cited, (1) all were written by mountain bikers, and (2) in every case, the authors misinterpreted their own data, in order to come to the conclusion that they favored. They also studiously avoided mentioning another scientific study (Wisdom et al) which did not favor mountain biking, and came to the opposite conclusions.

Those were all experimental studies. Two other studies (by White et al and by Jeff Marion) used a survey design, which is inherently incapable of answering that question (comparing hiking with mountain biking). I only mention them because mountain bikers often cite them, but scientifically, they are worthless.

Mountain biking accelerates erosion, creates V-shaped ruts, kills small animals and plants on and next to the trail, drives wildlife and other trail users out of the area, and, worst of all, teaches kids that the rough treatment of nature is okay (it's NOT!). What's good about THAT?

To see exactly what harm mountain biking does to the land, watch this 5-minute video: http://vimeo.com/48784297.

In addition to all of this, it is extremely dangerous: http://mjvande.nfshost.com/mtb_dangerous.htm .

For more information: http://mjvande.nfshost.com/mtbfaq.htm .

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

Bicycles should not be allowed in any natural area. They are inanimate objects and have no rights. There is also no right to mountain bike. That was settled in federal court in 1996: http://mjvande.nfshost.com/mtb10.htm . It's dishonest of mountain bikers to say that they don't have access to trails closed to bikes. They have EXACTLY the same access as everyone else -- ON FOOT! Why isn't that good enough for mountain bikers? They are all capable of walking....

A favorite myth of mountain bikers is that mountain biking is no more harmful to wildlife, people, and the environment than hiking, and that science supports that view. Of course, it's not true. To settle the matter once and for all, I read all of the research they cited, and wrote a review of the research on mountain biking impacts (see http://mjvande.nfshost.com/scb7.htm ). I found that of the seven studies they cited, (1) all were written by mountain bikers, and (2) in every case, the authors misinterpreted their own data, in order to come to the conclusion that they favored. They also studiously avoided mentioning another scientific study (Wisdom et al) which did not favor mountain biking, and came to the opposite conclusions.

Those were all experimental studies. Two other studies (by White et al and by Jeff Marion) used a survey design, which is inherently incapable of answering that question (comparing hiking with mountain biking). I only mention them because mountain bikers often cite them, but scientifically, they are worthless.

Mountain biking accelerates erosion, creates V-shaped ruts, kills small animals and plants on and next to the trail, drives wildlife and other trail users out of the area, and, worst of all, teaches kids that the rough treatment of nature is okay (it's NOT!). What's good about THAT?

To see exactly what harm mountain biking does to the land, watch this 5-minute video: http://vimeo.com/48784297.

In addition to all of this, it is extremely dangerous: http://mjvande.nfshost.com/mtb_dangerous.htm .

For more information: http://mjvande.nfshost.com/mtbfaq.htm .

With that as your first post, you can feel comfortable knowing that you have nowhere to go but up.

 

[Fausto's Schnauzer]

Mike old buddy. How the hell have you been?!

 

[fatandfast]

Bicycles should not be allowed in any natural area. They are inanimate objects and have no rights. There is also no right to mountain bike. That was settled in federal court in 1996: http://mjvande.nfshost.com/mtb10.htm . It's dishonest of mountain bikers to say that they don't have access to trails closed to bikes. They have EXACTLY the same access as everyone else -- ON FOOT! Why isn't that good enough for mountain bikers? They are all capable of walking....

A favorite myth of mountain bikers is that mountain biking is no more harmful to wildlife, people, and the environment than hiking, and that science supports that view. Of course, it's not true. To settle the matter once and for all, I read all of the research they cited, and wrote a review of the research on mountain biking impacts (see http://mjvande.nfshost.com/scb7.htm ). I found that of the seven studies they cited, (1) all were written by mountain bikers, and (2) in every case, the authors misinterpreted their own data, in order to come to the conclusion that they favored. They also studiously avoided mentioning another scientific study (Wisdom et al) which did not favor mountain biking, and came to the opposite conclusions.misimformation is worse than no information

Those were all experimental studies. Two other studies (by White et al and by Jeff Marion) used a survey design, which is inherently incapable of answering that question (comparing hiking with mountain biking). I only mention them because mountain bikers often cite them, but scientifically, they are worthless.

Mountain biking accelerates erosion, creates V-shaped ruts, kills small animals and plants on and next to the trail, drives wildlife and other trail users out of the area, and, worst of all, teaches kids that the rough treatment of nature is okay (it's NOT!). What's good about THAT?

To see exactly what harm mountain biking does to the land, watch this 5-minute video: http://vimeo.com/48784297.

In addition to all of this, it is extremely dangerous: http://mjvande.nfshost.com/mtb_dangerous.htm .

For more information: http://mjvande.nfshost.com/mtbfaq.htm .

Mt Bikes can do lots of damage on wet or very wets trails that are shared by hikers and horses. The look of bike and rider covered with mud is cool but when it comes at a cost of super erosion it sucks. Everywhere I have lived there is an anti-mountain bike lobby because buttplugs that bomb down a shared mountain while a soccer mom is hiking up with her kids scaring the living f-ck out of everybody. Same with horses, riders are slowing going up the hill when some fat ape on a full suspension carbon bomb nearly kills all those involved. Give respect get respect. Leaving power bar wrappers and gel packs all over and making nature look like Roger DeCoster just left town screws things up for everybody. In most cases mountain bikes cause as much damage as the other users of the land while it's dry.Been riding for awhile and consider myself to have some knowledge about ATV, motorcycle,horse,MTB and hikers that use public land, who kills animals while riding a mountain bike? Small plants are impacted by all the groups I mentioned and I don't consider mountain bikes as the worst offender.

 

[ebandit]

enjoy

mjvande ............enjoy your mountain biking

your roadie friend

Mark L

one day i will borrow a mtb and join you out on the trail

 

[Master50]

Long winded and self serving arguments aren't they? I think that you quoted yourself 5 or 6 times is evidence of that. If wilderness is only for animals then I might agree with some of your paper but then hikers would be out too. Victims of their own success? hikers barely ever go more than a couple of km from their cars so sure an MTB rider can see more and travel further but that is the point of a bike. liking a bike for cycling sake is a noble endeavour but roadies do that and ride for the view fine. I like to go out in tyne wild country on my bike because walking hurts and I never go far.
I don't see much treatment of equestrian areas and the trail damage horses do. I live in an urban area and 1 park banned cycling from the trails because we were doing so much damage. This was in the early 1990s when there were maybe 100 real off roaders. I had a long discussion/ argument over the erosion in the area by an anti bike guy. he ranted about the damage and the deep ruts, some even into the rock. he like you talked at length about braking across the trails and on and on. I patiently waited for him to let me have a word. I asked him if he knew any of the history of this park? No he has only lived here for 5 years. Did he know that this is an equestrian area and did he think that horses might have anything to do with the damage? He never sees horse he said and I pointed out some hoof marks. Then I got him with the zinger. So then you don't remember this was the site of the Victoria Motorcycle club and this was a dirt bike area? He said it is a park and I don't know jack. Sure buddy you see a couple of ruts, read some cheesy story about Mountain bikes destroying nature and figure the 100 riders in the city are actually causing years worth of erosion in the 4 years MTBs have existed.
Your argument is heavily biased by your prejudice. It isn't MTBs it is people in the wilderness. You want people to connect with nature but only your hikers yet they are part of the problem. That they don't go as far afield is likely why bicycles are popular. I won't argue that many users of the trails need to understand their impact but if biking has gained so much popularity maybe what we need is more work from them in maintaining the trails.
Wilderness areas do need to ban all human activity for reasons of habitat protection and sometimes trails should be closed because of rain but most of what I read of your paper is still educated crud. How do I know that? because you make arguments you think are self evident and that is all about your perspective. you actually believe a cycling forum is the place to stand up and say you hate us and we should stop riding in the woods?

 

[StyrbjornSterki]

 

[Cyivel]

mjvande ............enjoy your mountain biking

your roadie friend

Mark L

one day i will borrow a mtb and join you out on the trail

Have fun brother but I hope you two stay safe I know of some mountain bikers who've been attacked in the past.

 

[FitSsikS]

Jeesh, he's been copying and pasting that s... stuff in forums for years.
Courtesy of mtbr.com:

 

[Stingray34]

Mike old buddy. How the hell have you been?!

Nice one, FS. I was half-inclined to think the guy had a minor point. Thank you for this.

 

[MarkvW]

Nice one, FS. I was half-inclined to think the guy had a minor point. Thank you for this.

I don't think mountain bikes have any place in a true wilderness area, like a national park, but we all have to share the outdoors. I can't see any good reason for banning mountain bikes from any place that is regularly logged--especially if the mountain bikers contribute to the trail building in the area.

Mountain bikes can quickly chew up a hiking trail that took a ton of volunteer effort to build.

 

[Rip:30]

Bicycles should not be allowed in any natural area. They are inanimate objects and have no rights. There is also no right to mountain bike. That was settled in federal court in 1996: http://mjvande.nfshost.com/mtb10.htm . It's dishonest of mountain bikers to say that they don't have access to trails closed to bikes. They have EXACTLY the same access as everyone else -- ON FOOT! Why isn't that good enough for mountain bikers? They are all capable of walking....

A favorite myth of mountain bikers is that mountain biking is no more harmful to wildlife, people, and the environment than hiking, and that science supports that view. Of course, it's not true. To settle the matter once and for all, I read all of the research they cited, and wrote a review of the research on mountain biking impacts (see http://mjvande.nfshost.com/scb7.htm ). I found that of the seven studies they cited, (1) all were written by mountain bikers, and (2) in every case, the authors misinterpreted their own data, in order to come to the conclusion that they favored. They also studiously avoided mentioning another scientific study (Wisdom et al) which did not favor mountain biking, and came to the opposite conclusions.

Those were all experimental studies. Two other studies (by White et al and by Jeff Marion) used a survey design, which is inherently incapable of answering that question (comparing hiking with mountain biking). I only mention them because mountain bikers often cite them, but scientifically, they are worthless.

Mountain biking accelerates erosion, creates V-shaped ruts, kills small animals and plants on and next to the trail, drives wildlife and other trail users out of the area, and, worst of all, teaches kids that the rough treatment of nature is okay (it's NOT!). What's good about THAT?

To see exactly what harm mountain biking does to the land, watch this 5-minute video: http://vimeo.com/48784297.

In addition to all of this, it is extremely dangerous: http://mjvande.nfshost.com/mtb_dangerous.htm .

For more information: http://mjvande.nfshost.com/mtbfaq.htm .

STFU troll.

Hikers cause FAR more damage with their inflated sense of entitlement and righteousness than mtn bikers per individual and en masse.

 

[TexPat]

The most harmful species to the natural order is, of course, Homo sapiens.
And Homo sapiens need not be on a bicycle to cause irreversible damage.
Homo sapiens might be walking.
Homo sapiens might be on the back of an equine slave.
Homo sapiens might be on a bicycle.
It's all relative, man.
In my new country, the government drops a substance called 1080 from helicopters in order to kill an Australian import known as the brushy tailed possum. 1080 kills a lot of things and is banned in most civilised places. It's like carpet bombing or napalm for a marsupial. Kill em all and let god sort em out.
That possum is purported to be the most destructive pest in NZ, which was formerly a paradise for birds where no mammalian predators existed.
The government forgot that most of the problem started when man arrived.
So.
In order to drive the point home:
Folks on mtbs aren't killing your wilderness area mjvande- Man is.
Keep em all out and don't look for scapegoats. It's an asinine and relativistic approach. Hell, I'll even say it's intellectually lazy.
Blaming it in mountainbikes is just plain dumb. Many of those folks are out there for the sheer enjoyment of Nature. Maybe like you.
Or not.

 

[MarkvW]

STFU troll.

Hikers cause FAR more damage with their inflated sense of entitlement and righteousness than mtn bikers per individual and en masse.

Once you get deep into a wilderness area, you almost never meet anybody with any kind of a 'sense of entitlement' (whatever that overused phrase means). The people you find deep in the backcountry are usually just really happy 'leave no trace' people.

I don't know what you mean by "righteousness," but I do know that righteousness has never chewed up a hiking trail.

When people build a trail for hiking, that ought to be respected by mountain bikers. When mountain bikers build a trail for mountain biking, then that too ought to be respected.

What really sucks is when mountain bikers chew up a trail that hikers carefully engineered and built--and then leave their mess for other people to clean up. That happens a lot.

You may not realize it, but you are projecting exactly the same kind of unreasonable hate upon hikers that jerk automobile drivers bring upon cyclists. Besides, you are doing exactly what the troll wants.

It's all about sharing the outdoors. The issue doesn't seem that difficult to me.

 

[Hugh Januss]

Once you get deep into a wilderness area, you almost never meet anybody with any kind of a 'sense of entitlement' (whatever that overused phrase means). The people you find deep in the backcountry are usually just really happy 'leave no trace' people.

I don't know what you mean by "righteousness," but I do know that righteousness has never chewed up a hiking trail.

When people build a trail for hiking, that ought to be respected by mountain bikers. When mountain bikers build a trail for mountain biking, then that too ought to be respected.

What really sucks is when mountain bikers chew up a trail that hikers carefully engineered and built--and then leave their mess for other people to clean up. That happens a lot.

You may not realize it, but you are projecting exactly the same kind of unreasonable hate upon hikers that jerk automobile drivers bring upon cyclists. Besides, you are doing exactly what the troll wants.

It's all about sharing the outdoors. The issue doesn't seem that difficult to me.

Out in the "back country" mountain bikes don't do any more damage than hikers, for the simple fact that it is the "back country" only dedicated and serious riders or hikers even go there. All of the damage/assaults/bike-pedestrian accidents happen in the easily accessible areas. Generally those are not Wilderness Areas or even "back country".
I am curious to find out about these "chewed up messes" that mountain bikes have made of your "carefully engineered hiking trails", because I would be willing to bet that you are just talking out of your *** right now.

 

[Tom T.]

I don't think mountain bikes have any place in a true wilderness area, like a national park, but we all have to share the outdoors. I can't see any good reason for banning mountain bikes from any place that is regularly logged--especially if the mountain bikers contribute to the trail building in the area.

Mountain bikes can quickly chew up a hiking trail that took a ton of volunteer effort to build.

I agree that mountain bikers do not belong in a National Park or someplace like Baxter State Park here in Maine. But where I live in Portland, Maine, there would not be a fraction of the trails that exist without mountain bikers. There has been an explosion of trail building in and around the city, we can easily do a 50 mile MB ride on trail in Portland and the surrounding towns. This has been mostly spearheaded by mountain bikers. So hikers, dog walker and trail runners (something I also do) have benefited from the work of riders. We all coexist rather nicely.

 

[ebandit]

so

so you may ask yourself............what place do carefully engineered hiking trails have in any wilderness?

the world is there for ALL to explore............We don't require roads to do so

Mark L

 

[Boeing]

Is this the same dude who boobie-traps trails with spikes and sharpened branches?

 

[Boeing]

Even Hippies and Vegans disagree with this post.

 

[MarkvW]

I agree that mountain bikers do not belong in a National Park or someplace like Baxter State Park here in Maine. But where I live in Portland, Maine, there would not be a fraction of the trails that exist without mountain bikers. There has been an explosion of trail building in and around the city, we can easily do a 50 mile MB ride on trail in Portland and the surrounding towns. This has been mostly spearheaded by mountain bikers. So hikers, dog walker and trail runners (something I also do) have benefited from the work of riders. We all coexist rather nicely.

Yeah, I totally agree with you.

 

[veganrob]

Even Hippies and Vegans disagree with this post.

I can't speak for all hippies or vegans but me being both, yes, I disagree with his post.

 

[Boeing]

I can't speak for all hippies or vegans but me being both, yes, I disagree with his post.

word my brother OP is from Babylon

 

[mjvande]

Re:

I don't think mountain bikes have any place in a true wilderness area, like a national park, but we all have to share the outdoors. I can't see any good reason for banning mountain bikes from any place that is regularly logged--especially if the mountain bikers contribute to the trail building in the area.

Mountain bikes can quickly chew up a hiking trail that took a ton of volunteer effort to build.

I agree that mountain bikers do not belong in a National Park or someplace like Baxter State Park here in Maine. But where I live in Portland, Maine, there would not be a fraction of the trails that exist without mountain bikers. There has been an explosion of trail building in and around the city, we can easily do a 50 mile MB ride on trail in Portland and the surrounding towns. This has been mostly spearheaded by mountain bikers. So hikers, dog walker and trail runners (something I also do) have benefited from the work of riders. We all coexist rather nicely.

What do you think "an explosion of trail building" is????? HABITAT DESTRUCTION! Thanks for demonstrating exactly how utterly ignorant and selfish mountain bikers are!

 

[mjvande]

Re: so

so you may ask yourself............what place do carefully engineered hiking trails have in any wilderness?

the world is there for ALL to explore............We don't require roads to do so

Mark L

And mountain bikers are able to WALK on all trails - unless you are too LAZY to do so.... Nothing else is stopping you.

 

[Jspear]

This; for your viewing pleasure.

https://www.youtube.com/user/globalmtb