#!markdown
While I agree with the strategies outlined in the article, a few of the
arguments are weak - even hyperbolic. Stipulations about competing conflicts
of interests have no place in our communities rebuttal, this is better left to
the lawyers, else we be made to look like squabbling children. The comment
about BC Parks negatively viewing response due to a mountain bike bias is not
unfounded - elected representatives have a right to know about any bias that
exists in the data. Never make the argument that the bias only exists cause we
are the most interested party - we are only the loudest party - and people
need to know that to make informed decisions.
Furthermore, I appreciate the anecdotal evidence provided from people with
"lots of experience", and their input is important to form the emotional
coexisting fluffy side of the argument. But, sadly, No. of years participating
in a hobby doesn't make you an expert on coexisting with wildlife - it makes
you complacent to the bigger picture.
The unfortunate part is, biking absolutely impacts the environment. As the
population of our sport increases so will its impact. There will be a time
that nature reserves will need to forbid the erosion machines that bikes are
for the greater good of the community as whole. Is this the right time for the
Chilcotins, probably not - and I think 'our' strategies ultimately portray
this. I just wish the argument was more natural.
May 1, 2014, 11:47 a.m. - Mathew Reynolds
#!markdown While I agree with the strategies outlined in the article, a few of the arguments are weak - even hyperbolic. Stipulations about competing conflicts of interests have no place in our communities rebuttal, this is better left to the lawyers, else we be made to look like squabbling children. The comment about BC Parks negatively viewing response due to a mountain bike bias is not unfounded - elected representatives have a right to know about any bias that exists in the data. Never make the argument that the bias only exists cause we are the most interested party - we are only the loudest party - and people need to know that to make informed decisions. Furthermore, I appreciate the anecdotal evidence provided from people with "lots of experience", and their input is important to form the emotional coexisting fluffy side of the argument. But, sadly, No. of years participating in a hobby doesn't make you an expert on coexisting with wildlife - it makes you complacent to the bigger picture. The unfortunate part is, biking absolutely impacts the environment. As the population of our sport increases so will its impact. There will be a time that nature reserves will need to forbid the erosion machines that bikes are for the greater good of the community as whole. Is this the right time for the Chilcotins, probably not - and I think 'our' strategies ultimately portray this. I just wish the argument was more natural.