Sept. 29, 2015, 11:58 a.m. -  ashroadadam1 .

#!markdown I'm confused here. How is this about parking? This had every appearance of a person trying to deter another specific group from using the trails. Yes, they had their beefs about parking as well, but they were clearly trying to claim the trails and not just the pavement. The Kraal's letter (linked above) shows they only distinguished the trails and the environment based on one criteria: their use of it. There is nothing ecologically or environmentally unique about this land. There are no specific plants, animals, or geographical features risked by mountain bike trails that are not equally or greater affected by dozens if not hundreds of other sources of environmental usage. They merely singled out mountain bikers because they selfishly saw them as competition for a public resource that they wanted all to themselves. There is nothing about any other person's safety or enjoyment considered in their letter or their submissions in the press since the incident. This is simply people trying to use the threat of harm as a crude tool by which to seize control of a public resource. This is why the guilty verdict is so correct, and so satisfying. Now, I'm all for forgiving and moving on, but I'm also not about to forget the ugly, dangerous, and selfish thinking that was behind these actions. I realistically don't expect or demand a harsh punishment. However, I will never forget the malicious and selfish intent that was at the root of Kraal's action, or that same intent that drives other specific selfish zealots forward in their private and petty ploys to purloin public play areas and parks for their personal pleasure.