New posts

MEC = Dangerous

May 27, 2009, 8:21 a.m.
Posts: 1885
Joined: Oct. 16, 2005

Average consumer - price is king.

No argument there.

But I do not think that is reason alone not to have this discussion. Everyone gets to decide where to spend their dollar but they should at least be aware of what that dollar is supporting.

Seems to me that the guys in this thread who are speaking the loudest against MEC either in the industry or already getting great deals?

What I do for a living seems to be the only counter argument that anyone ever wants to come back at me with.

Is it possible to be aware of my (regularly disclosed) bias and still at least consider my argument about the costs beyond the sticker price of a fucking tube?

Mean People SUCK! Nice People SHOVEL!

Trails For All; Trails For Weather

May 27, 2009, 9:47 a.m.
Posts: 5225
Joined: July 22, 2003

Nice that it hasn't even been considered what positive impacts the groups which MEC funds may have. I'm sure none of those groups ever did anything important, ever. Probably spend 100% of their time trying to ban all mountain biking. /sarc

To me, long-term preservation of parks and protected areas is actually something worthwhile, and as I understand it that is what those groups mainly do. But I guess if you never do anything but ride a bike you might not see it this way.

You guys getting worked up over the slim chance that our government might change it's pro-bike tourism stance and start banning mountain biking due to the viewpoint of these groups is a bit much.

And shopping at MEC is definitely thinking and supporting local. They support many local causes and last time I checked all the employees were local people. I would wager they put more back into the community than a lot of the shittier LBSs.

May 27, 2009, 10:16 a.m.
Posts: 7657
Joined: Feb. 15, 2005

Shows how many times you've been in my store. Luckys are a currency there.

dude - you're in Comox - COMOX! I live in COurtenay - COURTENAY! - unfortunately for me you aren't even on the way to the trails!! What can I say - I'm lazy and I like to RIDE my bike to the LBS occasionally.

but don't worry - I'll come visit you again soon…

I have 21,474,850 rep points...

My blog - read it!

http://www.citizenclass.ca

May 27, 2009, 10:32 a.m.
Posts: 381
Joined: Sept. 2, 2005

I am not a fan of the Sierra Club for other non biking related issues and have stopped caring what they say and do a long time ago, so I am pretty new to their current policies and rhetoric. Having said that…

So, the Sierra Club's stance on mountain biking (as earlier linked in this thread) is that trails should be built so they do not cause erosion, and should be monitored as such. They support the efforts of the IMBA in this matter. Trails should not be built where it is illegal to build them.

The only other link against Sierra Club has been from a bulletin board where something was posted by someone from the WCWC.

Is there a link that someone has that specifically states this policy of no mountain biking anywhere?

May 27, 2009, 10:49 a.m.
Posts: 0
Joined: Feb. 2, 2005

Nice that it hasn't even been considered what positive impacts the groups which MEC funds may have. I'm sure none of those groups ever did anything important, ever. Probably spend 100% of their time trying to ban all mountain biking. /sarc

To me, long-term preservation of parks and protected areas is actually something worthwhile, and as I understand it that is what those groups mainly do. But I guess if you never do anything but ride a bike you might not see it this way.

You guys getting worked up over the slim chance that our government might change it's pro-bike tourism stance and start banning mountain biking due to the viewpoint of these groups is a bit much.

And shopping at MEC is definitely thinking and supporting local. They support many local causes and last time I checked all the employees were local people. I would wager they put more back into the community than a lot of the shittier LBSs.

I have more hate towards the Sierra club than just their stance on mtbing. They
are against anything they "perceive" as a threat. A lot of the time they will disregard
science and facts when those facts disagree with their cause.

Examples on Kauai:
-Super ferry
-Boats in Hanalei (both tourist and cruising boats anchored in the bay)
-Hunting of feral pigs and goats (oh, no don't kill the animals even though they're causing more damage than the track homes in Poipu)
-Mountain biking (they sure can change a pro biking government into a anti one).
These are just what I can remember off the top of my head.

Fuck the Sierra club (no I can't say that enough).

If you care about the environment, give to one that makes a difference like
the Nature Conservancy.

.
.
.
.
"i surf because, i"m always a better person when i come in"-Andy Irons
.
.

.

May 27, 2009, 11:13 a.m.
Posts: 11203
Joined: Nov. 18, 2004

Seems to me that the guys in this thread who are speaking the loudest against MEC either in the industry or already getting great deals?

Average consumer - price is king. Complain all you want about MEC, but the only way to pull business from them is to compete on price.

I'm an average consumer who wants to buy from knowledgable professionals and not from a department store (Canadian Tire-op), seperate from any research I have done. Price AND service are king.

I also want a store that supports my interests.

May 27, 2009, 11:17 a.m.
Posts: 15078
Joined: Nov. 20, 2002

anybody know exactly what bikes (not I think or probably) MEC is carrying yet ?

I would really like to see when it becomes public

May 27, 2009, 12:19 p.m.
Posts: 8935
Joined: Dec. 23, 2005

anybody know exactly what bikes (not I think or probably) MEC is carrying yet ?

I would really like to see when it becomes public

They are going to be doing an in-house brand commuter and light XC hardtails. Maybe a mid/high end XC dual suspension. Pretty much the "bread n butter" bikes that get sold in shops across the country. No FR or DH from what I've heard.

May 27, 2009, 12:29 p.m.
Posts: 961
Joined: April 9, 2006

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande/wc14

here is a link to the sierra club's policies on mountain biking. I actually laughed at some of the wording they selected. I don't know if this is still their current policy or not, but it would be nice to get some response from MEC dealing with the issue of supporting a group that holds these beliefs while continuing to support the dark side of the mountain bikers.

www.travelswithtyler.com

May 27, 2009, 12:34 p.m.
Posts: 11203
Joined: Nov. 18, 2004

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande/wc14

After reading that ^ do people still want to spend money at MEC?

May 27, 2009, 12:42 p.m.
Posts: 14370
Joined: Feb. 19, 2003

I'm an average consumer who wants to buy from knowledgable professionals and not from a department store (Canadian Tire-op), seperate from any research I have done. Price AND service are king.

I also want a store that supports my interests.

:lol: I'm always looking for knowledgable professionals to help me select just the right water bottle or inner tube. :lol:

May 27, 2009, 12:53 p.m.
Posts: 381
Joined: Sept. 2, 2005

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande/wc14

here is a link to the sierra club's policies on mountain biking. I actually laughed at some of the wording they selected. I don't know if this is still their current policy or not, but it would be nice to get some response from MEC dealing with the issue of supporting a group that holds these beliefs while continuing to support the dark side of the mountain bikers.

That is a link of a letter written by a known quack. It also references specifically one local chapter. I was hoping for something official from the Sierra Club, similar to what was linked to earlier. Using a post of one individual would be like making a judgment of the NSMB community based on Faithless or some other individual.

May 27, 2009, 1 p.m.
Posts: 1885
Joined: Oct. 16, 2005

That is a link of a letter written by a known quack. It also references specifically one local chapter. I was hoping for something official from the Sierra Club, similar to what was linked to earlier. Using a post of one individual would be like making a judgment of the NSMB community based on Faithless or some other individual.

As posted by Heckler:

http://www.sierraclub.org/policy/conservation/mtnbike.aspx

The key argument taking place is about what constitutes Wilderness.

Congress, under pressure from powerful lobby groups, has interpreted legislation banning "mechanized travel" from "wilderness areas" to include bicycles.

Horses, which arguably cause significantly more errosion then bicycles, are not mechanized and therefore allowed.

FYI. This "wilderness" can include fireroads going into previously logged and mined areas. In many cases we are not refering to "pristine" wilderness.

Mean People SUCK! Nice People SHOVEL!

Trails For All; Trails For Weather

May 27, 2009, 1:09 p.m.
Posts: 9747
Joined: Nov. 20, 2002

looks like MEC's donations were earmarked for specific causes. does that change anything?

May 27, 2009, 1:16 p.m.
Posts: 1885
Joined: Oct. 16, 2005

Nice that it hasn't even been considered what positive impacts the groups which MEC funds may have. I'm sure none of those groups ever did anything important, ever. Probably spend 100[HTML_REMOVED]#37; of their time trying to ban all mountain biking. /sarc

To me, long-term preservation of parks and protected areas is actually something worthwhile, and as I understand it that is what those groups mainly do. But I guess if you never do anything but ride a bike you might not see it this way.

You guys getting worked up over the slim chance that our government might change it's pro-bike tourism stance and start banning mountain biking due to the viewpoint of these groups is a bit much.
.

AWESOME. That is definitely a fair generalization of my point. An MEC grant has never gone towards anything good. So just to clarify your historic and current views on the subject with the same general brush:

-Monica Craver : Bad

-Well funded and organized groups using the same pseudo-scientific bullshit as her to try and shut down trails : Good

-Closing trails on Fromme, Seymour and Cypress: Bad

-Supporting an anti-mountain-bike organization that wants to shut down the entire trail network in Sooke because they may do something positive somewhere else: Good

I cannot believe that someone who has been involved with the politics associated with mountain biking in North Vancouver this long doesn't see how easy it is to get individual areas shut down one at a time.

It is not about changing the province's view on eco-tourism it is about shutting down Pink Starfish, then consolidating Digger and Boundary, then closing Mountain View park, now Grannies is not ridden anyways so lets close it, Upper Oil Can is "unsustainable," the ecological foot print on Lower Crippler is too high even though the whole area is zoned for housing, well we closed everything else lets close this too.

Regardless of what percentage of your dollar is saving the whales and what percentage is going to the Stream Keepers, Sierra Club, WCWC, Sierra Legal Defence Fund and various other groups with a majority of members who are against mountain bikers as trail users you are still contributing an amount of money to organizations who would like limit you to riding the Sea Wall and some select fireroads.

You definitely would not be milling up fallen "feeder tress" into rungs.

P.S. Arguments aside: Huge props to MEC and MANY other clubs and groups (and local bike shops) that raised the significant funds neccesary to save Mount Benson in Nanaimo from development. Now future generations of Mountain Bikers and Sierra Club members can fight over who is allowed to use it.

Mean People SUCK! Nice People SHOVEL!

Trails For All; Trails For Weather

Forum jump: