The hours of operation to the almost $500,000 parking lot the cost of which was borne by the District taxpayer, are not to the liking of some of those who might use it. The park is set to close at 8 PM at this time and as in all DNV Parks the hours of closure are dawn until dusk. The mountain biker user group is expressing concern that this is too early of a closure because many riders don't start out until 7 PM during the week and users are faced with their vehicles being impounded if they're past the closure time. DNV spokesperson Stephanie Smiley says the 8 PM closure is consistent with other public parks in the District's jurisdiction.
Should we be changing the hours of operations of all parks in the DNV?
Province newspaper story: Mountain bikers raise eyebrows to closure time....
57 comments:
It's bad enough that the wildlife aren't allowed to use their habitat during the day, due to the annoying presence of mountain bikers. Now they can't use it at night, either?!
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 .
The common thread among those who want more recreation in our parks is total ignorance about and disinterest in the wildlife whose homes these parks are. Yes, if humans are the only beings that matter, it is simply a conflict among humans (but even then, allowing bikes on trails harms the MAJORITY of park users -- hikers and equestrians -- who can no longer safely and peacefully enjoy their parks).
The parks aren't gymnasiums or racetracks or even human playgrounds. They are WILDLIFE HABITAT, which is precisely why they are attractive to humans. Activities such as mountain biking, that destroy habitat, violate the charter of the parks.
Even kayaking and rafting, which give humans access to the entirety of a water body, prevent the wildlife that live there from making full use of their habitat, and should not be allowed. Of course those who think that only humans matter won't understand what I am talking about -- an indication of the sad state of our culture and educational system.
Actually, the parking lot cost far more than the original $400,000 slated for it. Instead, it cost taxpayers $585,000. With another MTB "Tailgate Party" parking lot slated in the Dempsey-Braemar area, budgeted for $800,000, it will go over budget, too. Courtesy of DNV taxpayers, paying through the nose for the mountain bikers "Freeride" exploits inside our forests.
This latest fine whine coming from out of the mountain biking cult simply tells us there is no appeasing this MTB "community", until the last tree tumbles down the slopes, I would guess.
According to one local bike business owner (in the article) about the dusk closure time: "That is an early closure, for sure," he said. "It doesn't end at dusk up there. **People ride at night.**" (Really?!)
If DNV folds to these mountain bikers' demands, then they will have told the general public that Night Riding is now legal/"sanctioned", and with it all the liability that will follow.
I would like to think that DNV will not be so foolish this time around -- but looking at past MTB events and protests, it will remain to be seen if DNV, once again, kow-tows to the whiny MTBers' demands.
This is what happens when one self-interest group has been given too many rewards for their many "unsanctioned" (unauthorized) activities. It looks like Mayor Walton's Fromme Parking Lot "Monster" is rearing its ugly head.
The area of British Columbia is 944,735 km². Surely there is enough room to house wildlife and a few humans. Sometimes the bears have to move over.. sometimes the humans do.
The cost is much higher than the $500,000 even. This does not include the maintenance of the flush toilets and showers, and other maintenance. Why on earth should DNV taxpayers subsidize this very small special interest group made up largely of healthy young males??
I heard that a "vandal-resistant" toilet can cost upwards $200,000 in our parks. Why don't the mountain bikers just use one or more of the many "toilet pits" the NSMBA have already dug in the woods for them already? ;)
http://blogborgcollective.blogspot.ca/2015/05/part-i-nvmibsha-goal-public-pit-toilets.html
On the other hand, the NSMBA "toilet" borrow pits could become a fire hazard:
http://magicvalley.com/news/local/blm-idaho-cyclist-sparks-fire-by-burning-used-toilet-paper/article_c555ffef-6cd9-5c44-93a6-efd01e9e0646.html
BLM: Idaho Cyclist Sparks Fire by Burning Used Toilet Paper
July 23, 2015
BOISE (AP) | Authorities say a cyclist started a 73-acre wildfire in southwest Idaho by lighting his toilet paper on fire after taking a comfort break.
U.S. Bureau of Land Management officials say the cyclist stopped to defecate in a ravine in the Boise foothills on Wednesday afternoon. The man then lit the toilet paper on fire but lost control of the embers in the dry grass while trying to extinguishing the waste.
Firefighters contained the flames several hours later.
Investigators say the man contacted them Thursday morning and his story matched the evidence found at the scene.
The BLM did not release the name of the cyclist. However, officials say he will be fined for causing the fire.
Off topic but..
If you are right Mocrael..that the parking lot cost 585,0000 .. imagine the total cost of the congestion manufacturing 'traffic calming' and road narrowing 'corner bumps' in the District. It must be staggering.
If memory serves the District spends about 9 million dollars per year on Recreation services, almost entirely on bricks and mortar indoor recreation activities (Swimming, Ice, Courts, Fitness etc). There was a survey done a few years ago that was sent to residents only and it identified that the top recreation concern was trails and trail improvements. The District responded by committing some capital and operations in line with the residents wishes.
I am positive this was an accurate survey!! A very small percentage of DNV residents are mountain bikers. This is a fact.
Its not a fact until you back it up with evidence. A similarly small number are hikers, but that doesn't mean that non-hikers want to see hikers banned from the mountains... and before you say hikers don't cost as much as mountain bikers to the public, you are wrong. The parking demands for hiking are just as onerous, ask Deep Cove and Lynn Canyon.
But the hikers don't get showers.
It'll be interesting to see if non-mountainbikers will be allowed to park in this lot. They should be.
Yes it is still a public parking lot. Regarding the hours, I have always had difficulty with the legality of 'closing' a park at night. I understand the district can restrict vehicles, but members of the public should be allowed access to our parks at all hours. I suspect if someone wanted to fight it in court you would probably see that it is not enforceable. For now, it is just an opportunity to papertrail ne'er do wells.
Why are people assuming that these facilities are only available to mountain bikers?
Now our politicians are putting band-aids on a boondoggle that they themselves have created via their past and present funding and support of mountain (dirt) bikers ongoing eco-vandalism of the Hastings Creek Watershed, on Fromme Mtn. via their indiscriminate riding habits and non-stop new trail building, degrading and compacting the once hard-working watershed (which can no longer "hold water" like it used to). Drainage patterns have been altered (not just on Kilmer Creek...)
The MTB-pandering "Three Musketeers" are now patting themselves on the back for "solving" the problem with more band-aid funding, rather than addressing the MTB problem head-on. We will be seeing more "mitigation" flood-funding $$$$ in the future as these politicians continue supporting this ongoing MTB boondoggle:
$2.5M for flood control on District of North Vancouver creeks
Creek upgrades to reduce risk of repeat of November's flooding
http://www.nsnews.com/news/2-5m-for-flood-control-on-district-of-north-vancouver-creeks-1.2017814
It is pure insanity!
The Fromme Mtn. "MTB Tailgate Party" Parking Lot is now open (on time for the long, hot-tempered weekend) Mayor Walton's "monster" has been unleashed!
Itt won't stop MTBers from parking on the streets in front of major trailheads. Who is DNV kidding?
What really scares me about all this is that not only is the DNV covering for and supporting the mountain biking community....so is the Provincial government and the Feds. Giving us back our money just before a Federal election because of drainage problems CAUSED by the mountain bikers.
Maybe you all should move some place where there is no demand for recreational use of public lands.
"drainage problems CAUSED by the mountain bikers"... that's rich. Do you really believe flooding in North Van is caused by mountain bikers? Flooding in the last 20 years has been very mild compared to the time before mountain bikers (and modern weirs, basins, and flow control). The flooding last November was because of a historically unprecedented intense rain system that caused creeks all over North Van to overflow not just Mountain Biker areas. Deep Cove also had flooding, but that area is dominated by hikers. I guess your theory doesn't hold water?
Mountain bikers absolutely contribute to erosion in our forests. Which, then contributes to drainage problems. These are facts that the NSMBA does not want out there. Their spin is that the forests are made "better" because of them. Wrong! Such a sense of entitlement they have!
What are all these homes and roads running up the hillside doing to the erosion and water flow? If you're prepared to destroy a section of the environment for your homes and roadways then you'd better be prepared to accept that adjacent lands are going to be used for the recreation of these urban areas. To deny users access to the public lands surrounding our communities is nothing more than pure hypocrisy and NIMBYism. Mocreal and her ilk don't like to share our public resources. It's as simple as that.
Uh oh! There's TROUBLE in MTB Paradise!
http://nsmba.ca/content/2015-07_open-letter-community-response-lee-lau
July 31, 2015
Dear Members of the NSMBA and the North Shore Mountain Bike Community,
Over the past few weeks our organization has seen a troubling level of accusations tabled against it on bulletin boards as well as through various social media outlets. Whether you read the posts yourselves or were told of them by friends or family, the outcome was likely the same - none of this was a positive experience for the community.
You might have wondered why these discussions were not met by immediate replies from the NSMBA. The NSMBA prefers not to engage in responses to accusatory comments made on online forums; the anonymous nature of these discussions does not foster the type of dialogue that the NSMBA wishes to engage in.
As president of the NSMBA, I would like to take this opportunity to present to you, our community, with the NSMBA’s perspective on the events that have just passed. The comments I make will remain at a high level, this is out of respect for all parties involved. I would ask that this be respected and that needless speculation be avoided.
Over the past 4 years, the Board of Directors, Rachid Nayel, our treasurer, and I have facilitated several meetings with Mr. Lee Lau and Ms. Sharon Bader. We engaged in several rounds of mediation and discussion to try and resolve several matters between the parties. Despite our best efforts, none of the implemented solutions have worked; all parties must take some responsibility for this breakdown. The NSMBA took appropriate actions in order to investigate and substantiate concerns brought forth and those with merit were addressed, privately.
I would like to point out that Mr. Lau’s recent online statements are heavily biased and one-sided, and that Mr. Lau has continuously ignored the effect of his own actions, particularly the actions he took to undermine what had previously been agreed to. Mr. Lau continues to aggravate the situation with his personal assault on Mr. Mark Wood, an NSMBA employee. Following a rather terse email sent by Mr. Lau to the NSMBA’s Board of Directors on July 7 2015, an online campaign was launched that sought to bring into question Mr. Wood’s standing in the community, his competence and his integrity. Accusations were tabled with the perceived sole purpose of discrediting Mr. Wood, tarnishing his reputation and potentially compromising his livelihood. Throughout this event, the NSMBA’s position has been to investigate matters of concern and to support our employees.
At this time, the NSMBA does not wish to undertake additional discussion or mediation, as they have been known not to work or to only be effective for a short while. A solution to this situation cannot ensue until this online barrage has ceased and some time has passed. The escalation of this situation is not healthy for our association or our community.
As a primarily volunteer organization, with limited resources, we must remain dedicated to our mission and vision by remaining focused on our community and our trails. The NSMBA would like to see a cooling off period, a time for decompression. I will come back to review and seek solutions once some time and space have set in. I firmly believe this will yield solutions grounded in understanding and respect.
Respectfully yours,
Vince Beasse,
President of the Board of Directors
Will they end up settling accounts inside the new Fromme Parking Lot? O.o
"A solution to this situation cannot ensue until this online barrage has ceased and some time has passed. The escalation of this situation is not healthy for our association our community."
No kidding!
Quit digging up our forests and forcing other people out. You do not own the forest -- mountain bikers!
Everybody else has a right to be there too.
Whenever I hike the trails of the North Shore, I've never had a cyclist try forcing me out. What on earth are you on about anon 12:23pm?
Never been yelled at by a speeding mountain biker telling you to get the hell out of their way on so-called shared trails?
Lucky you, Anon 7:00pm
Nope, never. Me and my two dogs have never been mistreated on any trail in North Vancouver. Of course, we don't go out of our ways looking for reasons to be upset by other peoples modes of recreation. I suspect attitude is everything.
Your smugness is an attitude.
Expressing my personal experience is smugness? I feel sorry for you.
That narrow stretch of Mtn Hwy has become dangerous with both speeding cars, trucks and bikers. We need to see a stop sign placed on Mtn Hwy, at McNair Drive,
and speed bumps or rumble strips, before a tragedy happens.
SLOW DOWN, people, driving and riding down Mtn Hwy from the parking lot!Or someone is going to get badly hurt or worse.
The worst is those bikers that suddenly appear from behind a truck or car. We can't see you from the stop sign at McNair and Mtn Hwy. Playing "chicken" with cars and trucks isn't very intelligent.
Car drivers are equally responsible for driving with care. You are responsible for being aware of your surroundings. That means putting down the phone or egg mc muffin and looking out for pedestrians and cyclists. We all share the roads and no one user has more right to them than the other. All you soccer moms and other self absorbed drivers need to follow the rules of the road, especially the speed limits. There is no need for you to be moving faster than 50 on our residential roads ( don't get me started on the idiots who ignore school and other reduced speed zones).
Holy cow this cyclist's "no one user has more right to the roads than the other" is rich. I have no strong opinion on mountain bikers one way or the other but I am a safe driver and I am sick and tired of the arrogant behaviour of cyclists.
It is now the exception when I see a cyclist actually stop at a stop sign. Just blow right through. The latest escalation of entitled use? Blowing through stop lights too.
Lane splitting. Just illegally ride up the lane dividing line - don't worry if a car is changing lanes as it is his "responsibility to drive with care".
Riding 2, 3, 4 abreast and blocking all cars behind. Illegal and entitled.
Riding through crosswalks as if they are a pedestrian.
When cars are stopped at a stoplight, riding up the dividing lane line and placing their bicycle in front of all the cars so that they can be first instead of waiting their turn in the lineup. Then slowly starting when the light turns green holding up all of the vehicle traffic.
Check out legal "rights and duties" of cyclist. Every one of them is commonly broken every single day. Worst drivers on the road.
Rights and duties of operator of cycle
183 (1) In addition to the duties imposed by this section, a person operating a cycle on a highway has the same rights and duties as a driver of a vehicle.
(2) A person operating a cycle
(a) must not ride on a sidewalk unless authorized by a bylaw made under section 124 or unless otherwise directed by a sign,
(b) must not, for the purpose of crossing a highway, ride on a crosswalk unless authorized to do so by a bylaw made under section 124 or unless otherwise directed by a sign,
(c) must, subject to paragraph (a), ride as near as practicable to the right side of the highway,
(d) must not ride abreast of another person operating a cycle on the roadway,
(e) must keep at least one hand on the handlebars,
(f) must not ride other than on or astride a regular seat of the cycle,
(g) must not use the cycle to carry more persons at one time than the number for which it is designed and equipped, and
(h) must not ride a cycle on a highway where signs prohibit their use.
Cyclists. Get off your arrogant entitlement trip and follow the law and basic safe practices.
Once all automobile drivers start obeying the rules of the road, then you'll have the right to your sweeping generalities about cyclists. Like it or not, cyclists have e3qual right to the use of the roads. Do some break the rules? Yep. Just like how some motorists ignore the rules.
Entitled motorists who don't like to share; get off your arrogant entitlement trip and follow the law and basic safe practices.
You must be joking. The vast majority of drivers drive safely. If for no other reason they are policed and punished should they break the rules.
The majority of cyclists make a regular habit of breaking the law and do so with impunity. Entitled cyclists are the rule not the exception.
Share the road? You bet. Stop illegally riding side by side and chatting while you hold up long lines of drivers and, at least, ride on the right side of the road - not in the middle - as required by law.
Once you start exercising your responsibilities we can start a discussion regarding your rights.
I must add a point of concurrence. You are absolutely right when it comes to distracted driving, either cellphone or texting. This is much more serious than it is treated at the moment. I am very disappointed that the Attorney General will not consider a large fine plus impoundment of the cellphone as a suitable punishment. I have written her and made this point.
Frequently breaking the law through distracted driving is every bit a despicable and dangerous as reckless and unlawful cycling. BTW cyclists, wear your helmets as required by law. I don't want to pay for your lifelong medical treatment for brain injuries.
Remember, when push comes to shove, the car always wins, cyclists. It does not matter who may be in the right or in the wrong. Cycle safe, and share the road and the trails politely. Thank you.
Anon 10:29am, just how out of touch with reality are you? I challenge you to get out of your car and sit at any intersection along Lonsdale or other fairly busy residential street and watch just how many motorists fail to come to complete stops, turn right on red, ignoring pedestrians in crosswalks, are texting or talking on their phones, fail to stop completely at stop signs, fail to signal, etc.,etc. And don't get me started about the crap I see in school zones!c Don't speak for most drivers because you really aren't seeing what the other drivers are doing if your being attentive about the task at hand - driving. Again, get out of your car, slow down and look. Really look. You might be surprised at just how horrible a good number of drivers are.
Look, there are bad eggs in every segment of the population. Don't label everyone for the bad behaviour of a few. Cyclists are subject to the same rules and laws as motorists. If caught, they'll be charged and fined appropriately. Just as I would hope a motorist would be. But you know what? Show me where the police are actually enforcing traffic laws on the north shore. They're nowhere to be seen. And that's part of the problem. With no enforcement of the rules comes the attitude that you can do whatever you want on the roads. That's dangerous for everyone.
"If caught, they'll be charged and fined appropriately. Just as I would hope a motorist would be" ? Not really.
Motorists are already licensed and can be easily identified and reported for dangerous infractions. Cyclists cannot. This is why we need to license cyclists.
Those cyclists who don't agree to licensing must be the very ones breaking the laws of the road, knowing they can get away with it.
Agree with Anon 1:40
Cyclists should be licensed so they can be identified.
Do you take down the number of a car that rolls through a stop or doesn't signal or speeds through a school zone? Do you report these infractions? No? Then what makes you think you'd do the same if a bike had a license plate on it? The only time people get stopped and fined is when the police see the infractions. And even then enforcement is inconsistent.
Your argument makes no sense Anon 3:44
Then you aren't paying attention.
More food for thought:
http://www.vancitybuzz.com/2015/08/giving-children-freedom-roam/
Anon 3:44. Pointing out that there are poor auto drivers does not give a free license to be a reckless cyclist. If you really believe this then restrict riding your bike to the bush.
Otherwise, I suggest you bump up to life insurance. The foolishly reckless do not survive (see Charles Darwin) and self-cull themselves from the species especially when you pit a cyclist against a car. Good luck, you'll need it.
Anon 3:44. Pointing out that there are poor auto drivers does not give a free license to be a reckless cyclist. If you really believe this then restrict riding your bike to the bush.
Otherwise, I suggest you bump up your life insurance. The foolishly reckless do not survive (see Charles Darwin) and self-cull themselves from the species especially when you pit a cyclist against a car. Good luck, you'll need it.
Why should cyclist give free license to bad car drivers?! Your comment defies logic! We share the road. Both cars and bikes have the privilege of using roads funded by us, the tax payers. Nobody has a right to drive on those roads. Its a privilege. If you can't learn to share, then maybe you have no business on our roads.
What is your real excuse for not wanting bicycles to be licensed? We need to be able to report those dangerous selfish entitled cyclists who bowl over pedestrians on sidewalks, paths, and trails. More than a few people have been hurt over the years by these "hit and run" cyclists.
Dogs are licensed in the DNV. It seems to me that if one is following the rules, they should have no problem getting a license. It might cost a bit of money, but other road/trail users (including dogs) are licensed.
Where has anyone said cyclist shouldn't be licensed? I'm not opposing such a thing. All I'm advocating is that you learn to share the roads. As mentioned, thee are always a few bad eggs in every group. When you get serious about those dangerous selfish entitled motorists who bowl over pedestrians in crosswalks, roads without sidewalks, etc. See how that works? I challenge you to spend an afternoon sitting at an intersection and watching how many dangerous infractions are made by motorists who can't yield right of way to pedestrians, cyclists or other motorists. We're all trying to share the road, so stop behaving as though it's there for your sole use. If you want to talk about kids riding on sidewalks, take that up with your municipality because I believe that children are permitted to ride on sidewalks until they are old enough to ride on the streets.
Finally, if seeing cyclists share the road is such a burden for you, maybe stick to the roads that aren't designated as shared routes. Get yourself a cycling map (they're free!) and avoid any road marked by green. Please do this, because there are too many cranky drivers to deal with on any given day who have a hate-on for anyone not using a car. One less of you on the cycling routes just might save a life.
"Sharing the road" does not include bikes ignoring stop signs, stop lights, riding through crosswalks, sneaking up the lane lines to the front of the traffic waiting for a light, illegally riding 2 abreast or more etc.
Saying that there are poor drivers too is a weak response and doesn't excuse what has become a cyclist norm.
Suggesting that drivers who don't like this behaviour use other streets so that the bikes aren't impeded is ridiculous.
Don't hold your breath.
I'll continue this discussion when you improve your reading comprehension and when you stop generalizing about all cyclists. For every fault you place on cyclists, I can put forward a matching fault by motorists. Do I label all motorists as bad? No I don't, so stop painting all cyclists with your sweeping generalizations. And for the record, I drive more than I cycle. When I do cycle, I follow the laws. Is it too much to ask that every user of the road be able to do safely? Can I not take a ride with my nephews without worrying about some inattentive moron in a 5000 pound vehicle ignoring the bike lanes or stop signs and putting our lives in jeopardy? The roads are for use by everyone, not just you and your shitty attitude. Get over yourself and show a little respect for the other people who live in this community.
Get over myself? You suggest that drivers drive on alternate roads to leave them clear for your bicycle. Entitled doesn't even come close. Someone needs to get over themself. The readers can decide.
I only suggested that YOU stick to non-cycling routes. Your level entitlement and obvious lack of regard for anyone but yourself suggests that you're not capable of sharing anything, never mind roadways. New road laws, benefitting cyclists, being proposed this fall will probably make you an even more miserable SOB than you already are. Better brace yourself.
Roads were built for cars -- not bikes. We did not have problems with cyclists sharing the road for many years, until the whole cyclist entitlement factor came into play.
More cyclists are breaking the rules of the road and trails, than any other group I know of. BTW, there are more than one or two people commenting on your cyclist entitlement, Anon 7:37 I stated before, when push comes to shove, the automobile usually wins. If you still wish to play a game of chicken, expecting drivers to be able to stop on a dime -- go ahead.
If you have any sense of self-preservation, you will understand that the automobile is not going to go away. This is the North American culture. Look at the mountain bikers' relationship with the Toyota, most recently, with the introduction of the new Tacoma!
All those cars,trucks,SUVs and 4x4s driving into a packed Fromme Parking Lot speak volumes. It is really not about the bike, but all about the automobile, Anon. Otherwise we would not have had to accommodate all you mountain bikers with another forest shredding parking lot. Such hypocrisy.
Once again you are blinded by your own sense of self. Drivers don't have a lack of regard. They are desperately trying not to kill or injure the entitled scofflaw cyclists blatantly ignoring the basic rules of the road applicable to all and specific laws regarding cyclists.
You are a perfect example of the core of what is wrong with our society. Your sense of entitlement eclipses your regard for responsibility and you don't like to be called out on it.
Drivers wouldn't be miserable toward cyclists if they equally followed the same rules that drivers do. As you are so sanctimonious we will expect you to be shouting out to those giving your group a bad name. You will be quite hoarse after each trip.
Don't worry. If there are new laws most drivers will obey them (as per usual) and cyclists will take advantage of them and in addition a great number continue to illegally exploit the roadways (apu) to the risk of all.
More reason to license cyclists...
I wonder if this guy is one of the "Critical Mass Friday" group? These self-righteous dolts intentionally block a major intersection or bridge in Vancouver on the last Friday of each month with their bicycles. If you have to get to the airport or a police, fire or ambulance is rushing in an emergency they will be intentionally impeded by the cyclists and backed up traffic. The worst of it is that they get away with it without police intervention! Imagine what would happen if car owners decided to block the bike lanes at each end of the Burrard Bridge to protest cyclists ignoring traffic laws.
Just foreshadowing of what is come on the N. Shore from the entitled cyclists.
A fitting ending?
North Shore Mountain Biking Forums (http://bb.nsmb.com/index.php)
- The Shore (http://bb.nsmb.com/forumdisplay.php?f=3)
- - Dear Woodro Part 2 (http://bb.nsmb.com/showthread.php?t=162371)
JakeWestmoreland 08-05-2015 06:47 AM
Interesting
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Lau (Post 2882565)
I would further point out that while Mark was a NSMBA employee, in 2011 he built Gnomer (later becoming a portion of Forever After) on Metro land without Metro permission.
Ha!
Straw 08-17-2015 04:12 AM
My bikes have been stolen and I can't afford to replace them, and life moves on anyway.
But my gosh, what a wreck this thread is. Things sure have changed in the last few years. Is everyone always this angry?
And what pseudonyms is Lee using here on the site, for someone new to this disaster?
Or, maybe i'll leave for another few years and forget all about it.
Buster Bluth 08-17-2015 06:51 PM
This thread will not die until there is a right proper fist fight in the Fromme lot.
:lol:
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:54 PM.
Money well spent up on Fromme. I suggest, however, that the mnt bike community have had there fair share of tax dollars and that the District should spend next years budget on more passive recreation opportunities.
Post a Comment