RoadBikeReview.com's Forum Archives - General


Archive Home >> General(1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 )


This is an unjust world (rant)(35 posts)

This is an unjust world (rant)PhatMatt
Jul 2, 2002 9:57 AM
The is a local canyon here in Salt Lake with some good trails. (Millcreek for those familiar with the area) How ever you can only ride the trails ever other day. (On odd or even days) I have no issues this part of the rules. It is last year they actually started enforcing the leash laws on the trails. The Dog owners were pissed to say the least. So they now get every other day with no leash law. I do not know which day it is, as I have not been riding my MTB very much. But I still think it is total bullshit that they get to hike both days and do not have to keep the pooch on a leash. I almost killed a puppy once on a blind corner. While I was picking myself up out of the brush (and bleeding) the owner had the tonicity to yell at me and tell me I should not be on the trail. Lucky for her I like animals, and made the personal sacrifice to my body not the pup.

Matt
I know Utah doesn't always make sense,TJeanloz
Jul 2, 2002 10:01 AM
But wouldn't it be reasonable to allow mountain biking on odd days, and unleashed dogs on even days?
I know Utah doesn't always make sense,PhatMatt
Jul 2, 2002 10:27 AM
That does make sense, and I think that is what is being done. But they also caved to the small populas that has the $$. I have not ridded up there at all this year but my friends say taht the dogs still run the canyon. (leashless)
Turn it aroundgrzy
Jul 2, 2002 10:24 AM
Be glad you even get to ride on the trail at all. Just one look at Mt. Tam (the birth place of MTB's) should tell you that things can get really bad. As in no single track for MTB's....ever.

Seems to me like you need to figure out which day you're allowed to be on the multi-use trail and follow the rules. People like yourself are ammunition for the opposition. They'll claim that the odd/even thing isn't working since the MTB'ers go whenever they want and endanger their pooches - especially around blind corners. Point is if you had to ditch into the brush then you weren't riding in control - the crash is entirely YOUR fault - the dog and the owner had the right to be there. You never have the right to ride out of control in this type of situation. If you want a closed course and to ride out of control then join an organized race - they're full of people that share your attitude and enough support people to pick up the wrecks.

I think I'd be pissed at you also if you were on the trail when you weren't supposed to be, crashed and nearly flattened my puppy/kid/self.

Think about taking some responsibilty for your actions and stop blaming others.
Always in controlniteschaos
Jul 2, 2002 10:30 AM
You should ride like you should drive. Never go fast enough that if the end of the world were to appear around the next bend, that you couldn't stop for it. As a road cyclist I was caught hitting sand around a sharp turn and learned my lesson.
Turn it aroundPhatMatt
Jul 2, 2002 10:42 AM
I see your point. The point with this particular incident was it is very narrow at this point. I was not going very fast and I always slow way down since there are often horses on the trail. It was the attitude of the owner the rubbed me wrong since the dog was just running carelessly about 50yds in front of the owner. I do not mind sharing since I also hike with my wife. I just wish we could all have to obey the rules. Bikes are heavily fined if they are caught in the canyon on the wrong day. However the leash laws are not enforced at all. I guess the other thing that pisses me off is I paid for my canyon permit as well as they did.
Oh, that's differentgrzy
Jul 2, 2002 2:46 PM
Sorry, but the way I interperted your original post was that you were riding on the wrong day, not in control and I didn't catch that the puppy wasn't on a leash. I would've been tempted to flatten the puppy (that's why they make a lot of them) and certainly given the lady a ration of crap. Usually I'm a little stunned after a wreck, however. I've learned to surpress the instinct to automatically swerve b/c something smaller gets in the way. Better the than me. We all benefit when we obey the rules. If you break them then be prepared for what ever comes out of it. Even if you're totally right MTBing loses as a result.

It kinda irks me the way trail systems get locked up for hikers and horses and MTB's are banned. Yeah, we work through the system to get things changed, put in our trail maintenance time, and are polite and courteous on the trails. Still we're a bunch of outlaws. I figure time is mostly on our side - eventually the hateful old hikers will die and their kids, who ride MTBs, will inherit their money. Fewer people are going to be able to spend the vast sums on keeping horses. The numbers will shift and policies will change. Nothing more ludicrous than horse people insisting that MTBs tear up the trails. Ultimately we go out of our way to find and ride trails that hikers and horse people avoid. That you need a permit is a good indication that it's too crowded. The best way to deal with conflict is to avoid it all together which is easier said than done.

You need to file a complaint with the controlling authority and tattle about the leash issue - every single time. You can bet they file complaints against MTBs and I'm sure the lady left the part out about her pup not being on the leash. In the end some droid reviews the complaints and decides where resources get allocated.
I didn't get that out of his postMel Erickson
Jul 2, 2002 10:43 AM
I believe he was talking about riding on the trail before there was a leash law and an odd/even rule. You could easily be under control and come around a blind corner and almost hit a dog that wasn't under control by his/her owner. Sounds to me like the owner of the dog was responsible for not having her dog under control (leash). I am a dog owner (two wonderful labs) and lover but never take them unleashed where leashing is required. Where a leash is not required, and it's a multiuse area, I sure wouldn't complain because another person, who was using the area responsibly, hit my dog. It's my responsibility to make sure my dog is safe when not on a leash. Dogs don't know bikes can hurt them, nor do they pay attention to blind corners. That's the owners job.
Turn it 360...biknben
Jul 2, 2002 10:57 AM
Yes, the cyclist should be able to ride under control. Shouldn't the pet owner be responsible to control the dog? If that dog behaves erratically and gets tangled up in my bike, I'm not gonna feel responsible.

Are you going to blame yourself the next time a squirrel jumps into your paceline?
Turn it 360...ohmk1
Jul 2, 2002 11:09 AM
Someone's dog isn't the same as a squirrel. God help the mother effer that messes with my dog.
Turn it 360...mickey-mac
Jul 2, 2002 11:13 AM
"Someone's dog isn't the same as a squirrel." Maybe not, but some dogs sure act pretty damn squirrelly, especially when off-leash.
messes with your dog?filtersweep
Jul 2, 2002 1:13 PM
Isn't it YOUR responsibility to CONTROL that dog, leash or not? If you truly care about your dog, you will assume the responsibility... I suppose you'd let your kids play on the freeway?
messes with your dog?ohmk1
Jul 2, 2002 1:17 PM
thanks for stating the obvious...
messes with your dog?Leisure
Jul 2, 2002 8:48 PM
When a deer ran into my car two weeks ago the police told me I couldn't be held responsible because you can't predict the behavior of a deer. He was right. There was no way to avoid that stupid thing and it rammed into the side of my car, messed up the roof, and I think it punched me in the face (well, something did!). Dogs should be looked at the same, meaning any accident between dog and person should be the dog's fault and potentially the owner's liability. I restrict that argument to ACCIDENTS; I am not applying it to people going out of their way to abuse animals, of course. It's the owner's responsibility to keep them on a leash, and it shouldn't matter what day it is. While most dogs are trained well enough to stay tame and not go harassing after every person that comes by, a certain percentage are not and that is why leash laws should be enforced all the time. Not that they'll ever see it that way. Mountainbikers will continue to be seen as "at fault" because they're doing the newer sport, they're younger on average, they're going faster, and a marginally higher percentage of them are assholes. Most of it is unfair, but some of it is earned.
If you"Turn it 360" aren't you where you started from?...jromack
Jul 2, 2002 12:10 PM
You mean turn it 180 degrees!
Quote from "Last Action Hero"....tronracer
Jul 2, 2002 12:18 PM
"you spaghetti slurping moron..."
No, 360...biknben
Jul 2, 2002 1:35 PM
Someone else turned it around. I turned it around again. 360

No big deal.
Yes, but dizzy. (nm)grzy
Jul 2, 2002 2:46 PM
You've made three turns-you can lie down now. -nmSnowBlind
Jul 3, 2002 11:42 AM
My main rantPhatMatt
Jul 2, 2002 11:57 AM
I think my main rant is that fact of fairness here. The leash less law went into effect last year. The odd and even days have been around forever. I have never violated that or would I. I think it is probably the same argument on both sides. We as cyclists want to own the roads and trails, and the dog owners and auto think they own the roads. I just wish they would enforce the leash laws that exist. The main reason I quit riding up there is I was almost bitten by a Great Dane (sp) that was off its leash and the owner was sitting under a tree resting about 10 yds off the uphill side of the trail. You tell me. I am not a speed demon and this is the only time I have ever been accused of riding out of control. If I had of been out of control I would have been way off the trail not just in the oak brush with a banged up elbow from a slow speed ditch.
Dogs always need to be restrained in public areas, period.MXL02
Jul 2, 2002 12:08 PM
I know this is politically incorrect, and I am inviting flames from all the animal lovers out there, but I do not believe there is any excuse for an animal to be unrestrained in a public area, period. It is always hazardous to other users. And yes cyclists have a responsibility to ride cautiously as well, but how can you possibly do that with an unrestrained dog chasing you or someone else? MHO.

PS- I own a dog and a cat, both are always on leashes, or a reasonable facimile, when in public.
Dogs always need to be restrained in public areas, period.ohmk1
Jul 2, 2002 12:31 PM
you are in fact very POLITICALLY CORRECT, and no, animals don't need to always be restrained in public areas-quiet frankly there are many more dangerous people out there that should be restrained.
My experience has been differentmickey-mac
Jul 2, 2002 12:46 PM
In the past six months, I've been charged by two angry pit pulls and chased by an angry Rotweiller. I've also had numerous dogs go after me that would have gotten to me if not leashed. On the other hand, I haven't been threatened physically by any people while out riding during that same time. Obviously, we've got a lot of dangerous people in the world, but we have ways of dealing with them other than leashes. People should be responsible for their own actions and those of their pets. Pet owners give up some small amount of control over their own lives when required to leash their dogs. However, I feel a lot safer out walking with my two young kids, knowing we have a leash law.
My experience has been differentohmk1
Jul 2, 2002 1:12 PM
I've been chased by plenty of dogs. Squirted them with my water bottle, and off they went. What's the big deal?
I think its cool that you and your progenies feel a lot safer in the world because of leash laws.
PS, like many riders on this board, I have been threatened, chased, gotten run over, and had objects (beer bottles, apples, and even a friggin dildo!)thrown at me. I have yet to be bitten, by a dog, on four legs that is.
LOL a dildo??No_sprint
Jul 2, 2002 1:37 PM
What's a guy with a dildo in his car anyway?
LOL a dildo??ohmk1
Jul 3, 2002 5:18 AM
I never said it was a guy throwing a dildo at me.
I actually don't know the gender of the dildo assulter.
My experience has been differentmickey-mac
Jul 2, 2002 2:03 PM
I can assure you that water wasn't doing anything to the pit bulls that came after me. I got away only because I had a downhill to work with that allowed me to escape.

I'm not sure I understand your position here and how bad human behavior fits with it. Do you think dogs should never have to be on leash? Do you believe that as long as bad people are allowed to roam freely, bad dogs should be allowed to do the same?
Pets are property, people aren't,MXL02
Jul 2, 2002 12:59 PM
no matter how dangerous they are. Owners must be responsible for the actions of their pets. My guess is that the people with dangerous behaviors are the same ones who allow their pets to go off unrestrained.
Pets are property, people aren't,ohmk1
Jul 2, 2002 1:16 PM
Parents are less liable and get less hassle for their delinquent offsprings that cause crime, violence, and destruction of property, than dog owners going out for a hike with their pooch.
Not in my neighborhood. nmMXL02
Jul 2, 2002 1:20 PM
Beg to differ...filtersweep
Jul 2, 2002 1:34 PM
most Counties actually BILL parents for any "custodial care" of their minor offspring- usually starting at $150/day... often the parents are actually held more accountable than their kids (just like dogs)- a kid practically has to commit a felony with a weapon for a first time offense that results in a "secure" detention setting (and the parents would STILL be billed). What does the kid get? A few nights spent with a few other miscreants, a court appearance, and likely "group probation." The parent has a lien put on the house. Happens all the time.
wait a minute...Breakfast
Jul 2, 2002 6:28 PM
...I like dogs, I like hiking, I like MTB's, I have to agree to multi-use trails for everyone's sake, I also think it's cool to walk on trails with unleased dogs.

Dogs don't go after bikes on trails unless there's something wrong with the dog. Dogs do chase bikes that ride by their territory, that's normal but needs be corrected by the owner before dog dies in roadway or people get hurt.

I have to take a position on these issues that reflects all my interests. Even if I had a completely pro bike bias, I still have to say that bikes need to control their speed when they can't see beyond corners or other obstructions. Sometimes, you just need a bell or device that warns people on the trail.

Life can suck when you don't always get your way, but that's life!
P.S.Breakfast
Jul 2, 2002 6:41 PM
One more thing after reading more thoroughly, I don't know the area where you are but in my area all civilization seems to disappear three or four miles away from trailhead. Unless there are multiple access points, the back country soon sheds walkers and dogs.

If the area is more like a park, full of people, my heart goes out to you. It's just going to have it's share of conflicts. Choosing off hours on weekdays and just plain luck will determine how conflict-free your ride will be.

If this area is that popular I just wouldn't ride it. To me, mountain biking doesn't begin until you're miles from the trailhead and a couple thousand feet up. Depends where you live, I guess.
re: This is an unjust world (rant)paulw
Jul 2, 2002 6:34 PM
Dogs should be off leashes period unless it's someone's yard or a dog park. Unleashed dogs wreak havoc with wildlife in an area like that. Dogs = wolves as far as wild animals are concerned.

I like all kinds of animals including dogs.

As for the odd/even day thing, that's assinine.
Leash laws should be enforced all the time.Leisure
Jul 2, 2002 9:19 PM
I frequent Millcreek as well and even though most hikers are extremely pleasant, most with dogs do not follow the leash laws at all. Most tell me they know they're supposed to and try to give me right of way to make up for it. I'm pleasant about it but generally don't accept; hikers SHOULD get right of way, bikers ARE responsible to go safe speeds, but those dogs SHOULD be leashed. Whether it's an odd or even day shouldn't matter. I won't give anyone a fuss about it until a dog actually comes chasing me, which I've been fortunate enough not to deal with, but I have had plenty of dogs jump in front of me without warning and that is irritating. Thus, why I insist on hiker right of way. Knowing that a properly leashed dog will always be in the vicinity of its owner (as opposed to piddling about in the bushes) would simply facilitate safe traffic flow and everyone has more fun. But like I said, until I have to deal with a firsthand problem that puts my safety at risk I won't make a stink. I do my share to ride responsible speeds and I know this has played a part in my not having any big problems. With dogs, at least. A certain small percentage of hikers will try to get in your face no matter what you're doing.