Living Car Free...The reality.
#76
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 4,355
Mentioned: 90 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8084 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 14 Times
in
13 Posts
The damage that people would do if they could access more of nature without cars, is trivial compared to the damage they actually do
every day and have done for generations with their cars and with the infrastructure their cars require. For every remote, pristine valley that people might want to flock to, to escape from crowds and cars, there is another one, or several, that have been despoiled and developed and permanently removed from nature, because cars made it available for development or necessary as a transportation corridor.
every day and have done for generations with their cars and with the infrastructure their cars require. For every remote, pristine valley that people might want to flock to, to escape from crowds and cars, there is another one, or several, that have been despoiled and developed and permanently removed from nature, because cars made it available for development or necessary as a transportation corridor.
#77
Prefers Cicero
yahoo!
The guy explains why stuff won't work for him, and people who didn't bother to read carefully say, 'Do it anyway."
The guy has a solution which works for him, and peple say, 'Don't do what works, do what won't work."
The whole thing is just about senseless from the first post.
car-free doesn't suit every person, every lifestyle, every situation .... and some people seem to find that really hard to accept.
I feel like i have entered into some sort of Fanatic Zone ... oh, wait. Sorry, I didn't read the sign on the door.
later.
The guy explains why stuff won't work for him, and people who didn't bother to read carefully say, 'Do it anyway."
The guy has a solution which works for him, and peple say, 'Don't do what works, do what won't work."
The whole thing is just about senseless from the first post.
car-free doesn't suit every person, every lifestyle, every situation .... and some people seem to find that really hard to accept.
I feel like i have entered into some sort of Fanatic Zone ... oh, wait. Sorry, I didn't read the sign on the door.
later.
Except for 3alarmer, of course
#78
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 15,481
Bikes: 2015 Workswell 066, 2017 Workswell 093, 2014 Dawes Sheila, 1983 Cannondale 500, 1984 Raleigh Olympian, 2007 Cannondale Rize 4, 2017 Fuji Sportif 1 LE
Mentioned: 144 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7649 Post(s)
Liked 3,465 Times
in
1,831 Posts
Yeah , ... and for every place there is a guy on a computer, there is a mountain in West Virginia without a top and a bunch of valleys with rivers full of coal ash.
#79
Prefers Cicero
I edited my post to say "our" cars since I don't claim to be somehow outside the system. However "we" can do a lot to reduce our impact, and reducing driving would be a huge step. If people routinely went to National parks by train instead of car, a lot more nature would be preserved along the route, and a lot less of the park itself would be paved.
#80
Prefers Cicero
I agree, and when I go to otherwise-wonderful natural preserves and see all the cars parked and all the people walking as if they're at an amusement park, it bothers me; but when I think about what it would be like if there was a train line or direct bus connection, I think it might get even worse. Compare US national parks with touristy parts of, say, Switzerland, where there are trains and cable lifts, etc. Gatlinburg and Pidgeon Forge are touristy, and it's certainly understandable to have some touristy areas like that, but given the way humans behave when they all flock to just about any destination, I wonder if making such places transit accessible isn't even worse than having them easily accessible by driving. I don't know if it's possible to entrust the transit-using public with responsible stewardship of natural areas if they get car-free access to them.
If visitors to a park started to exceed capacity, it would be up to the park stewards to figure out how to limit access while maintaining fairness. by perhaps rationing permits or whatever. That way more people could enjoy the park without the park necessarily sustaining more stress or feeling more crowded. People take up a lot less space than cars.
Last edited by cooker; 09-18-18 at 05:18 PM.
#81
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 4,355
Mentioned: 90 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8084 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 14 Times
in
13 Posts
if you barred car access and only allowed train access, and designed pedestrian friendly gondolas and monorails etc, instead of roads to get people to widely scattered sites inside the park, the park could handle a lot more visitors than it can if they come by car, and drive around inside the park. Some interior roads could be reinvented as hiking trails where appropriate, with the right of way narrowed from 50 feet to 6 feet or 3 feet, or whatever, and trees replacing asphalt.
If visitors to a park started to exceed capacity, it would be up to the park stewards to figure out how to limit access while maintaining fairness. by perhaps rationing permits or whatever. That way more people could enjoy the park without the park necessarily sustaining more stress or feeling more crowded. People take up a lot less space than cars.
If visitors to a park started to exceed capacity, it would be up to the park stewards to figure out how to limit access while maintaining fairness. by perhaps rationing permits or whatever. That way more people could enjoy the park without the park necessarily sustaining more stress or feeling more crowded. People take up a lot less space than cars.
It's ironic, considering that even amusement parks require guests to park outside the park and take transit to get in and access attractions.
Last edited by tandempower; 09-18-18 at 05:35 PM.
#82
Prefers Cicero
I'd be open to replacing car access with car-free access, but I don't think car-access will get banned any time soon, unfortunately.
It's ironic, considering that even amusement parks require guests to park outside the park and take transit to get in and access attractions.
It's ironic, considering that even amusement parks require guests to park outside the park and take transit to get in and access attractions.
Last edited by cooker; 09-18-18 at 07:56 PM.
#83
Friendship is Magic
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 22,984
Bikes: old ones
Mentioned: 304 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26390 Post(s)
Liked 10,365 Times
in
7,197 Posts
Again, he chose to post in the LCF forum and challenged people to explain how he could do his trip car-free, and people politely responded and explained that he would have to do a different trip or at least do things a little differently. And of course he is free to ignore these comments. Where are you seeing all this fanaticism and senselessness? Are you sure you just aren't distorting things through some kind of lens of preconception that people here must be some kind of hard-core zealots, and reading that into perfectly sensible comments?
Except for 3alarmer, of course
Except for 3alarmer, of course
Originally Posted by Barry Goldwater (by gosh)
Tolerance in the face of tyranny is no virtue. Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. And moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue. Moderation in the protection of liberty is no virtue; extremism in the defense of freedom is no vice.
#84
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Providence
Posts: 732
Bikes: Specialized tarmac sl2 giant tcx zero
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 319 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
3 Posts
Car free means no car at all no cheating , you get there by bike , the vacation becomes the journey , riding 100 plus miles a day .
#85
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 4,355
Mentioned: 90 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8084 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 14 Times
in
13 Posts
I assume larger national parks do have lots of people come by tour bus in groups or even solo by Greyhound etc. in some cases, but there are probably a lot of smaller state parks etc. where private car is the only choice, and it's a bit of a class issue where people who can't afford cars miss out on a shared resource. So I hope in future there is more equitable access, and I'm sure the park managers will find various ways to ensure they aren't damaged by overuse.
#86
In Real Life
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Down under down under
Posts: 52,152
Bikes: Lots
Mentioned: 141 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3203 Post(s)
Liked 596 Times
in
329 Posts
The horror! All those hordes of people having fun in a park! Imagine!
__________________
Rowan
My fave photo threads on BF
Century A Month Facebook Group
Machka's Website
Photo Gallery
Rowan
My fave photo threads on BF
Century A Month Facebook Group
Machka's Website
Photo Gallery
#87
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 4,355
Mentioned: 90 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8084 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 14 Times
in
13 Posts
I like having fun, too; but people should respect that plants and animals living in the park set the tone of the park and humans should quiet down and observe. There can be recreational areas, but people shouldn't turn natural areas into recreational areas. Those are for observing nature and hiking/biking/camping in a way that is harmonious with it. It really comes down to not being too noisy, not trampling on plants, and not littering (take only pictures and leave only footprints).
#88
In Real Life
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Down under down under
Posts: 52,152
Bikes: Lots
Mentioned: 141 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3203 Post(s)
Liked 596 Times
in
329 Posts
I like having fun, too; but people should respect that plants and animals living in the park set the tone of the park and humans should quiet down and observe. There can be recreational areas, but people shouldn't turn natural areas into recreational areas. Those are for observing nature and hiking/biking/camping in a way that is harmonious with it. It really comes down to not being too noisy, not trampling on plants, and not littering (take only pictures and leave only footprints).
Sometimes nature is the ideal place to be noisy.
__________________
Rowan
My fave photo threads on BF
Century A Month Facebook Group
Machka's Website
Photo Gallery
Rowan
My fave photo threads on BF
Century A Month Facebook Group
Machka's Website
Photo Gallery
#89
Prefers Cicero
There is a deeper problem, which is what happens when hordes of people show up with frisbees and balls and turn a park into a playground. Then there are the vendors and park managers who use them to turn the park into a business that generates more revenue. There is fundamental bias against having parks be nature sanctuaries where people can hike/bike, camp, and live in a more primitive, small-footprint, way because most people just don't want to be humbled by nature, i.e. because humility in the face of nature feels like humiliation to them.
#90
Prefers Cicero
All recreational areas used to be natural areas. Even a 3 foot wide biking or hiking trail is a recreational area that is no longer fully "natural'. If it goes on for miles, it disturbs more nature than a baseball field. Why do your recreational choices take priority over baseball?
#91
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 15,481
Bikes: 2015 Workswell 066, 2017 Workswell 093, 2014 Dawes Sheila, 1983 Cannondale 500, 1984 Raleigh Olympian, 2007 Cannondale Rize 4, 2017 Fuji Sportif 1 LE
Mentioned: 144 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7649 Post(s)
Liked 3,465 Times
in
1,831 Posts
I like having fun, too; but people should respect that plants and animals living in the park set the tone of the park and humans should quiet down and observe. There can be recreational areas, but people shouldn't turn natural areas into recreational areas. Those are for observing nature and hiking/biking/camping in a way that is harmonious with it. It really comes down to not being too noisy, not trampling on plants, and not littering (take only pictures and leave only footprints).
#92
Prefers Cicero
So your "people" or "peple" [sic] is one person? Here I thought you were referencing hordes of fanatics overrunning the forum, like locusts swarming over a rice field, destroying everything, or emulating the reavers in Firefly.
Last edited by cooker; 09-20-18 at 08:31 AM.
#94
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 4,355
Mentioned: 90 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8084 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 14 Times
in
13 Posts
Parks are versatile and diverse. They can have areas that are cleared and modified for specific activities like cricket or lawnbowling, others that are cleared for generic purposes and other parts that are left in their natural state. Again, the space we clear for recreational purposes is drastically overshadowed by the massive space we clear for transportation corridors. Let's cut back on the latter before we try to ostracize the frisbee players or mountain bikers who want space to play in parks.
#95
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 4,355
Mentioned: 90 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8084 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 14 Times
in
13 Posts
All recreational areas used to be natural areas. Even a 3 foot wide biking or hiking trail is a recreational area that is no longer fully "natural'. If it goes on for miles, it disturbs more nature than a baseball field. Why do your recreational choices take priority over baseball?
#96
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 15,481
Bikes: 2015 Workswell 066, 2017 Workswell 093, 2014 Dawes Sheila, 1983 Cannondale 500, 1984 Raleigh Olympian, 2007 Cannondale Rize 4, 2017 Fuji Sportif 1 LE
Mentioned: 144 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7649 Post(s)
Liked 3,465 Times
in
1,831 Posts
You are another one ... though I must say, the strength of your African river could power many cities if it could be used for hydroelectric.
#97
Friendship is Magic
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 22,984
Bikes: old ones
Mentioned: 304 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26390 Post(s)
Liked 10,365 Times
in
7,197 Posts
...you people !!
#98
Senior Member
#99
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Southwestern Ontario
Posts: 5,122
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1579 Post(s)
Liked 1,187 Times
in
604 Posts
Actually, let's stop the zero-sum logic that it's ok to deforest some areas if we protect and preserve forests in others. The CO2 balance is kept by keeping ecosystems rooted in soils. Human activities should be part of that, not a replacement of it. Once we have learned to humble ourselves and fully respect the critical functions of ecological life, then we can start thinking about allowing some clearing. Right now, we need to get over ourselves so that we can get down to the business of letting nature do the work it does for us and the rest of life on this planet.
Finally, no -- "we" do not need "to get over ourselves". If there is one person on this sub-forum who needs to get over him- or herself, and to "humble" him- or herself -- that is, demonstrate just a little less arrogance -- it is you.
#100
Been Around Awhile
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 29,965
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked 1,530 Times
in
1,042 Posts
One person could be sufficient to wreak such havoc if so motivated.