August 11,
1997
Juan Antonio Samaranch
President, International Olympic Committee
Chateau de Vidy
1007 Lausanne, Switzerland
Katia Mascagni Stivachtis, Chief, Section of Environmental Affairs
Department of International Cooperation and Public Information
International Olympic Committee
Chateau de Vidy
1007 Lausanne, Switzerland
Gentlepersons:
I was delighted to learn (from your web page) that protection
of the environment (after s****ts and culture) is now one of the main
goals of the Olympics. The visibility and prestige of the Olympics
give you enormous responsibility, especially toward young people, who
will be strongly influenced by what they see. As you well know,
nonverbal learning is very powerful, and is for many people (e.g.
preliterate children) the primary means by which the Olympics teaches
them about s****ts, culture, and the environment. People, especially
children, assume that what they see on television, especially in the
Olympics, is proper.
Therefore, I was shocked, saddened, and embarrassed when I
discovered that mountain biking has been accepted as an Olympic s****t.
I am enclosing several papers in which I explain in detail the harm
that mountain biking inflicts on wildlife. But I will try to summarize
that information here.
We are in the midst of a worldwide extinction crisis.
According to the IUCN (International Union for the Conservation of
Nature and Natural Resources), one fourth of all of the world's
animals are threatened with extinction. The primary threat is loss of
habitat. Such loss includes obvious, outright destruction, such as
clearcutting and open-pit mining, but also the excessive presence of
humans, which often causes wildlife to abandon their preferred
habitat. In either case, the wildlife lose access to im****tant
resources, such as certain food sources and potential mates. When
judging effects on wildlife, it is essential to look at the situation
from their point of view, not ours. If they abandon an area, the
habitat is effectively destroyed for them, regardless of what we
think.
The primary reason why mountain biking is harmful to wildlife,
thus, is that it makes it much easier for people to get into wildlife
habitat. Mountain bikers don't just show up at the Olympics to race.
They have to spend many hours training. And where do they prefer to
ride? In wilderness (wildlife habitat). And what kind of trail do they
prefer to ride on? "Single-track" trails, which are primarily in
wilderness, or at least the most natural part of any area. That is
also, of course, the area preferred by wildlife. The Olympics are a
powerful motivator. When people see a s****t in the Olympics, they
identify with the athletes and want to participate in the s****t. Thus,
by simply including mountain biking in the Olympics, you unleash a
tidal wave of people buying mountain bikes, flooding parks and
wilderness areas, and participating in races. As is usual when there
is an increase in recreation, wildlife lose more and more of their
(already dangerously dwindling) habitat.
The bicycle is a wonderful tool, but like any technological
aid, it can be used for good (e.g. to replace auto travel) or evil
(e.g. to expand man's domination of wildlife habitat). Similar damage
arises from the use of the use of other technologies, such as climbing
aids (extending man's reach onto cliffs), rafts (giving people access
to the entire length of a river), night-vision goggles (making
night-time access to habitat easier), etc. Throughout our evolution,
technological aids (e.g. guns, the internal combustion engine, etc.)
have given us vastly more power than any other species, and the more
we have wielded them, the more damage we have done. You had the right
idea when you banned s****ts that "depend essentially on mechanical
propulsion". Technological aids have no place (or at most a minor
place) in Olympic s****ts, which are based on simple physical
activities like walking and swimming that measure the physical (e.g.
strength and health) and spiritual (e.g. s****tsman****p) dimensions of
a human being, not of his or her tools.
Many mountain bikers also lack s****tsman****p. They insist on
riding even when their enjoyment conflicts with that of wildlife and
other people. Elderly hikers are being driven off of hiking trails
they have enjoyed all their lives. Threatened species have been killed
by bikers, who then try to pretend that it didn't happen or was
insignificant. Anyone who speaks out against mountain biking is
attacked viciously, as I have been and continue to be. My physical
safety and that of my family have been threatened, for simply telling
the truth about the effects of mountain biking on wildlife. Many
mountain bikers seem to see their goal as conquering anything and
anyone in their path. I haven't seen such a lack of s****tsman****p in
any other s****t (with the exception of professional wrestling and one
infamous instance in ice skating).
Mountain biking also destroys vast numbers of organisms that
live in and on soil, creating devastating erosion. One Olympic
hopeful, for example, trained in Brown's Woods, DesMoines, Iowa, where
habitat destruction was so bad that the county was forced to close the
park to bikes. The knobby tires used by virtually all mountain bikers
are perfectly designed to rip up the soil and kill the plants and
animals that live there. They insist on using those tires even though
they don't need that much traction unless they are traveling at
excessive speed, or riding on steep slopes or wet ground where biking
is inappropriate.
The Earth's environmental problems are so huge that they will
not be solved without all of us doing our part. I appreciate that you
are striving to do your part, and are re-examining the Olympics with
the environment in mind. I hope you will consider dropping mountain
biking as an Olympic s****t, and take another look at all the other
s****ts (e.g. canoeing, which also intrudes into im****tant wildlife
habitat) from the point of view of wildlife.
Sincerely,
Michael J.
Vandeman, Ph.D.
P.S. A larger issue, of course, is whether an activity that requires
the long-distance travel of thousands of people can ever be
sustainable. I suggest that you recognize that the Earth's oil
supplies will soon be exhausted (estimated by the experts at about
2040), and create a committee to begin planning for it. (E.g., how do
we want to make use of the oil that is left? Burn it up?!). Every
organization should have such a committee!
References:
Ehrlich, Paul and Anne, Extinction: The Causes and Consequences of the
Disappearance of Species. c.1981.
Knight, Richard L. and Kevin J. Gutzwiller, eds. Wildlife and
Recreationists. Covelo, California: Island Press, c.1995.
Phillips, Kathryn, Tracking the Vani****ng Frogs: An Ecological
Mystery. New York: St. Martin's Press, 1994.
Stebbins, Robert, personal communication.
Vandeman, Michael J., Ph.D.
http://www.imaja.com/change/environment/mvarticles/
--
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)
Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are
fond of!
http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande
|
