View Single Post
Old 09-18-18, 04:31 PM
Prefers Cicero
cooker's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Toronto
Posts: 12,784

Bikes: 1984 Trek 520; 2007 Bike Friday NWT; misc others

Mentioned: 75 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3518 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 9 Times in 8 Posts
Originally Posted by tandempower View Post
There's a serious issue I have thought about related to this, which is that I think many pristine destinations could be threatened if they were made easily accessible by car-free means of transportation. E.g. if there was a train or bus connection between major urban centers and pristine wilderness sites, people could flock to the sites and cause the kind of degradation that insensitive humans can cause when they trample around, litter, etc.

So is it possible that, although motor vehicles driving and parking cause unnecessary pavement, roadkill, etc. they may deter significant numbers of visits to pristine areas to protect those areas a little more than if they were convenient transit destinations from major population areas.
The damage that people would do if they could access more of nature without cars, is trivial compared to the damage to nature we actually do every day and have done for generations with our cars and with the infrastructure our 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 has been despoiled and developed and permanently removed from nature, because cars made it available for development or necessary as a transportation corridor.

Red Hill Valley - a former nature area in Hamilton, Ontario.

Last edited by cooker; 09-18-18 at 04:53 PM.
cooker is offline