Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
1 - 20 of 45 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,668 Posts
E-bikes have motors, no matter how manufacturers and marketers and e-bike advocates might try to dance around it, it is a simple fact. They don't belong on non-motorized trails in most cases.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
785 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
E-bikes have motors, no matter how manufacturers and marketers and e-bike advocates might try to dance around it, it is a simple fact. They don't belong on non-motorized trails in most cases.
That argument has been well stated we don't need to beat a dead horse, but how does the fact over 50 conservation groups have come out and voiced their opinion in opposition of ebikes on non motorized trails have on the argument for trail access? I've also seen examples of compromise like in Idaho where ebikes are allowed on non motorized trails for people with disabilities.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
98 Posts
If you read the list of signers, it's dominated by horse associations, who pretty much hate all bike users. They will take any opportunity to limit cycling activities. As more people switch to eMTB, if they succeed in fighting against the current rules being relaxed then it's a huge win for them as there will be fewer bikes on the trail.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
375 Posts
If you read the list of signers, it's dominated by horse associations, who pretty much hate all bike users. They will take any opportunity to limit cycling activities. As more people switch to eMTB, if they succeed in fighting against the current rules being relaxed then it's a huge win for them as there will be fewer bikes on the trail.
EBikes are a death sentence to the dying breed of those who use horses on a public trail. EBikes will also kill off the internal combustion dirt bike. EBikes are a huge benefit for traditional bicycles which is why you see Wilderness Watch fight against them.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
11,819 Posts
EBikes are a death sentence to the dying breed of those who use horses on a public trail. EBikes will also kill off the internal combustion dirt bike. EBikes are a huge benefit for traditional bicycles which is why you see Wilderness Watch fight against them.
I think the horse riders will definitely not be lessened by ebikes. It is a social thing not a convenience thing. I mean the majority of them drive a 1000 pound animal to a trail to ride or they can afford a property adjacent to the trail itself. They are not looking for a toy to putter around a trails, this is a lifestyle decision.

However I totally see ICE motorcycles being challenged by emotorcycles. I mean you can get a really good dual sport emotorcycle for the price of a levo (zero FX MSRP $8500 (https://www.zeromotorcycles.com/zero-fx/)/ Levo Expert MSPR $8250 (https://www.specialized.com/us/en/mens-turbo-levo-expert/p/154388?color=239491-154388)

Sure the motorcyle has around a 50 mile range and probably less on technical terrain but over time these will get longer legs and less money, just like electric cars.

A certainly conservation groups will oppose ebikes because one of their big objects to even mountain bikes is speed. Higher speeds scare horses and increase chances of crashes with pedestrians. Ebikes only increase the speed factor with higher climbing speeds and ability to have more sustained flat speeds. Either way I wouldn't say this is a stake in the ground for ebike access to trails but it certainly doesn't help.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
375 Posts
I think the horse riders will definitely not be lessened by ebikes. It is a social thing not a convenience thing. I mean the majority of them drive a 1000 pound animal to a trail to ride or they can afford a property adjacent to the trail itself. They are not looking for a toy to putter around a trails, this is a lifestyle decision.
Horse riders avoid trails frequented by bicyclists/hikers in my experience. The more bicyclists, the fewer public trails that a horse backrider wants to access. I know of several eBikers who were former horse riders.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
11,819 Posts
Horse riders avoid trails frequented by bicyclists/hikers in my experience. The more bicyclists, the fewer public trails that a horse backrider wants to access. I know of several eBikers who were former horse riders.
All the more reason for them to object to ebike use on trails. Or bike use on trails. Many, many, many horse riders are quite wealthy and of the opinion, as wealthy people tend to be, that their right supersede other people who are less rich. If the horse groups are part of the conservation groups noted below, with their money and histories, i would not say that bodes well for adding ebikes to non motorized trails.

Frankly horses on trails terrify me. They are huge masses of easily spooked, death dealing hoofed, animals. When I am on trail and see horses I tend to put my bike behind me and back away to the edge of the trail or off the trail because I have seen horses spooked just by the sight of bike and don't want to be responsible for someone dying because my bike or my riding spooked their horse, or nor do I want to be the dead person because I ran into one on the trail because I was going faster than prudent on a multi use trail or just bad luck. I am sure they feel the same way.

I ran into many horses in Arizona, where our mountain bike trails abutted rich ranches (including spas with horses, the kinda place that Oprah and Madonna, etc visited), and we were always, as a group, very conscious of avoiding spooking or impacting the horse riders in anyway as these trails were awesome and the shear might if the wealth associated with the horse riders would be enough to easily get us shut out of these trails. Respect those with the wealth for they can change things you can only imagine.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
375 Posts
All the more reason for them to object to ebike use on trails. Or bike use on trails. Many, many, many horse riders are quite wealthy and of the opinion, as wealthy people tend to be, that their right supersede other people who are less rich. If the horse groups are part of the conservation groups noted below, with their money and histories, i would not say that bodes well for adding ebikes to non motorized trails.

Frankly horses on trails terrify me. They are huge masses of easily spooked, death dealing hoofed, animals. When I am on trail and see horses I tend to put my bike behind me and back away to the edge of the trail or off the trail because I have seen horses spooked just by the sight of bike and don't want to be responsible for someone dying because my bike or my riding spooked their horse, or nor do I want to be the dead person because I ran into one on the trail because I was going faster than prudent on a multi use trail or just bad luck. I am sure they feel the same way.

I ran into many horses in Arizona, where our mountain bike trails abutted rich ranches (including spas with horses, the kinda place that Oprah and Madonna, etc visited), and we were always, as a group, very conscious of avoiding spooking or impacting the horse riders in anyway as these trails were awesome and the shear might if the wealth associated with the horse riders would be enough to easily get us shut out of these trails. Respect those with the wealth for they can change things you can only imagine.
EBiker's wealth rival or surpasses those who ride horses in my experience. Horses endanger the rider and other trail users. I pity the fools who stand in the way of the eBike access train.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,881 Posts
but how does the fact over 50 conservation groups have come out and voiced their opinion in opposition of ebikes on non motorized trails have on the argument for trail access?
Hardly a ringing death knell for emtbs, but it's not helpful.

If you read the list of signers, it's dominated by horse associations, who pretty much hate all bike users. They will take any opportunity to limit cycling activities. As more people switch to eMTB, if they succeed in fighting against the current rules being relaxed then it's a huge win for them as there will be fewer bikes on the trail.
Conservation groups fighting against ebike access = fewer ebikes on the trail. Or do you think everyone will stop riding mtbs and switch to ebikes even though there's no where legal to ride them? And then not ride either? No emtbs here hasn't hurt mtb access at all, it's only increasing with new trails every season.

I think mtbs will lose access based on only their stupid actions, not because of emtbs. Except in Wilderness, no way that's happening.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
98 Posts
Hardly a ringing death knell for emtbs, but it's not helpful.

Conservation groups fighting against ebike access = fewer ebikes on the trail. Or do you think everyone will stop riding mtbs and switch to ebikes even though there's no where legal to ride them? And then not ride either? No emtbs here hasn't hurt mtb access at all, it's only increasing with new trails every season.

I think mtbs will lose access based on only their stupid actions, not because of emtbs. Except in Wilderness, no way that's happening.
No, I'm not saying unassisted mtbs will lose access due to this. As you said, it's only for eMTB, which don't currently have access. What I'm saying is that the result of not allowing eMTB access is fewer bikes on restricted trails as the percentage of eMTB vs unassisted bikes increases. This is a win for the anti-bike crowd.

It would be interesting to find out what percentage of eMTB riders are crossovers from unassisted MTB vs. completely new to the sport. I believe most are crossovers, but it would also make sense that a significant percentage of people new to the sport will be on the e-bike version.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,881 Posts
No, I'm not saying unassisted mtbs will lose access due to this. As you said, it's only for eMTB, which don't currently have access. What I'm saying is that the result of not allowing eMTB access is fewer bikes on restricted trails as the percentage of eMTB vs unassisted bikes increases. This is a win for the anti-bike crowd.

It would be interesting to find out what percentage of eMTB riders are crossovers from unassisted MTB vs. completely new to the sport. I believe most are crossovers, but it would also make sense that a significant percentage of people new to the sport will be on the e-bike version.
Based on what I see in forums, which is hardly hard and fast data, the vast majority of emtb riders are either current mtb riders or lapsed ones who used to ride in the past. Assuming you had legal access, I'd venture that new riders who could afford it would start on emtbs, but that's just conjecture on my part.

If you ended up in a situation where say 50% of your local trails were emtb legal, and that meant that the other 50% lost some mtb traffic, I'd say that was a win for everyone who didn't ride emtbs. I wouldn't mind less mtb traffic on my trails.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
790 Posts
I've also seen examples of compromise like in Idaho where ebikes are allowed on non motorized trails for people with disabilities.
I wouldn't call that a compromise since they didn't really give anything due to the fact that the ADA allows for people with disabilities to use eBikes whether they say so or not. Any reasonable accommodation is allowed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,115 Posts
No, I'm not saying unassisted mtbs will lose access due to this. As you said, it's only for eMTB, which don't currently have access. What I'm saying is that the result of not allowing eMTB access is fewer bikes on restricted trails as the percentage of eMTB vs unassisted bikes increases. This is a win for the anti-bike crowd.
Which is exactly why I think the two need to come to some sort of agreement. Pitting similar groups against each other and using that to restrict access is a tried and true tactic.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
 

·
Formerly of Kent
Joined
·
13,144 Posts
I wouldn't call that a compromise since they didn't really give anything due to the fact that the ADA allows for people with disabilities to use eBikes whether they say so or not. Any reasonable accommodation is allowed.
Well, there are limits. Pretty considerable ones. And they are variable.

For starters, the type of vehicle. Good luck convincing the National Park Service that their trails should be accessible via a golf cart or a Segway.

Also, any public facility can designate a max speed for OPDMDs. In many places, such as parks and opens races, the speed limit is between 5mph and 10mph. They can also designate a maximum slope they can be operated on.

For example, in Fort Collins, CO, the speed limit for OPDMDs on trails is 5mph.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,270 Posts
EBiker's wealth rival or surpasses those who ride horses in my experience. Horses endanger the rider and other trail users. I pity the fools who stand in the way of the eBike access train.
What??? Ebike riders are richer then horse owners? Just stop you are making yourself look like an idiot.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
11,819 Posts
I wouldn't call that a compromise since they didn't really give anything due to the fact that the ADA allows for people with disabilities to use eBikes whether they say so or not. Any reasonable accommodation is allowed.
The last part is the part that makes the first part of your comment not correct. The ADA specifies certain criteria that land owners and managers need to meet. However it recognizes that all trails cannot be made accessible. Based on this if you are disabled and riding your ebike on NPS trails you will more than likely get a ticket because unless it is one of trails designated as accessible you are essentially poaching it with a means that is not recognized as being allowed on it. Will they ticket you? I doubt it, but just like abuse of accessible parking spaces, there is bound to be abuse of the belief that all trails are open to disabled users on ebikes, which is just not true.
 
1 - 20 of 45 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top