# Dozens Of Conservation Groups Oppose eBikes On Non-Motorized Trails



## Lemonaid (May 13, 2013)

> The issue came to light earlier this summer at Acadia National Park in Maine, where eBike users were told they could not ride on the Carriage Roads that wind through the park on Mount Desert Island. Fines for those caught on the roads start at $130,





> according to the park's website.


https://www.nationalparkstraveler.o...ion-groups-oppose-ebikes-non-motorized-trails

Watch where you ride, Conservation groups may be watching


----------



## SteveF (Mar 5, 2004)

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.


----------



## Lemonaid (May 13, 2013)

SteveF said:


> 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.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Lemonaid said:


> 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?


It probably portends an exclusion of motorized traffic me thinks.


----------



## ron t (Jun 15, 2018)

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.


----------



## figofspee (Jul 19, 2018)

notb said:


> 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.


----------



## rockcrusher (Aug 28, 2003)

figofspee said:


> 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.


----------



## figofspee (Jul 19, 2018)

rockcrusher said:


> 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.


----------



## rockcrusher (Aug 28, 2003)

figofspee said:


> 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.


----------



## figofspee (Jul 19, 2018)

rockcrusher said:


> 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.


----------



## rockcrusher (Aug 28, 2003)

figofspee said:


> 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.


Hmm, yes, well good luck with that!


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Lemonaid said:


> 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.



notb said:


> 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.


----------



## ron t (Jun 15, 2018)

Harryman said:


> 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.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

notb said:


> 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.


----------



## rsilvers (Aug 23, 2015)

Lemonaid said:


> 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.


----------



## tuckerjt07 (Nov 24, 2016)

notb said:


> 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


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

rsilvers said:


> 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


----------



## 93EXCivic (Mar 12, 2018)

figofspee said:


> 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.


----------



## rockcrusher (Aug 28, 2003)

rsilvers said:


> 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.


----------



## ki5ka (Dec 17, 2006)

rockcrusher said:


> ... if you are disabled and riding your ebike on NPS trails you will more than likely get a ticket ...


I'm skeptical, can you cite me an example of this happening?


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

ki5ka said:


> I'm skeptical, can you cite me an example of this happening?


I'm guessing no one has yet been so stupid as to think that an eBike would be an acceptable OPDMD on single track trails in Yosemite, Yellowstone or Rocky Mountain. But, give it time, I'm sure someone will try it soon.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ki5ka (Dec 17, 2006)

Le Duke said:


> I'm guessing no one has yet been so stupid as to think that an eBike would be an acceptable OPDMD on single track trails in Yosemite, Yellowstone or Rocky Mountain. But, give it time, I'm sure someone will try it soon.


"I'm guessing", like the entirety of this conversation, speculation and conjecture based on unsupported assumptions.

How to kill a great website...


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

ki5ka said:


> "I'm guessing", like the entirety of this conversation, speculation and conjecture based on unsupported assumptions.
> 
> How to kill a great website...


Hopefully anyone that has an ADA placard has actually read up on the issue. As, you know, accessibility directly impacts their lives. In many ways. To that end, the DOJ clarified this in 2011. Meaning, this has been spelled out already, and it's pretty clear.

"Q. What does the rule require?
A. The entity shall make reasonable modifications in its policies, practices, or procedures to permit the use of other power-driven mobility devices by individuals with mobility disabilities, unless the public entity can demonstrate that the class of OPDMD cannot be operated in accordance with legitimate safety requirements that the public entity has adopted based on actual risks, not on mere speculation, stereotypes, or generalizations about individuals with disabilities. In determining whether a particular OPDMD can be allowed in a specific facility as a reasonable modification an entity shall consider the issues listed in the Assessment Factors.

Q. Does the DOJ ADA rule also apply to Federal agencies? 
A. The National Forest System, the National Park Service, the US Fish and Wildlife Service, and the other Federal land management agencies are not under the 1990 ADA and therefore the ADA rule does not apply directly to them. Federal agencies are under the 1968 Architectural Barriers Act (ABA) requiring new or altered facilities to comply with the accessibility guidelines and the 1973 Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act requiring qualified people with disabilities not be denied participation unless allowing that participation would result in a fundamental alteration of the program."

https://www.americantrails.org/training/other-power-driven-mobility-devices-opdmd

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Rock (Jan 13, 2004)

"dozens"? 

That's an improvement isn't it?


----------



## figofspee (Jul 19, 2018)

Rock said:


> "dozens"?
> 
> That's an improvement isn't it?


The only thing those people are "conserving" is their ability to exclude cyclists.


----------



## bsieb (Aug 23, 2003)

figofspee said:


> The only thing those people are "conserving" is their ability to exclude cyclists.


You are not a cyclist fos, you're a m/c rider, and as such, not welcome on the human/animal powered trails. What were you expecting? Go build some trails for the atv crowd to take over... you'll love the e-atv's coming down the line.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

figofspee said:


> EBikes will also kill off the internal combustion dirt bike.


LOL!!!

Please, stop...I'm dying over here...:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

[video]https://www.pinkbike.com/news/video-the-fim-emtb-world-cup-race-in-imola-was-embarrassing.html[/video]


----------



## rockcrusher (Aug 28, 2003)

slapheadmofo said:


> LOL!!!
> 
> Please, stop...I'm dying over here...
> 
> [video]https://www.pinkbike.com/news/video-the-fim-emtb-world-cup-race-in-imola-was-embarrassing.html[/video]


What did I just watch? How is that video 1hr long?

Sent from my SM-G955U1 using Tapatalk


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

rockcrusher said:


> What did I just watch? How is that video 1hr long?
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955U1 using Tapatalk


That video is going to be posted far and wide and hopefully will drive a rather large wedge between human and battery powered bicycles, access-wise.

It's the gift that will keep on giving.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

rockcrusher said:


> What did I just watch? How is that video 1hr long?


That right there was the slow, painful and incredibly boring death of figofspee's opinion.

The first minute serves as proof to reasonable people, the other 59 minutes are for those special people who continue to refuse to get it.


----------



## figofspee (Jul 19, 2018)

Lemonaid said:


> Watch where you ride, Conservation groups may be watching


conservation groups like:
Back Country Horsemen of America 
Blue Ridge Horsemen's Association
Fort Custer Horse Friends Association
Ionia Horse Trails Association
Michigan Horse Council
Michigan Trail Riders Association
North Carolina Horse Council
Oregon Equestrian Trails
Oregon Horse Council
Pinckney Trail Riders Association
Pisgah Trailblazers
Pontiac Lake Horseman's Association
Proud Lake Trail Riders
Quiet Trails Group
Rose Oaks Equine Adventurers
Tri-County Horse Association
Yankee Springs Trail Riders Association


----------



## figofspee (Jul 19, 2018)

slapheadmofo said:


> That right there was the slow, painful and incredibly boring death of figofspee's opinion.
> 
> The first minute serves as proof to reasonable people, the other 59 minutes are for those special people who continue to refuse to get it.


Is that singletrack?


----------



## rsilvers (Aug 23, 2015)

That video is the dirt version of this: 




Circular racing is a thing. A boring thing, but a thing.

BBC Sport - Cycling - Velodrome guide

The difference is that the manual road bikes reach 80 kph and the eMTB are 25 or 45, depending on the race class.


----------



## rsilvers (Aug 23, 2015)

rockcrusher said:


> 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.


It does seem uncertain for an ADA person to ride on a trail that is wilderness and for foot traffic only. It could be argued either way because they don't allow any mechanized transportation. I was referring to an ADA person using a Class-1 eMTB on a trail that is open for manual MTB.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

figofspee said:


> Is that singletrack?


You said e-bikes would kill off ICE dirt bikes. 
That video is exactly what happens when your fantasy tries to meet reality. 
Still holding to it? 
:lol:


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

rsilvers said:


> That video is the dirt version of this:


Actually, it's the most incredibly lame attempt ever at being a version of this:


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

figofspee said:


> EBiker's wealth rival or surpasses those who ride horses in my experience. Horses endanger the rider and other trail users.


Where exactly do you live where you think this is true?

I live in San Diego, there is a lot of Horse Property around here, much of it within the City Limits in is Del Mar and it is not a cheap place to live. Much of that horse property is for racing schools and horse boarding or breeding. Much of it is tied to the Del Mar Race Track where very expensive horses race. Del Mar is full of multi-million dollar estates and very very very wealthy people.

By Contrast I can afford to go buy an eBike, but I could never afford to live in Del Mar or own a horse down there.....

But if I really wanted a horse I could move way out to the far edges of the county and board a horse or get some horse property. But it would still be expensive.

Growing up my parents owned a few horses and we lived in 2.5 acres. The horses we had were given to us for free (old horses) but it was not cheap to feed or transport them.

While there might be a growing number of cyclists who are wealthy, they are late to the game of trail access which has firmly been in the grasp of the Equestrian groups for decades.

Mission Trails, which is a big City park, has a giant equestrian center that was built a few years ago that gets very little use, and a ton of crappy fire roads that are not great for Mountain Biking, why? Because the horse groups have the money, the influence and thus the power to decide what is built and where.


----------



## figofspee (Jul 19, 2018)

slapheadmofo said:


> You said e-bikes would kill off ICE dirt bikes.
> That video is exactly what happens when your fantasy tries to meet reality.
> Still holding to it?
> :lol:


Oh wow, you got me good. I might have to go dry my tears on a long eBike ride on nonmotorized trails.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

figofspee said:


> Oh wow, you got me good. I might have to go dry my tears on a long eBike ride on nonmotorized trails.


Once you finish wiping away those tears, take another look at the videos you posted with clear vision and try to find the pedals on those bikes. Or are you saying that 50hp and no pedals qualifies as an e-bike now? :skep:

Speaking of Alta Motorcycles, how they doing these days?
Like, besides the whole having gone out of business thing?


----------



## stiksandstones (Oct 7, 2004)

Le Duke said:


> Hopefully anyone that has an ADA placard has actually read up on the issue. As, you know, accessibility directly impacts their lives. In many ways. To that end, the DOJ clarified this in 2011. Meaning, this has been spelled out already, and it's pretty clear.
> 
> "Q. What does the rule require?
> A. The entity shall make reasonable modifications in its policies, practices, or procedures to permit the use of other power-driven mobility devices by individuals with mobility disabilities, unless the public entity can demonstrate that the class of OPDMD cannot be operated in accordance with legitimate safety requirements that the public entity has adopted based on actual risks, not on mere speculation, stereotypes, or generalizations about individuals with disabilities. In determining whether a particular OPDMD can be allowed in a specific facility as a reasonable modification an entity shall consider the issues listed in the Assessment Factors.
> ...


How does ADA work on a local state park, or regional park? I have 2 friends that are pulling their ADA card to ride class 1 eMTB bikes on trails where eMTB's are NOT allowed (OCparks, which has banned eMTB). I have told them, ADA does not apply there, but they are running it anyway-I also don't think any ranger/land manager would actually go to the trouble to bust someone with an ADA card. More information or links would be helpful.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

stiksandstones said:


> How does ADA work on a local state park, or regional park? I have 2 friends that are pulling their ADA card to ride class 1 eMTB bikes on trails where eMTB's are NOT allowed (OCparks, which has banned eMTB). I have told them, ADA does not apply there, but they are running it anyway-I also don't think any ranger/land manager would actually go to the trouble to bust someone with an ADA card. More information or links would be helpful.


Unless the trails' main designation is as a bike trail (or anything other than a hiking trail), and/or the land managers have cataloged the specific reasons why e-bikes are unfit for use on them per the ADA guidelines, then it is quite likely that they are technically allowed.

Trails whose main designation is biking are exempt from ADA OPDMD provisions; pretty unlikely that would be the case though. Not a ton of designated bike trails around most places.


----------



## rsilvers (Aug 23, 2015)

stiksandstones said:


> How does ADA work on a local state park, or regional park? I have 2 friends that are pulling their ADA card to ride class 1 eMTB bikes on trails where eMTB's are NOT allowed (OCparks, which has banned eMTB). I have told them, ADA does not apply there, but they are running it anyway-I also don't think any ranger/land manager would actually go to the trouble to bust someone with an ADA card. More information or links would be helpful.


The quote in your post explained it. ADA applies as long as they have not published a policy banning eBikes for people with mobility disabilities, and no agency has ever done that.

As for an "ADA card," my state only has parking placards, as far as I know. They are issued under the motor vehicle department and you have to state that you cannot walk at least 200 feet without resting. I don't qualify for that, so I carry a doctor's letter explaining my condition and his recommendation to use an eMTB as my ADA accomidation, and I carry an official-looking medical ID card that I designed myself and had printed by an ID badge company, complete with hologram and stuff. Looks great and only cost about $3.50 to get made. No one has ever questioned me and if they did, I think the chances of them arguing with my letter are close to zero. No one wants an ADA lawsuit, especially when you are not actually causing any problem.


----------



## stiksandstones (Oct 7, 2004)

Thanks for insight...so, sounds like these guys are in the right, to ride in Laguna Beach trails and OC parks with ADA exclusions on their class 1 eMTB's....damn, I've been wrong then.

I wonder what happened with this lawsuit?
https://forums.mtbr.com/trail-building-advocacy/usfs-e-bike-lawsuit-1028784.html


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

One of the other, often ignored bits of the eBikes-as-OPDMDs arguments is that many parks set speed limits on OPDMDs. Which are often times 10mph or less. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

stiksandstones said:


> Thanks for insight...so, sounds like these guys are in the right, to ride in Laguna Beach trails and OC parks with ADA exclusions on their class 1 eMTB's....damn, I've been wrong then.
> 
> I wonder what happened with this lawsuit?
> https://forums.mtbr.com/trail-building-advocacy/usfs-e-bike-lawsuit-1028784.html


USFS is exempt from ADA rules.


----------

