# USFS Designates E-Bikes “Motorized Vehicles”



## SkiTalk'er (Jun 26, 2021)

SAM Magazine—Washington, D.C., April 21, 2022—The U.S. Forest Service issued final directives clarifying e-bike definitions and use management on National Forest System lands. Per the directive, all e-bikes, including Class 1 pedal-assist-only e-bikes, are now classified as motorized vehicles.







As such, e-bikes are not allowed on non-motorized trails unless those trails undergo a NEPA process for redesignation.

The change will not impact ski area constructed and maintained trails within special permit boundaries, noted National Ski Areas Association (NSAA) director of public policy Geraldine Link in the organization’s latest Capitol Watch newsletter. “However,” Link advised, “ski areas that have an NFS trail inside their permit boundary or connecting NFS trails outside their boundary should be aware that the ‘seamless experience’ that NSAA advocated for in our comments was not achieved with this new policy.”

Link:








USFS Designates E-Bikes “Motorized Vehicles”


SAM Magazine—Washington, D.C., April 21, 2022—The U.S. Forest Service issued final directives clarifying e-bike definitions and use management on National




www.saminfo.com


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

Well, they are cycles with motors. Pretty obvious right?


----------



## CRM6 (Apr 7, 2021)

Following....


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

Actual facts about the regulation discussed here.









USDA Forest Service Issues Guidance to Manage Future...


The Forest Service on March 31 issued final directives that clarify how electric bicycles (e-bikes) are managed on National Forest System lands. Final changes were made to Forest Service Manual 7700 Travel Management – Zero Code and to 7710 Travel Management – Travel Planning. The directives add...




www.mtbr.com





Seems like a well-reasoned policy. Doesn't prohibit ebikes via blanket policy. Leaves decision-making process up to each land manager. Recognizes that ebikes are not the same thing as bicycles, but also that they're not dirt bikes. They're still motorized, though.


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

…


----------



## nilswalk (Nov 26, 2014)

That's a bit of a clickbait thread title.

The USFS has always considered them motorized vehicles. All that's happened is they tweaked a few subsections of an existing policy and clarified a process for how requests to change trail classifications can happen. Nothing to see here except a National agency tweaking their policies to prevent themselves from being sued again.


----------



## RideTheEast (10 mo ago)

As someone who lived through the Skier vs Snowboarder wars, this is absurd. This is What Skiers Thought of Snowboarders in 1985 - Onboard Magazine


----------



## REZEN (Aug 7, 2020)

RideTheEast said:


> As someone who lived through the Skier vs Snowboarder wars, this is absurd. This is What Skiers Thought of Snowboarders in 1985 - Onboard Magazine







Though I see every reason to allow class 1 e-bikes on MTB trails.


----------



## RideTheEast (10 mo ago)

REZEN said:


> Though I see every reason to allow class 1 e-bikes on MTB trails.


Love it. Anyone who thinks this is a bad idea has never had to skate a cat-track


----------



## spaightlabs (Dec 3, 2011)

RideTheEast said:


> Love it. Anyone who thinks this is a bad idea has never had to skate a cat-track


I have skated many a catwalk in my days. It’s a bad idea. 
What’s the next step then? Electric snowmobiles?


----------



## Catmandoo (Dec 20, 2018)

It's a mostly useless recognition about being a motorized vehicles. The cat is out of the bag and there will be zero enforcement. NY State already forbids e-bikes of all classes on dirt trails on state land, yet they are all over the place and that ban is widely ignored.


----------



## Cerpss (Sep 13, 2015)

RideTheEast said:


> Love it. Anyone who thinks this is a bad idea has never had to skate a cat-track


I wonder if I could use this to help groom the singletrack in winter. for those need float and grind it out days.


----------



## Rod (Oct 17, 2007)

I stopped by to say that this is nothing new. The USFS has always considered ebikes in a class with motor vehicles. They have had that designation for years.


----------



## Cleared2land (Aug 31, 2012)

spaightlabs said:


> What’s the next step then? Electric snowmobiles?


E-snow shoes are in development now.


----------



## Zeroselect (Aug 12, 2021)

7711.3: Adds an additional category (Trails Open to E-Bikes Only) to identify classes of motor vehicles on an MVUM:
_g. Trails Open to E-Bikes Only. Specify the class or classes of e-bikes allowed (Class 1, 2, and/or 3). - _No other motorized. 

I LULed when they described about having a E-bike Only Trail Option. Good Luck Finding that Unicorn.


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

Cleared2land said:


> E-snow shoes are in development now.


A riding buddy just turned 75 — we got him an e-walker.
=sParty


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

Zeroselect said:


> 7711.3: Adds an additional category (Trails Open to E-Bikes Only) to identify classes of motor vehicles on an MVUM:
> _g. Trails Open to E-Bikes Only. Specify the class or classes of e-bikes allowed (Class 1, 2, and/or 3). - _No other motorized.
> 
> I LULed when they described about having a E-bike Only Trail Option. Good Luck Finding that Unicorn.


read carefully. that would be a class of trail where ebikes are the only permitted _motorized_ vehicle (not necessarily the only permitted use at all). moto trails already occasionally make distinctions between full size 4x4, side-by-sides, quads, and dirt bikes. this is no different and just adds a new classification. and considering similarity of use, this will allow a bit of overlap with otherwise nonmotorized trails.

some districts are likely to permit a great deal of ebike use through this process. some very little. this is really no different than how the USFS handles mountain bikes already.


----------



## Dirtrider127 (Sep 17, 2010)

I will ride mine and have a great day on the bike. Maybe a post ride brew or two also😁


----------



## Zeroselect (Aug 12, 2021)

Harold said:


> read carefully. that would be a class of trail where ebikes are the only permitted _motorized_ vehicle (not necessarily the only permitted use at all). moto trails already occasionally make distinctions between full size 4x4, side-by-sides, quads, and dirt bikes. this is no different and just adds a new classification. and considering similarity of use, this will allow a bit of overlap with otherwise nonmotorized trails.
> 
> some districts are likely to permit a great deal of ebike use through this process. some very little. this is really no different than how the USFS handles mountain bikes already.


I honestly don't have too much hope for the USFS to have this sorted any time soon. I'm glad at least I work in VA where the state allows all Class 1 and 2 ebikes on a State Bike Trails unless specified.

https://www.dcr.virginia.gov/state-parks/document/e-bikes.pdf


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

Zeroselect said:


> I honestly don't have too much hope for the USFS to have this sorted any time soon. I'm glad at least I work in VA where the state allows all Class 1 and 2 ebikes on a State Bike Trails unless specified.
> 
> https://www.dcr.virginia.gov/state-parks/document/e-bikes.pdf


NEPA reviews take time, so it's not like legal ebike use is going to explode. There will be objections to allowing it, as NEPA reviews require public comment periods. But this is how the USFS already operates. So again, nothing new here. Like it or hate it, it is what it is and it's consistent with how the USFS already functions.

I think wholesale permissions, grouping ebikes with bicycles, is shortsighted. They have demonstrably different characteristics. Sometimes those differences don't make much difference for trail access. Sometimes they do. I think it's reasonable for land managers to be able to make those considerations and determinations, rather than the rule being dictated to them from above.

I think the capabilities of ebikes will encourage more land managers to consider speed limits on dirt trails.


----------



## Zeroselect (Aug 12, 2021)

Harold said:


> NEPA reviews take time, so it's not like legal ebike use is going to explode. There will be objections to allowing it, as NEPA reviews require public comment periods. But this is how the USFS already operates. So again, nothing new here. Like it or hate it, it is what it is and it's consistent with how the USFS already functions.
> 
> I think wholesale permissions, grouping ebikes with bicycles, is shortsighted. They have demonstrably different characteristics. Sometimes those differences don't make much difference for trail access. Sometimes they do. I think it's reasonable for land managers to be able to make those considerations and determinations, rather than the rule being dictated to them from above.
> 
> I think the capabilities of ebikes will encourage more land managers to consider speed limits on dirt trails.


Yeah but i wish they did what VA State did. Rather than designating if Ebikes are allowed have it where they have to specify if Ebikes are NOT allowed.


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

Zeroselect said:


> Yeah but i wish they did what VA State did. Rather than designating if Ebikes are allowed have it where they have to specify if Ebikes are NOT allowed.


that's the hasty decision I disagree with. 

And that's something that will _never_ work for an agency like the USFS that is legally required to conduct NEPA reviews whenever it wants to change something.


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

Zeroselect said:


> Yeah but i wish they did what VA State did. Rather than designating if Ebikes are allowed have it where they have to specify if Ebikes are NOT allowed.


The Fed rule on motorized used to read that way decades ago.
OPEN unless posted CLOSED.
But that changed back in the '80s IIRC.
Now with regard to motorized everything is CLOSED unless posted OPEN.
=sParty


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

Sparticus said:


> The Fed rule on motorized used to read that way decades ago.
> OPEN unless posted CLOSED.
> But that changed back in the '80s IIRC.
> Now with regard to motorized everything is CLOSED unless posted OPEN.
> =sParty


And in many cases, mountain biking is treated the same.


----------



## blammo585 (Apr 24, 2012)

Zeroselect said:


> 7711.3: Adds an additional category (Trails Open to E-Bikes Only) to identify classes of motor vehicles on an MVUM:
> _g. Trails Open to E-Bikes Only. Specify the class or classes of e-bikes allowed (Class 1, 2, and/or 3). - _No other motorized.
> 
> I LULed when they described about having a E-bike Only Trail Option. Good Luck Finding that Unicorn.


LOL. I can see an e-biker reporting a regular mountain biker for riding on their trail.


----------



## Amt0571 (May 22, 2014)

They have a motor. So they're motorized. It makes sense.


----------



## Dale-Calgary (Feb 14, 2018)

Complicated restrictions cause problems. Places that allow ebikes create tourism with old guys with lots of money that stay at high end hotels, eat at high end restaurants, and spend more than people in vans.


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

Dale-Calgary said:


> Complicated restrictions cause problems. Places that allow ebikes create tourism with old guys with lots of money that stay at high end hotels, eat at high end restaurants, and spend more than people in vans.


That's why us cheap bastards in vans follow those old guys around.
=sParty


----------



## blammo585 (Apr 24, 2012)

I'm in the market for a bike right now. Still unsure of whether I'm going with a regular bike or e-bike. I'm not too concerned about whether I can ride a place or not but bike parks where I have to get "inside" is concerning. But I would assume bike parks would not have a problem with ebikes.

I live in VA, and one place my family and I have been is the Virginia Creeper Trail. It's a 17 mile ride down the mountain where you take a shuttle to the top and get dropped off. I have read that ebikes are not allowed on it. I could probably get away with it because I don't think many people would know a Trek Rail is an e-bike. But I'd hate to spend thousands on a bike and not be able to ride it.


----------



## RideTheEast (10 mo ago)

spaightlabs said:


> What’s the next step then? Electric snowmobiles?


Bolton Valley Ski Patrol in Vermont is testing 3 right now.


----------



## J.B. Weld (Aug 13, 2012)

Dale-Calgary said:


> Complicated restrictions cause problems.




It does not seem complicated.


----------



## Dale-Calgary (Feb 14, 2018)

Sparticus said:


> That's why us cheap bastards in vans follow those old guys around.
> =sParty


They wont be giving you a doggie bag from the restaurants


----------



## yzedf (Apr 22, 2014)

Catmandoo said:


> It's a mostly useless recognition about being a motorized vehicles. The cat is out of the bag and there will be zero enforcement. NY State already forbids e-bikes of all classes on dirt trails on state land, yet they are all over the place and that ban is widely ignored.


Same in CT. E-bikes have to be specifically allowed, NEMBA is 100% against and actively lobbying to keep them out. Yet we see them everywhere, group rides, staying off Strava etc. The whole thing is ridiculous.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

blammo585 said:


> But I would assume bike parks would not have a problem with ebikes.


I think just about every lift-served bike park that I've visited had a no ebike rule


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

Nat said:


> I think just about every lift-served bike park that I've visited had a no ebike rule


Those pesky ebikers start goin' up trails that are only 'sposed to be for goin' down!
=sParty


----------



## mlx john (Mar 22, 2010)

Angel Fire in New Mexico is E-bike friendly. Totally legal. My modded Levo SL (F/160 R/155) was a blast there.


----------



## Squirrel in the Spokes (Apr 9, 2021)

Dale-Calgary said:


> They wont be giving you a doggie bag from the restaurants


That’s not the bag someone in a van is looking for


----------



## Zeroselect (Aug 12, 2021)

Dale-Calgary said:


> Complicated restrictions cause problems. Places that allow ebikes create tourism with old guys with lots of money that stay at high end hotels, eat at high end restaurants, and spend more than people in vans.


Yeah, It's called a "Bike Park"


----------



## Zeroselect (Aug 12, 2021)

blammo585 said:


> I'm in the market for a bike right now. Still unsure of whether I'm going with a regular bike or e-bike. I'm not too concerned about whether I can ride a place or not but bike parks where I have to get "inside" is concerning. But I would assume bike parks would not have a problem with ebikes.
> 
> I live in VA, and one place my family and I have been is the Virginia Creeper Trail. It's a 17 mile ride down the mountain where you take a shuttle to the top and get dropped off. I have read that ebikes are not allowed on it. I could probably get away with it because I don't think many people would know a Trek Rail is an e-bike. But I'd hate to spend thousands on a bike and not be able to ride it.


If your in VA your fine as long as you stick with VA STATE Parks.

https://www.dcr.virginia.gov/state-parks/document/e-bikes.pdf


----------



## blammo585 (Apr 24, 2012)

Nat said:


> I think just about every lift-served bike park that I've visited had a no ebike rule


I'm in the middle of two. I reached out to both, but have only heard back from one so far. The other must not check their Facebook messages. One is Beech Mountain in NC, and the other is Bryce Resort in VA. Beech Mountain responded back with a resounding "Yes!" that they allow e-bikes. I'll try to call Bryce one day. The only other place that I might would go is Snowshoe in WV.


----------



## blammo585 (Apr 24, 2012)

I just checked Snowshoe, and ebikes are allowed there as well.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

Sparticus said:


> Those pesky ebikers start goin' up trails that are only 'sposed to be for goin' down!
> =sParty


I’d feel bad for the lifties in a place where they have to pick up and hang the bikes.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

Mammoth bike park allows ebikes


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

Nat said:


> I’d feel bad for the lifties in a place where they have to pick up and hang the bikes.


Ugh! Mine weighs 54#!
=sParty


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

Sparticus said:


> Ugh! Mine weighs 54#!
> =sParty


Ski Bowl is an example of a place where they suspend and take down the bikes from hooks for you. I would not trust the hooks to hold your bike all the way up though. They're held on with Ace Hardware quality hose clamps, LOL.


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

Nat said:


> Ski Bowl is an example of a place where they suspend and take down the bikes from hooks for you. I would not trust the hooks to hold your bike all the way up though. They're held on with Ace Hardware quality hose clamps, LOL.


If I went to a lift-assist park, I'd leave my pedal-assist bike at home. 
=Amish sParty


----------



## Cleared2land (Aug 31, 2012)

I thought one of the benefits of an e-bike was that you didn't need a lift.


----------



## bpressnall (Aug 25, 2006)

RideTheEast said:


> As someone who lived through the Skier vs Snowboarder wars, this is absurd. This is What Skiers Thought of Snowboarders in 1985 - Onboard Magazine


If you are an ebike advocate, I would think you would welcome the change. Before, the FS classified ebikes the same as motorcycles. Now they are a separate category and trails can be approved for ebike use, but not motorcycle use.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

Sparticus said:


> If I went to a lift-assist park, I'd leave my pedal-assist bike at home.
> =Amish sParty


Amish sParty! LOL

I wouldn't choose an ebike for lift-assisted riding either but surprisingly I've seen people taking their ebikes into parks. I wonder if maybe that's their only bike?


----------



## blammo585 (Apr 24, 2012)

bpressnall said:


> If you are an ebike advocate, I would think you would welcome the change. Before, the FS classified ebikes the same as motorcycles. Now they are a separate category and trails can be approved for ebike use, but not motorcycle use.


The whole "ebikes have a motor" is so stupid. It's not necessarily a motor that makes a difference; it's a throttle. And the class 1 ebikes are just an assist up to 20 mph that you still have to pedal to get there. You're not just pushing or twisting a throttle to get there. It's totally different. It's so dumb to have to try to fit ebikes into some kind of classification of their own.


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

blammo585 said:


> The whole "ebikes have a motor" is so stupid. It's not necessarily a motor that makes a difference; it's a throttle. And the class 1 ebikes are just an assist up to 20 mph that you still have to pedal to get there. You're not just pushing or twisting a throttle to get there. It's totally different. It's so dumb to have to try to fit ebikes into some kind of classification of their own.


the motor is the functional item that regulations are based around. they have been based on motors for decades. it continues to make sense, because the motor is a clear difference, rather than the presence of a button or a twisty grip to make the motor go, that can be extremely subtle.


----------



## J.B. Weld (Aug 13, 2012)

blammo585 said:


> And the class 1 ebikes are just an assist up to 20 mph that you still have to pedal to get there.



Do you know that it's entirely up to the manufacturer as to how hard you have to press the pedals in order to activate full power? 

Most major brands are nicely progressive and feel semi-natural but on some class 1's you merely need to spin the crank. So basically a spin throttle.


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

blammo585 said:


> The whole "ebikes have a motor" is so stupid. It's not necessarily a motor that makes a difference; it's a throttle. And the class 1 ebikes are just an assist up to 20 mph that you still have to pedal to get there. You're not just pushing or twisting a throttle to get there. It's totally different. It's so dumb to have to try to fit ebikes into some kind of classification of their own.


If what you say is true, then just turn the motor off and leave it off.
You can still operate the throttle -- the crank is the throttle on an ebike.
Let us know how that goes.
=sParty


----------



## blammo585 (Apr 24, 2012)

Sparticus said:


> If what you say is true, then just turn the motor off and leave it off.
> You can still operate the throttle -- the crank is the throttle on an ebike.
> Let us know how that goes.
> =sParty


I don't get your point. I'm kind of saying the same thing. Seems like agencies and people are losing their minds over something that can be turned to "OFF". I can pedal an ebike and use it the same as another person uses their regular bike. I'm sure there are people that can hit 20mph on a regular bike. What's the real concern here? People having a motor or people going too fast?

We can ride an ebike in the off position. But try riding a dirt bike without using the motor. These are 2 very different things.


----------



## blammo585 (Apr 24, 2012)

J.B. Weld said:


> Do you know that it's entirely up to the manufacturer as to how hard you have to press the pedals in order to activate full power?
> 
> Most major brands are nicely progressive and feel semi-natural but on some class 1's you merely need to spin the crank. So basically a spin throttle.


Point me to those bikes so I can look into them. I need one like that. 

What difference does it really make on the trail how hard you have to pedal to hit your max? If I pedal all out to get to 20 and you pedal a little to get to 20 we're still going the same. 20mph with minimal effort may be more of a danger to yourself more so than to anyone else.


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

blammo585 said:


> I don't get your point. I'm kind of saying the same thing. Seems like agencies and people are losing their minds over something that can be turned to "OFF". I can pedal an ebike and use it the same as another person uses their regular bike. I'm sure there are people that can hit 20mph on a regular bike. What's the real concern here? People having a motor or people going too fast?
> 
> We can ride an ebike in the off position. But try riding a dirt bike without using the motor. These are 2 very different things.


We ebikers do a disservice to our sport when we deny the truth.
Whenever we do this, we lose credibility. We look like liars.
Because we are liars.

Ebikes have motors.
The motor is what makes the ebike fundamentally different from a pedal bike.
Let's not try to hide this truth or lie about it.
Let's seek objective truth. Let's not try to fool others or worse yet, try to fool ourselves.

People who seek objective truth have nothing to fear.
They have credibility.
Tell it like it is, not like you wish it was.
This is how we earn respect -- by seeking & embracing objective truth.
Even when it casts us in a bad light.

Ebikers ride machines that have motors.
Motors cannot be operated without a throttle of some sort.
Even if it's an awkward one.

A former friend once told me, "Don't become the thing you hate."
It's a powerful concept. Please consider it.
=sParty


----------



## dysfunction (Aug 15, 2009)

Sounds a lot like complaining that you're not getting what you want.

If that's not your message, change your delivery.


----------



## Squirrel in the Spokes (Apr 9, 2021)

How many people can pedal at 20 mph as a regular pace? Im speaking with true ignorance


----------



## J.B. Weld (Aug 13, 2012)

blammo585 said:


> What difference does it really make on the trail how hard you have to pedal to hit your max? If I pedal all out to get to 20 and you pedal a little to get to 20 we're still going the same. 20mph with minimal effort may be more of a danger to yourself more so than to anyone else.




That's a different conversation. I was responding to your point saying that it's not the motor that makes a difference but the throttle. 

I'm saying that the cranks can (and do) act as a throttle so by your own logic ebikes are not "totally different than twisting a throttle"


----------



## blammo585 (Apr 24, 2012)

Sparticus said:


> We ebikers do a disservice to our sport when we deny the truth.
> Whenever we do this, we lose credibility. We look like liars.
> Because we are liars.
> 
> ...


It has a motor of sorts, but let's not pretend that people are out there recreating the experience of riding a Honda 125 through the trails, or even an 80.

I've been going back through the ebike topics and reading certain threads that catch my eye and it's unbelievable to see the talk of lawsuits and restrictions and all these types of things. As a potential ebike buyer it kind of sours me on the whole thing. When you make something harder it usually makes it less appealing. I don't really want to have to investigate where I can ride, if I can ride etc.

To me, this stuff seems to leave ebikes in kind of a limbo. You might not be able to ride where regular bikes can on the trails. You might not be able to ride at a private bike park. I'm sure there are probably greenways that are restricting ebikes. I guess you can ride on trails for motorized vehicles but that's a completely different thing. I wouldn't want to ride a bike on the trails I've ridden my ATV on. That leaves roads and private land. 

Seems like they came out with a product with no thought, or care to where they can be used.


----------



## blammo585 (Apr 24, 2012)

J.B. Weld said:


> That's a different conversation. I was responding to your point saying that it's not the motor that makes a difference but the throttle.
> 
> I'm saying that the cranks can (and do) act as a throttle so by your own logic ebikes are not "totally different than twisting a throttle"


I've only been on one model ebike so I can't speak to the type of pedaling you referred to. But I definitely had to put some kind of effort in to make it go and pedal harder to make it go faster.

What I was saying is there's a big difference in only having to push a throttle to get to speed.

By what you're saying even a regular bike has a throttle, legs and cranks.


----------



## blammo585 (Apr 24, 2012)

Squirrel in the Spokes said:


> How many people can pedal at 20 mph as a regular pace? Im speaking with true ignorance


I know darn well there are people who can hit 20mph; not saying how long they will keep it up. But how many ebikers are going to do 20 mph the whole way through a trail?


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

blammo585 said:


> I've only been on one model ebike so I can't speak to the type of pedaling you referred to. But I definitely had to put some kind of effort in to make it go and pedal harder to make it go faster.
> 
> What I was saying is there's a big difference in only having to push a throttle to get to speed.
> 
> By what you're saying even a regular bike has a throttle, legs and cranks.


Sounds to me like you joined the conversation we've been having for the last 4+ years except you still feel a bit raw. Maybe relax a bit, read some more threads and then pick, or start, your own pertinent thread. This one isn't it.

Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk


----------



## J.B. Weld (Aug 13, 2012)

blammo585 said:


> By what you're saying even a regular bike has a throttle, legs and cranks.



No, that's not what I'm saying. Legs and cranks don't turn a motor.

Look, I'm not anti ebike at all and it's great to see people getting out on them who might otherwise be sitting on their @sses. I just happen to agree with the USGS assessment. Ebikes will be allowed in many areas and I'm sure many more will continue to open up.


----------



## .WestCoastHucker. (Jan 14, 2004)

Squirrel in the Spokes said:


> How many people can pedal at 20 mph as a regular pace? Im speaking with true ignorance


certainly not me...


----------



## .WestCoastHucker. (Jan 14, 2004)

blammo585 said:


> ... But how many ebikers are going to do 20 mph the whole way through a trail?


i do...


----------



## FredCoMTB (Jul 25, 2020)

blammo585 said:


> I don't really want to have to investigate where I can ride, if I can ride etc.


You already have to do that in Virginia, and pretty much anywhere. I can't ride a bike on a trail that's hiking-only, can't ride (almost) anywhere on the AT or in a lot of the areas of National Parks. 

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

blammo585 said:


> It has a motor of sorts, but let's not pretend that people are out there recreating the experience of riding a Honda 125 through the trails, or even an 80.
> 
> I've been going back through the ebike topics and reading certain threads that catch my eye and it's unbelievable to see the talk of lawsuits and restrictions and all these types of things. As a potential ebike buyer it kind of sours me on the whole thing. When you make something harder it usually makes it less appealing. I don't really want to have to investigate where I can ride, if I can ride etc.
> 
> ...


You seem to want your ebike -- and all ebikes -- to only be the thing you see your own as.
A thing with a motor that's not really a motor plus a throttle that's not really a throttle.
You're not looking at ebikes objectively.



blammo585 said:


> Seems like they came out with a product with no thought, or care to where they can be used.


So what? What if 'they' did?
What if 'they' could get people to buy them?
Who's problem would 'where to ride' be?
It wouldn't be the manufacturers problem, would it.
It'd be the problem of the person who bought the ebike.
Meanwhile the manufacturers are back in their offices, snickering, _"Suckers!"_
Did you research where ebikes can legally be ridden before you bought yours?
If not, whose fault is it that the owner has to do research to find places to ride it?



blammo585 said:


> It has a motor of sorts, but let's not pretend that people are out there recreating the experience of riding a Honda 125 through the trails, or even an 80.


'It has a motor of sorts' -- HA! It sure as heck does.
As for the way you say ebikes aren't ridden, I can prove you wrong.
Because I ride my ebike the same way I ride my dirt bike: Full throttle, baby.
And I know lots of other guys who ride their ebikes the same way.
Bands of them, the first one trying to get away from the rest and the last one not willing to let the others get away.
Raging through the forest, all out. The same way bands of dirt bikers -- and bands of mountain bikers -- ride their bikes when they ride in groups.
You think ebikers are different?
They're not.
The ebike is just a magnifier.
Think about it. A power magnifier.

Next argument, please.
=sParty


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

blammo585 said:


> I don't really want to have to investigate where I can ride, if I can ride etc.


You're supposed to though, even with regular old mountain bikes. For example, you can't mountain bike in every National Park. Some allow it, some don't. You have to look it up first. You can't ride on every trail just because it's there. You're supposed to find out first if it's allowed.




blammo585 said:


> Seems like they came out with a product with no thought, or care to where they can be used.


That's probably accurate. I was going to comment on the old "it's better to ask for forgiveness than permission" school of thought but it probably doesn't even weigh in that much. If it sells, the company will build it -- let everyone else figure out what happens after that.


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

@blammo585, I just want to say that while I certainly feel as I do about this subject, I'm sorry for coming off so virulently about it.
I believe you're not malicious and yet so far I've tended to respond as if you are.

I admit I get my hair up about this stuff a bit -- on both sides of the fence.
When anti-ebikers get all self righteous and hostile just as much as when ebikers deny that we ride motorized equipment.
I believe there's a middle ground.

So I'm sorry I sounded condescending in my previous replies -- I know I did. Sorry for that.
Meanwhile I haven't changed how I feel about ebikes having motors and throttles.
Most often the problem with wheeled machines turns out to be the nut that holds the handlebar.
=sParty


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

Trail access laws and discussions of those laws belong in the Advocacy forum. Thread moved to follow posting guidelines.

Carry on.


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

blammo585 said:


> It has a motor of sorts, but let's not pretend that people are out there recreating the experience of riding a Honda 125 through the trails, or even an 80.


This tells me that you didn't bother reading the USFS guidelines, or even any of the analysis of them.

The USFS is NOT saying any of this. What they are saying is that ebikes have motors. This makes them fundamentally different from bicycles without motors. However, they're also not a Honda 125 or a Honda 80. They're fundamentally different from that, too. They are a COMPLETELY NEW TYPE OF VEHICLE THAT WE DID NOT HAVE A CLASSIFICATION THAT ACCURATELY REFLECTED THE REALITIES OF WHAT EBIKES ARE. So this new guidance creates that new classification that says, "yes, they have motors. but here's a trail classification that considers ebikes uniquely and separately from all this other stuff out there that is not the same as an ebike."



> I've been going back through the ebike topics and reading certain threads that catch my eye and it's unbelievable to see the talk of lawsuits and restrictions and all these types of things. As a potential ebike buyer it kind of sours me on the whole thing. When you make something harder it usually makes it less appealing. I don't really want to have to investigate where I can ride, if I can ride etc.
> 
> To me, this stuff seems to leave ebikes in kind of a limbo. You might not be able to ride where regular bikes can on the trails. You might not be able to ride at a private bike park. I'm sure there are probably greenways that are restricting ebikes. I guess you can ride on trails for motorized vehicles but that's a completely different thing. I wouldn't want to ride a bike on the trails I've ridden my ATV on. That leaves roads and private land.


Anytime you buy a new thing that's intended to be used on public land, or someone else's private land, you have to research the regulations regarding the use of said thing, and follow them. 

You can't buy a small aircraft and use public roadways to take off and land. There are rules and licensing requirements in order to operate it according to the law.

You have to register your car, pay your taxes and fees, and obtain a license to operate it on public roads. You don't need any of that if you drive it on your private property only.

You need to know where and how to use your bicycle anytime you want to go ride it somewhere. Not just for legality's sake, but for safety, also.

Ebikes are a newish thing, that is a little different from what's come before. It makes absolute sense that buyers have to keep new things in mind when choosing where to use it and how to use. That onus is on the buyer, like everything else.



> Seems like they came out with a product with no thought, or care to where they can be used.


This is absolutely true. The thoughts about where ebikes can be used (and how) didn't come until after they were thrown onto the market and agencies were left scrambling trying to figure out how to handle them. And for simplicity's sake, a lot of the manufacturers have been pushing to get them grouped with bicycles. Sure, it seems like an easier way of handling it on the surface. But if you look at the fundamental aspects of an ebike and how those things change how ebikes are used compared to bicycles, you begin to understand that from a regulatory standpoint, it's not that easy. If your regulations don't take those differences into account, then you're going to get yourself into trouble as a regulatory agency not doing due diligence. You're going to have a regulatory hodgepodge for awhile until the various agencies start to settle on "best practices" with ebikes. Right now, ebikes (and emtbs) are too new for "best practices" to have been established. Various regulatory agencies have created different policies that make sense to them and the other management considerations they have to make. Maybe in a number of years, a "best practices" for handling emtbs will get settled upon and there will be less variation in regulations. Maybe not, though.

Doesn't change the fact that if you buy one, it's your responsibility to learn about responsible and legal use of your ebike.


----------



## RobG-ADV (Mar 18, 2019)

Given that the Federal Gov't has classified Class 1 e-bikes to be no different than a regular bicycle, it's absurd that the USFS, BLM or any other organization wants to do it differently.

I haven't ridden much in 20 years; am about to get my first ebike, and I've concluded that I will ignore all of these arbitrary bans, and if I get cited, I'm going to get a good lawyer and go after them.


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

RobG-ADV said:


> Given that the Federal Gov't has classified Class 1 e-bikes to be no different than a regular bicycle, it's absurd that the USFS, BLM or any other organization wants to do it differently.
> 
> I haven't ridden much in 20 years; am about to get my first ebike, and I've concluded that I will ignore all of these arbitrary bans, and if I get cited, I'm going to get a good lawyer and go after them.


Need some more gasoline for that fire?


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

RobG-ADV said:


> Given that the Federal Gov't has classified Class 1 e-bikes to be no different than a regular bicycle, it's absurd that the USFS, BLM or any other organization wants to do it differently.
> 
> I haven't ridden much in 20 years; am about to get my first ebike, and I've concluded that I will ignore all of these arbitrary bans, and if I get cited, I'm going to get a good lawyer and go after them.


It's not absurd. There is a reason for that. That rule is a DOT rule, for use on public roads. Public roads are not dirt trails.

You are going to lose a bunch of money hiring a lawyer.


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

Love when people cite the DOT as justification for their ebike...offroad.

Riding trails that are closed to your chosen mode of transportation is a surefire way to ostracize your platform and to piss off landowners, with far reaching effects. 

Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

Silentfoe said:


> Riding trails that are closed to your chosen mode of transportation is a surefire way to ostracize your platform and to piss off landowners, with far reaching effects.


Pretty surefire way to piss off fellow members of your own sport, too.

In fact a great way to be hated by everybody -- just think of yourself and nobody else.
=sParty


----------



## Squirrel in the Spokes (Apr 9, 2021)

But you guys are forgetting what’s important: my fun!


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

Squirrel in the Spokes said:


> But you guys are forgetting what’s important: my fun!


It's all about you, Squirrel! 🤣 
=sParty


----------



## rod9301 (Oct 30, 2004)

The war against class1e bike is lost 

Tons are being sold. Soon they will outnumber non e bikes, like in Europe

Sent from my moto g 5G using Tapatalk


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

Ebikes stole the election.


----------



## blammo585 (Apr 24, 2012)

The point that I'm trying to make is, just what are these things? What is an ebike and what are we supposed to do with them? I'm not necessarily talking about USFS guidelines and analysis. There seems to be a lot of confusion and debate on where you can use an ebike.

I get checking with places to see if something is allowed. I don't know about anyone else but I used to sit around and Google "Wherever, USA". If I found they had trails then I'd go. But now we have to add another layer to it. Things are getting too subdivided. Now if they have trails, I have to check if they allow E-bikes?

Someone joked earlier in this thread about ebike-specific trails. That would be funny. For everyone who wants to say that "ebikes have a motor"... it's like checking in somewhere and they point over to the ATV/dirt bike trails and saying, "Oh you belong over there." And you turn your head and you see they're pointing to a bunch of muddy, rutted out trails.

I don't know the correct answer. In my opinion it's more bicycle than motorized vehicle. Seems it's being overcomplicated.


----------



## J.B. Weld (Aug 13, 2012)

rod9301 said:


> The war against class1e bike is lost




Can't lose something that never was.


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

blammo585 said:


> I don't know the correct answer. In my opinion it's more bicycle than motorized vehicle. Seems it's being overcomplicated.


How complicated is it when the distinction is the MOTOR?

If you want to distinguish between various vehicles with motors (land managers are _already_ asking questions about power, number of wheels, size, etc to put various motorized vehicles into classifications that determine trail access), then there are other questions to ask. But it's not complicated.


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

Harold nailed it.


Harold said:


> ... the distinction is the MOTOR
> ... it's not complicated.


Again --


Harold said:


> ... the distinction is the MOTOR
> ... it's not complicated.


Again --


Harold said:


> ... the distinction is the MOTOR
> ... it's not complicated.


Again --


Harold said:


> ... the distinction is the MOTOR
> ... it's not complicated.


@blammo585, I previously apologized for being condescending but if you don't get up to speed on this pretty quickly. I'm going to intentionally go back to being condescending.

Ebikes have motors.
Their motors may be detuned compared to every other motorized vehicle on the planet but the fact remains that ebikes have a motor.
Ebikes may have awkward throttles insofar as that throttle is activated by pedaling but it's still a throttle.
Public land owners & managers are struggling to pigeonhole these motorized vehicles which are clearly not bicycles (since bicycles are strictly human powered) yet are different than traditional motorized two-wheeled vehicles (motorcycles.)
Complicated?
No.
Compared to what came before it, the ebike is a new and unique two-wheeled conveyance.
Embrace the thought.

You don't happen to know a guy named @_CJ, do you?
He also tends to confuse bicycles with ebikes here on MTBR.
Very frustrating.
=sParty


----------



## blammo585 (Apr 24, 2012)

Sparticus said:


> Harold nailed it.
> 
> Again --
> 
> ...


Ebikes are bicycles...period. You won't change my mind on that. Be as condescending as you want. Electric bicycles. It's right in the name.

For all those telling me it has a motor and a throttle, just stop. We already know all that. Instead, tell me your thoughts on what should be done with them or what you would do with them. Where do they fit in and where should they be ridden?


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

blammo585 said:


> For all those telling me it has a motor and a throttle, just stop. We already know all that.


Yet you've denied it at least twice here since you began posting. Should we quote you?

Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk


----------



## JumpinMacaque (Jan 26, 2010)

blammo585 said:


> Instead, tell me your thoughts on what should be done with them or what you would do with them. Where do they fit in and where should they be ridden?


They should be ridden on motorized trails or private land. The Forest should do exactly what they did. If you want more e-bike access, the burden is on you or your industry leaders. So far, industry groups have tried to ram through legislation, twist words and get into areas that are in conflict but have no enforcement. It's not a good way to make friends and leaves the user with nothing gained if the lobbyist fails. Industry groups have to do it the right way, which is the harder and more expensive way. If they want more motorized trails fast, they need to approach private landowners or pay for NEPA analysis.


----------



## dysfunction (Aug 15, 2009)

Silentfoe said:


> Yet you've denied it at least twice here since you began posting. Should we quote you?
> 
> Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk


It's inconvenient.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

RobG-ADV said:


> Given that the Federal Gov't has classified Class 1 e-bikes to be no different than a regular bicycle, it's absurd that the USFS, BLM or any other organization wants to do it differently.
> 
> I haven't ridden much in 20 years; am about to get my first ebike, and I've concluded that I will ignore all of these arbitrary bans, and if I get cited, I'm going to get a good lawyer and go after them.


That's immature and disrespectful to the mountain bike community that has worked to earn access to non-motorized trails. 

Sent from my SM-G715A using Tapatalk


----------



## dysfunction (Aug 15, 2009)

Suns_PSD said:


> That's immature and disrespectful to the mountain bike community that has worked to earn access to non-motorized trails.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G715A using Tapatalk


Welcome to why I will never bother with land use advocacy again. We are our own worst enemy.


----------



## Z71-K9 (Oct 22, 2010)

In PA is even more confusing. PennDOT defines an ebike as a bicycle. DCNR and PGC define an ebike as motorized vehicle. Maybe we should be figuring a way to integrate all biking forms


----------

