# eMTB's and Wilderness



## Empty_Beer (Dec 19, 2007)

With the anti-bike Wilderness zealots slowly learning that one of the things they hate the most (mountain bikes) now can come with a motor, all bets are off on the effort to allow reasonable access for mountain biking in Wilderness and Wilderness Study Areas (i.e., not lose access to newly designated Wilderness a la Boulder White Clouds, and regain access to _some_ trails that Wilderness land managers believe are suitable for MTB access). What a gift they've been given by the mountain bike industry! :madman:

Expect more of these from Wilderness advocates and anti-bike groups:

Friends of Allegheny Wilderness FB post

Wilderness Watch FB post

The Sustainable Trails Coalition is opposed to ebikes in Wilderness:

The Sustainable Trails Coalition Officially Opposes E-Bikes on Wilderness Trails | Singletracks Mountain Bike News


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

Up until e-bikes there hasn't been a suitable replacement for the horse. E-bikes are safer for the rider, safer for other trail users, less destructive, all while being powered by less horsepower then the average horsebackrider. 

The fact that e-bikes have a motor means that we now have a sacrificial lamb to those who want bikes banned because they love regulations and nothing else. 

Growing user groups in cycling means that land managers will have to open up trails that were previously to cycling in order to accomodate everyone logically.

The forest service is using e-bikes to maintain non-motorized trail. Once the forest service reduces their dependance on horses for administrative purposes, singletrack can be retuned to quite human-powered activities like non-e-cycling. Part of the reason the forest service allows horsebackriders unrestrained access, s that the forest service is deeply dependant on horses. If e-bikes can make horses look like the archaic, destructive, lazy activity that they are, all human powered activities will benefit.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Linktung said:


> The forest service is using e-bikes to maintain non-motorized trail.


Do you have proof of this?


----------



## Curveball (Aug 10, 2015)

This is exactly what I expected to happen and is the main reason that I dislike e-MTBs.

I fully expect e-MTBs to completely kill all efforts by the STC for wilderness access. They may prove problematic for access in other areas as well.


----------



## Curveball (Aug 10, 2015)

Linktung said:


> The forest service is using e-bikes to maintain non-motorized trail.


Can you provide any evidence to support this statement?


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

It is hard to link to an observation. Can you link to evidence of it not happening?


----------



## Crankout (Jun 16, 2010)

Linktung said:


> Part of the reason the forest service allows horsebackriders unrestrained access, s that the forest service is deeply dependant on horses. If e-bikes can make horses look like the archaic, destructive, lazy activity that they are, all human powered activities will benefit.


I like this part of your statement. Horseback riders are far and away one of the most destructive and reckless user groups on our trails.


----------



## formula4speed (Mar 25, 2013)

Linktung said:


> It is hard to link to an observation. Can you link to evidence of it not happening?


Where did you observe it happening? It would be interesting if it could be verified e-bikes are being used for official business.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Linktung said:


> It is hard to link to an observation. Can you link to evidence of it not happening?


I've heard that the Forest Service is using Monster Trucks in the George Washington NF.

The head ranger drives in Grave Digger!

See what I did there?

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


----------



## Empty_Beer (Dec 19, 2007)

This didn't take long to become another horse hate thread. Horses will never be prohibited from Wilderness. Get over it. On the other hand, bicycles will be permitted in some capacity some day. The bikes with motors will probably delay that reality for a good many years.

By the way, zero bike manufacturers donated $ to STC (except for an employee from Santa Cruz Bicycles).


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

formula4speed said:


> Where did you observe it happening? It would be interesting if it could be verified e-bikes are being used for official business.


It was on a popular trail, and the Forest Service worker had a chainsaw on their back. My guess is that with all the wildercrazies around they don't want it to be a well known fact so I won't be pursuing contact about it.


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

Empty_Beer said:


> This didn't take long to become another horse hate thread. Horses will never be prohibited from Wilderness. Get over it. On the other hand, bicycles will be permitted in some capacity some day. The bikes with motors will probably delay that reality for a good many years.
> 
> By the way, zero bike manufacturers donated $ to STC (except for an employee from Santa Cruz Bicycles).


A semi-popular bike trail I rode last year was recently closed to bikes because horsebackriders complained of the danger cyclists posed. Sorry, it is fresh in my mind. Part of the reason the forest followed through on the ban is that they too rely on horses and prefer bike-free trails. When the forest service starts using ebikes more there will be a better balance.

Of course horses will never be blanket banned, but on some trails they can and should be banned, just like bikes are.


----------



## formula4speed (Mar 25, 2013)

On one hand it could get someone in trouble, on the other it might seem to legitimize the use of e-bikes for trail maintenance. I'm more curious than anything, but it wouldn't necessarily mean access for the public either. Park services can drive trucks into places the public can't drive, so it could end up a moot point either way.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Linktung said:


> A semi-popular bike trail I rode last year was recently closed to bikes because horsebackriders complained of the danger cyclists posed. Sorry, it is fresh in my mind. Part of the reason the forest followed through on the ban is that they too rely on horses and prefer bike-free trails. When the forest service starts using ebikes more there will be a better balance.
> 
> Of course horses will never be blanket banned, but on some trails they can and should be banned, just like bikes are.


You said, just an hour ago, that the USFS is already using e-bikes.

Now, you use "starts using". Future tense.

So, which is it?


----------



## Empty_Beer (Dec 19, 2007)

Linktung said:


> A semi-popular bike trail I rode last year was recently closed to bikes because horsebackriders complained of the danger cyclists posed. Sorry, it is fresh in my mind. Part of the reason the forest followed through on the ban is that they too rely on horses and prefer bike-free trails. When the forest service starts using ebikes more there will be a better balance.
> 
> Of course horses will never be blanket banned, but on some trails they can and should be banned, just like bikes are.


There are plenty of non-Wilderness trails that ban horses already. If there are some trails in Wilderness horses are banned from, well that's exactly what STC is asking for with regard to bicycle access: Manage each Wilderness and trail on a case-by-case basis... not a blanket ban.

As otherwise clueless hikers, etc. latch onto the ebike phenomena as further reason to continue banning bicycles (since most people/LEO's won't know the difference between bike and ebike), achieving an access victory will be significantly more difficult. And then the hikers and equestrians will set their sights on non-Wilderness, non-motorized trails (with plenty of help from mt. bikers). You just watch. I think the latter can be worked out, but the former is made very difficult due to the reverence that is the Wilderness Act.

The USFS can already use dirt bikes to access non-motorized trails... whether it be for trail work or search and rescue. What's the point in them using an ebike then? Last year a local District Ranger got permission from HQ to moto into the Grouse Ridge Motorless Area to log out a couple dozen trees on a trail far from anywhere. They did in a day what would take traditional trail maintainers a week.


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

Empty_Beer said:


> The USFS can already use dirt bikes to access non-motorized trails... whether it be for trail work or search and rescue. What's the point in them using an ebike then? .


Enginecycles are heavy, smelly, dangerous, polluting, and boring. Now that ebikes are getting better batteries, I can see a good chunk of gasheads converting over to the light side. If I was allowed to ride either the decision would be easily in favor of ebike.


----------



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

Empty_Beer said:


> With the anti-bike Wilderness zealots slowly learning that one of the things they hate the most (mountain bikes) now can come with a motor, all bets are off on the effort to allow reasonable access for mountain biking in Wilderness and Wilderness Study Areas (i.e., not lose access to newly designated Wilderness a la Boulder White Clouds, and regain access to _some_ trails that Wilderness land managers believe are suitable for MTB access). What a gift they've been given by the mountain bike industry! :madman:


And I for one approve, the buck has to stop somewhere.


----------



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

Linktung said:


> Up until e-bikes there hasn't been a suitable replacement for the horse. E-bikes are safer for the rider, safer for other trail users, less destructive, all while being powered by less horsepower then the average horsebackrider.


Henry Ford said the same thing about the model T and 100 years later we have 4,000,000 miles of pavement to thank him for. That's enough motor traffic for me. Serenity now!


----------



## Empty_Beer (Dec 19, 2007)

J.B. Weld said:


> And I for one approve, the buck has to stop somewhere.


In terms of the Wilderness Act, the buck stops at motorized... although you've made it clear you don't want to see bicycles in any Wilderness. Here's hoping you personally never lose access to backcountry trails you love riding and enjoy maintaining!


----------



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

Empty_Beer said:


> In terms of the Wilderness Act, the buck stops at motorized...


-as it should, the only problem is that Trek, Specialized, Larry Pizzi, among other heavy hitters are lobbying hard to change the legal definition of what is motorized. Their eyes are keenly focused on the prize.

Mountain biking is just about my favorite thing in the world right now but I would give it up in a heartbeat if it meant saving wilderness lands from motorized intrusion.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Linktung said:


> Enginecycles are heavy, smelly, dangerous, polluting, and boring. Now that ebikes are getting better batteries, I can see a good chunk of gasheads converting over to the light side.


Now that's funny.

Almost as funny as 'enginecycle'.


----------



## Carl Mega (Jan 17, 2004)

slapheadmofo said:


> Now that's funny.
> 
> Almost as funny as 'enginecycle'.


These guys are the best - one side of the mouth: same as a bicycle. it's so low wattage you barely notice.

Other side: they are totally going to replace boring motorcycles cause the ebikes will be soooo powerful.

Guess they can't make up their mind on the narrative so why not use both?


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Seriously. 

And then BMXers and skaters are all gonna give up on their sports and start riding electric Razor scooters instead. Cuz easier. (If any of you are familiar with how scooters are looked at by skaters and BMXers, you'll get how ridiculous that idea is). 

E-bikes are like the Razor scooters of the trails. If you want to ride one, great, have fun. Just don't expect much respect.


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

In the backwoods e-bikes are hardly engine-less; how 'ya going to charge the batteries?

Portable generator that's how.

No, no we use solar panels. (What if it's a week of overcast?)

No, no we use wind turbines. (A week of dead calm?)

No, no we bring spare batteries. (Care to calculate how many gallons of gas can be bought for the price of a spare battery?)

A modern dual-purpose ICE moto (street exhaust, etc.) is a much better choice for backwoods patrol than an e-bike. They're quiet, don't smell, much greater range and much cheaper than an equivalent e-bike. (Or e-moto as the case may be)

My understanding is that some parks are being bribed with free e-bikes for patrol duties.


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

slapheadmofo said:


> If you want to ride one, great, have fun. Just don't expect much respect.


You think your respect is worth something, now that is funny.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Linktung said:


> You think your respect is worth something, now that is funny.


Worth about the same as your opinion, I suppose.


----------



## Curveball (Aug 10, 2015)

It's become very clear to me that the Wilderness access issue is something that the e-bike proponents absolutely cannot directly address.

All I see is obfuscation and misdirection from them.


----------



## str8edgMTBMXer (Apr 15, 2015)

J.B. Weld said:


> -as it should, the only problem is that Trek, Specialized, Larry Pizzi, among other heavy hitters are lobbying hard to change the legal definition of what is motorized. Their eyes are keenly focused on the prize.
> 
> Mountain biking is just about my favorite thing in the world right now but I would give it up in a heartbeat if it meant saving wilderness lands from motorized intrusion.


+1000!!!!


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

This isn't a bad idea...."They're no different than a watch with a battery in it."

Electric bikes add to wilderness debate - Idaho Mountain Express Newspaper: Letters To Editor


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

Harryman said:


> This isn't a bad idea...."They're no different than a watch with a battery in it."
> 
> Electric bikes add to wilderness debate - Idaho Mountain Express Newspaper: Letters To Editor


 Are you confident that they will want their Richard Milles and Pateks to associate with those low-life Casios and Seikos?

Actually I have no problem with banning all bicycle access to actual designated Wilderness Areas as long as they ban all other mechanical assistance, like wristwatches, fishing reels, battery lights, gas stoves, SPOT rescue radios, matches and lighters, etc. All provide artificial mechanical and electronic or electrical assistance to enable deeper access and have no business being in the Wilderness.

I am undecided about steel knives and axes and iron frying pans, but artificial aids such as corrective lenses, pacemakers, hearing aids and possibly prescription meds should certainly be banned. These are clearly artificial devices made solely to enable humans who do not have the physical abilities to be in the wild access to the wilderness by "cheating".


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Is it just me or do 90% of the pro e-bike comments here reek of sock-puppetry?

-Walt


----------



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

Walt said:


> Is it just me or do 90% of the pro e-bike comments here reek of sock-puppetry?
> 
> -Walt


I'd say closer to 95%


----------



## rider95 (Mar 30, 2016)

So would Hang Gliding be allowed ???


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

rider95 said:


> So would Hang Gliding be allowed ???


Wow; you also hang glide???

Hang gliders are more likely to gain access to Wilderness than e-bikes.

In part; this is the STC's position on e-bikes:


> "E-bikes can help the disabled, elderly, and less physically fit visit trails already open to other motorized travel," said STC co-founder and treasurer Jackson Ratcliffe. "But in Wilderness, as in many other places, there is a rigorous separation between nonmotorized trail uses and motorized ones.* E-bikes are motorized. The Wilderness Act has always prohibited motorized travel in Wilderness, and properly so.*"


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Wilderness access guidelines for disabled persons are addressed specifically here:

https://www.wilderness.net/toolboxes/documents/accessibility/wild_access_decision_tool.pdf


----------



## Empty_Beer (Dec 19, 2007)

Using the existence of ebikes to deny mountain bike access to a Special Management Area (the Dunoir) during forest revision planning in 2014. Mt. bikers had been using the area for years but the USFS was unsure if it was allowed. The hikers and equestrians wanted the bikes out so that the area would qualify as a Wilderness Study Area. They won.









Sierra Club:








The fun begins on page 120. HOHA central:
http://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/stelprd3823039.pdf

Same old story... no mountain bikers were at the table to defend?








ebikes are a HOHA's best new friend.... :madman:


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

E-bikes played no part in the Forest Services decision to ban bikes from Dunoir. The Forest Service banned bikes because of paranoid horseback riders (outfitters) are afraid they they will lose control of their horse on the steep-sidehilling that the pinnacles butte trail has. If you want more information on the ban, PM me your email.
P.S. send the Shoshone National Forest a nasty note about the ban.


----------



## Empty_Beer (Dec 19, 2007)

Linktung said:


> E-bikes are not why bikes are banned from Dunoir. Bikes are banned because of paranoid horseback riders who are afraid they they will lose control of their horse on the steep-sidehilling that the pinnacles butte trail has. If you want more information on the ban, PM me your email.
> P.S. send the Shoshone National Forest a nasty note about the ban.


Of course ebikes aren't the reason. And of course the HOHA's and HOE's would have exclusively blamed mt. bikes for all of their woes and fears if ebikes didn't exist ... but in this case, they used electric motorized bikes to seal the deal.... "since bicycles now have motors and you can't tell a motorized one from a non-motorized one so you have to absolutely ban all machines that look like bicycles." That's an easy decision for a land manager


----------



## rider95 (Mar 30, 2016)

If the hikers complain about Mt bike tire tracks what do they say about the horse tracks??? Hopefully you guys have other places to ride .


----------



## Empty_Beer (Dec 19, 2007)

Don't get me wrong, I think many, many hikers would love to never see evidence of horses on trails, but horses are allowed in Wilderness and these types of places and that's not a battle they'll win. The hikers get bent out of shape when they see evidence of bikes in places bikes aren't supposed to be. And this can get them worked up. 

Now, these hikers couldn't care less if the bike had a small motor or not... they just feel violated that a biker "broke the rules". But if pointing out that bikes now have motors helps their case to prohibit bikes, that's what they'll do.


----------



## str8edgMTBMXer (Apr 15, 2015)

Empty_Beer said:


> Don't get me wrong, I think many, many hikers would love to never see evidence of horses on trails, but horses are allowed in Wilderness and these types of places and that's not a battle they'll win. The hikers get bent out of shape when they see evidence of bikes in places bikes aren't supposed to be. And this can get them worked up.
> 
> Now, these hikers couldn't care less if the bike had a small motor or not... they just feel violated that a biker "broke the rules". But if pointing out that bikes now have motors helps their case to prohibit bikes, that's what they'll do.


...and after all is said and done, I have always...ALWAYS seen more damage from hikers in the form of trash not packed out; beer can/cigarette butt litter; trees cut down for firewood or shelter etc. Hikers tend to "stay" in an area longer and go off trail more; bikers tend to be in an area for split seconds at a time, and in most cases, stay on the trail.

ALL forms of human expedition into wilderness is damaging. Rather than focusing on banning, why not focus on educating on how to interact with and leave a smaller mark on the wilderness...then it all wouldn't matter.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

Why does a moderator think it's cool to denigrate a group trying to discuss a matter respectfully? The anti-bike coalition may have been assisted by the presence of ebikes, but they were a fact of life when the manufacturers decided they were a way to energize a flat market. Horses damage trails more than MTB's AFAIK, but their coalition is too affluent to oppose.


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

sXeXBMXer said:


> ...and after all is said and done, I have always...ALWAYS seen more damage from hikers in the form of trash not packed out; beer can/cigarette butt litter; trees cut down for firewood or shelter etc. Hikers tend to "stay" in an area longer and go off trail more; bikers tend to be in an area for split seconds at a time, and in most cases, stay on the trail.
> 
> ALL forms of human expedition into wilderness is damaging. Rather than focusing on banning, why not focus on educating on how to interact with and leave a smaller mark on the wilderness...then it all wouldn't matter.


 I was a hiker long before I was a biker and this has been my experience too. Hikers with dogs are the worst, especially unleashed dogs. And what's with the people who put their dogs poo in a plastic bag and then just throw it on the ground and walk away?


----------



## Welnic (Feb 6, 2013)

WoodlandHills said:


> I was a hiker long before I was a biker and this has been my experience too. Hikers with dogs are the worst, especially unleashed dogs. And what's with the people who put their dogs poo in a plastic bag and then just throw it on the ground and walk away?


They believe in the poop fairy, who comes along and carries those bags out.


----------



## str8edgMTBMXer (Apr 15, 2015)

WoodlandHills said:


> I was a hiker long before I was a biker and this has been my experience too. Hikers with dogs are the worst, especially unleashed dogs. And what's with the people who put their dogs poo in a plastic bag and then just throw it on the ground and walk away?


You are right. I can't stand dogs off leash anywhere....and it is for the dogs safety not mine!! On our local-yokel trails, there have been hundreds of times where I almost plowed into a dog running out of the brush...and then the owner comes meandering down the trail 5 minutes later (usually in sandals wit ha Big Gulp in their hand, on their phone) asking if I have seen their dog....I love taking my dog out, but it is never off leash...

when I hiked part of the AT, it was a disaster area in many places...and it is supposedly used by "experienced hikers"....it was like they were waiting for the poop/boot/old tent/tin can/underwear/paper wrapper fairies to all come along

on any of the MTB trails I have been on, the only places I see messes are the parking lots and or trailheads....not on the trail itself. We are not total angels, but I feel more respect from the MTB world than the hiking world


----------



## rider95 (Mar 30, 2016)

After reading the letter Why didn't anyone from the MT bike community show up ? did they not ask for input from the Mt bikers ??


----------



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

sXeXBMXer said:


> ...and after all is said and done, I have always...ALWAYS seen more damage from hikers in the form of trash not packed out; beer can/cigarette butt litter; trees cut down for firewood or shelter etc.


Huh, must be a regional or local thing. I've hiked a lot of different areas everywhere from the Mississippi river and West to the Pacific, and as far as trash, litter, etc. there has always been one common denominator- motors. Once you get about 1 mile beyond anywhere accessible by car, boat, or atv's the litter disappears.

Every time I've spent some time in the backcountry I always know I'm getting close to "civilization" when I start seeing cig butts, beer cans and candy wrappers.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

I think it's less an issue based on a form of conveyance and more an igonorance and respect issue. People that have learned to respect the environment have likely been taught that by others in their peer group and by spending a lot of time in that environment. Which is often backpackers, bikers, trail runners, and moto trail riders. Those who haven't are the casual in-the-park trash dropping hikers, poop leaving dog walkers, new clueless bikers and idiot moto heads. While I agree that having a motor allows idiots to expand their reach and impact in trashing wild lands, it's mostly just idiots + ease of access = problems.


----------



## evasive (Feb 18, 2005)

Welnic said:


> They believe in the poop fairy, who comes along and carries those bags out.


----------



## evasive (Feb 18, 2005)

rider95 said:


> After reading the letter Why didn't anyone from the MT bike community show up ? did they not ask for input from the Mt bikers ??


Look up where the Dunior is.


----------



## Empty_Beer (Dec 19, 2007)

J.B. Weld said:


> Huh, must be a regional or local thing. I've hiked a lot of different areas everywhere from the Mississippi river and West to the Pacific, and as far as trash, litter, etc. there has always been one common denominator- motors. Once you get about 1 mile beyond anywhere accessible by car, boat, or atv's the litter disappears.
> 
> Every time I've spent some time in the backcountry I always know I'm getting close to "civilization" when I start seeing cig butts, beer cans and candy wrappers.


These guys pulled 1,000 lbs of trash off the AT. They are doing the same on the PCT now.

https://gearjunkie.com/packing-first-100-miles


----------



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

Empty_Beer said:


> These guys pulled 1,000 lbs of trash off the AT. They are doing the same on the PCT now.
> 
> https://gearjunkie.com/packing-first-100-miles


Well I never would claim hikers to be saints, just less of them mostly and due to lack of transport to carry a lot of gear they generally have less trash on hand to leave around. I've never been on that trail but it sounds like a highway of sorts.

A decent mathematician could probably develop an algorithm to predict the amount of trash in any given place based on population, traffic, ease of access by motorized transport, distance from nearest road, etc. Motors allow humans to more easily transport and dump larger quantities of garbage, a fact proven by highway ditches the world over.


----------



## bakerjw (Oct 8, 2014)

J.B. Weld said:


> there has always been one common denominator- motors. Once you get about 1 mile beyond anywhere accessible by car, boat, or atv's the litter disappears.


When I ride USFS roads, there is nothing that I love more than seeing a locked gate. That means that the ******* nation doesn't have easy access to go and trash come pristine areas.


----------



## Empty_Beer (Dec 19, 2007)

Just wait till the ebikers dump their dead batteries to "lighten the load" on their journey out of the woods rft:


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

No way, they cost more than the motors.


----------



## str8edgMTBMXer (Apr 15, 2015)

J.B. Weld said:


> Huh, must be a regional or local thing. I've hiked a lot of different areas everywhere from the Mississippi river and West to the Pacific, *and as far as trash, litter, etc. there has always been one common denominator- motors. Once you get about 1 mile beyond anywhere accessible by car, boat, or atv's the litter disappears.*
> 
> Every time I've spent some time in the backcountry I always know I'm getting close to "civilization" when I start seeing cig butts, beer cans and candy wrappers.


dude, this is soooo true as well....and is probably why so many of the pedal-bike types (and horse riders and hikers) are up in arm about "motorized" bikes. You can't deny that their fears are founded in some truth


----------



## str8edgMTBMXer (Apr 15, 2015)

Harryman said:


> I think it's less an issue based on a form of conveyance and more an igonorance and respect issue. People that have learned to respect the environment have likely been taught that by others in their peer group and by spending a lot of time in that environment. Which is often backpackers, bikers, trail runners, and moto trail riders. Those who haven't are the casual in-the-park trash dropping hikers, poop leaving dog walkers, new clueless bikers and idiot moto heads. *While I agree that having a motor allows idiots to expand their reach and impact in trashing wild lands, it's mostly just idiots + ease of access = problems.*


This is awesome! I was trying to go down this same path, but couldn't word it correctly.


----------



## matuchi (Jun 9, 2008)

Welnic said:


> They believe in the poop fairy, who comes along and carries those bags out.


If there was really a poop fairy - I'd be a rich man! :thumbsup:


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

Empty_Beer said:


> Just wait till the ebikers dump their dead batteries to "lighten the load" on their journey out of the woods rft:


Sweet!!!! Free batteries!!! Those suckers cost a ton!


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

rider95 said:


> After reading the letter Why didn't anyone from the MT bike community show up ? did they not ask for input from the Mt bikers ??


Most of the riders are from Jackson and the Shoshone office is in dubois. It is another example of the Forest Service using logistics to leverage out a legal user group.


----------



## Linktung (Oct 22, 2014)

http://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/stelprd3837255.pdf

This is an overview of the process which eliminated cycling on the Pinnacle Buttes trail.

Correction: the Shoshone office is in Cody.


----------



## uhoh7 (May 5, 2008)

Empty_Beer said:


> This didn't take long to become another horse hate thread. Horses will never be prohibited from Wilderness. Get over it. On the other hand, bicycles will be permitted in some capacity some day. The bikes with motors will probably delay that reality for a good many years.


Total Rot, sorry. E-bikes are not even allowed on non-motorized NFS trails right now why should they effect mtb access to wilderness?

Blaming E-bikes for where you can and cannot go puts you in the same category as those who lock mtbs out of wilderness like the White Clouds, because they are "mechanized", or what ever.

Class 1 e-bikes should be allowed on NFS non-motor trails, because they are not loud and have little or no more impact than a mtb. But I'd draw the line at wilderness. Let the mtbs in though.

Anti-Ebike sentiment is more nimbyism, to my mind.

BTW non motorized trials are often maintained in Idaho by special wide tire motorbikes to carry tools etc.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

uhoh7 said:


> Total Rot, sorry. E-bikes are not even allowed on non-motorized NFS trails right now why should they effect mtb access to wilderness?
> 
> Blaming E-bikes for where you can and cannot go puts you in the same category as those who lock mtbs out of wilderness like the White Clouds, because they are "mechanized", or what ever.
> 
> ...


 Nail on the head. " NFS non-motor trails" Umm, e bikes have a motor. Next.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

Totally agree; no ebikes in Wilderness areas, but don't mind if MTB's are excluded. Blaming ebikes for keeping MTB's out of the Wilderness is inane. Grow up, they exist. Also, if the forest service doesn't want ebikes on their trails, that's fine too; many other places to ride. Must be a problem with some locales and not others. Socal has so many places to ride MTB's or ebikes that a few exclusions aren't relevant. You just need a little common sense to avoid the crowded areas on weekend mornings.


----------



## Empty_Beer (Dec 19, 2007)

fos'l said:


> Socal has so many places to ride MTB's or ebikes that a few exclusions aren't relevant. You just need a little common sense to avoid the crowded areas on weekend mornings.


Isn't San Diego in SoCal? San Diego Mountain Biking Association » SDMBA supports the Sustainable Trails Coalition ? Bikes in Wilderness!

"....and in areas such as Southern California we have virtually no access to long distance backcountry routes."

Orange County is in SoCal, right? Separate trails for every type of user? Clashes mount as more mountain bikers, hikers, equestrians hit the trails - The Orange County Register


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

Empty_Beer said:


> Isn't San Diego in SoCal? San Diego Mountain Biking Association » SDMBA supports the Sustainable Trails Coalition ? Bikes in Wilderness!
> 
> "....and in areas such as Southern California we have virtually no access to long distance backcountry routes."
> 
> Orange County is in SoCal, right? Separate trails for every type of user? Clashes mount as more mountain bikers, hikers, equestrians hit the trails - The Orange County Register


 The trails mentioned in the link are all close-in, easy access for large population centers and very busy. If you avoid the places where the trails are easy enough for people to take their kids for a walk or go through them slowly for a mile or three to get to other trails and there are still miles of legal empty trail and fire road.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

Empty_Beer said:


> Isn't San Diego in SoCal? San Diego Mountain Biking Association » SDMBA supports the Sustainable Trails Coalition ? Bikes in Wilderness!
> 
> "....and in areas such as Southern California we have virtually no access to long distance backcountry routes."
> 
> Orange County is in SoCal, right? Separate trails for every type of user? Clashes mount as more mountain bikers, hikers, equestrians hit the trails - The Orange County Register


I have more than five, but probably fewer than 10 park areas within bike riding distance of my house. All are basically empty except three or four on weekend mornings (if it was necessary to be more exacting I could). Guess what? On weekends when I ride during the morning hours, I either drive to one of the other 10 - 20 places within a half hour, ride to one of the uncrowded places or go on a little longer drive to sites that are totally empty. This guy is just trying to sell papers. Of course, if you're looking for crowds you can locate them. There are many crowded places in Orange County but my wife and I like solitude. Admittedly, our longest rides are 15 miles or so; that may trouble some purists, but it's enough for us. By the way, these are all MTB rides; usually use the ebikes for dinner rides using bike lanes. We're advocates of ebikes, but only use them where they're allowed.


----------



## Empty_Beer (Dec 19, 2007)

In the latest issue of Bike Magazine (July 2016), Ferrentino's "Grimy Handshake" column is titled, "Electric Wilderness", which summarizes the reason I started this thread perfectly. I don't believe I can post copywrighted stuff here, so go pick up a copy yourself (or buy online): Magazine Archive | BIKE Magazine

But the final sentence in the article says it all: "And in the here and now of mountain bikes and land access, the electric assist could not be arriving at a worse time."


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

fos'l said:


> I have more than five, but probably fewer than 10 park areas within bike riding distance of my house. All are basically empty except three or four on weekend mornings (if it was necessary to be more exacting I could). Guess what? On weekends when I ride during the morning hours, I either drive to one of the other 10 - 20 places within a half hour, ride to one of the uncrowded places or go on a little longer drive to sites that are totally empty. This guy is just trying to sell papers. Of course, if you're looking for crowds you can locate them. There are many crowded places in Orange County but my wife and I like solitude. Admittedly, our longest rides are 15 miles or so; that may trouble some purists, but it's enough for us. By the way, these are all MTB rides; usually use the ebikes for dinner rides using bike lanes. We're advocates of ebikes, but only use them where they're allowed.


Almost nobody has that many trails, that close. Good for you, not good for anybody else.


----------



## portnuefpeddler (Jun 14, 2016)

Here's a pic of my folding Montague E bike in a real honest to God wilderness, the Frank Church River of No Return Soldier Bar airstrip. I took this picture just to get you guys even more riled up, enjoy. For those who are interested.... those are 2 of my 11.5 AH batteries secured to the lift struts, safe as they are, they are safer not carried in the plane next to fuel lines, etc.

BTW, the bike was not ridden or even made ready to ride (which takes 2.5 minutes), as not even wheel barrows are allowed back there, I didn't even roll a tire. Now you can say you saw "an e MBT in a wilderness," and fan the hysteria over nothing happening even more.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

What's your point here? Neat spot, cool plane. But not really relevant.

-Walt


----------



## rider95 (Mar 30, 2016)

sure it is I get it the sky is not falling good post


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Oooo, nice plane.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Your post has nothing to do with riding a bike of any kind in wilderness. Or riding a bike at all. I guess it is relevant to transporting Li-ion batteries by airplane, so that's nice.

-Walt


----------



## Empty_Beer (Dec 19, 2007)

^ It is illegal to *possess *a bicycle in Wilderness, actually. Call the cops! Oh wait... everyone says ebikes are not bicycles. Hmmm.... its illegal to possess a motorcycle in Wilderness!!! Call The Wilderness Society!!

The irony of grandfathering airplanes into the Frank but booting bikes from newly designated Wilderness is not lost on me.

Why do you have an ebike in your plane anyway? Just curious.


----------



## fos'l (May 27, 2009)

sfgiantsfan said:


> Almost nobody has that many trails, that close. Good for you, not good for anybody else.


Good point; probably why it's difficult for some of us to understand others. Everyone has a different challenge, and some of us none that are perceivable.


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

Empty_Beer said:


> The irony of grandfathering airplanes into the Frank but booting bikes from newly designated Wilderness is not lost on me.


Also has something to do with $$$.

A lot to do with $$$

Money talks; BS walks. Care to guess who has the most money; the average plane owner/pilot or the average bike rider?


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Empty_Beer said:


> Why do you have an ebike in your plane anyway? Just curious.


I'm guessing that although he could probably land that in a liquor store parking lot if the wind was right, most municipalities would rather you ride your bike into town from the strip for your beer run.


----------



## portnuefpeddler (Jun 14, 2016)

pliebenberg said:


> Also has something to do with $$$.
> 
> A lot to do with $$$
> 
> Money talks; BS walks. Care to guess who has the most money; the average plane owner/pilot or the average bike rider?


 Airplanes have been part of the Frank Church way before it was a designated wilderness, they are used to ferry rafters around and to supply some remote areas, there is a very long history that has nothing to do with who has the most money. They are simple the most practical means of transportation in a extremely rough area.


----------



## portnuefpeddler (Jun 14, 2016)

I've had two different Montague's in two different homebuilt airplanes, for the last 20 years. They are how I get my fuel, I don't buy av gas, (it's leaded, plus don't need the high octane or the high price) I go get car gas. Plus it transforms the flying experience:being able to get around after you land is a real game changer, to get a cold beer if nothing else.

I have also always used the bike to explore/trail ride the Idaho/Montana/Wyoming remote areas I fly into. Since the addition of the BBS02 system, it has made what was already a great combo even better, the small weight increase is more then made up for by the increased range. I now have a Travoy trailer for hauling my gas (and other stuff), no more hanging plastic jugs on the handlebars. It also folds and fits in the small plane, frigging amazing but it does. With all the bike stuff and full camping gear (for one, no passengers when carrying the bike) I can still land off airport in very short places. Imagine if you will, the opportunities for adventure that entails.

My e addition to the 9 year old Montague has been so successful, that I bought a brand new Paratrooper Pro model, that has the 1500 watt (capable with the right programming) BBSHD motor, along with badly needed disc brakes and other updates. I am equipping it with a Rohloff hub, we'll see how that works out. I should probably opt out of any comments on your perceived trail access concerns relating to e bikes, as it is highly unlikely our paths will ever cross. I'll post a few pics of the spectacular rides I have been lucky enough to access since the ebike, all without any problems or interactions with other riders, as I go where there isn't any others, on another thread. When I do ride in town (rarely) I ride responsibly, and am accepted by the other p riders with zero problems.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

Yeah, I think if you're flying to remote locations to ride, you aren't likely to run into a trail conflict.

Then again, you're also not in a position to comment on the situation of 99.9% of mountain bikers/trails.

-Walt


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

sfgiantsfan said:


> Almost nobody has that many trails, that close. Good for you, not good for anybody else.


 Lots of people do, maybe you just live too close to the cities or major population centers. I'm in MA and live North of Boston. 15 miles of singletrack 100yds from my driveway. 60 miles more in a 20 minute drive in either direction. I can link many properties with several short hops on pavement or dirt roads.


----------



## rider95 (Mar 30, 2016)

Just another good reason to own a e bike there is so many .


----------



## WoodlandHills (Nov 18, 2015)

pliebenberg said:


> Also has something to do with $$$.
> 
> A lot to do with $$$
> 
> Money talks; BS walks. Care to guess who has the most money; the average plane owner/pilot or the average bike rider?


 It is also the lowest impact method of getting into the wilderness: no trail needed from the road and much, much quieter than a helicopter.


----------

