# In U.S.A. Today



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

https://www.yahoo.com/news/electric-bike-rode-backcountry-now-090011832.html



Delete if not appropriate.


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

That article seems pretty well written to me.
=sParty


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

I liked that article it did not try to take sides, but rather tried to collect as much information as possible about this new motorized conveyance and how their adoption is being taken in different area's by different groups.


----------



## BadgerOne (Jul 17, 2015)

Yeah, pretty good article. I like the different view points presented, and not a single one came off 'wrong' to me, just different perspectives. Also very clear that enforcement is all but impossible. It's true that the rules and regs are fluff. Class designations for ebikes are for the buyer only. No one else is going to be able to determine their class or legality on a trail. My concern is that with progression in technology, soon enough we'll have Sur Ron level "MTBs" that are really just electric motorcycles with cranks, and that would be a safety and damage problem.

The one thing I think is absolutely incorrect is this: "They contend electric bike ownership is dominated by older people who travel slower, with less danger and trail damage." Complete BS. When I'm out on the trail and see ebikes, there are at least as many thirty-something pasty-softies with no apparent ailments ripping around at speed as there are older people riding them. So while they can absolutely be used to extend accessibility for certain demographics, they are used just as much by people who want it easier and faster just because they can, not because they actually need it. Which is perfectly fine, but honesty is important.

One point they didn't cover was the increased likelihood of e-bike users needing rescue and recovery services because they misjudged range and are unable to exit under their own power. Hopefully a rare occurence.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

BadgerOne said:


> One point they didn't cover was the increased likelihood of e-bike users needing rescue and recovery services because they misjudged range and are unable to exit under their own power. Hopefully a rare occurence.


actually the article did cover that.


----------



## ownyourtime (Dec 11, 2021)

It seems all of these class of articles make the incorrect analogy of snowboarding to skiing when snowboarding started. Comparing two non motorized activities isnt the same as motorized versus human powered. Allowing snowmobiling on XC ski trails is more analogous.


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

ownyourtime said:


> It seems all of these class of articles make the incorrect analogy of snowboarding to skiing when snowboarding started. Comparing two non motorized activities isnt the same as motorized versus human powered. Allowing snowmobiling on XC ski trails is more analogous.


While I agree that motor vs non-motor is probably most analogous, I believe that the conflict between two disparate user groups who both want access to the same turf makes the comparison germane. Especially considering that one group is established and the other is relatively new.

In the end they’re both people saying, ”I was here first. Get lost.”
=sParty


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

Sparticus said:


> In the end they’re both people saying, ”I was here first. Get lost.”


While that might be the case with some. The article pointed out all the reasons the other groups have been against the eBikes on trails, and when they take the land managers to court their arguments have nothing to do with "I was here first". Those groups taking the time to go to court are Horseback groups and Hikers. Many mountain bikers have been against them as well, but I have yet to hear of a mountain biking organization going to court over the matter.

I personally find the skier's vs Snowboarders analogy to be full of holes when comparing it to the eBikes vs Bikes/Horses/hikers.

Snowboarders joining the scene did not bring motors to the mountain and are in actuality slower than skiers. The skiers were just being selfish, none of their whining held water and certainly would have been thrown out of court.

Snowboarding was never going to impact trail access on the mountain, skiing was never in danger of getting banned because of snowboarders. eBikes have the potential to impact trail access for regular bikes in some places, and that is a valid concern.


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

Klurejr said:


> While that might be the case with some. The article pointed out all the reasons the other groups have been against the eBikes on trails, and when they take the land managers to court their arguments have nothing to do with "I was here first". Those groups taking the time to go to court are Horseback groups and Hikers. Many mountain bikers have been against them as well, but I have yet to hear of a mountain biking organization going to court over the matter.
> 
> I personally find the skier's vs Snowboarders analogy to be full of holes when comparing it to the eBikes vs Bikes/Horses/hikers.
> 
> ...


Ya got me.
=sParty


----------



## netaron (12 mo ago)

So I ride around those parts, have been for years on my regular mtb, don't really care much for e-bikes in places that clearly forbids them. Trails are already busy enough with hikers and regular MTB'ers. The gent ought to know better.

At the same time, I don't have an issue with carving out specific ebike trails. Or places "all" bikes are allowed.


----------



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

Sparticus said:


> While I agree that motor vs non-motor is probably most analogous, I believe that the conflict between two disparate user groups who both want access to the same turf makes the comparison germane. Especially considering that one group is established and the other is relatively new.




I don't think so. One is for profit and generally involves private (or leased) land so they can do whatever they want. The other is generally on public lands so there are many different considerations involved.


----------



## eb1888 (Jan 27, 2012)

"Today, according to the Forest Service, just 35 (out of 130) miles of single-track paths in Tahoe National Forest are open to e-bikers, along with nearly 400 miles of OHV(ORV) and single-track motorcycle routes. " Lots of users using new tech need new trails.


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

J.B. Weld said:


> I don't think so. One is for profit and generally involves private (or leased) land so they can do whatever they want. The other is generally on public lands so there are many different considerations involved.


I already admitted defeat, J.B. 
=sParty


----------



## Fleas (Jan 19, 2006)

That was darn near inspirational...

"_Trails were closed to e-bikers until environmental assessments were done and the public had an opportunity to weigh in_."

"_A place shouldn’t be shut down just because there are a few scofflaws, she added. The solution is to teach trail etiquette and ethics_."

"_In fact, there seems to be a consensus among trail users, conservationists and land managers that any blanket policy for electric bikes would prove a dismal failure. From Arizona deserts to Rocky Mountains highs, the logic goes, rules should be based on trail conditions, environmental factors, traffic volume and local politics_."

Yes, every trail system is different and should be evaluated on an individual basis, just like they were when MTBs wanted access.

-F


----------



## BadgerOne (Jul 17, 2015)

Another thing not really mentioned is the far higher of likelihood of poaching by ebike riders, compared to skiiers/snowboarders/equestrians/etc. I mean, these guys buy a bike, look up trails, show up, and who is really going to turn around or not ride a trail because there is a sign at the entrance showing that ebikes aren't allowed? I imagine the attitude is I went to a bicycle store, spent a lot of money to buy a bicycle, took it to a bicycle trail, and now you tell me I can't take my bicycle on it. Screw it, I'm doing it anyway. I can always play dumb, and that's if anyone even notices or says something.

Are they right, wrong, or otherwise? Not my place to judge. Probably somewhere in the middle, between 'breaking the rules' and 'my rights don't end where your feelings begin'.


----------



## Curveball (Aug 10, 2015)

An electric bike rode into the backcountry. Now there's a nationwide turf war

I thought the comment by the horse person on erosion was pretty ironic. The article seems to provide a pretty good summary of the situation.


----------



## Rusty762 (8 mo ago)

What a joke, I managed OHV trails in the Sierra National Forest for 15 years. We had a vast network of trails, some very technical, rocky jeep trails, Dirt bike and MTB trails as well as a ton of Equestrian trails. I used to patrol in a Jeep Wrangler, Klein Mt bike and couple of different dirt bikes. I always found it funny when the Equestrians tried to argue that MTB's were destroying many of the single track trails. We did several studies and especially in the winter time the impact of hooves from a 600 pound horse on a sidehill single track was devastating compared to a MTB tire. In fact many places we found the tires compacted the trail bed, corners were often times an issue if people were braking through them instead of before them.
Now that I own an EMTB and live in a liberal state that likes to ban everything I am worried we are going to start seeing many of the areas around Santa Cruz banned, they have already put signs up at Demonstration Forest and all of UCSC campus is illegal for EMTB's. No one is enforcing it yet but at some point I can see it happening. Right now the state of California has most state parks open with no management. Its pretty upside down, I spent the weekend doing trail maintenance at our local park that allows EMTB's on all of the single track trails just to help out and do what I can to keep things open. Its also important to wave, say hi and just be courteous to other users. I stop and get off my bike if I see hikers or someone on horseback to let them go by.


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

…and more MTBR comments here:








In U.S.A. Today


https://www.yahoo.com/news/electric-bike-rode-backcountry-now-090011832.html Delete if not appropriate.




www.mtbr.com


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

moving to advocacy


----------



## FrankS29 (Oct 23, 2019)

This is going to be a very contentious issue for a very long time. 

It's not helping that many manufacturers are shoving e-bikes to the forefront in a lot of their marketing. 

I personally don't have any real strong aversion to e-bikes, but I understand why a lot of people do. 

Honestly, this sport is already really easy to get in over your head and into dangerous situations, I only see e-bikes as making that issue worse. Less and less athletic people, who probably don't have great bike handling skills, pushing further and further into backcountry terrain where there is little to no service and can take a long time for emergency personnel to reach you is not a great combination.


----------



## 2xPneu (Jan 26, 2004)

BadgerOne said:


> Another thing not really mentioned is the far higher of likelihood of poaching by ebike riders, compared to skiiers/snowboarders/equestrians/etc. I mean, these guys buy a bike, look up trails, show up, and who is really going to turn around or not ride a trail because there is a sign at the entrance showing that ebikes aren't allowed? I imagine the attitude is I went to a bicycle store, spent a lot of money to buy a bicycle, took it to a bicycle trail, and now you tell me I can't take my bicycle on it. Screw it, I'm doing it anyway. I can always play dumb, and that's if anyone even notices or says something.
> 
> Are they right, wrong, or otherwise? Not my place to judge. Probably somewhere in the middle, between 'breaking the rules' and 'my rights don't end where your feelings begin'.


I would say it depends on how one rides. If at most you’re going essentially the same speed as, let’s say, an elite MTB rider then what additional damage can be caused to the trail? None.
And if you combine that with taking pains to slow/stop/yield to horses/hikers then an emtb is no more hazardous to the environment or other trail users than a regular rig.
It’s the roosting, sliding, cloud of dust/spray of gravel idiots that screw it up for us all. And a lot of those are on nonmotorized DH rigs! No offense intended.


----------



## Battery (May 7, 2016)

We should complain that horses are pooping on the trail and the riders aren't picking up the mess with a bag. Responsible dog owners typically do it! Why not horse owners?


----------



## dysfunction (Aug 15, 2009)

Battery said:


> We should complain that horses are pooping on the trail and the riders aren't picking up the mess with a bag. Responsible dog owners typically do it! Why not horse owners?


We don't have enough money for that to matter.


----------



## Bacon Fat (Mar 11, 2016)

FrankS29 said:


> This is going to be a very contentious issue for a very long time.
> 
> It's not helping that many manufacturers are shoving e-bikes to the forefront in a lot of their marketing.
> 
> ...


Absolutely, we should have a skills test to be able to ride a bike. Don't pass the test, you aren't allowed to ride your bike. Now hopefully they won't make the test level above your skill level and ban you from the trails


----------



## Dogbrain (Mar 4, 2008)

Battery said:


> We should complain that horses are pooping on the trail and the riders aren't picking up the mess with a bag. Responsible dog owners typically do it! Why not horse owners?


Horse poop is a significant source of invasive species in many areas. It depends on where the owners source the feed.


----------



## BadgerOne (Jul 17, 2015)

2xPneu said:


> I would say it depends on how one rides. If at most you’re going essentially the same speed as, let’s say, an elite MTB rider then what additional damage can be caused to the trail? None.
> And if you combine that with taking pains to slow/stop/yield to horses/hikers then an emtb is no more hazardous to the environment or other trail users than a regular rig.
> It’s the roosting, sliding, cloud of dust/spray of gravel idiots that screw it up for us all. And a lot of those are on nonmotorized DH rigs! No offense intended.


I'd say that in the current state of development, type of bike doesn't matter when it comes to damage. It is 100% rider. As previously mentioned, the real problem is etiquette and people's complete and utter lack of ability to understand it, much less observe it.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

2xPneu said:


> I would say it depends on how one rides. If at most you’re going essentially the same speed as, let’s say, an elite MTB rider then what additional damage can be caused to the trail? None.
> And if you combine that with taking pains to slow/stop/yield to horses/hikers then an emtb is no more hazardous to the environment or other trail users than a regular rig.
> It’s the roosting, sliding, cloud of dust/spray of gravel idiots that screw it up for us all. And a lot of those are on nonmotorized DH rigs! No offense intended.



If they wouldn’t be out there without the motor, yes, that is additional damage. 

It’s like saying that before, Joe Smith would do three laps, but with his new eBike, he does six laps. It’s basically adding another rider. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Curveball (Aug 10, 2015)

BadgerOne said:


> Another thing not really mentioned is the far higher of likelihood of poaching by ebike riders, compared to skiiers/snowboarders/equestrians/etc. I mean, these guys buy a bike, look up trails, show up, and who is really going to turn around or not ride a trail because there is a sign at the entrance showing that ebikes aren't allowed? I imagine the attitude is I went to a bicycle store, spent a lot of money to buy a bicycle, took it to a bicycle trail, and now you tell me I can't take my bicycle on it. Screw it, I'm doing it anyway. I can always play dumb, and that's if anyone even notices or says something.
> 
> Are they right, wrong, or otherwise? Not my place to judge. Probably somewhere in the middle, between 'breaking the rules' and 'my rights don't end where your feelings begin'.


The article pointed out that there is no enforcement of the rules. This is consistent with my observations as well. And I think this is a major point of contention. When you see an e-bike (or a great many) on a trail where they are prohibited, it brings up a sense of unfairness (whether right or wrong).

And yes, I fully realize that mountain bikers were poaching hiking trails way back in the day.


----------



## FrankS29 (Oct 23, 2019)

Bacon Fat said:


> Absolutely, we should have a skills test to be able to ride a bike. Don't pass the test, you aren't allowed to ride your bike. Now hopefully they won't make the test level above your skill level and ban you from the trails




Here comes the drama queens... 

I flat out said that I don't have an issue with e-bikes. But you can't ignore that they come with many, many complications that a lot of organizations have to consider when deciding if they are going to allow them. Including the increased likelihood of out of shape, unskilled riders getting hurt or worse in increasingly hard-to-reach areas where that person might not even have a way to call for help. 

Mt. Hood Skibowl Shuts Down Bike Park Due to Injury Lawsuit - Singletracks Mountain Bike News

Injury and lawsuits are a real concern for a lot of organizations, and it was just highlighted VERY recently why it's a concern.


----------



## Curveball (Aug 10, 2015)

2xPneu said:


> I would say it depends on how one rides. If at most you’re going essentially the same speed as, let’s say, an elite MTB rider then what additional damage can be caused to the trail? None.
> And if you combine that with taking pains to slow/stop/yield to horses/hikers then an emtb is no more hazardous to the environment or other trail users than a regular rig.
> It’s the roosting, sliding, cloud of dust/spray of gravel idiots that screw it up for us all. And a lot of those are on nonmotorized DH rigs! No offense intended.


The article also mentioned the prevalence of motors being modified to give much more power than the stock setup. That would certainly enhance erosion. And user conflicts.


----------



## Bacon Fat (Mar 11, 2016)

So you are worried about inexperienced riders causing problems and you link to an experienced rider that got everything shutdown. So you are worried about something that didn't actually happen and use a opposite example to try to proof that point......Speaking of drama queen


----------



## FrankS29 (Oct 23, 2019)

Bacon Fat said:


> So you are worried about inexperienced riders causing problems and you link to an experienced rider that got everything shutdown. So you are worried about something that didn't actually happen and use a opposite example to try to proof that point......Speaking of drama queen





FrankS29 said:


> Injury and lawsuits are a real concern for a lot of organizations, and it was just highlighted VERY recently why it's a concern.


It was pretty clear I was simply highlighting the issue of mitigating exposure to lawsuits.

E-bikes increase that risk, period.


----------



## Bacon Fat (Mar 11, 2016)

FrankS29 said:


> It was pretty clear I was simply highlighting the issue of mitigating exposure to lawsuits.
> 
> E-bikes increase that risk, period.


If your point that being further out on the trail was an issue, then everyone would be calling to ban bikepacking. But they aren't because it has shown to be an issue. Just as e-bike being further out would be an issue....It is just a made up issue with no data to back it up.


----------



## BadgerOne (Jul 17, 2015)

Curveball said:


> The article also mentioned the prevalence of motors being modified to give much more power than the stock setup. That would certainly enhance erosion. And user conflicts.


True. I do think that the modified controllers are part of the DIY ebike scene more than factory MTBs though. There are companies out there selling controllers and battery arrays that integrate with Bafang mid drive motors and the like, but from what I've seen the Bosch/Shimano/Yamaha have proprietary setups and don't get messed with very much. Most factory eMTBs are fully integrated with the frame designs and limit space and form factor for batteries and controllers, which limits the ability to modify. Definitely not an acident on the part of mfgs. I would like to think that buyers would also give serious second thoughts to voiding the warranty on a 5k+ bike. For my part, around town on multi-use paved paths and streets, I see plenty of DIY ebikes or tacked-on systems. I've only seen factory eMTBs out on the trails.


----------



## rowyourown (11 mo ago)

The e-bike issue will determine its own fate. Either there will be enough injuries and lawsuits that they become a documented issue, or there won't be. Not enough data yet to see how it shakes out.


----------



## FrankS29 (Oct 23, 2019)

Bacon Fat said:


> If your point that being further out on the trail was an issue, then everyone would be calling to ban bikepacking. But they aren't because it has shown to be an issue. Just as e-bike being further out would be an issue....It is just a made up issue with no data to back it up.


Bike packing is still an incredibly niche sport.

E-bikes have become one of the best selling type of bikes, rapidly.

A lot of this has to do with expected volume.


----------



## Curveball (Aug 10, 2015)

BadgerOne said:


> True. I do think that the modified controllers are part of the DIY ebike scene more than factory MTBs though. There are companies out there selling controllers and battery arrays that integrate with Bafang mid drive motors and the like, but from what I've seen the Bosch/Shimano/Yamaha have proprietary setups and don't get messed with very much. Most factory eMTBs are fully integrated with the frame designs and limit space and form factor for batteries and controllers, which limits the ability to modify. Definitely not an acident on the part of mfgs. I would like to think that buyers would also give serious second thoughts to voiding the warranty on a 5k+ bike. For my part, around town on multi-use paved paths and streets, I see plenty of DIY ebikes or tacked-on systems. I've only seen factory eMTBs out on the trails.


I don't know all the details of the power modifications, but it seems like a potential issue that may need to be mitigated. I don't know that it's much of a problem at the moment, but if a modified e-bike causes a serious accident, or accidents, the fallout from that could affect all e-bike users.


----------



## Dogbrain (Mar 4, 2008)

FrankS29 said:


> Bike packing is still an incredibly niche sport.
> 
> E-bikes have become one of the best selling type of bikes, rapidly.
> 
> A lot of this has to do with expected volume.


This right here is the crux of the issue. If something is physically difficult, like trail climbing or venturing far into the backcountry, very few people will do it and those that do will tend to be more capable. As we lower the barrier for anyone who can run a credit card, then the volume increases and the level of skill, knowledge, and preparedness decreases. This results in more issues.


----------



## dysfunction (Aug 15, 2009)

Since we're now talking about bike packing.... I want to watch someone carry their eBike on Kaibab  

Really, I'd just totally cheer them on.


----------



## Bacon Fat (Mar 11, 2016)

Dogbrain said:


> This right here is the crux of the issue. If something is physically difficult, like trail climbing or venturing far into the backcountry, very few people will do it and those that do will tend to be more capable. As we lower the barrier for anyone who can run a credit card, then the volume increases and the level of skill, knowledge, and preparedness decreases. This results in more issues.


Oh no, I sure hope we don't have more cases of this situation that doesn't happen.


----------



## 2xPneu (Jan 26, 2004)

Curveball said:


> The article also mentioned the prevalence of motors being modified to give much more power than the stock setup. That would certainly enhance erosion. And user conflicts.


Actually it wouldn’t if the bike was ridden in the way I outlined. Wouldn’t matter how much power it has. I ride an Optibike which has way more power than most ebikes (plus a THROTTLE, oh the humanity!) but I ride pretty much at the pace of most non-ebikes, it’s just a lot easier esp going uphill, and never had a problem with other riders, equestrian, or hikers. As someone said previously, it’s 100% the rider, powered or not.


----------



## Curveball (Aug 10, 2015)

2xPneu said:


> Actually it wouldn’t if the bike was ridden in the way I outlined. Wouldn’t matter how much power it has. I ride an Optibike which has way more power than most ebikes (plus a THROTTLE, oh the humanity!) but I ride pretty much at the pace of most non-ebikes, it’s just a lot easier esp going uphill, and never had a problem with other riders, equestrian, or hikers. As someone said previously, it’s 100% the rider, powered or not.


Right, that may be _your_ approach, but I wouldn't bet that others will use added power in a responsible manner. I don't think that you can reasonably extend your personal experience to other e-bike riders. Dirt bikes aren't very compatible with hikers due to the large speed differentials and having separate trails for each of those users seems to be the solution. I know that's a bit of an extreme situation, but it stands as an example of potential use-conflict problems.

My main point is that it would likely be a very good idea to get in front of that potential issue before it becomes a serious problem that affects all e-bike users.


----------



## Bacon Fat (Mar 11, 2016)

Curveball said:


> I don't think that you can reasonably extend your personal experience to other e-bike riders.


Why not? You and others extend your personal experience to other e-bikers. Why can't he?


----------



## eb1888 (Jan 27, 2012)

One future-


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

eb1888 said:


> One future-



oh boy.


He starts off telling us how no Bikes are allowed on that trail, but then informs us he is going to do it anyway. Then he proceeds to ride a motorcycle on the trail.

I hiked up there once and I do think the trails were no Bicycles at all, certainly no motos.

At least he went mid week when foot traffic was extremely light. I went on a Saturday and it was a zoo up there.


I hate that click-baity title. there is nothing secrect about those trails, literally surrounded by millions of people:


----------



## d365 (Jun 13, 2006)

eb1888 said:


> One future-


Exactly! I've already seen a Class3 e-mtb riding our local trails, but I've only seen a handful of e-mtbs overall...


----------



## Curveball (Aug 10, 2015)

I'm really considering getting a YZ450 for the local mountain bike trails. I used to love riding dirt bikes way back in high school, but the nearest legal moto trails to me are about two hours away.

There are a lot of mountain biking only trails close to me that I ride with my MTB and would be awesomely fun on a dirt bike. I can't really see any problems with that.


----------



## Morningdove (7 mo ago)

Its a good article. I live here, so I'd like to see a state law taking this power away from the cities so regulations have some consistency.


----------



## kpdemello (May 3, 2010)

Ha, bicycle face








"Bicycle face": a 19th-century health problem made up to scare women away from biking


A truly terrifying medical condition.




www.vox.com





Talking about emtbs gives me bicycle face. But the ship has sailed, the cat's out of the bag, and pandora's box is open. They are here to stay. I hate the motherf***ers but I'll also probably end up on one some day.


----------

