# Proposed Forest Service eMBT rules



## watermonkey (Jun 21, 2011)

https://www.imba.com/blog/action-alert-new-forest-service-emtb-rules

Quote from the article:
"If the Forest Service were to permit eMTBs on non-motorized trails, those trails would then be reclassified as motorized. To avoid this confusion the Forest Service should align the proposal with the recent Bureau of Land Management (BLM) final rule and create an exemption to allow eMTBs on non-motorized trails."

So, if I get this correct, IMBA's stance is this... in order to keep our trails safe from motorized vehicles, we should all sign off on eMBT's. I can't think of a more concise way to sum up 2020.

Hey, IMBA...rumor has it your headquarters has a giant bag full of used adult novelty toys that you may or may not choose to choke yourself on.


----------



## barnold74 (Jul 11, 2005)

IMBA is more about selling bikes more than it is about advocating for you and I. I’ve seen their chapter clubs taken over by corporate organizations with their support. Like everything money corrupts.


----------



## sotak (May 20, 2009)

My state's largest mountain bike advocacy organization, Evergreen Mountain Bike Alliance, is also supporting this move to have class I ebikes designated as non-motorized. They say this will align with state rules that are already in place, and prevent trails from being designated as motorized when class I ebikes are eventually allowed. The way they word their call for comments makes it sound like they feel it's inevitable class I ebikes will be on trails in significant numbers. 

On state owned lands in Washington ebikes are not allowed on non-motorized trails by default, but local land managers can allow class I bikes after some sort of process. I'm not sure how it's worked out overall, but I think the results are largely mixed. People just ride where they want. 

I have a fundamental discomfort calling any ebike "non-motorized". Some of this from IMBA, Evergreen, and manufacturers seems like fear-mongering and an attempt to increase ease of access to ebikes. I do think ebikes should be allowed on trails, but they should be trails designated to allow for that use. Maybe they should create a third category for low-powered motorized vehicles (i.e. class I ebikes). Once that's done people with an interest in riding ebikes can advocate for access. 

Class I ebikes are motorized. Designating them as non-motorized does not seem like it would resolve confusion about access. Are sellers really going to spend a lot of time educating potential buyers about the nuances? I doubt it. Most buyers will just think (or claim to think when challenged), "Oh, my ebike is classified as non-motorized and can got anywhere a bike can go."

Again, I support ebike riding as a recreational activity in the right setting. This rule change sounds like it would make it easier to allow use more broadly. Done right, I don't think that's a big deal. Ignoring the fact they have motors isn't right. It's more than semantics.


----------



## mbmb65 (Jan 13, 2004)

Once again, IMBA has shown that it has lost its way, and no longer advocates for mountain bikers. What a colossal collection of ****. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## julien AR (Jun 2, 2011)

Can someone explain why e-bikes are a problem? 
In my estimation: e-bikes (pedal-assist bikes without a trigger or a throttle) have no significant impact on-trail condition because they don't lose traction as a motorcycle would. 
Their speed performance seems irrelevant too. All it take is to try one to understand. Riders are limited by the terrain they are riding on. If an e-bike could have a top speed of 100mph it wouldn't go significantly faster than a regular bike on a mountain bike trail. The problems with e-bikes are more likely related to trailheads, roads and access trails where the relative speed of e-bikes compare to other park goers can easily become an issue.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

julien AR said:


> Can someone explain why e-bikes are a problem?
> In my estimation: e-bikes (pedal-assist bikes without a trigger or a throttle) have no significant impact on-trail condition because they don't lose traction as a motorcycle would.
> Their speed performance seems irrelevant too. All it take is to try one to understand. Riders are limited by the terrain they are riding on. If an e-bike could have a top speed of 100mph it wouldn't go significantly faster than a regular bike on a mountain bike trail. The problems with e-bikes are more likely related to trailheads, roads and access trails where the relative speed of e-bikes compare to other park goers can easily become an issue.


I only see 2 challenges that have any viability as far as opposition is concerned.

Speed
Enforcement
I do not feel that Class 1 bikes are much of a problem in the speed department for most places. Situationally they could be more dangerous if the rider is going full power mode on a flat surface around a blind corner.... but really that could happen on a pedal bike as well.

I don't buy into the erosion rhetoric one bit. Rain causes more erosion in a single heavy storm than thousands of trails users do over a long summer. I have seen this in very clear detail in my local riding area when a land manager shut down the local builders from regular maintenance and the trails went to crap after a heavy winter. (same group that shut down access also did ZERO to mitigate erosion)

Enforcement is the biggest issue. How do we get land management agencies to enforce the true bad players, the guys who get a monster eBike that is really a motorcycle and go shred the local trails?

I used to think eBikes should be banned, but time and experience has shown me that the class 1 eBikes are fine sharing trails with pedal bikes, trail runners, equestrians, etc.


----------



## chazpat (Sep 23, 2006)

My concern is that they can ride faster uphill. I'm just worried that the trails I ride will get blown out wide as more and more ebikes mean more and more passing on narrow singletrack. I really wish the US had followed the European standards with the lower cut-off. That would be more "bicycle like" but whenever I bring that up, there are ebikers who say, "that's too slow". To me, that says they value the motor experience over the bicycle experience.

Rain causes more erosion when people have broken the soil surface and/or disturbed vegetation/rocks/roots.


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

chazpat said:


> Rain causes more erosion when people have broken the soil surface and/or disturbed vegetation/rocks/roots.


Or when hikers cut the switch backs and create fall lines.

Or when land management agencies refuse to allow trail work days, or are too slow to make them happen.

I agree with you that the European standards would have been better for advocacy.


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

julien AR said:


> Can someone explain why e-bikes are a problem?
> In my estimation: e-bikes (pedal-assist bikes without a trigger or a throttle) have no significant impact on-trail condition because they don't lose traction as a motorcycle would.
> Their speed performance seems irrelevant too. All it take is to try one to understand. Riders are limited by the terrain they are riding on. If an e-bike could have a top speed of 100mph it wouldn't go significantly faster than a regular bike on a mountain bike trail. The problems with e-bikes are more likely related to trailheads, roads and access trails where the relative speed of e-bikes compare to other park goers can easily become an issue.


The speed difference is not irrelevant. It's the primary issue at hand.

No, it's not really part of the issue for descents. But on climbs and on more level terrain, especially stuff that's nontechnical or relatively less technical, it's absolutely a thing. Where folks on regular pedal bikes would mostly be chilling, an ebike can hit that speed cutoff with comparably less effort. The greater issue is definitely one of manners and passing etiquette, for sure. But the additional speed capability of ebikes has DEFINITELY enabled trail conflicts on a couple of my rides. Frankly, we need an extra push for trail manners in general, and specifically by land managers, backed up with by potential enforcement.

Because of these issues that are pushed to the forefront by ebikes, there absolutely need to be specific management considerations for them.

Also potential issues with ebikes:

battery fires
fitness filters on trail systems largely aren't an issue for ebikers, so some ebikers are going to wind up in places they lack the skills/fitness to deal with...especially if the electronic systems on their bike fail.
aforementioned enforcement when it comes to illegal ebikes, illegal aftermarket kits, and illegal modifications that put a stock ebike outside of legal specs. this is a huge amount of extra oversight land managers will be expected to perform.
These aren't insurmountable issues. But they're issues that it would be a bad idea to ignore now, before they become actual problems.

Another problem I have is with ebikers simply expecting to ride on the coattails of previous mtb advocacy efforts. Because e-bikes actually are different in some important ways, it's hurting e-biker advocacy efforts to pretend that those differences don't exist. E-bikers need to do their own organizing and advocacy work to address those issues on their end. Because you can bet that the manufacturers won't be doing it. E-bikers aren't going to like to have non-e-bike-riders addressing these issues. And if the land managers have to get involved to address issues, y'all aren't going to like it, either.


----------



## julien AR (Jun 2, 2011)

Harold said:


> Also potential issues with ebikes:
> 
> battery fires
> fitness filters on trail systems largely aren't an issue for ebikers, so some ebikers are going to wind up in places they lack the skills/fitness to deal with...especially if the electronic systems on their bike fail.
> aforementioned enforcement when it comes to illegal ebikes, illegal aftermarket kits, and illegal modifications that put a stock ebike outside of legal specs. this is a huge amount of extra oversight land managers will be expected to perform.


We can imagine everything that can go wrong with anything new. But until there is statistical evidence e-bikes have a significant adverse impact on trails and their users, there is no reason to regulate preventively. As mountain bikers, we've paid a heavy price for people's misperceptions about our sport. 
Too many trails are still not accessible to bicycles due to pedestrians' fear of a collision that's - statistically - extremely rare. 
You may be able to remember how it felt when bicycles were banned from the national wilderness preservation system? The sierra-club lobbied to classify bicycles as a "mechanized" type of vehicle, most likely because their urban supporters were entrenched in a turf war against mountain biking. Hundreds of miles of trails were erased from the mountain biking map.
The point is: preemptive regulations on potential issues are bad.


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

There are very real differences that need very real consideration. This is not make-believe. None of my statements is unreasonable.

Ebike batteries have already erupted into flames. The things I mentioned already exist. Just like there are very real differences between mtb riding and hiking. It's ludicrous to pretend that those real differences don't exist.

Hikers don't need to fabricate lies to acknowledge the differences between hiking and mtb, and to insist they be managed as separate activities. It's important to be realistic about the differences so that work can be done to address them, manage/mitigate them as necessary, and make smart decisions.

Like I said, pretending the differences don't exist does nobody any favors.


----------



## youth slayer (Apr 13, 2010)

watermonkey said:


> https://www.imba.com/blog/action-alert-new-forest-service-emtb-rules
> 
> Quote from the article:
> "If the Forest Service were to permit eMTBs on non-motorized trails, those trails would then be reclassified as motorized. To avoid this confusion the Forest Service should align the proposal with the recent Bureau of Land Management (BLM) final rule and create an exemption to allow eMTBs on non-motorized trails."
> ...


Yes and we are also considering making all cars that can go over 70 mph off the freeway.?


----------



## youth slayer (Apr 13, 2010)

youth slayer said:


> Yes and we are also considering making all cars that can go over 70 mph off the freeway.?


How about just common sense and let only the class 1 and two mountain bikes and they follow same rules as anyone else.seems most people don't understand the differences of e bikes.Educate yourself on this matter before you speak or meet me out on the trail and we will have a class discussion on the matter ?


----------



## Silentfoe (May 9, 2008)

youth slayer said:


> How about just common sense and let only the class 1 and two mountain bikes and they follow same rules as anyone else.seems most people don't understand the differences of e bikes.Educate yourself on this matter before you speak or meet me out on the trail and we will have a class discussion on the matter


Are you really arguing with yourself?

Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

Silentfoe said:


> Are you really arguing with yourself?
> 
> Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk


something is off..... Joined up 11 years ago and just now started actively posting...


----------



## PS mtb (10 mo ago)

Harold said:


> There are very real differences that need very real consideration. This is not make-believe. None of my statements is unreasonable.
> 
> Ebike batteries have already erupted into flames. The things I mentioned already exist. Just like there are very real differences between mtb riding and hiking. It's ludicrous to pretend that those real differences don't exist.
> 
> ...


Do you ride with your cell phone ? They are also known to spontaneously combust...should we outlaw those also ?


Harold said:


> The speed difference is not irrelevant. It's the primary issue at hand.
> 
> No, it's not really part of the issue for descents. But on climbs and on more level terrain, especially stuff that's nontechnical or relatively less technical, it's absolutely a thing. Where folks on regular pedal bikes would mostly be chilling, an ebike can hit that speed cutoff with comparably less effort. The greater issue is definitely one of manners and passing etiquette, for sure. But the additional speed capability of ebikes has DEFINITELY enabled trail conflicts on a couple of my rides. Frankly, we need an extra push for trail manners in general, and specifically by land managers, backed up with by potential enforcement.
> 
> ...


Riding on the coat tails of mtb advocacy efforts ? I have been riding and racing mtb's since '94, have worked with groups cleaning and maintaining trails, and just bought a Orbea Rise, so now I get grouped into ebiker category and need to join, or start a new emtb advocacy group ? Seriously, WTF ?


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

PS mtb said:


> Do you ride with your cell phone ? They are also known to spontaneously combust...should we outlaw those also ?


bigger battery = bigger fire



PS mtb said:


> Riding on the coat tails of mtb advocacy efforts ? I have been riding and racing mtb's since '94, have worked with groups cleaning and maintaining trails, and just bought a Orbea Rise, so now I get grouped into ebiker category and need to join, or start a new emtb advocacy group ? Seriously, WTF ?


you did buy a different toy with different use considerations. it should be no surprise, then, that you need to advocate differently for the things you want. you should not expect people who don't have that same toy as you to advocate on your behalf. maybe some will do so. but others will not.


----------



## PS mtb (10 mo ago)

Harold said:


> bigger battery = bigger fire
> 
> 
> 
> you did buy a different toy with different use considerations. it should be no surprise, then, that you need to advocate differently for the things you want. you should not expect people who don't have that same toy as you to advocate on your behalf. maybe some will do so. but others will not.


Fire is fire, big fires start from small fires...no win there.
How the hell is it a different use ? I'll be on single track on my DaVinci or my Orbea, riding up, riding down...I don't expect other people to advocate for me, we all need tolerance and respect, granted respect is earned. I guess I'm a good boy when riding my mtb on the trail, and a complete jerk when riding my emtb on the trail... got it. I know, I know, only emtb specific trails...so is it OK to have an mtb on ebike trails ? Do we have to slow down on the climbs to accommodate non emtb's blocking the trail on approved emtb trails ? Bottom line, pretty sure they're here to stay, can we all get along ? I personally think we can.


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

an ebike has a motor and others do not. you can't get around this.

some trails do not allow bikes, because bikes have wheels and others do not. land managers have decided that some trails are suitable for multiple use types and that some are not. ebikes are no different here. the real difference is that rule writing did not take into account a future with an ebike that's clearly got a motor, but also is not 100% motor-powered. ebikes don't fit clearly in existing "motorized" vs. "nonmotorized" rules. they fit a little bit in both. from a management perspective, it does not make sense to permanently shove them into one or the other definition, yet that's exactly what has happened so far.

they should be managed separately from both, but with some overlap with both. but not 100% overlap with either.

gasoline powered motorized vehicles are required to have spark arrestor equipment installed in places where fire is a risk. when a forest fire that causes massive amounts of damage and loss of life is caused by a phone battery spontaneously combusting, you can expect rules to be developed. if land managers don't get ahead of it with ebikes, I see the same thing happening with them. when a wildfire is caused by one (most likely a cheap one of questionable legality), you will see rules developed to reduce the chances of it happening again.

big difference with smaller devices is that the smaller batteries are less likely to cause a large fire, which is less likely to spread. also considering that cell phones are generally handled more frequently, I expect most people are likely to notice a battery that's in bad shape to address it before it erupts in flame.

I'm not saying that such a thing should necessarily exclude ebikes (though, in some places, maybe it should). Rather that it's a management consideration that sets it apart from regular bicycles.


----------



## WHALENARD (Feb 21, 2010)

Beyond chemistry & volume/stored energy, the difference between a cell phone battery and e-bike battery is discharge rate. One creating a more unstable environment than the other. Comparing the 2 is either out of ignorance or bad faith. 

Sent from my Pixel 4a (5G) using Tapatalk


----------



## PS mtb (10 mo ago)

Harold said:


> an ebike has a motor and others do not. you can't get around this.
> 
> some trails do not allow bikes, because bikes have wheels and others do not. land managers have decided that some trails are suitable for multiple use types and that some are not. ebikes are no different here. the real difference is that rule writing did not take into account a future with an ebike that's clearly got a motor, but also is not 100% motor-powered. ebikes don't fit clearly in existing "motorized" vs. "nonmotorized" rules. they fit a little bit in both. from a management perspective, it does not make sense to permanently shove them into one or the other definition, yet that's exactly what has happened so far.
> 
> ...


Funny, but before I ever considered an emtb, i thought that a small, like fist sized fire extinguisher would eventually be required. I live in So.West Colorado and we know all too well about wildfires, and are very mindful of what we do while in the woods. I have yet to see or hear of an emtb catching fire, but seems 100% likely.


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

PS mtb said:


> I have yet to see or hear of an emtb catching fire, but seems 100% likely.


not seen an emtb fire yet, but there have been quite a few fires. Mostly from the cheap trash, it appears. Most places that allow ebikes on trails appear to have rules in place that exclude the cheap kits.






MANY reports of "ebike" fires in elevators in China (though the vids I have seen appear to be electric scooters).

Shocked bystander catches moment e-bike goes up in flames outside East London McDonald's - MyLondon

E-Bike Fires Become Serious Problem in New York City - Consumer Reports

It's only a matter of time before an emtb causes a fire on the trails.


----------

