Federal Rules Regarding E-mtb - Page 2- Mtbr.com
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 201 to 400 of 463
  1. #201
    ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ SuperModerator
    Reputation: Klurejr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    7,017
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    The original ask didn't get through so trying another approach. Someone reported an abusive reputation comment in this thread and the response from moderation was rep is the wild west and you can say whatever you like and it will not be policed. I even commented that I did not think that that was correct. There was confusion that A. I was complaining about my rep, not even my post. B. That the rep score was being asked to be changed, content was what was solely being discussed.

    Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk
    Thanks for clarifying.

    Rep is a weird system and the best that can be done is a mod can send a PM to the person making the rude comments in the rep posting. To be fair, the comment that was posted was not calling the user a bad name, but was questioning the users post, even if it was using foul language, it was not really a personal attack. It is a pretty common thing for people in this country to say "WTF are you talking about" when they are questioning another persons comments.... I don't really like it myself, but if ruthabagah is seriously hurt by it Rockcrusher is right, he will need to reach out to fc or MTBRadmin to have it removed. they are the only ones with those sorts of admin rights on the site.
    Ride Bikes, Drink Craft Beer, Repeat.

    Know these before you post:
    MTBR Posting Guidelines

  2. #202
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    2,889
    Quote Originally Posted by Klurejr View Post
    Thanks for clarifying.

    Rep is a weird system and the best that can be done is a mod can send a PM to the person making the rude comments in the rep posting. To be fair, the comment that was posted was not calling the user a bad name, but was questioning the users post, even if it was using foul language, it was not really a personal attack. It is a pretty common thing for people in this country to say "WTF are you talking about" when they are questioning another persons comments.... I don't really like it myself, but if ruthabagah is seriously hurt by it Rockcrusher is right, he will need to reach out to fc or MTBRadmin to have it removed. they are the only ones with those sorts of admin rights on the site.
    Context was mentioned earlier. Considering the source has perpetuated multiple attacks across various mediums it was read in that light.

    Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk

  3. #203
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    8,335
    Lawsuit!!!!!
    Sinister Bikes
    Wraith Bicycles
    Sunday River Mtn Bike Park
    NEMBA
    Wachusett Brewing Co.

  4. #204
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    1,519
    Bike Duel GO

  5. #205
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ruthabagah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    204
    Quote Originally Posted by Klurejr View Post
    Thanks for clarifying.

    Rep is a weird system and the best that can be done is a mod can send a PM to the person making the rude comments in the rep posting. To be fair, the comment that was posted was not calling the user a bad name, but was questioning the users post, even if it was using foul language, it was not really a personal attack. It is a pretty common thing for people in this country to say "WTF are you talking about" when they are questioning another persons comments.... I don't really like it myself, but if ruthabagah is seriously hurt by it Rockcrusher is right, he will need to reach out to fc or MTBRadmin to have it removed. they are the only ones with those sorts of admin rights on the site.
    Thank you for the clarification.

    I was reviewing my "reputation" and it seems that the same 2-3 users have been the source of all the negative I have received so far. When you give kids a button, they'll press it until their finger hurt. When you give troll a button, they'll press it until their finger bleed...

    Happy riding y'all!

  6. #206
    mtbr member
    Reputation: watermonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,265
    Quote Originally Posted by ruthabagah View Post
    Thank you for the clarification.

    I was reviewing my "reputation" and it seems that the same 2-3 users have been the source of all the negative I have received so far. When you give kids a button, they'll press it until their finger hurt. When you give troll a button, they'll press it until their finger bleed...

    Happy riding y'all!
    Well, someone's got to supply the negative reinforcement for your persecution complex. Happy to help.
    I would advise not taking my advice.

  7. #207
    poser Administrator
    Reputation: rockcrusher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    9,746
    Quote Originally Posted by ruthabagah View Post
    Thank you for the clarification.

    I was reviewing my "reputation" and it seems that the same 2-3 users have been the source of all the negative I have received so far. When you give kids a button, they'll press it until their finger hurt. When you give troll a button, they'll press it until their finger bleed...

    Happy riding y'all!
    FWIW you can only rep someone once and then need to rep something like 100 other folks before you can return, which prevents the clicky clicky of the red button or buddy repping with the green button.
    MTBR Posting Guidelines
    calories>electrons

  8. #208
    Location: 10 ft from Hell Moderator
    Reputation: life behind bars's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,426
    Quote Originally Posted by ruthabagah View Post
    Thank you for the clarification.

    I was reviewing my "reputation" and it seems that the same 2-3 users have been the source of all the negative I have received so far. When you give kids a button, they'll press it until their finger hurt. When you give troll a button, they'll press it until their finger bleed...

    Happy riding y'all!




    Uhmmm, no.
    I ncredibly
    M yopic
    B ackstabbing
    A ssholes

  9. #209
    poser Administrator
    Reputation: rockcrusher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    9,746
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    The original ask didn't get through so trying another approach. Someone reported an abusive reputation comment in this thread and the response from moderation was rep is the wild west and you can say whatever you like and it will not be policed. I even commented that I did not think that that was correct. There was confusion that A. I was complaining about my rep, not even my post. B. That the rep score was being asked to be changed, content was what was solely being discussed.

    Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk
    I am going to say let people fight their own battles. You needn't be the unofficial forum police. As I have said numerous times if you feel you have been unfairly targeted or the guidelines (which are MIA with the new forum ownership, as I have mentioned) are not being adhered too in your opinion direct your concerns to FC directly as he is the only one that can address Reputation comments or can review whether moderators or other users are operating outside the boundaries of what he deems is the forum guidelines.

    I have also mentioned this is a free forum. You don't pay to play here so you get volunteers with opinions. You could certainly suggest to FC that there should be a paywall and he hire people to do the moderating but I would wager that MTBR would quickly become a shell of what it was but maybe he is looking into that anyway. However currently you are stuck with moderating by volunteers. If you don't like them or their methods suggest to FC that he put you in the driver seat for a forum or 2 and see how well you do in being fair and even with the anonymous internet. It ain't fun.
    MTBR Posting Guidelines
    calories>electrons

  10. #210
    poser Administrator
    Reputation: rockcrusher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    9,746
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    I never said I care about reputation and no one asked you to control reputation. However, abusive messages are against the TOS. Now if you are saying I can go write whatever I like about you in your reputation comments with zero repercussions just say so and we can be done.

    Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk
    Knock yourself out, my sense of self worth is not bound by my reputation or comments therein. It is a useless system, systematically abused, and not monitored by ownership or moderators. The only people that can review and adjust it are currently at this point ownership and FC, you cannot directly report rep and it means jackshit to anyone except maybe moderators who can look at a person in the reds history of posts to determine if they are a serial puppet user or someone that came in with an agenda to stir shit up. Otherwise I would wager most folks give a flying **** about it. I mean most users have a full green striped from 1000 posts on anyway. Go to the user list and sort by rep and see who has the largest rep and the worst rep. The worst ones are users that came and went, the highest is so meaningless that it goes pages and pages with users all having a full bar of green.
    MTBR Posting Guidelines
    calories>electrons

  11. #211
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    2,889
    Quote Originally Posted by rockcrusher View Post
    I am going to say let people fight their own battles. You needn't be the unofficial forum police. As I have said numerous times if you feel you have been unfairly targeted or the guidelines (which are MIA with the new forum ownership, as I have mentioned) are not being adhered too in your opinion direct your concerns to FC directly as he is the only one that can address Reputation comments or can review whether moderators or other users are operating outside the boundaries of what he deems is the forum guidelines.

    I have also mentioned this is a free forum. You don't pay to play here so you get volunteers with opinions. You could certainly suggest to FC that there should be a paywall and he hire people to do the moderating but I would wager that MTBR would quickly become a shell of what it was but maybe he is looking into that anyway. However currently you are stuck with moderating by volunteers. If you don't like them or their methods suggest to FC that he put you in the driver seat for a forum or 2 and see how well you do in being fair and even with the anonymous internet. It ain't fun.
    I moderate in other places. It's actually quite easy being fair and balanced with the correct approach. Don't moderate topics about which you are passionate and do not moderate in threads in which you are already otherwise engaged. Neglecting either of those things isn't moderation. It's bully pulpiting.

    Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk

  12. #212
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    8,335
    Who cares?
    Sinister Bikes
    Wraith Bicycles
    Sunday River Mtn Bike Park
    NEMBA
    Wachusett Brewing Co.

  13. #213
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ruthabagah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    204
    Quote Originally Posted by life behind bars View Post
    Uhmmm, no.
    well yeah, but you've constantly been wrong around here, so no worries.Federal Rules Regarding E-mtb-reputation2.jpg

  14. #214
    poser Administrator
    Reputation: rockcrusher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    9,746
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    I moderate in other places. It's actually quite easy being fair and balanced with the correct approach. Don't moderate topics about which you are passionate and do not moderate in threads in which you are already otherwise engaged. Neglecting either of those things isn't moderation. It's bully pulpiting.

    Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk
    Seeing as you seem to fight other people's battles for them I have a hard time imagining that you are fair and balanced. In many of these posts you have made regarding things that are wrong with MTBR it takes me awhile to realize that you are advocating for someone else.

    As far as you charge that moderators are abusing their power I have not seen any posts deleted that were deleted because they were counter to a moderators belief. A moderator calling you out is not different than any other user calling you out or you calling a moderator out. Neither of these are examples of a bully pulpit but examples of discourse in a public forum. If you have examples where a thread has been deleted where your opinion was different than a moderators and it was deleted for that reason then I would concur that you were being silenced with the moderator's power but again most threads are deleted because they become part of a flame war, or are grossly off topic to the OP, or are argumentative for the sake of being argumentative. I looked back through the last 3 months of your posts and saw nothing that was moderated in your history of posts. I went through the list of posts deleted in the last month and didn't see any that were deleted because of personal bias. I saw a lot of deleted posts from flame wars, some troll posts from now banned users, and some spam posts, mostly bitcoin and others, from spammers.

    I know you won't believe any of this as I have a position of power and you will discount what I am saying but I am even and fair in all adjudication I do here at MTBR, wear my heart on my sleeve when it comes to my belief and humbly acknowledge when I am in the wrong.
    MTBR Posting Guidelines
    calories>electrons

  15. #215
    poser Administrator
    Reputation: rockcrusher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    9,746
    Quote Originally Posted by ruthabagah View Post
    well yeah, but you've constantly been wrong around here, so no worries.Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Reputation2.jpg 
Views:	47 
Size:	119.3 KB 
ID:	1276649
    Yeah like I said rep is a broken system. Specific users can rep all day and return to give negative rep. I hope the new system deletes the rep, would much prefer an upvote/downvote system or better nothing.
    MTBR Posting Guidelines
    calories>electrons

  16. #216
    Location: 10 ft from Hell Moderator
    Reputation: life behind bars's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,426
    Quote Originally Posted by ruthabagah View Post
    well yeah, but you've constantly been wrong around here, so no worries.Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Reputation2.jpg 
Views:	47 
Size:	119.3 KB 
ID:	1276649



    And you wonder why you get tagged, but not by the same users over and over as you spuriously claimed. Thanks for validating the point.
    I ncredibly
    M yopic
    B ackstabbing
    A ssholes

  17. #217
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ruthabagah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    204
    Quote Originally Posted by life behind bars View Post
    And you wonder why you get tagged, but not by the same users over and over as you spuriously claimed. Thanks for validating the point.
    What point? I have checked your post history (yeah, slow day at work...) and you don't make points. Like ever. You just casually jump on post that you barely understand and make a one line snappy comment, to stir the pot. You mostly live in denial and your call/predictions for a "E Apocalypse" have yet to materialize.

    Anyway... Have, what you think is fun, with this one LBB, and feel free to add to my reputation as usual, I love red anyway.

  18. #218
    mtbr member
    Reputation: hikerdave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,267
    Quote Originally Posted by ruthabagah View Post
    What point? I have checked your post history (yeah, slow day at work...) and you don't make points. Like ever. You just casually jump on post that you barely understand and make a one line snappy comment, to stir the pot. You mostly live in denial and your call/predictions for a "E Apocalypse" have yet to materialize.

    Anyway... Have, what you think is fun, with this one LBB, and feel free to add to my reputation as usual, I love red anyway.
    From the point of view of a bicycle traditionalist, a ruling that equates electric bicycles with human-powered bicyclists IS the apocalypse as they see their dream of wilderness access melt away. Even I, a newly-minted eBiker, don’t think that eBikes should be managed the same as human-powered bicycles.

    I will continue to advocate for increased eBike access in the National Forests closest to my home; it is absurd that my eBike is subject to environmental restrictions designed for motorcycles with 25 to 50 times the power and double the gross weight. And yes, I’ve tried out moto trails and it wasn’t a great experience; those trails are designed for motors a lot more powerful than mine - lots of steep hills and sandy washes killed my battery in no time. At least the trails weren’t busy so I didn’t get in anyone’s way. (I did this decades ago on my human-powered bike too and it wasn’t a great experience then either - lots of short steep climbs with no real payoff of sustained downhill riding).
    "Thank you, God, for letting me have another day"
    The Milagro Beanfield War

  19. #219
    Sheepherder/Cat Herder Moderator
    Reputation: Visicypher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    2,715
    Have we really been at this thing long???? And you are correct, it is NOT fun.
    ...building wherever they'll let me...

  20. #220
    10,000,000 Watts
    Reputation: Gutch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2,752
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    It's all e-bike friendly except for Hobbs which is kind of murky on the technicality of it being legal. For gnarly stuff you're going to want to hit Fitzgerald, Coler, and the two trail systems in Eureka Springs. Back 40 is a great burn out the miles ride and Slaughter Pen is the OG and definitely worth hitting.

    Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk
    Thank you!
    Mountain Bikers Do It Til They Bonk!

  21. #221
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    461
    can we ride blm trails now on ebikes or wait till end of the month?

  22. #222
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ruthabagah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    204
    Quote Originally Posted by etacata View Post
    can we ride blm trails now on ebikes or wait till end of the month?
    Personally, I am waiting for an official communications of the local district I'd like to ride late October.

  23. #223
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    323
    Quote Originally Posted by Boulder Pilot View Post
    I use the term "electric motorized bike" because this is the term that is used by Cal. State and US Federal agencies that I deal with. The agencies differentiate mountain bikes from motorized bikes. All of the people on this forum are wasting their time trying to convince anyone on this forum otherwise. These proponents for electric motorized bikes should, in my opinion, be trying to build and earn partnerships with all trail user groups.
    Cheers,

    Jason
    Nice

  24. #224
    mtbr member
    Reputation: sfgiantsfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2,161
    Quote Originally Posted by etacata View Post
    can we ride blm trails now on ebikes or wait till end of the month?
    No you can't. This is from P4B

    "While it has been reported that the Secretarial Order immediately opened up all DOI lands to e-bikes this in not accurate. The Sec Order creates a process by which each agency within the DOI that manages public lands will creat a new policy for e-bikes that are specific to each agency. "

    By the end of september each agency is supposed to report back to the Sec of Int any laws or regulations that that limit its ability to make policy changes and a timeline for recieving public comments on the proposed rules.

    I don't think you'll be riding by October either. I have seen this happen in Marin and as soon as they take this step, the law suits start and all access is postponed.
    I'm sick of all the Irish stereotypes, as soon as I finish this beer I"m punching someone

  25. #225
    Let go lightly
    Reputation: CruzSS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    220
    My biggest concern over the years I have been riding is expanding trail access for MTB's. I worry that this new order by Interior will reduce the number of trails I can pedal my bike on. So I wrote this to explain my concerns https://annoyedcyclist.wordpress.com...ountain-bikes/

    Sent from my Pixel 3 using ****************android_app_mtbr

  26. #226
    mtbr member
    Reputation: sfgiantsfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2,161
    Quote Originally Posted by CruzSS View Post
    My biggest concern over the years I have been riding is expanding trail access for MTB's. I worry that this new order by Interior will reduce the number of trails I can pedal my bike on. So I wrote this to explain my concerns https://annoyedcyclist.wordpress.com...ountain-bikes/

    Sent from my Pixel 3 using ****************android_app_mtbr
    Your fears a justified.
    I'm sick of all the Irish stereotypes, as soon as I finish this beer I"m punching someone

  27. #227
    mtbr member
    Reputation: sfgiantsfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2,161
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    The original ask didn't get through so trying another approach. Someone reported an abusive reputation comment in this thread and the response from moderation was rep is the wild west and you can say whatever you like and it will not be policed. I even commented that I did not think that that was correct. There was confusion that A. I was complaining about my rep, not even my post. B. That the rep score was being asked to be changed, content was what was solely being discussed.

    Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk
    The abusive reputation comment was "what the **** are you talking about".

    I still don't know what the **** he's talking about.
    I'm sick of all the Irish stereotypes, as soon as I finish this beer I"m punching someone

  28. #228
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Posts
    22
    Quote Originally Posted by sfgiantsfan View Post
    No you can't. This is from P4B

    "While it has been reported that the Secretarial Order immediately opened up all DOI lands to e-bikes this in not accurate. The Sec Order creates a process by which each agency within the DOI that manages public lands will creat a new policy for e-bikes that are specific to each agency. "

    By the end of september each agency is supposed to report back to the Sec of Int any laws or regulations that that limit its ability to make policy changes and a timeline for recieving public comments on the proposed rules.

    I don't think you'll be riding by October either. I have seen this happen in Marin and as soon as they take this step, the law suits start and all access is postponed.
    I read this as saying each dept has 30 days to change their policies to match this memo? Also states at bottom no legal challenge can be brought against this policy? Whatever that means?

    Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

  29. #229
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Posts
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by Klurejr View Post
    My point was that there is already a ton of backlash on the order that is defining eBikes as Bicycles and giving them access to the same trails bicycles are allowed on.
    There is nothing new in the classification. Federal law has stated for well over a decade that these low speed electric bicycles cannot be considered motor vehicles. It is this exact language that prompted questions of clarification to the Government as a precursor to lawsuits. In the fight of commerce and regulated products Congress wins over opinions, and even policies of government entities. As the law stands, groups maintaining trails on public land could fight a growing population of users in public opinion and very soon in courts and they would lose because the people who make laws will not cede their authority to regulate commerce. Want to change it - change the law.

    What if hiking groups ban people with pacemakers from pedestrian only access - it is an assist motor and after all, "a motor is a motor".


    The writing is on the wall, the market share analysis tells you all you need to know about how this will play out over time. My advice to advocacy groups is bring the new ebikers in to the fold, work with them and change the law to define only Class I bikes as bicycles (much like BC rules). Building these new people into already existing groups could have a potentially giant shift from hikers to cycling as the dominant voice of outdoor recreation in the future. Pretending you are going to keep the billions of dollars soaking into the bicycle market from ebikes showing up on your trails is folly.

  30. #230
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    5,454
    ^^^ Don't confuse a DOT hiway ruling in the consumer protection classification with rules for off road biking. Much different context. New England rider here. Not so much in the way of national parks here, except for Acadia in Maine. Most of the rule makers , land mangers and stake holders are local, town and regional. I'm sure they are watching and looking carefully though. No one is going to classify a pacemaker as a motor, really?

  31. #231
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    2,889
    Quote Originally Posted by leeboh View Post
    ^^^ Don't confuse a DOT hiway ruling in the consumer protection classification with rules for off road biking. Much different context. New England rider here. Not so much in the way of national parks here, except for Acadia in Maine. Most of the rule makers , land mangers and stake holders are local, town and regional. I'm sure they are watching and looking carefully though. No one is going to classify a pacemaker as a motor, really?
    The ruling applies to much more than just National Parks...

    Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk

  32. #232
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    323
    Quote Originally Posted by leeboh View Post
    ^^^ Don't confuse a DOT hiway ruling in the consumer protection classification with rules for off road biking. Much different context. New England rider here. Not so much in the way of national parks here, except for Acadia in Maine. Most of the rule makers , land mangers and stake holders are local, town and regional. I'm sure they are watching and looking carefully though. No one is going to classify a pacemaker as a motor, really?
    15 U.S.C. § 2085 is the CPSC law and it is the document that equates eBikes with bikes on trails and pathways in 75 percent of Federal lands according to the DOI order. When reading the Order from Secretary Bernhardt, it is unlikely that the remaining 25 percent (USFS) has any legs to stand on for eBikes as motorized because of the CPSC law. State legislatures are quoting 15 U.S.C. § 2085 as the document which they base their decision to equate eBikes with nonmotorized on trails as well.
    DOI order:
    4 Policy. Consistent with governing laws and regulations:
    a) For the purpose ofthis Order, "e-bikes" shall mean "low-speed electric bicycle" as
    defined by 15 U.S.C. § 2085 and falling within one of the following classifications:
    i) "Class 1 electric bicycle" shall mean an electric bicycle equipped with a
    motor that provides assistance only when the rider is pedaling, and that ceases to provide assistance
    when the bicycle reaches the speed of 20 miles per hour;
    ii) "Class 2 electric bicycle" shall mean an electric bicycle equipped with a
    motor that may be used exclusively to propel the bicycle, and that is not capable of providing
    assistance when the bicycle reaches the speed of 20 miles per hour; and
    iii) "Class 3 electric bicycle" shall mean an electric bicycle equipped with a
    motor that provides assistance only when the rider is pedaling, and that ceases to provide assistance
    when the bicycle reaches the speed of28 miles per hour.
    b) E-bikes shall be allowed where other types of bicycles are allowed; and
    c) E-bikes shall not be allowed where other types of bicycles are prohibited.

  33. #233
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Posts
    22
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    The ruling applies to much more than just National Parks...

    Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk
    Go up a dozen posts and read it. It discusses bring current policies in line with the consumer protection act.....

    Edit sorry quoted wrong post.

    Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

  34. #234
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    2,889
    Quote Originally Posted by moabmark View Post
    Go up a dozen posts and read it. It discusses bring current policies in line with the consumer protection act.....

    Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
    I'm not sure why you think I should reread it?

    Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk

  35. #235
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Posts
    22
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    I'm not sure why you think I should reread it?

    Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk
    I miss quoted you my bad.

    Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

  36. #236
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    5,521
    Quote Originally Posted by tinfang View Post
    There is nothing new in the classification. Federal law has stated for well over a decade that these low speed electric bicycles cannot be considered motor vehicles. It is this exact language that prompted questions of clarification to the Government as a precursor to lawsuits. In the fight of commerce and regulated products Congress wins over opinions, and even policies of government entities. As the law stands, groups maintaining trails on public land could fight a growing population of users in public opinion and very soon in courts and they would lose because the people who make laws will not cede their authority to regulate commerce. Want to change it - change the law.

    What if hiking groups ban people with pacemakers from pedestrian only access - it is an assist motor and after all, "a motor is a motor".


    The writing is on the wall, the market share analysis tells you all you need to know about how this will play out over time. My advice to advocacy groups is bring the new ebikers in to the fold, work with them and change the law to define only Class I bikes as bicycles (much like BC rules). Building these new people into already existing groups could have a potentially giant shift from hikers to cycling as the dominant voice of outdoor recreation in the future. Pretending you are going to keep the billions of dollars soaking into the bicycle market from ebikes showing up on your trails is folly.
    To add to that, but make no real contribution:

    Wouldn't horses be considered a biological motor? Worse yet, you don't have to put out any effort to get a horse to move. Even worse than that, horses leave "residue" behind.
    Lead by my Lefty............... right down the trail, no brakes.

  37. #237
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    2,889
    Quote Originally Posted by Gutch View Post
    Gonna be in Bentonville Sunday for a week of riding. I’m assuming it’s all Ebike friendly? I know you live around there. Any advice on trails besides the obvious? The backwoods, gnarly techy stuff, you know the pucker kind?
    How are you liking Bentonville? You're not part of the Jeremy McGrath, Jimmy Johnson, Brian Lopes, Hans Rey, a Redbull Cross racer and a few other big names group that's in town and riding e-bikes are you?

    Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk

  38. #238
    10,000,000 Watts
    Reputation: Gutch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2,752
    Not bad, rode Slaughter, back 40, Hobbs, Coler, and am traveling to Fitzgerald today. Hey do we ride “the best trail ever” clockwise or counter? Thx man.
    Mountain Bikers Do It Til They Bonk!

  39. #239
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    2,889
    Quote Originally Posted by Gutch View Post
    Not bad, rode Slaughter, back 40, Hobbs, Coler, and am traveling to Fitzgerald today. Hey do we ride “the best trail ever” clockwise or counter? Thx man.
    I want to say clockwise but can't remember. There's a Fitzgerald trail conditions page on Facebook where you could ask.

    Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk

  40. #240
    E-Moderator
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    714
    These threads always come for circle several times over! Arguing over speed cutoff when it’s already set at 20mph is pointless.
    Class 1, 2 & 3 bikes going up normal climbs unless under an elite rider, YOU will not hit 20mph. I don’t know why people against ebikes aways try to peddle this argument.
    Only flats or slight up hills will you can reach 20mph and if going slight up hills, it’s still a strong push!
    Point downhill and you can easy surpass 20mph, but so can bikes. Our top speeds on downhill single track are regulated by the trail and skill set of the rider not the cutoff speed.


    A throttle on a 250watt bike is not going to be any faster than a Class 1 bike

  41. #241
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    360
    Here's a bike made from a kit. It has pedals, so I guess it's still a bicycle, and since it is home made it doesn't have a class sticker, so I suppose you could call it whatever class you want. Pretty cool, it will do 100 kph on flat pavement!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F_yHTRN6DMs

  42. #242
    Location: 10 ft from Hell Moderator
    Reputation: life behind bars's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,426
    Quote Originally Posted by mtbbiker View Post


    A throttle on a 250watt bike is not going to be any faster than a Class 1 bike



    Until it's hot rodded beyond 250 watts. Don't pretend it isn't happening.
    I ncredibly
    M yopic
    B ackstabbing
    A ssholes

  43. #243
    mtbr member
    Reputation: J.B. Weld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    12,783
    Quote Originally Posted by mtbbiker View Post
    These threads always come for circle several times over! Arguing over speed cutoff when it’s already set at 20mph is pointless.
    Class 1, 2 & 3 bikes going up normal climbs unless under an elite rider, YOU will not hit 20mph. I don’t know why people against ebikes aways try to peddle this argument.
    Only flats or slight up hills will you can reach 20mph and if going slight up hills, it’s still a strong push!


    Maybe you can't but I found myself giggling the other day when I was climbing a ~15% slope and looked down to see I was doing 19mph. I'd probably be doing good to maintain 5 or 6 mph on my bike.
    I brake for stinkbugs

  44. #244
    E-Moderator
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    714
    Quote Originally Posted by life behind bars View Post
    Until it's hot rodded beyond 250 watts. Don't pretend it isn't happening.
    Can you show me a class 1 production (Levo, Trazer, Powerfly, Giant) bike that has been hotrod giving it more power?

  45. #245
    E-Moderator
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    714
    Quote Originally Posted by J.B. Weld View Post
    Maybe you can't but I found myself giggling the other day when I was climbing a ~15% slope and looked down to see I was doing 19mph. I'd probably be doing good to maintain 5 or 6 mph on my bike.
    Awesome, you must be a good climber

  46. #246
    mtbr member
    Reputation: J.B. Weld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    12,783
    Quote Originally Posted by mtbbiker View Post
    Awesome, you must be a good climber


    I'm ok for an amateur of my age but give me a class 1 and I will absolutely school any pro on the planet

    I really don't care and wasn't trying to boast, just refuting your blanket statement.
    I brake for stinkbugs

  47. #247
    E-Moderator
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    714
    Quote Originally Posted by J.B. Weld View Post
    I'm ok for an amateur of my age but give me a class 1 and I will absolutely school any pro on the planet

    I really don't care and wasn't trying to boast, just refuting your blanket statement.
    And I’m still stating majority of the people on ebikes cannot hold 20mph up a 15% grade. You are a good climber.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  48. #248
    ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ SuperModerator
    Reputation: Klurejr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    7,017
    Quote Originally Posted by bpressnall View Post
    Here's a bike made from a kit. It has pedals, so I guess it's still a bicycle, and since it is home made it doesn't have a class sticker, so I suppose you could call it whatever class you want. Pretty cool, it will do 100 kph on flat pavement!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F_yHTRN6DMs
    That thing looks pretty different from the factory Class 1, 2 or 3 bikes that can be bought off the shelf. Will be interesting to see what happens when a guy shows up at a National Park with one of those monsters and tries to ride it thinking he qualifies under this new Order. I don't think the Rangers will be fooled.
    Ride Bikes, Drink Craft Beer, Repeat.

    Know these before you post:
    MTBR Posting Guidelines

  49. #249
    Moderator Moderator
    Reputation: Harryman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    2,733
    Quote Originally Posted by mtbbiker View Post
    A throttle on a 250watt bike is not going to be any faster than a Class 1 bike
    Assuming the speed cut off limit is respected, all Class 1 and 2 ebikes are equal in top powered speed, 20 mph, it doesn't matter if you activate the motor by turning pedals or turning a throttle. Not that the speed cut off is respected by many.

    A US legal 750w Class 1 would have more available power and torque than the 250w ebikes currently being ridden regardless of if it has a throttle or not, which would enable the rider to add roughly 1500w to their effort. As gradients increase they'd be able to crush the current crop of emtbs while climbing. Assuming it's a piece of trail you can go fast on anyway.

  50. #250
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    2,889
    Quote Originally Posted by Harryman View Post
    Assuming the speed cut off limit is respected, all Class 1 and 2 ebikes are equal in top powered speed, 20 mph, it doesn't matter if you activate the motor by turning pedals or turning a throttle. Not that the speed cut off is respected by many.

    A US legal 750w Class 1 would have more available power and torque than the 250w ebikes currently being ridden regardless of if it has a throttle or not, which would enable the rider to add roughly 1500w to their effort. As gradients increase they'd be able to crush the current crop of emtbs while climbing. Assuming it's a piece of trail you can go fast on anyway.
    The biggest difference in Class 1 and 2 for mountain bikes is that the latter offers much more potential for trail erosion.

    Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk

  51. #251
    mtbr member
    Reputation: J.B. Weld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    12,783
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    The biggest difference in Class 1 and 2 for mountain bikes is that the latter offers much more potential for trail erosion.

    Possibly, but I would guess a bigger reason is that when someone is being propelled without pedaling it becomes impossible to argue that they are on a bicycle, even if speed and torque capabilities are identical.
    I brake for stinkbugs

  52. #252
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    2,889
    Quote Originally Posted by J.B. Weld View Post
    Possibly, but I would guess a bigger reason is that when someone is being propelled without pedaling it becomes impossible to argue that they are on a bicycle, even if speed and torque capabilities are identical.
    Personally, I couldn't care less about if someone is pedaling or not. It doesn't effect and doesn't effect other trail users if ridden in a responsible manner. The issue is the ability to roost that's present with a throttle.

    Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk

  53. #253
    mtbr member
    Reputation: J.B. Weld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    12,783
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    The issue is the ability to roost that's present with a throttle.

    That ability also exists for pedal assist, and they could easily limit torque just like they limit speed.

    I get that you don't care about the pedaling thing and as far as e-bikes go I really don't care either. I'm just saying that it could never be sold to the public at large as being the same as a bicycle in regards to backcountry access. Therefore pedals.
    I brake for stinkbugs

  54. #254
    Moderator Moderator
    Reputation: Harryman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    2,733
    Quote Originally Posted by J.B. Weld View Post
    Possibly, but I would guess a bigger reason is that when someone is being propelled without pedaling it becomes impossible to argue that they are on a bicycle, even if speed and torque capabilities are identical.
    The interior secretary doesn't seem to share the opinion that class 2 ebikes aren't bicycles, his order is to give them the same access. We'll see if local blm agencies have the leeway and interest in implementing the separation of classes.

  55. #255
    mtbr member
    Reputation: J.B. Weld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    12,783
    Quote Originally Posted by Harryman View Post
    The interior secretary doesn't seem to share the opinion that class 2 ebikes aren't bicycles, his order is to give them the same access. We'll see if local blm agencies have the leeway and interest in implementing the separation of classes.

    I guess that shouldn't surprise me, probably they're be a new interior secretary soon anyway though.

    Well then why not class 3? That's bs discrimination! The rider controls their actions on the trail after all.
    I brake for stinkbugs

  56. #256
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    2,889
    Quote Originally Posted by J.B. Weld View Post
    That ability also exists for pedal assist, and they could easily limit torque just like they limit speed.

    I get that you don't care about the pedaling thing and as far as e-bikes go I really don't care either. I'm just saying that it could never be sold to the public at large as being the same as a bicycle in regards to backcountry access. Therefore pedals.
    The potential to roost with a throttle is exponentially higher than with pedal only actuation. Frankly it's not even close.

    Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk

  57. #257
    mtbr member
    Reputation: J.B. Weld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    12,783
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    The potential to roost with a throttle is exponentially higher than with pedal only actuation. Frankly it's not even close.

    Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk


    Now you're talking like the anti-class 1 crowd, complaining of problems that have yet to occur.
    I brake for stinkbugs

  58. #258
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    2,889
    Quote Originally Posted by J.B. Weld View Post
    Now you're talking like the anti-class 1 crowd, complaining of problems that have yet to occur.
    Nope, have I advocated for excluding them based off of those things? From a regulatory standpoint that's the only minute difference. I can think of four, maybe five, places on 250+ miles of trail that it would even potentially be a problem. Like I said I have zero issues with them.

    Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk

  59. #259
    mtbr member
    Reputation: J.B. Weld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    12,783
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    Nope, have I advocated for excluding them based off of those things? From a regulatory standpoint that's the only minute difference. I can think of four, maybe five, places on 250+ miles of trail that it would even potentially be a problem. Like I said I have zero issues with them.

    So you don't advocate excluding class 2's but admit they "offer much more potential for soil erosion" and their potential to roost is "exponentially higher." Fair enough and I won't argue that. Curious though, based on that would you advocate excluding class 3's?
    I brake for stinkbugs

  60. #260
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    8,335
    Quote Originally Posted by J.B. Weld View Post
    So you don't advocate excluding class 2's but admit they "offer much more potential for soil erosion" and their potential to roost is "exponentially higher." Fair enough and I won't argue that. Curious though, based on that would you advocate excluding class 3's?
    Would seem to go against his regular 'ally or lose all access' screed.
    Sinister Bikes
    Wraith Bicycles
    Sunday River Mtn Bike Park
    NEMBA
    Wachusett Brewing Co.

  61. #261
    Moderator Moderator
    Reputation: Harryman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    2,733
    Quote Originally Posted by J.B. Weld View Post
    I guess that shouldn't surprise me, probably they're be a new interior secretary soon anyway though.

    Well then why not class 3? That's bs discrimination! The rider controls their actions on the trail after all.
    Yep. They all have the same power and torque, so if they're all considered low power by the feds, it's hard to argue they're different in their jurisdictions.

  62. #262
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    2,889
    Quote Originally Posted by J.B. Weld View Post
    So you don't advocate excluding class 2's but admit they "offer much more potential for soil erosion" and their potential to roost is "exponentially higher." Fair enough and I won't argue that. Curious though, based on that would you advocate excluding class 3's?
    An expontial of a tiny number is still a tiny number, so no, I don't see the need to exclude them. It's all relative. No, I don't advocate excluding class 3s. The trails I ride have the ability to easily achieve the same speeds with no assist and there have not been any major issues so I don't see the need at this point.

    Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk

  63. #263
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    2,737

    Good article in Outside Magazine summarizing "The Order"


  64. #264
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,048
    I don't understand how requiring e-bikes to be pedal-assist only “decreases regulatory burden” on land managers and rangers. Another short-sighted and less-than-thought-out policy from this administration.

  65. #265
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    405
    Quote Originally Posted by chazpat View Post
    Try entering your ebike in a serious bicycle race and see how that works out.

    Again, what's wrong with "ebike" and "ebiking"?
    These fat slackers entered their emtb's in a serious race

    https://www.pinkbike.com/news/result...hips-2019.html

  66. #266
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ruthabagah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    204
    Quote Originally Posted by shreddr View Post
    These fat slackers entered their emtb's in a serious race

    https://www.pinkbike.com/news/result...hips-2019.html
    wow... fat slackers.... typical prejudice and misrepresentation.

    lets take just 2 of the name on this list, as an example.

    https://www.velonews.com/tag/maghalie-rochette

    Seem pretty fit to me....

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julien_Absalon

    Won gold at the Olympics....

  67. #267
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    405
    Quote Originally Posted by ruthabagah View Post
    wow... fat slackers.... typical prejudice and misrepresentation.

    lets take just 2 of the name on this list, as an example.

    https://www.velonews.com/tag/maghalie-rochette

    Seem pretty fit to me....

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julien_Absalon

    Won gold at the Olympics....
    Was my sarcasm completely lost on you?

  68. #268
    mtbr member
    Reputation: J.B. Weld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    12,783
    Quote Originally Posted by ruthabagah View Post
    wow... fat slackers.... typical prejudice and misrepresentation.


    I believe shreddr's comment was tongue & cheek.
    I brake for stinkbugs

  69. #269
    saddlemeat
    Reputation: bsieb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    3,814
    Quote Originally Posted by shreddr View Post
    Was my sarcasm completely lost on you?
    E-posers have little sense of irony or sarcasm, are clumsy with the mtb lexicon.
    I ride with the best dogs.




  70. #270
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    323
    Quote Originally Posted by honkinunit View Post
    The Wilderness Society and Wilderness Watch have gone full crazy. I rarely hear their names anymore except when it comes to opposing pro-(e)bike legislation. It's a huge positive when Backcountry Horsemen concede that the anti-(e)bike stance is a bad look and start embracing reality.

  71. #271
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    405
    Quote Originally Posted by bsieb View Post
    E-posers have little sense of irony or sarcasm, are clumsy with the mtb lexicon.
    I'm not sure what e-posers are. I ride an emtb and I am not a poser, just a long time rider having a great time with the new technology. I am really surprised at the level of bravado of the purists, no wonder I quit racing I couldn't stand myself anymore

  72. #272
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ruthabagah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    204
    Quote Originally Posted by shreddr View Post
    Was my sarcasm completely lost on you?
    Yep... Sorry.

  73. #273
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ruthabagah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    204
    3 parks already made a decision it seems.

    https://www.eastidahonews.com/2019/0...ational-parks/

  74. #274
    Location: 10 ft from Hell Moderator
    Reputation: life behind bars's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,426
    Quote Originally Posted by ruthabagah View Post
    3 parks already made a decision it seems.

    https://www.eastidahonews.com/2019/0...ational-parks/



    Bicycles are restricted to pavement in those parks, no?
    I ncredibly
    M yopic
    B ackstabbing
    A ssholes

  75. #275
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ruthabagah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    204
    Quote Originally Posted by life behind bars View Post
    Bicycles are restricted to pavement in those parks, no?
    There are a couple of MTB trails in Yellowstone. I rode the Mt Washburn one a couple of years ago. Mostly dirt road, no singletrack.

  76. #276
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    323
    Quote Originally Posted by ruthabagah View Post
    There are a couple of MTB trails in Yellowstone. I rode the Mt Washburn one a couple of years ago. Mostly dirt road, no singletrack.
    The trails would be the next step for the eBike lobbyists. EBikers are a user group that aren't content with being the doormat of our public lands. There is no blanket stipulation that regular bikes can't be banned (where eBikes are allowed), so we can keep that restriction in place as most mountain bikers have accepted their position at the bottom of the totem pole.

  77. #277
    mtbr member
    Reputation: tom tom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    373
    Look at this......Not one e-bike track causing the severe trail erosion.........
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Federal Rules Regarding E-mtb-20190110_212823.jpg  

    I Pity The Fool That Can't Ride A Bike Without A Dropper!!

  78. #278
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Posts
    30
    Quote Originally Posted by tom tom View Post
    Look at this......Not one e-bike track causing the severe trail erosion.........
    Wheres the Horse tracks.


    Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

  79. #279
    mtbr member
    Reputation: richardjohnson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    117
    Quote Originally Posted by figofspee View Post
    The trails would be the next step for the eBike lobbyists. EBikers are a user group that aren't content with being the doormat of our public lands. There is no blanket stipulation that regular bikes can't be banned (where eBikes are allowed), so we can keep that restriction in place as most mountain bikers have accepted their position at the bottom of the totem pole.
    dang you are weird.

  80. #280
    mtbr member
    Reputation: richardjohnson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    117
    Quote Originally Posted by tom tom View Post
    Look at this......Not one e-bike track causing the severe trail erosion.........
    I think you meant to post this in the thread about ebike erosion for 2016.

    I don't think I have read a post from anyone in the last 2 years or more regarding their exception to ebikes being about erosion. Heck even the federal rules don't mention erosion. This is a weird thing to post in this thread.

  81. #281
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    5,454
    Quote Originally Posted by figofspee View Post
    The trails would be the next step for the eBike lobbyists. EBikers are a user group that aren't content with being the doormat of our public lands. There is no blanket stipulation that regular bikes can't be banned (where eBikes are allowed), so we can keep that restriction in place as most mountain bikers have accepted their position at the bottom of the totem pole.
    Just wow. Do you have a clue as to how trail access and advocacy work? What trails in what state do you ride on?

  82. #282
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    323
    Quote Originally Posted by richardjohnson View Post
    dang you are weird.
    Your analysis would have more impact if your avatar wasn't some random picture of a creepy old dude.

  83. #283
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    2,889
    Quote Originally Posted by leeboh View Post
    Just wow. Do you have a clue as to how trail access and advocacy work? What trails in what state do you ride on?
    Apparently the work is being done by lobbiest and, according to some in this thread, courtrooms, just like you were told it was moving to.

    Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk

  84. #284
    Location: 10 ft from Hell Moderator
    Reputation: life behind bars's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,426
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    Apparently the work is being done by lobbiest and, according to some in this thread, courtrooms, just like you were told it was moving to.

    Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk






    Lobbyists don't build trails, people do. Let us know when you get a new trail approved in a national park.
    I ncredibly
    M yopic
    B ackstabbing
    A ssholes

  85. #285
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    790
    I am pretty happy with the trails that we have and not in search of more trails, but maybe I would care if there were not tons within a 15 minute drive and tons more within a 35 minute drive. I just want Pedlec to be able to ride them without a medical waiver because I think they should be able to.

  86. #286
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    2,889
    Quote Originally Posted by life behind bars View Post
    Lobbyists don't build trails, people do. Let us know when you get a new trail approved in a national park.
    The post I quoted nor my post had anything to do with actual building of trails. However, in your example you even admit you need approval before you can build. Lobbiest are one mechanism to get said approval.


    Also your national park qualifier is pretty specific considering that is only a fraction of the land the NPS manages. Additionally, singletrack mountain bike trails do exist and more are being built.

    Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk

  87. #287
    Location: 10 ft from Hell Moderator
    Reputation: life behind bars's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,426
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    more are being built.

    Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk



    Where?
    I ncredibly
    M yopic
    B ackstabbing
    A ssholes

  88. #288
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    8,335
    Quote Originally Posted by tom tom View Post
    Look at this......Not one e-bike track causing the severe trail erosion.........
    You should probably find out what 'erosion' actually means.

    It's not that.
    Sinister Bikes
    Wraith Bicycles
    Sunday River Mtn Bike Park
    NEMBA
    Wachusett Brewing Co.

  89. #289
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    2,889
    Quote Originally Posted by life behind bars View Post
    Where?
    Predictably you just ignore all the issues with your post and latch on to one tiny idea.

    You're going to have to read to find it though because I'm not sure how this site found out about it already.

    https://www.adventure-journal.com/20...kes-on-trails/

    Oh, by the way, those are also going to be e-bike legal the day they open.

    Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk

  90. #290
    Location: 10 ft from Hell Moderator
    Reputation: life behind bars's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,426
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    Predictably you just ignore all the issues with your post and latch on to one tiny idea.

    You're going to have to read to find it though because I'm not sure how this site found out about it already.

    https://www.adventure-journal.com/20...kes-on-trails/

    Oh, by the way, those are also going to be e-bike legal the day they open.

    Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk




    Not a thing in there that even points to new trails in national parks.
    I ncredibly
    M yopic
    B ackstabbing
    A ssholes

  91. #291
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    2,889
    Quote Originally Posted by life behind bars View Post
    Not a thing in there that een points to new trails in national parks.
    "(soon, not yet)"

    Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk

  92. #292
    chasing simplicity
    Reputation: MattMay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    1,128
    Quote Originally Posted by rancher52 View Post
    Wheres the Horse tracks.


    Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
    Exactly right. Horses do more damage to trails than any bike of any kind. For some reason horsey people delight in riding right after it rains. 1200 lbs in wet dirt...hoof holes for days. Then the hoof holes harden and bake in the sun. So fun to ride. (Not!)
    Never underestimate an old man with a mountain bike.

  93. #293
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    5,521
    Quote Originally Posted by tom tom View Post
    Look at this......Not one e-bike track causing the severe trail erosion.........
    Quote Originally Posted by richardjohnson View Post
    I think you meant to post this in the thread about ebike erosion for 2016.

    I don't think I have read a post from anyone in the last 2 years or more regarding their exception to ebikes being about erosion. Heck even the federal rules don't mention erosion. This is a weird thing to post in this thread.
    Rich,

    thanks for pointing out the obvious.

    I will say I am working day and night trying to figure out how I (180lbs on a 50 ebike) cause more erosion than my buddy who is 210lbs and riding a 30lbs stumpjumper.

    I think I will get there and figure it out, but my sarcasm credits might need replenishing first.
    Lead by my Lefty............... right down the trail, no brakes.

  94. #294
    Cleavage Of The Tetons
    Reputation: rideit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,682
    It’s simple, you have the capability of riding three times as much in a day with similar effort, that’s three times the potential wear and tear.
    "We LOVE cows! They make trails for us.....

    And then we eat them."

    Thrill Bikers Unite!

  95. #295
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    1,519
    Quote Originally Posted by rideit View Post
    It’s simple, you have the capability of riding three times as much in a day with similar effort, that’s three times the potential wear and tear.
    That is a cool thing.
    Rescue 3x faster.

  96. #296
    Cleavage Of The Tetons
    Reputation: rideit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,682
    And 3 times the chance of a mishap.
    "We LOVE cows! They make trails for us.....

    And then we eat them."

    Thrill Bikers Unite!

  97. #297
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    5,521
    Quote Originally Posted by rideit View Post
    It’s simple, you have the capability of riding three times as much in a day with similar effort, that’s three times the potential wear and tear.
    I see your point, but then what do we do with that alien-like XC rider who can do 3x my normal distance?

    Maybe I should have prefaced my comment with "When going the same distance.............."
    Lead by my Lefty............... right down the trail, no brakes.

  98. #298
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    5,521
    Quote Originally Posted by 33red View Post
    That is a cool thing.
    Rescue 3x faster.
    it would be nice to be able to keep up with a few of the XC riders around here. They ride further and faster than I could ever do.

    You could also self-rescue in some situations.
    Lead by my Lefty............... right down the trail, no brakes.

  99. #299
    Cleavage Of The Tetons
    Reputation: rideit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,682
    Quote Originally Posted by ziscwg View Post
    I see your point, but then what do we do with that alien-like XC rider who can do 3x my normal distance?

    Maybe I should have prefaced my comment with "When going the same distance.............."
    They are such outliers, they are basically a statistical anomaly. Which is offset by the freak doing 5 runs on the ebike!
    "We LOVE cows! They make trails for us.....

    And then we eat them."

    Thrill Bikers Unite!

  100. #300
    10,000,000 Watts
    Reputation: Gutch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2,752
    Ebikes and Trump- make mtbing great again.. love it.
    Mountain Bikers Do It Til They Bonk!

  101. #301
    ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ SuperModerator
    Reputation: Klurejr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    7,017
    Quote Originally Posted by Gutch View Post
    Dude- your a great guy I’m sure, but man you are always poking at a shroud of evidence that proves ebikers to be the anti-Christ. WTH, as mtbr.com welcomes ebike forums, why are you against the beliefs of your piers?
    Quote Originally Posted by ruthabagah View Post
    3 parks already made a decision it seems.

    https://www.eastidahonews.com/2019/0...ational-parks/
    The person who wrote that article obvious had no idea Class 2 throttle bikes are included in this order and by this orders definition are eBikes......

    The operator of an e-bike may only use the motor to assist pedal propulsion. The motor may not be used to propel an e-bike without the rider also pedaling, except in locations open to public motor vehicle traffic. Motorbikes with a throttle are not e-bikes.
    Also this comment by life long bicycle hater MV is too funny.

    Federal Rules Regarding E-mtb-annotation-2019-09-23-144216.png
    Ride Bikes, Drink Craft Beer, Repeat.

    Know these before you post:
    MTBR Posting Guidelines

  102. #302
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    2,889
    Quote Originally Posted by Klurejr View Post
    The person who wrote that article obvious had no idea Class 2 throttle bikes are included in this order and by this orders definition are eBikes......


    Nothing in that quote is inaccurate. It is poorly worded but not inaccurate.


    Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk

  103. #303
    mtbr member
    Reputation: hikerdave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,267
    Quote Originally Posted by Klurejr View Post
    The person who wrote that article obvious had no idea Class 2 throttle bikes are included in this order and by this orders definition are eBikes......



    Also this comment by life long bicycle hater MV is too funny.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Annotation 2019-09-23 144216.png 
Views:	21 
Size:	24.6 KB 
ID:	1281475
    Regarding he who must not be named’s comment on NEPA; there’s a gigantic loophole for Class I, II, III eBikes; a finding of no significant impact will make the process of admitting eBikes pretty easy from an environmental point of view; all that’s left is satisfying land managers that user conflicts between eBikes and other users will be minimal.

    Ride responsibly out there.
    "Thank you, God, for letting me have another day"
    The Milagro Beanfield War

  104. #304
    ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ SuperModerator
    Reputation: Klurejr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    7,017
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    Nothing in that quote is inaccurate. It is poorly worded but not inaccurate.


    Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk
    It was not accurate, he stated: "Motorbikes with a throttle are not e-bikes." A class 2 eBike is a "motorbike with a throttle" if you take the words at face value, which many who read that will. Yes I know you and many like you will argue semantics that a class 2 eBike is not a "motorbike", but that word is not clearly defined the way "motorcycle" is defined. A class 2 eBike with a throttle is a bike with an electric motor on it that can be propelled without spinning the cranks, Motorbike to many.

    Do you always feel the need to attack everything others say in an effort to prove them wrong?
    Ride Bikes, Drink Craft Beer, Repeat.

    Know these before you post:
    MTBR Posting Guidelines

  105. #305
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    2,889
    Quote Originally Posted by Klurejr View Post
    It was not accurate, he stated: "Motorbikes with a throttle are not e-bikes." A class 2 eBike is a "motorbike with a throttle" if you take the words at face value, which many who read that will. Yes I know you and many like you will argue semantics that a class 2 eBike is not a "motorbike", but that word is not clearly defined the way "motorcycle" is defined. A class 2 eBike with a throttle is a bike with an electric motor on it that can be propelled without spinning the cranks, Motorbike to many.

    Do you always feel the need to attack everything others say in an effort to prove them wrong?
    As defined by the NPS and BLM, which is what is being discussed, a class 2 e-bike is defined as a bicycle. That is not semantics. That is a statement of fact. Also, I'm pretty sure site rules say you cannot call them motorbikes but I could be wrong.

    I did not attack you. I even stated it was poorly worded. However it now seems you knew that and were attempting to leverage it to cloud the issue for some reason.

    Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk

  106. #306
    10,000,000 Watts
    Reputation: Gutch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2,752
    I’d stick a fork in this thread and call it done.
    Mountain Bikers Do It Til They Bonk!

  107. #307
    Cycologist
    Reputation: chazpat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    6,093
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    As defined by the NPS and BLM, which is what is being discussed, a class 2 e-bike is defined as a bicycle. That is not semantics. That is a statement of fact. Also, I'm pretty sure site rules say you cannot call them motorbikes but I could be wrong.

    I did not attack you. I even stated it was poorly worded. However it now seems you knew that and were attempting to leverage it to cloud the issue for some reason.

    Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk
    Yes, it is a statement of fact that the NPS and BLM classify a class 2 ebike as a bicycle for regulations, it does not change the fact that it is a bike with a motor though. And I believe the "site rules say you cannot call them motorbikes" only applies within the ebike forum, which this isn't.
    This post is a natural product. Variances in spelling & grammar should be appreciated as part of its character & beauty.

  108. #308
    ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ SuperModerator
    Reputation: Klurejr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    7,017
    Does not matter what the BLM and NPS define as an eBike, that is not what I was pointing out as inaccurate information in the article linked.

    The Author of that article is claiming that "motorbikes" with Throttles are NOT eBikes. That is not correct. That would lead people who are reading that article to believe that on BLM and NPS trails where bicycles are currently permitted that NO Bikes with Throttles would be allowed. That is not accurate. The Order clearly includes Class 2 Throttle driven eBikes to be part of the ruling to be allowed where Bicycles are currently permitted. Thus "motorbikes", "motorized bikes", "motorized bicycles", "eBikes", "e-mopeds" that are specifically rated as Class 2 eBikes ARE ALLOWED where bicycles are permitted post Order.

    Electric Motorcycles would not be allowed.

    Now maybe the Author was intending to apply his statement to Electric Motorcycles, but that is not what he wrote. Sloppy journalism. In the United States the term "motorbike" is not commonly used to describe Motorcycles. It could be very confusing to the general public when they read it.
    Ride Bikes, Drink Craft Beer, Repeat.

    Know these before you post:
    MTBR Posting Guidelines

  109. #309
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    2,889
    Quote Originally Posted by Klurejr View Post
    Does not matter what the BLM and NPS define as an eBike, that is not what I was pointing out as inaccurate information in the article linked.

    The Author of that article is claiming that "motorbikes" with Throttles are NOT eBikes. That is not correct. That would lead people who are reading that article to believe that on BLM and NPS trails where bicycles are currently permitted that NO Bikes with Throttles would be allowed. That is not accurate. The Order clearly includes Class 2 Throttle driven eBikes to be part of the ruling to be allowed where Bicycles are currently permitted. Thus "motorbikes", "motorized bikes", "motorized bicycles", "eBikes", "e-mopeds" that are specifically rated as Class 2 eBikes ARE ALLOWED where bicycles are permitted post Order.

    Electric Motorcycles would not be allowed.

    Now maybe the Author was intending to apply his statement to Electric Motorcycles, but that is not what he wrote. Sloppy journalism. In the United States the term "motorbike" is not commonly used to describe Motorcycles. It could be very confusing to the general public when they read it.
    That would be applicable except the author clearly stated that e-bikes, specific to Class 2s in this case, cannot be operated as motorbikes, ie they have to be pedaled, unless they are on motorized approved trails.

    Once you start pedaling, for the context of the article due to how the BLM and NPS define them, it ceases to be a motorbike under the rules.

    Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk

  110. #310
    Cycologist
    Reputation: chazpat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    6,093
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    That would be applicable except the author clearly stated that e-bikes, specific to Class 2s in this case, cannot be operated as motorbikes, ie they have to be pedaled, unless they are on motorized approved trails.

    Once you start pedaling, for the context of the article due to how the BLM and NPS define them, it ceases to be a motorbike under the rules.

    Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk
    But don't you think that is an issue, that as soon as the rider stops pedaling and just uses the twist throttle, it is no longer a bicycle but transforms into a motorbike? With just about zero people to enforce that they are not using the throttle, what percentage of class 2 riders will not use the twist throttle?
    This post is a natural product. Variances in spelling & grammar should be appreciated as part of its character & beauty.

  111. #311
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    2,889
    Quote Originally Posted by chazpat View Post
    But don't you think that is an issue, that as soon as the rider stops pedaling and just uses the twist throttle, it is no longer a bicycle but transforms into a motorbike? With just about zero people to enforce that they are not using the throttle, what percentage of class 2 riders will not use the twist throttle?
    Short answer, no, not an issue.

    Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk

  112. #312
    ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ SuperModerator
    Reputation: Klurejr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    7,017
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    Short answer, no, not an issue.

    Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk
    Real answer, yes it might become an issue, or no it might not. But we will have to wait and see.

    The eBikes that will be ridden on the Paths in National Parks are going to be beachcruiser and commuter style eBikes, they are not going to be eMTB's. The people riding them are going to be the same people we see riding those style bikes on the boardwalks at the beach, around the local towns n such. They are going to be tourists, and for many it will be their first time on a motorized Conveyance. If they are renting Class 2 eBikes you can bet they wont be pedaling. I see these kinds of riders and bike all the time here in San Diego, they are not pedaling.

    So, if they are not pedaling are they breaking the law? Based on what I read of that ORDER Class 2 eBikes are defined as Bicycles, I don't recall it specifically calling out that people riding a Class 2 had to be pedaling.


    For BLM dirt trails I forsee an entirly different scenario. Those will mostly be eMTB's, and considering most BLM trails are not as crowded as NPS paths where bicycles are permitted there will be less issues, possibly none.
    Ride Bikes, Drink Craft Beer, Repeat.

    Know these before you post:
    MTBR Posting Guidelines

  113. #313
    E-Moderator
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    714
    In regards to Class 2 throttle.
    To me it seems to be clear the intent of DOI Order 3376
    “Purpose. This Order is intended to increase recreational opportunities for all Americans, especially those with physical limitations”

    This is why I believe class 2 is being allowed. There are a lot of people who aren’t lucky enough to have good genes or have been in accidents that now have limited mobility with their legs. Having a throttle is a must for them.

    All 3 classes of ebikes follow the guidelines of the Consumer Product Safety Act: means low power electric motor less than 750watts (1hp). Plus everything that’s been talked about before.

    What does that mean? All 3 classes have the same type of acceleration power. If a person is using only the throttle, they will not be accelerating very fast with only 1hp available! The fastest way to accelerate on any 3 classes is pedaling with all your might.
    Put the same person on all 3 classes of bikes & that person will reach 20mph at about the same time regardless of throttle as long as they are pedaling their hearts out. Only the class 3 will continue to accelerate to 28mph, but if it’s a mountain bike, the gearing will limit its top speed.



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  114. #314
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    2,889
    Quote Originally Posted by Klurejr View Post
    Real answer, yes it might become an issue, or no it might not. But we will have to wait and see.

    The eBikes that will be ridden on the Paths in National Parks are going to be beachcruiser and commuter style eBikes, they are not going to be eMTB's. The people riding them are going to be the same people we see riding those style bikes on the boardwalks at the beach, around the local towns n such. They are going to be tourists, and for many it will be their first time on a motorized Conveyance. If they are renting Class 2 eBikes you can bet they wont be pedaling. I see these kinds of riders and bike all the time here in San Diego, they are not pedaling.

    So, if they are not pedaling are they breaking the law? Based on what I read of that ORDER Class 2 eBikes are defined as Bicycles, I don't recall it specifically calling out that people riding a Class 2 had to be pedaling.


    For BLM dirt trails I forsee an entirly different scenario. Those will mostly be eMTB's, and considering most BLM trails are not as crowded as NPS paths where bicycles are permitted there will be less issues, possibly none.
    Based on my area's experience there is no issue with any type of e-bike so for me it's not really wait and see. It's an informed opinion based on actual real world experience. The order reads something to the effect of "the rider must be actively pedaling throttle equipped bikes". There are also dirt, single-track trails, current and in construction, in both National Parks and NPS sites.

    Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk

  115. #315
    ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ SuperModerator
    Reputation: Klurejr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    7,017
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    Based on my area's experience there is no issue with any type of e-bike so for me it's not really wait and see. It's an informed opinion based on actual real world experience. The order reads something to the effect of "the rider must be actively pedaling throttle equipped bikes". There are also dirt, single-track trails, current and in construction, in both National Parks and NPS sites.

    Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk
    See that is the great thing about all the different places we live, we experience different things. Some national parks are very crowded and having throttle equipped class 2 eBikes might cause issues.

    Yes there are a few dirt paths and trails in National parks that will fall under this order, but compared to the number of hiking trails and the number of trails on BLM land they are not even a drop in the bucket.

    I am going to Yosemite in a few weeks, I am bringing my cruiser bike since the only paths to ride in the valley are paved bike paths. I don't expect to see many eBikes on those paths so soon after the order, but come next summer there might be a way to rent them in the valley and ride them all over the place, and we will have to wait and see if Class 2 throttle driven eBikes are part of that equation and whether or not people will pedal when they dont have to and whether or not the Park Rangers are going to bother enforcing that.
    Ride Bikes, Drink Craft Beer, Repeat.

    Know these before you post:
    MTBR Posting Guidelines

  116. #316
    Cycologist
    Reputation: chazpat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    6,093
    Quote Originally Posted by mtbbiker View Post
    In regards to Class 2 throttle.
    To me it seems to be clear the intent of DOI Order 3376
    “Purpose. This Order is intended to increase recreational opportunities for all Americans, especially those with physical limitations”

    This is why I believe class 2 is being allowed. There are a lot of people who aren’t lucky enough to have good genes or have been in accidents that now have limited mobility with their legs. Having a throttle is a must for them.

    All 3 classes of ebikes follow the guidelines of the Consumer Product Safety Act: means low power electric motor less than 750watts (1hp). Plus everything that’s been talked about before.

    What does that mean? All 3 classes have the same type of acceleration power. If a person is using only the throttle, they will not be accelerating very fast with only 1hp available! The fastest way to accelerate on any 3 classes is pedaling with all your might.
    Put the same person on all 3 classes of bikes & that person will reach 20mph at about the same time regardless of throttle as long as they are pedaling their hearts out. Only the class 3 will continue to accelerate to 28mph, but if it’s a mountain bike, the gearing will limit its top speed.



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    The order reads something to the effect of "the rider must be actively pedaling throttle equipped bikes".
    I agree that it doesn't really matter if the rider is controlling the motor via pedals or a twist throttle, but the order doesn't seem to agree with that.
    This post is a natural product. Variances in spelling & grammar should be appreciated as part of its character & beauty.

  117. #317
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    2,889
    Quote Originally Posted by Klurejr View Post
    See that is the great thing about all the different places we live, we experience different things. Some national parks are very crowded and having throttle equipped class 2 eBikes might cause issues.

    As are the trails here. On a nice weekend day the user density is unbelievable, which is a great thing, yet still no issues.


    Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk

  118. #318
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    2,889
    Quote Originally Posted by chazpat View Post
    I agree that it doesn't really matter if the rider is controlling the motor via pedals or a twist throttle, but the order doesn't seem to agree with that.
    Their house, their rules. I imagine there were some very compelling reasons due to legal wording of various items that caused the order to be written as it was.

    Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk

  119. #319
    ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ SuperModerator
    Reputation: Klurejr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    7,017
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    As are the trails here. On a nice weekend day the user density is unbelievable, which is a great thing, yet still no issues.


    Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk
    where is that?
    Ride Bikes, Drink Craft Beer, Repeat.

    Know these before you post:
    MTBR Posting Guidelines

  120. #320
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    2,889
    Quote Originally Posted by Klurejr View Post
    where is that?
    Bentonville

    Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk

  121. #321
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ruthabagah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    204
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    Based on my area's experience there is no issue with any type of e-bike so for me it's not really wait and see. It's an informed opinion based on actual real world experience. The order reads something to the effect of "the rider must be actively pedaling throttle equipped bikes". There are also dirt, single-track trails, current and in construction, in both National Parks and NPS sites.

    Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk
    I would like to second that: Where I ride, emtb are plenty, and no issues have been reported.

  122. #322
    10,000,000 Watts
    Reputation: Gutch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2,752
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    Bentonville

    Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk
    Drove 14 hours to Bentonville with 4 guys, rented a house, and rode everyday for a week. I was the only one with an emtb, had a blast. I think it was probably a 3 to 10 ebike to mtb ratio. Their is some crazy Red Bull rampage stuff there! Cool town with good bike vibe. Heck the police lady gave us the lay of the land as she was an avid mtbr. Seemless integration of ebikes. One area there was a group of at least 25 people and probably at least 10 were Levo’s.
    Mountain Bikers Do It Til They Bonk!

  123. #323
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    2,889
    Quote Originally Posted by Gutch View Post
    Drove 14 hours to Bentonville with 4 guys, rented a house, and rode everyday for a week. I was the only one with an emtb, had a blast. I think it was probably a 3 to 10 ebike to mtb ratio. Their is some crazy Red Bull rampage stuff there! Cool town with good bike vibe. Heck the police lady gave us the lay of the land as she was an avid mtbr. Seemless integration of ebikes. One area there was a group of at least 25 people and probably at least 10 were Levo’s.
    Glad you enjoyed it. Our public use ideminity laws allow for some crazy stuff to be built. If I remember correctly you were looking for some techy stuff. They just cut a new trail at Coler for the enduro called The Waterfall, hate you didn't get to ride it.

    Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk

  124. #324
    Moderator Moderator
    Reputation: Harryman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    2,733
    Quote Originally Posted by ruthabagah View Post
    I would like to second that: Where I ride, emtb are plenty, and no issues have been reported.
    Do you guys work within the land agencies? How would you know what's been reported? I work closely with my land agents, and I only hear about the worst of the worst. Genuinely curious

  125. #325
    10,000,000 Watts
    Reputation: Gutch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2,752
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    Glad you enjoyed it. Our public use ideminity laws allow for some crazy stuff to be built. If I remember correctly you were looking for some techy stuff. They just cut a new trail at Coler for the enduro called The Waterfall, hate you didn't get to ride it.

    Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk
    Yeah man, thanks for the riding tips. I was actually riding coler when they were working on the Enduro course. Pretty cool that a guy cruises around all day on a Trek ebike to make sure everybody is ok and no one is bleeding out or anything. Never seen that before. I will say I prefer my local dirt here as it is dirt. Very rocky in Bentonville. Definitely a fun trip. Tahoe next year.
    Mountain Bikers Do It Til They Bonk!

  126. #326
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    2,889
    Quote Originally Posted by Gutch View Post
    Yeah man, thanks for the riding tips. I was actually riding coler when they were working on the Enduro course. Pretty cool that a guy cruises around all day on a Trek ebike to make sure everybody is ok and no one is bleeding out or anything. Never seen that before. I will say I prefer my local dirt here as it is dirt. Very rocky in Bentonville. Definitely a fun trip. Tahoe next year.
    You're welcome. You got to meet Andrew Lester. He manages the park, came from New England and is an all around great guy. He's actually helping ram through the changes we needed to get part of Coler NICA certified for a race.

    It's a good thing he cruises like he does though. They do have to do the occasional extraction. I had to call 911 during the enduro because someone got in over their head, assuming, on Cease and Decist and it went horribly wrong.

    Here is the aforementioned Waterfall, even though it's suffering massive GoPro effect. Further down the trail there was a big creek gap.

    https://www.facebook.com/779779171/p...7965754399172/

    Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk

  127. #327
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Posts
    3
    Hello

    Europe is full of e-bikes. Many young people use them to do more kms, not because they are disabled.

    The disabled people are the Troy Horse of the the industry to introduce e-bikes to every people, young or old, disabled or healthy. To make money. As much as they can.

    You can read this article (in french) to see the future in your lands with this new rules:

    Dans les Alpes bavaroises, les VTT électriques irritent

    https://www.sciencesetavenir.fr/natu...rritent_137067

  128. #328
    Location: 10 ft from Hell Moderator
    Reputation: life behind bars's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,426
    Quote Originally Posted by ericvtt78 View Post
    Hello

    Europe is full of e-bikes. Many young people use them to do more kms, not because they are disabled.

    The disabled people are the Troy Horse of the the industry to introduce e-bikes to every people, young or old, disabled or healthy. To make money. As much as they can.

    You can read this article (in french) to see the future in your lands with this new rules:

    Dans les Alpes bavaroises, les VTT électriques irritent

    https://www.sciencesetavenir.fr/natu...rritent_137067




    Thankfully, we're not in Europe.
    I ncredibly
    M yopic
    B ackstabbing
    A ssholes

  129. #329
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    1,519
    Quote Originally Posted by ericvtt78 View Post
    Hello

    Europe is full of e-bikes. Many young people use them to do more kms, not because they are disabled.

    The disabled people are the Troy Horse of the the industry to introduce e-bikes to every people, young or old, disabled or healthy. To make money. As much as they can.

    You can read this article (in french) to see the future in your lands with this new rules:

    Dans les Alpes bavaroises, les VTT électriques irritent

    https://www.sciencesetavenir.fr/natu...rritent_137067
    I am in Montreal, Quebec.
    All that bashing is nothing else than bashing.
    It is always this way.
    New comers are not welcome.
    People move to the Laurentians to be closer to nature than they say stop construction **they** take away my beautifull view.(the new comers)
    About 40 years ago they started doing cycling path, now they are considered multi-users. I could say the electric wheelchairs should be illegal, same for skateboards, same for inline skaters, same for dog walkers, same for cops who park there for no good reason, same for cellphone users... ...
    Snowboarders were not welcome, same for fatbikes than those activities are seen on TV and become cool. Just ad a tiny wheel and pretend it is your electric wheelchair. Smile at the bashers they are miserable, no need to waste energy on them.

  130. #330
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    5,454
    Quote Originally Posted by 33red View Post
    I am in Montreal, Quebec.
    All that bashing is nothing else than bashing.
    It is always this way.
    New comers are not welcome.
    People move to the Laurentians to be closer to nature than they say stop construction **they** take away my beautifull view.(the new comers)
    About 40 years ago they started doing cycling path, now they are considered multi-users. I could say the electric wheelchairs should be illegal, same for skateboards, same for inline skaters, same for dog walkers, same for cops who park there for no good reason, same for cellphone users... ...
    Snowboarders were not welcome, same for fatbikes than those activities are seen on TV and become cool. Just ad a tiny wheel and pretend it is your electric wheelchair. Smile at the bashers they are miserable, no need to waste energy on them.
    Thank goodness we are not Canada either.

  131. #331
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ruthabagah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    204
    Quote Originally Posted by ericvtt78 View Post
    Hello

    Europe is full of e-bikes. Many young people use them to do more kms, not because they are disabled.

    The disabled people are the Troy Horse of the the industry to introduce e-bikes to every people, young or old, disabled or healthy. To make money. As much as they can.

    You can read this article (in french) to see the future in your lands with this new rules:

    Dans les Alpes bavaroises, les VTT électriques irritent

    https://www.sciencesetavenir.fr/natu...rritent_137067
    this article does not cover anything about the future of our land.... its the same craptalk about ebikes, reported from the german point of view...

  132. #332
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ruthabagah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    204
    Quote Originally Posted by life behind bars View Post
    Thankfully, we're not in Europe.
    You would not survive 2 min there.

  133. #333
    Single(Pivot)and Happy
    Reputation: Boulder Pilot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,774
    Quote Originally Posted by Harryman View Post
    Do you guys work within the land agencies? How would you know what's been reported? I work closely with my land agents, and I only hear about the worst of the worst. Genuinely curious
    I work closely with land managers, some directly affected by the recent DOI Order.

    Now, there are some people that argue that an E-mtb is the "same" as a mountain bike. Based upon this argument, they conclude E-mtb'ers should have trail access wherever mountain bikers have trail access. The recent DOI Order directs land managers within DOI jurisdiction to manage E-mtbs using the same regulations used for mountain bikes.

    What has been discussed with me regarding E-mtb access by those responsible to manage federal property set aside not for recreation but for wildlife and habitat conservation, property that rarely allows for mountain biking access, can be broken down into two categories: E-mtb's and E-mtber's.

    One of the things that has pissed off land managers that I have personally spoken with is the classification system developed by the e-bike industry. The previous argument was that "Class 1 E-mtbikes" are ok, Class 2 & 3 not ok. The manufacturers know that there is no way in hell that any local, State or Federal agency has the personnel and financial resources to regulate and enforce such a system, and it is well documented on the internet, this website included, that this Class system is meaningless. When an industry creates a system that does not address land managers responsibilities to protect habitat and wildlife, this is viewed as insulting. And disrespectful.

    Another factor of e-mtb's is the fact it has a motor. Many agencies rely on grants and funding from sources that stipulate non-motorized use. This fact, often overlooked by keyboard advocate warriors, but not by those that advocate for mountain bike access, is critical for trail access. If funding is lost, trail access is reduced due to an agency unable to adequately manage the recreational component of their Mission.

    The recent DOI Order states its purpose is to expand access for more people. The Order does not include funding to provide for all the new people gaining access. This oversight is quite common in politics.

    I acknowledge that there are some areas, maybe many areas, where an influx of a new trail user group will not negatively affect trail user experiences nor wildlife and habitat. It makes sense to me and there are no factual arguments one can produce to deny e-mtb access under these conditions, regardless of so-called Classification.

    It makes no sense to me to provide blanket trail access for any trail user group on lands managed to protect wildlife and habitat resources. Land Managers must be able to decide which trails are appropriate for trail users.

    Let's take Arkansas for example, since it is a very popular bike riding destination. There's around 3 million people distributed across approximately 53,000 square miles. I live in a County of 3.3 million people distributed across 325 square miles. I can confidently state the recent DOI Order will not negatively impact the entire State of Arkansas.

    Land Managers in my area will be retaining the ability to manage the properties they are entrusted to protect. They will decide if e-mtb's are an appropriate use and also if they are compatible to existing conditions.

    We all, whether we e-mtbike or not, should demand that our land managers to be able to decide on local trail access since they are the ones that know their properties, know how much help they can count on from the local trail using community, and know how not to get in the crosshairs of anti-recreational organizations that are well funded and biased.
    The suspension of your bike sucks if it's different than mine. Really. It sucks. Big time.

  134. #334
    10,000,000 Watts
    Reputation: Gutch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2,752
    ^Valid points, I completely agree.
    Mountain Bikers Do It Til They Bonk!

  135. #335
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ruthabagah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    204
    Quote Originally Posted by Harryman View Post
    Do you guys work within the land agencies? How would you know what's been reported? I work closely with my land agents, and I only hear about the worst of the worst. Genuinely curious
    I don't work within the LM or the bike industry, but I have been working with various LM, at the local, federal and private level for over almost 30 years on conservation / land development / EPA regulations issues.

    I have my contacts, and even if ebikes are not my primary motivations to talk to them, they all know that I have been riding them and we often use this as an "ice breaker" before discussing business matters.... Lately, Ebikes have been a hot topic, and even the more "reluctant" LM I talk to, have admitted that the Ebike apocalypse did not happen in their jurisdiction once they were allowed...

  136. #336
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ruthabagah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    204
    Quote Originally Posted by Boulder Pilot View Post
    I work closely with land managers, some directly affected by the recent DOI Order.

    Now, there are some people that argue that an E-mtb is the "same" as a mountain bike. Based upon this argument, they conclude E-mtb'ers should have trail access wherever mountain bikers have trail access. The recent DOI Order directs land managers within DOI jurisdiction to manage E-mtbs using the same regulations used for mountain bikes.

    What has been discussed with me regarding E-mtb access by those responsible to manage federal property set aside not for recreation but for wildlife and habitat conservation, property that rarely allows for mountain biking access, can be broken down into two categories: E-mtb's and E-mtber's.

    One of the things that has pissed off land managers that I have personally spoken with is the classification system developed by the e-bike industry. The previous argument was that "Class 1 E-mtbikes" are ok, Class 2 & 3 not ok. The manufacturers know that there is no way in hell that any local, State or Federal agency has the personnel and financial resources to regulate and enforce such a system, and it is well documented on the internet, this website included, that this Class system is meaningless. When an industry creates a system that does not address land managers responsibilities to protect habitat and wildlife, this is viewed as insulting. And disrespectful.

    Another factor of e-mtb's is the fact it has a motor. Many agencies rely on grants and funding from sources that stipulate non-motorized use. This fact, often overlooked by keyboard advocate warriors, but not by those that advocate for mountain bike access, is critical for trail access. If funding is lost, trail access is reduced due to an agency unable to adequately manage the recreational component of their Mission.

    The recent DOI Order states its purpose is to expand access for more people. The Order does not include funding to provide for all the new people gaining access. This oversight is quite common in politics.

    I acknowledge that there are some areas, maybe many areas, where an influx of a new trail user group will not negatively affect trail user experiences nor wildlife and habitat. It makes sense to me and there are no factual arguments one can produce to deny e-mtb access under these conditions, regardless of so-called Classification.

    It makes no sense to me to provide blanket trail access for any trail user group on lands managed to protect wildlife and habitat resources. Land Managers must be able to decide which trails are appropriate for trail users.

    Let's take Arkansas for example, since it is a very popular bike riding destination. There's around 3 million people distributed across approximately 53,000 square miles. I live in a County of 3.3 million people distributed across 325 square miles. I can confidently state the recent DOI Order will not negatively impact the entire State of Arkansas.

    Land Managers in my area will be retaining the ability to manage the properties they are entrusted to protect. They will decide if e-mtb's are an appropriate use and also if they are compatible to existing conditions.

    We all, whether we e-mtbike or not, should demand that our land managers to be able to decide on local trail access since they are the ones that know their properties, know how much help they can count on from the local trail using community, and know how not to get in the crosshairs of anti-recreational organizations that are well funded and biased.
    Well written comment and I fully agree with your conclusion.

    One comment though:

    "Many agencies rely on grants and funding from sources that stipulate non-motorized use. This fact, often overlooked by keyboard advocate warriors, but not by those that advocate for mountain bike access, is critical for trail access. If funding is lost, trail access is reduced due to an agency unable to adequately manage the recreational component of their Mission."

    Interestingly enough I know of multiple Land owner or Trusts, that have recently modified their covenant to exclude ebikes from the non-motorized stipulation. They may not contribute financially, but own the land.

  137. #337
    ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ SuperModerator
    Reputation: Klurejr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    7,017
    Quote Originally Posted by Boulder Pilot View Post
    Let's take Arkansas for example, since it is a very popular bike riding destination. There's around 3 million people distributed across approximately 53,000 square miles. I live in a County of 3.3 million people distributed across 325 square miles. I can confidently state the recent DOI Order will not negatively impact the entire State of Arkansas.
    Thank you for pointing that out Boulder. A blanket order that effects so many diverse area's and treats them all with the same set of rules is not a good thing.

    I get the feeling that some of the more Extremely Pro or Anti eBike guys that post on this site get hung up on "how it works" on the trails they ride, and don't take into consideration the situation can be 100% different a few states, counties or Cities away from them.

    I fully support the decision making being done at the local level.
    Ride Bikes, Drink Craft Beer, Repeat.

    Know these before you post:
    MTBR Posting Guidelines

  138. #338
    Single(Pivot)and Happy
    Reputation: Boulder Pilot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,774
    Quote Originally Posted by ruthabagah View Post
    Well written comment and I fully agree with your conclusion.

    One comment though:

    "Many agencies rely on grants and funding from sources that stipulate non-motorized use. This fact, often overlooked by keyboard advocate warriors, but not by those that advocate for mountain bike access, is critical for trail access. If funding is lost, trail access is reduced due to an agency unable to adequately manage the recreational component of their Mission."

    Interestingly enough I know of multiple Land owner or Trusts, that have recently modified their covenant to exclude ebikes from the non-motorized stipulation. They may not contribute financially, but own the land.
    I want to be sure I understand this correctly. You are stating that private land owners that have allowed the public to access non motorized trails on private property are allowing e-mtbs to access the same trails? If so, this a positive step for e-mtb'ers.

    This thread was started with Federal rules and regulations as the topic so I'm going to stick to the thread topic moving forward.

    The main issue I have with all "blanket" rulings is the fact the people making the rulings have no fking idea how their ruling will negatively affect any one area. When land managers are not able to fulfill their responsibility to manage their property, the power of influence ramps up. Mountain bikers that have no respect for rules and that poach trails in areas of my County will back up this statement, having learned first hand of the power of influence.

    I am not and have never been against e-mtbike trail access opportunities. I have been and I am more so now due to this DOI Order a firm believer and advocate that
    e-mountain bikers be treated as a separate trail user group. They should want to be considered separate anyways due to the amount of stupid sh!t and problems mountain bikers cause themselves.

    When land management decisions about trail access are being considered, the criteria and information used to reach a decision includes estimated usage and how this usage will affect habitat, trail user experiences, etc.

    Looking at this from only a trail maintenance perspective, I believe we all can agree that adding "X" amount of new trail users will create "Y" amount of trail maintenance. As long as there are enough new trail users that will perform at least "Y" amount of trail maintenance, there will be no credible argument against the new trail users creating a net gain of habitat destruction.

    Looking at this from only a trail user experience perspective, of course adding "X" amount of new trail users will create "Y%" of new trail user conflicts. Land managers factor this in to their decisions, this is not a bad or good thing, it's simply a fact to consider. If there are trails that are currently heavily used, and reported incidents (trail user conflicts) are frequent, it makes no sense to encourage more trail users to access an trail that cannot manage current capacity. In this instance, it makes more sense to propose more shared use trails.

    I have advocated against mountain bike access on heavily used hiking trails that did not offer much of a trail user experience. The potential for conflict was 100%, to "fight" simply based upon the principle of whatever does not benefit riders in the big picture.

    It is the "Big Picture" that many of us sometimes fail to consider when we want something.
    The suspension of your bike sucks if it's different than mine. Really. It sucks. Big time.

  139. #339
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    2,737
    I think a lot of people, both pro and anti ebike, would agree that "The Order" was a blunt force instrument and maybe a little overreaching, but quite frankly, it was necessary because some of the local land use managers for both NPS and BLM were saying NO ebikes PERIOD, even when that attitude was simply ridiculous. Our land managers should not be gatekeepers based on personal or even local bias, their access decisions should be based on real life observation and fact, and they should actually make efforts to make those observations and gather those facts. That wasn't happening in many areas, and perhaps the most egregious situation was Arches and Canyonlands banning ebikes even on pavement, and even on 4x4 roads where lifted Jeeps and highly modified dirt bikes are allowed, along with MTBs. Apparently Canyonlands has relented as a result of "The Order", I do not know about Arches. BLM is still refusing access to the trails on BLM in Moab. I would think pushing back against your bosses' bosses' bosses' boss would be a career limiting move, but maybe they don't care?

    NPS and BLM irrational positions on Class 1 ebikes contributed at least partially to the backlash in the opposite direction in the form of "The Order". I hope they have learned the lesson that as land managers, they need to be flexible and forward thinking, not simply gatekeepers charged with giving a kneejerk and 100% inflexible "NO" to every request that comes along, especially when that "NO" flies in the face of all logic.

  140. #340
    Moderator Moderator
    Reputation: Harryman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    2,733
    Quote Originally Posted by honkinunit View Post
    I would think pushing back against your bosses' bosses' bosses' boss would be a career limiting move, but maybe they don't care?
    One thing to remember regarding bureaucracy, and in particular federal ones, is that the individuals will often take the very, very long view when faced with making any decisions, especially ones they don't want to make. Interior Secretaries come and go, while the rank and file BLM people are there forever. I see it all the time, people will sit on their hands for years and come up with reasons why they can't implement this or that. I'm not saying that things aren't going to change with this order, or others, but I doubt there are many in the trenches worrying about what David Burnhardt wants.

    In 100% agreement on the changes so far in Moab though, just flat out stupid you couldn't ride an ebike on a road.

  141. #341
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    2,737
    Quote Originally Posted by Harryman View Post
    One thing to remember regarding bureaucracy, and in particular federal ones, is that the individuals will often take the very, very long view when faced with making any decisions, especially ones they don't want to make. Interior Secretaries come and go, while the rank and file BLM people are there forever. I see it all the time, people will sit on their hands for years and come up with reasons why they can't implement this or that. I'm not saying that things aren't going to change with this order, or others, but I doubt there are many in the trenches worrying about what David Burnhardt wants.

    In 100% agreement on the changes so far in Moab though, just flat out stupid you couldn't ride an ebike on a road.
    You want to talk stupid? You still can't ride an ebike on the paved bike paths in Moab, even the one running along Highway 191 to the north, which gains 600 feet of elevation in two miles and has grades as steep as 6%. You can coast a road bike down that bike path at 40MPH, but they don't want Class 1 ebikes going 11 MPH uphill? Of course, this is a local issue, not a Federal one. The 191 bike path is on top of the former highway roadbed, and ebikes are legal on all public roads in Utah, but somehow Grand County thinks, I don't know, they need to save the fragile egos of the local bike shop bros? There are some people out there who are rabidly anti-ebike, but eventually they'll be shown the light, I'm sure. The shops get Euros all day long wanting to rent ebikes to ride around town and on the paths. Eventually they'll pressure Grand County to call off the dogs so they can rent ebikes without having to tell the mystified tourists that they have to ride in traffic if they rent one.

  142. #342
    Cycologist
    Reputation: chazpat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    6,093
    Quote Originally Posted by honkinunit View Post
    I think a lot of people, both pro and anti ebike, would agree that "The Order" was a blunt force instrument and maybe a little overreaching, but quite frankly, it was necessary because some of the local land use managers for both NPS and BLM were saying NO ebikes PERIOD, even when that attitude was simply ridiculous. Our land managers should not be gatekeepers based on personal or even local bias, their access decisions should be based on real life observation and fact, and they should actually make efforts to make those observations and gather those facts. That wasn't happening in many areas, and perhaps the most egregious situation was Arches and Canyonlands banning ebikes even on pavement, and even on 4x4 roads where lifted Jeeps and highly modified dirt bikes are allowed, along with MTBs. Apparently Canyonlands has relented as a result of "The Order", I do not know about Arches. BLM is still refusing access to the trails on BLM in Moab. I would think pushing back against your bosses' bosses' bosses' boss would be a career limiting move, but maybe they don't care?

    NPS and BLM irrational positions on Class 1 ebikes contributed at least partially to the backlash in the opposite direction in the form of "The Order". I hope they have learned the lesson that as land managers, they need to be flexible and forward thinking, not simply gatekeepers charged with giving a kneejerk and 100% inflexible "NO" to every request that comes along, especially when that "NO" flies in the face of all logic.
    Again, the NPS is saying they can restrict ebikes as they see necessary, it's not just a blanket order that everything must now be open to ebikes:

    May superintendents restrict the use of e-bikes or close areas to e-bikes under certain circumstances?

    Yes. Superintendents may restrict or impose conditions upon the use of e-bikes, or close locations to the use of e-bikes, after taking into consideration public health and safety, natural and cultural resource protection, and other management activities and objectives. If warranted by these criteria, superintendents may manage e-bikes, or particular classes of e-bikes, differently than traditional bicycles in particular locations. For example, a superintendent could determine that a trail open to traditional bicycles should not be open to e-bikes, or should be open to class-1 e-bikes only.


    I kind of doubt they would publish this if it was really going against their boss's boss's etc. The order should cause them to better evaluate the acceptance of ebikes and certainly on pavement and 4x4 roads, but don't be surprised if they don't have 100% access everywhere.
    This post is a natural product. Variances in spelling & grammar should be appreciated as part of its character & beauty.

  143. #343
    mtbr member
    Reputation: hikerdave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,267
    Quote Originally Posted by chazpat View Post
    Again, the NPS is saying they can restrict ebikes as they see necessary, it's not just a blanket order that everything must now be open to ebikes:

    May superintendents restrict the use of e-bikes or close areas to e-bikes under certain circumstances?

    Yes. Superintendents may restrict or impose conditions upon the use of e-bikes, or close locations to the use of e-bikes, after taking into consideration public health and safety, natural and cultural resource protection, and other management activities and objectives. If warranted by these criteria, superintendents may manage e-bikes, or particular classes of e-bikes, differently than traditional bicycles in particular locations. For example, a superintendent could determine that a trail open to traditional bicycles should not be open to e-bikes, or should be open to class-1 e-bikes only.


    I kind of doubt they would publish this if it was really going against their boss's boss's etc. The order should cause them to better evaluate the acceptance of ebikes and certainly on pavement and 4x4 roads, but don't be surprised if they don't have 100% access everywhere.
    That’s fine with me; one of the nice things about eBiking is that you’re far less dependent on gravity for fun; a trail without the payoff of a nice downhill run that wouldn’t be preferred by mountain bikers could easily be popular with eBike riders.
    "Thank you, God, for letting me have another day"
    The Milagro Beanfield War

  144. #344
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    2,737
    Annnndddd....today Arches and Canyonlands officially opened every trail/road open to MTBs to ebikes. Also, Natural Bridges (no opportunities off pavement there) and Hovenweep (same deal).

    Finally.

    For Canyonlands, this means White Rim, Elephant Hill, roads in the Maze, the Confluence Overlook and Colorado River overlook roads, among others, are now open to ebikes. In Arches, the Tower Arch 4x4 road and the Salt Valley road are open. All of the paved roads are open as well.

    All told, several hundred miles opened up.

    These are all roads where Jeeps and licensed dirt bikes were allowed previously. It made zero sense to ban ebikes on these roads.

  145. #345
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    348
    Today is the deadline right? for the land managers to respond to the executive order.

  146. #346
    Single(Pivot)and Happy
    Reputation: Boulder Pilot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,774
    Quote Originally Posted by stiksandstones View Post
    Today is the deadline right? for the land managers to respond to the executive order.
    Yes.
    The suspension of your bike sucks if it's different than mine. Really. It sucks. Big time.

  147. #347
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    2,737
    I'm shocked that the only thing coming out of BLM about ebikes is the sound of crickets.

    Actually, there is *one* thing I found. BLM is in the cycle of of doing an Environmental Assessment for its travel plans for part of SW Colorado. In the EA, it specifically mentions that regardless of which Alternative is selected, ebikes will be allowed on trails where bicycles are allowed, even if the "No Action" alternative is chosen.

    I get the feeling that this is how "The Order" is going to roll out. Very slowly.

    https://eplanning.blm.gov/epl-front-..._ePlanning.pdf

  148. #348
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    323
    I would be interested in hearing what regulation the BLM can base a ticket on. Before "the order" they were ticketing eBikes on the basis of the recreation director's wishy washy suggestion that eBikes are exclusively self-propelled. Now that "the order" destroys that suggestion, is there a judge that will uphold a ticket for treating an pedal assist eBike like a bicycle? "The Order" isn't a stand alone order either, it is mostly an assertion that Federal Agencies are ignoring §1512.2 and Order 3366 by segregating bikes and eBikes. At this point, the BLM can't treat eBikes like motor vehicles and there are no laws regarding the use of eBikes to fall back on. What LEO/judge is going to put themselves between a low level land manager and the most powerful government representative of US public lands?

  149. #349
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    2,737
    From the EA for SW Colorado, which is the first mention of "The Order" I have found in an official BLM document, the managers don't think ebikes need to be allowed until implementation of Section 5 of "The Order". That was supposed to have been done as of 9/30, including "provide appropriate public guidance regarding the use of e-bikes on public lands within units of the National Park System, National Wildlife Refuge System, lands managed by BLM, and lands managed by BOR." If this has happened for any trails in Colorado or on BLM in Utah, I can't find it.

    Politics.

  150. #350
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Posts
    3
    The new Specialized Kenevo

    The 2020 Specialized Kenevo Aims to Replace Your Shuttle Truck

    "It's designed to be a shuttle truck or chairlift replacement"

    https://www.pinkbike.com/news/first-...-oriented.html

    yes, the bikes industry is thinking about the disabled people with their e-bikes

  151. #351
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    2,737
    Quote Originally Posted by ericvtt78 View Post
    The new Specialized Kenevo

    The 2020 Specialized Kenevo Aims to Replace Your Shuttle Truck

    "It's designed to be a shuttle truck or chairlift replacement"

    https://www.pinkbike.com/news/first-...-oriented.html

    yes, the bikes industry is thinking about the disabled people with their e-bikes
    I'll bet Paul Basagoitia would love one.

    https://www.bicycling.com/culture/a2...sagoitia-bike/

  152. #352
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    145
    People
    Crave
    Politics

    Control.
    Human Control.
    Control myself.
    Avoid controlling humans.
    Happy, Free, Human enjoying my bike.
    Gravity, trees, and rocks my only external contentions......
    Last edited by OzarkFathom; 10-13-2019 at 06:06 AM.

  153. #353
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    396

  154. #354
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ruthabagah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    204
    Pretty clear. Thank you for posting this

  155. #355
    bipedal
    Reputation: levity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    655

    a few key words...

    Yes, thanks you GW!

    The first link seems clear enough:

    "Guidance released on October 22, 2019 enables visitors to use these bicycles with a small electric motor (less than 1 horsepower) power assist in the same manner as traditional bicycles.


    But the second link suggests District Managers may be able to fight approval:

    "As the BLM works to implement fully SO 3376, District or Field Managers should, as appropriate to address local situations (my emphasis), use the exclusion to the definition of off-road vehicle at 43 CFR 8340.0-5(a)(3) to authorize the use of Class I, II, and III e-bikes, as those terms are defined in section 4 of SO 3376, where other types of bicycles are allowed. In considering when and where to authorize the use of e-bikes, District or Field Managers should take into account the policy set forth in SO 3376 that the use of e-bikes in the pedal assist mode and traditional bicycles without an electric pedal assist should be treated generally in the same manner.

    In the event that a District or Field Manager is considering denying the use of low-speed electric bicycles in a specific location, a written explanation must be submitted to and approved by the State Director."


    Another link seems to imply broad approval - https://www.blm.gov/press-release/bl...electric-bikes

    "The BLM will now permit visitors to use low-speed e-bikes on BLM roads, trails and designated areas where traditional bikes are allowed."

  156. #356
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    396
    Hopefully I didn't read it wrong but I found it interesting that a local land manager has to submit an ebike ban to be approved by the state authority for the particular state. I am hoping that this will force Moab to open up all biking trails to ebikes. In other words, there would have to be a good reason for banning other than "I don't like ebikes". I understand there are areas where that would be appropriate but not in Moab.

  157. #357
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    7,198
    There’s really no place an ebike should be banned if bikes are allowed cuz ebikes have no more impact than a bike.

    It’s always been about principles.
    GG Megatrail (Braaap!)
    GG Trail Pistola (in process)
    Fezzari Signal Peak (frame for Sale)
    Pivot Shuttle (wife's)

  158. #358
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    396
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    There’s really no place an ebike should be banned if bikes are allowed cuz ebikes have no more impact than a bike.

    It’s always been about principles.
    I am talking about ebikes in the context of the BLM rules. If I remember right they allow throttles now. A throttle might not be appropriate on a heavy foliage MUT with blind corners and drop offs. Like the kind of exposed trails where the rider can die. I was an early adopter of the Turbo Levo (3yrs now). I remember the early firmware allowed crazy take off speed. There were places in Moab where you could bump the pedal and get launched off a cliff if you weren't careful. Of course it doesn't have a throttle but you get the idea. Cheers

  159. #359
    mtbr member
    Reputation: watermonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,265
    Quote Originally Posted by Giant Warp View Post
    I am talking about ebikes in the context of the BLM rules. If I remember right they allow throttles now. A throttle might not be appropriate on a heavy foliage MUT with blind corners and drop offs. Like the kind of exposed trails where the rider can die. I was an early adopter of the Turbo Levo (3yrs now). I remember the early firmware allowed crazy take off speed. There were places in Moab where you could bump the pedal and get launched off a cliff if you weren't careful. Of course it doesn't have a throttle but you get the idea. Cheers
    People on ATV's and motorcycles go over cliffs every year in Moab. E-bikers should have the same opportunities as everyone else.
    I would advise not taking my advice.

  160. #360
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    396
    Touche. I am all about personal responsibility. Do you think a throttle would be wise on Captain Ahab?

  161. #361
    Formerly of Kent
    Reputation: Le Duke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    10,964
    Quote Originally Posted by Giant Warp View Post
    Touche. I am all about personal responsibility. Do you think a throttle would be wise on Captain Ahab?
    As long as Bubba, who hasn't been on a bike in 20 years, signs a waiver absolving the local SAR teams from having to look for his 245lb corpse after he launches himself off of Ahab or TWE, I'm fine with it.

    I mean, god knows the SAR guys in Moab are already busy enough without having to look for the bodies of even more people that have no business being out there in the first place.
    Death from Below.

  162. #362
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    2,737
    Quote Originally Posted by Giant Warp View Post
    Hopefully I didn't read it wrong but I found it interesting that a local land manager has to submit an ebike ban to be approved by the state authority for the particular state. I am hoping that this will force Moab to open up all biking trails to ebikes. In other words, there would have to be a good reason for banning other than "I don't like ebikes". I understand there are areas where that would be appropriate but not in Moab.
    You can take it to the bank, the vast majority of singletrack around Moab is going to remain closed to ebikes. Trail Mix *hates* ebikes, and they run the show there. The only singletrack that *might* open would be the trails north of Klondike. And *maybe* Bar-M, but not Klonzo.

    The district manager will write a letter with all of the usual BS arguments, and the trails on BLM like LPS/UPS/Jimmy Keen/Porcupine, Ahab, Navajo Rocks, Klonzo trails, Mag 7, etc. will all remain closed.

  163. #363
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    2,737
    Quote Originally Posted by Le Duke View Post
    As long as Bubba, who hasn't been on a bike in 20 years, signs a waiver absolving the local SAR teams from having to look for his 245lb corpse after he launches himself off of Ahab or TWE, I'm fine with it.

    I mean, god knows the SAR guys in Moab are already busy enough without having to look for the bodies of even more people that have no business being out there in the first place.
    I've seen plenty of out of shape riders on 20 year old hardtails on those trails. Should we require a license to ride?

  164. #364
    Moderator Moderator
    Reputation: Harryman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    2,733
    Quote Originally Posted by Giant Warp View Post
    Touche. I am all about personal responsibility. Do you think a throttle would be wise on Captain Ahab?
    I think a throttle would be just fine on Ahab, why not? It's not like there have been endless streams of moto riders inadvertently launching off of cliffs in Moab from day 1.

    The reality is that the BLM ruling opens up anything that can sort of pass as a legal ebike to singletrack unless it's explicitly banned. The quaint idea that making a trail only Class 1 legal will mean only 250w Class 1 emtbs will be on it is a fantasy.

  165. #365
    Formerly of Kent
    Reputation: Le Duke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    10,964
    Quote Originally Posted by honkinunit View Post
    I've seen plenty of out of shape riders on 20 year old hardtails on those trails. Should we require a license to ride?
    Do their 20 year old hardtails have throttles that, should they mistakenly touch them the wrong way, launch them off of one of the many cliff faces in that area?
    Death from Below.

  166. #366
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    2,737
    Quote Originally Posted by Le Duke View Post
    Do their 20 year old hardtails have throttles that, should they mistakenly touch them the wrong way, launch them off of one of the many cliff faces in that area?
    I have three Class 1 eMTBs, and none of them "have throttles that, should they mistakenly touch them the wrong way, launch them off of one of the many cliff faces in that area".

  167. #367
    Formerly of Kent
    Reputation: Le Duke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    10,964
    Quote Originally Posted by honkinunit View Post
    I have three Class 1 eMTBs, and none of them "have throttles that, should they mistakenly touch them the wrong way, launch them off of one of the many cliff faces in that area".
    That's great. Not everyone on an e-bike is going to be riding a Class 1 e-bike.
    Death from Below.

  168. #368
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ruthabagah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    204
    Quote Originally Posted by Le Duke View Post
    That's great. Not everyone on an e-bike is going to be riding a Class 1 e-bike.
    Tell you what: you can choose to strap a rocket on your regular bike today... How many people do it? None. The fact that they exist (class 2) doesn't make them the norm on the trails... I have been riding cyclocross/mtb for 40 years and EMTB for almost 3 years now: I have NEVER seen a class 2 on a trail.

  169. #369
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    440
    Even Gondola serviced ski mountains with a trail to the parking lot, I have seen skiers go up the "Trail Out" / "Run Out" it saves them a $50 for the gondola ride itself. On a mountain its even easier to ride up. I mountain biked down ski mountains in the early 1980's before it even became a thing, same went for skiing on the short 4' skis. This is of course back when some ski mountains banned snow boards. These days I know a days ski pass is $100 and undoubtedly to take your mountain bike there would be the same price, and for that kind of money, I'd rather go to a place like Whistler/Blackcomb near Vancouver British Columbia.

    The difference is of course the ski mountain is private land or leased from the governments crown land corp.


    Quote Originally Posted by Walt View Post
    It would make a ton of sense to let local districts control things as they see fit. Got a crowded trail system with bad sight lines and a ton of users? Don't allow e-bikes. Got a wide-open system (Moab) or a ski area with directional trails (ie Mammoth)? Let them ride it all.

    Ski areas are really a no-brainer. Nobody rides up the singletrack (in most cases it's not even allowed with a few exceptions) and it's already a lift-served bike park. Nobody is causing anybody a problem with their e-bike on a deforested slope served by giant electric chairlifts. You could really probably allow dirtbikes with no real impact on users or the environment in most of the ski area bikeparks, though you'd have to make an effort to keep the mouth-breathing ones from climbing up DH trails.

    -Walt

  170. #370
    Moderator Moderator
    Reputation: Harryman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    2,733
    Quote Originally Posted by ruthabagah View Post
    Tell you what: you can choose to strap a rocket on your regular bike today... How many people do it? None. The fact that they exist (class 2) doesn't make them the norm on the trails... I have been riding cyclocross/mtb for 40 years and EMTB for almost 3 years now: I have NEVER seen a class 2 on a trail.
    I see more class 2 than class 1 on my local trails, I gess we cancel each other out...

  171. #371
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ruthabagah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    204
    Quote Originally Posted by Harryman View Post
    I see more class 2 than class 1 on my local trails, I gess we cancel each other out...
    Since you are in Co too, chances are we are riding the same trails, so which one? Are they single tracks, or city path?

    Again, zero class 2 sightings in any of the trails I have been riding (state parks from FoCo to trinidad, Jeffco parks, mountain jeep roads).

  172. #372
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ruthabagah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    204
    Meanwhile in Tahoe...


    As the 2019 field season winds to a close, the Tahoe National Forest would like to share an update on class 1, pedal-assisted E-bike use on recommended routes and trails:
    • No observed increase in trail degradation nor resource damage occurred as a result of class 1, pedal-assisted E-bike use on Tahoe National Forest routes or trails.
    • No trail conflicts were reported or observed between class 1, pedal-assisted E-bike users and other recreationalists on Tahoe National Forest roads or trails.
    • There were no reported accidents or injuries due to E-bike use of any class type on Tahoe National Forest routes or trails.
    • Tahoe National Forest trail and recreation managers did observe an increase in the diversity of skill levels and age groups utilizing E-bikes to access Tahoe National Forest routes and trails. This included both class 1, pedal-assisted E-bike use, and other classes of E-bikes utilizing motorized routes.

    https://www.facebook.com/TahoeNF/posts/2360414850886769

  173. #373
    ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ SuperModerator
    Reputation: Klurejr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    7,017
    Quote Originally Posted by ruthabagah View Post
    Meanwhile in Tahoe...


    As the 2019 field season winds to a close, the Tahoe National Forest would like to share an update on class 1, pedal-assisted E-bike use on recommended routes and trails:
    • No observed increase in trail degradation nor resource damage occurred as a result of class 1, pedal-assisted E-bike use on Tahoe National Forest routes or trails.
    • No trail conflicts were reported or observed between class 1, pedal-assisted E-bike users and other recreationalists on Tahoe National Forest roads or trails.
    • There were no reported accidents or injuries due to E-bike use of any class type on Tahoe National Forest routes or trails.
    • Tahoe National Forest trail and recreation managers did observe an increase in the diversity of skill levels and age groups utilizing E-bikes to access Tahoe National Forest routes and trails. This included both class 1, pedal-assisted E-bike use, and other classes of E-bikes utilizing motorized routes.

    https://www.facebook.com/TahoeNF/posts/2360414850886769
    Good to have some actual studied findings instead of conjecture.

    As to the second point on trail conflict, does the report state how many miles of trails and how many users? The Crux of any trail conflict issue has to do with number of people per mile of trails. In remote places where one can go for a hike or ride and only encounter a small handful of people, trail conflicts will be minimal. In more urban area's where the trails are very crowded, especially on weekends, where one will encounter 10's if not 100's of people on the trail the number of trail conflicts has the opportunity to become higher. In some locals the Hikers and MTBer's have good relationships already and adding in a few Class 1 eBikes will not even be noticed. In other places the Hikers and bird watchers HATE 2-wheeled anything, so those groups will be vocal with or without reason. Marin is a good example of that.
    Ride Bikes, Drink Craft Beer, Repeat.

    Know these before you post:
    MTBR Posting Guidelines

  174. #374
    E-Moderator
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    714
    Quote Originally Posted by Harryman View Post
    I see more class 2 than class 1 on my local trails, I gess we cancel each other out...
    I’m is SO CA and on actual dirt trails all I see are only class 1 as well. But go to the beach or road and all bets are off.

  175. #375
    E-Moderator
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    714
    Quote Originally Posted by ruthabagah View Post
    Meanwhile in Tahoe...


    As the 2019 field season winds to a close, the Tahoe National Forest would like to share an update on class 1, pedal-assisted E-bike use on recommended routes and trails:
    • No observed increase in trail degradation nor resource damage occurred as a result of class 1, pedal-assisted E-bike use on Tahoe National Forest routes or trails.
    • No trail conflicts were reported or observed between class 1, pedal-assisted E-bike users and other recreationalists on Tahoe National Forest roads or trails.
    • There were no reported accidents or injuries due to E-bike use of any class type on Tahoe National Forest routes or trails.
    • Tahoe National Forest trail and recreation managers did observe an increase in the diversity of skill levels and age groups utilizing E-bikes to access Tahoe National Forest routes and trails. This included both class 1, pedal-assisted E-bike use, and other classes of E-bikes utilizing motorized routes.

    https://www.facebook.com/TahoeNF/posts/2360414850886769
    Great post and thanks for the link!
    I don’t remember exactly we’re I read it, but I could’ve sworn I saw something similar about AZ as well.

  176. #376
    E-Moderator
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    714
    Quote Originally Posted by Klurejr View Post
    In some locals the Hikers and MTBer's have good relationships already and adding in a few Class 1 eBikes will not even be noticed. In other places the Hikers and bird watchers HATE 2-wheeled anything, so those groups will be vocal with or without reason. Marin is a good example of that.
    No disrespect intended, but I hike on occasion around Laguna Beach: Aliso Woods or Laguna Coast Park. My GF & I almost always have to jump quickly to a side to avoid from getting run over. So far it’s always been an MTB, but it can easily be an emtb as well. I get the feeling most hikers tolerate bikers and I only hike occasionally. As a bike rider, I make it a point to always greet people and there are always a few you can tell don’t want to say a thing because you are on a bike. I

    Personally I think it’s naive to believe there is a good relationship between hikers and bikers. I bet, if there was good way to get MTB’s off the trail, hikers would take it. That’s why MTBs and emtbs should you unite to become a larger trail advocacy group.

  177. #377
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    1,519
    Please someone what is specific about class 2?

  178. #378
    Cycologist
    Reputation: chazpat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    6,093
    Quote Originally Posted by 33red View Post
    Please someone what is specific about class 2?
    Hand twist throttle instead of cranks assist throttle.
    This post is a natural product. Variances in spelling & grammar should be appreciated as part of its character & beauty.

  179. #379
    Moderator Moderator
    Reputation: Harryman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    2,733
    Quote Originally Posted by ruthabagah View Post
    Since you are in Co too, chances are we are riding the same trails, so which one? Are they single tracks, or city path?

    Again, zero class 2 sightings in any of the trails I have been riding (state parks from FoCo to trinidad, Jeffco parks, mountain jeep roads).
    Lots of riding in the front range, it doesn't look like we overlap. The only state park I very infrequently ride is Cheyenne Mtn state park. I stay out of Jeffco. Otherwise, trails generally local to me in the springs in various park systems and USFS. It's rare to see a class 1 on bike paths, I think I've seen two in the last several years, class 2 and kit bikes are the ebikes of choice. On singletrack, it's about 40/60 between class 1 and 2. With more Chinese middrives hitting the market, it'll become increasingly hard to tell the difference.

  180. #380
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    2,737
    Quote Originally Posted by Harryman View Post
    Lots of riding in the front range, it doesn't look like we overlap. The only state park I very infrequently ride is Cheyenne Mtn state park. I stay out of Jeffco. Otherwise, trails generally local to me in the springs in various park systems and USFS. It's rare to see a class 1 on bike paths, I think I've seen two in the last several years, class 2 and kit bikes are the ebikes of choice. On singletrack, it's about 40/60 between class 1 and 2. With more Chinese middrives hitting the market, it'll become increasingly hard to tell the difference.
    I've ridden Moab, Rabbit Valley, Jeffco and multiple state parks, certainly hundreds of rides at this point, and I have *never* seen a Class 2 ebike on the trails, and I know what I'm looking for. I've never seen one on the 4x4 roads above Boulder where I ride, either.

    I commute on the US36 bike path quite a bit, and I've only even seen a couple of Class 2s on there, and they were bolt upright shit bikes being piloted by people who have probably hung them in the garage forever by now.

  181. #381
    ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ SuperModerator
    Reputation: Klurejr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    7,017
    Quote Originally Posted by mtbbiker View Post
    No disrespect intended, but I hike on occasion around Laguna Beach: Aliso Woods or Laguna Coast Park. My GF & I almost always have to jump quickly to a side to avoid from getting run over. So far it’s always been an MTB, but it can easily be an emtb as well. I get the feeling most hikers tolerate bikers and I only hike occasionally. As a bike rider, I make it a point to always greet people and there are always a few you can tell don’t want to say a thing because you are on a bike. I

    Personally I think it’s naive to believe there is a good relationship between hikers and bikers. I bet, if there was good way to get MTB’s off the trail, hikers would take it. That’s why MTBs and emtbs should you unite to become a larger trail advocacy group.
    No disrespect taken.

    But i do sense you did not fully read my post. I mentioned that some trails will have conflict when large groups of MTB's and hikers use the same trails and some would not. I live in Oceanside, less than an hour from laguna Beach and the trail system I frequent does not have the trail sharing issues you are describing.

    It all comes down to each individual trail system and the issues that particular system has to deal with. That is why I am in favor of the local Trail Managers having full control of the rules set forth for said trail system, blanket rules meant to apply to every single trail in the city/county/state/nation are not a good thing.

    What works in Laguna Beach is not necessarily going to work in Oceanside, or Fort Collins, or Upstate New York......
    Ride Bikes, Drink Craft Beer, Repeat.

    Know these before you post:
    MTBR Posting Guidelines

  182. #382
    Moderator Moderator
    Reputation: Harryman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    2,733
    Quote Originally Posted by honkinunit View Post
    I've ridden Moab, Rabbit Valley, Jeffco and multiple state parks, certainly hundreds of rides at this point, and I have *never* seen a Class 2 ebike on the trails, and I know what I'm looking for. I've never seen one on the 4x4 roads above Boulder where I ride, either.

    I commute on the US36 bike path quite a bit, and I've only even seen a couple of Class 2s on there, and they were bolt upright shit bikes being piloted by people who have probably hung them in the garage forever by now.
    There is a Pedego dealer 500 feet from a park that backs up to the USFS and is laced with popular riding trails, I wouldn't be surprised if that had an effect. Just goes to show there aren't any universal truths regarding how people behave in parks. Wait, I'm wrong, they don't pick up bags of poop, that one is indisputable.

  183. #383
    Cycologist
    Reputation: chazpat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    6,093
    At one point not long ago, Pedego wasn't manufacturing/selling class 1 ebikes. They had eMTBs but one of their selling points was that all their ebikes had throttles, claiming that is what customers wanted (most did have pedal assist as well). I guess they realized they were missing out not having class 1 and removed the throttles from at least some of their eMTBs.
    This post is a natural product. Variances in spelling & grammar should be appreciated as part of its character & beauty.

  184. #384
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ruthabagah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    204
    Quote Originally Posted by Harryman View Post
    There is a Pedego dealer 500 feet from a park that backs up to the USFS and is laced with popular riding trails, I wouldn't be surprised if that had an effect. Just goes to show there aren't any universal truths regarding how people behave in parks. Wait, I'm wrong, they don't pick up bags of poop, that one is indisputable.
    Absolutely agree on your last point on poop. Yeah, only pedego and radrover still sell Class 2 bikes that could pretend to be on a trail. Sales of class 2 have been so abysmal in Colorado that most LBS aside from the pedego store do not keep them in stock. Unless you are in the springs were they all ride a class 2... I thought it would be boulder...

  185. #385
    Trail Rider
    Reputation: mlx john's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,040
    There seem to be general confusion, or lack of information concerning E-bikes on BLM land around Moab.

    Are they allowed until the local land managers implement restrictions? Are they not allowed until land managers release policy that they are legally allowed?

    The caption of the photo in this article states that they are allowed to use BLM trails.

    https://moabtimes.com/2019/10/25/fed...-public-lands/

    MTB Project is now labeling trails such as Captain Ahab and Mag 7 as e-bike legal.

    Just wondering what the deal is.
    2020 SC Hightower

  186. #386
    Moderator Moderator
    Reputation: Harryman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    2,733
    Quote Originally Posted by mlx john View Post
    There seem to be general confusion, or lack of information concerning E-bikes on BLM land around Moab.

    Are they allowed until the local land managers implement restrictions? Are they not allowed until land managers release policy that they are legally allowed?

    The caption of the photo in this article states that they are allowed to use BLM trails.

    https://moabtimes.com/2019/10/25/fed...-public-lands/

    MTB Project is now labeling trails such as Captain Ahab and Mag 7 as e-bike legal.

    Just wondering what the deal is.
    FWIW, anyone can change the ebike status of trails on mtb project, or at least request the change. I take what I see on any of the online trail mapping sites with a grain of salt, I've yet to see one that is reliably accurate about anything.

  187. #387
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    323
    When the National Parks released their statement on the Order, eBikes were automatically equated with bicycles as far as access goes. The BLM has released their statement on the Order, so they would in theory be obligated to equate the two. Should they determine that a trail is worthy of an eBike ban, they would have to go through the proper channels to create a law that will apply to the situation. The former laws that applied to eBikes were designed for motor vehicles and extended to eBikes. Those laws can no longer be used because of the order. When the laws are ambiguous, they work in your favor because a judge cannot hold you accountable for breaking an ambiguous law according to U.S. Code § 706.

  188. #388
    Formerly of Kent
    Reputation: Le Duke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    10,964
    Quote Originally Posted by figofspee View Post
    When the National Parks released their statement on the Order, eBikes were automatically equated with bicycles as far as access goes. The BLM has released their statement on the Order, so they would in theory be obligated to equate the two. Should they determine that a trail is worthy of an eBike ban, they would have to go through the proper channels to create a law that will apply to the situation. The former laws that applied to eBikes were designed for motor vehicles and extended to eBikes. Those laws can no longer be used because of the order. When the laws are ambiguous, they work in your favor because a judge cannot hold you accountable for breaking an ambiguous law according to U.S. Code § 706.
    You understand that literally none of this is law, right?

    Your insistence on repeatedly referring to a change in policy as “law” is concerning to me as an American taxpayer. Our educational system has obviously failed you.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Death from Below.

  189. #389
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    72
    https://www.blm.gov/download/file/fid/35157

    E-bikes should not be used on a trail or road that is currently limited to non-OHV or non-motorized use only, unless a BLM District or Field Manager issues a decision authorizing their use in accordance with applicable law

  190. #390
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    323
    Quote Originally Posted by sunderland56 View Post
    https://www.blm.gov/download/file/fid/35157

    E-bikes should not be used on a trail or road that is currently limited to non-OHV or non-motorized use only, unless a BLM District or Field Manager issues a decision authorizing their use in accordance with applicable law
    If you are caught violating this suggestion, the BLM officer will call your mom and tell her what a bad kid you are as punishment... Paternalistic land agencies aren't good at ceding power.

  191. #391
    Formerly of Kent
    Reputation: Le Duke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    10,964
    Quote Originally Posted by sunderland56 View Post
    https://www.blm.gov/download/file/fid/35157

    E-bikes should not be used on a trail or road that is currently limited to non-OHV or non-motorized use only, unless a BLM District or Field Manager issues a decision authorizing their use in accordance with applicable law
    Do you think that a single appointed official is capable of creating or augmenting an actual LAW?

    Holy crap, guys. The law authorizes officials to create policy and regulation. They cannot create law.

    That’s up to the House, Senate and POTUS.

    https://youtu.be/FFroMQlKiag


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Death from Below.

  192. #392
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    2,889
    Quote Originally Posted by Le Duke View Post
    Do you think that a single appointed official is capable of creating or augmenting an actual LAW?

    Holy crap, guys. The law authorizes officials to create policy and regulation. They cannot create law.

    That’s up to the House, Senate and POTUS.

    https://youtu.be/FFroMQlKiag


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Please inform the ATFE of that.

    Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk

  193. #393
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ruthabagah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    204
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    Please inform the ATFE of that.

    Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk
    Boom. Excellent

  194. #394
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    31
    Quote Originally Posted by ruthabagah View Post
    Boom. Excellent
    3 cheers for twitter, flashy headlines and sick one liners, they are a lot of fun.
    There is a lot more process involved than one guy at an agency signing a one-pager.

    https://www.atf.gov/rules-and-regulations

  195. #395
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    2,889
    Quote Originally Posted by aoliver View Post
    3 cheers for twitter, flashy headlines and sick one liners, they are a lot of fun.
    There is a lot more process involved than one guy at an agency signing a one-pager.

    https://www.atf.gov/rules-and-regulations
    I don't know what you think your link shows. They, the ATF, recently went as far as to not prosecute a brazen, repeat offender who was blatantly giving them the bird, figuratively, while hosting build parties because they found out that their policy they were enforcing as law, ie people have been sent to jail using this policy, actually ran afoul of federal law. What makes it even more interesting is that they believe that by not prosecuting the guy their policy somehow still supersedes federal law.

    So yes, the precedent is more than set where unaccountable, appointed officials codify laws outside the framework of the Constitution. Because, despite what they say, the head of the agency, any agency really, can, and has, push through regulations with no regard to the input process.

    Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk

  196. #396
    Professional Slacker
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    3,208
    Quote Originally Posted by figofspee View Post
    If you are caught violating this suggestion, the BLM officer will call your mom and tell her what a bad kid you are as punishment... Paternalistic land agencies aren't good at ceding power.
    The REWARD for turning in a motorized vehicle on BLM singletrack is $250, I imagine the fine is several times that amount.

    But he's selectively quoting, missing this part:
    Question: Are e-bikes allowed on BLM trails due to SO 3376?
    Answer: As the BLM works to fully implement SO 3376, District or Field managers should use the exclusion to the definition of off-road vehicle (OHV) at 43 CFR 8340.0-5(a)(3) to authorize the use of Class I, II, and III e-bikes where ever bicycles are allowed, provided they are operated in the pedal assist mode.
    If someone quotes something with a link, follow the link for the full story.

  197. #397
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    323
    § 8340.0-5 Definitions.
    As used in this part:

    (a) Off-road vehicle means any motorized vehicle capable of, or designed for, travel on or immediately over land, water, or other natural terrain, excluding:

    (1) Any nonamphibious registered motorboat;

    (2) Any military, fire, emergency, or law enforcement vehicle while being used for emergency purposes;

    (3) Any vehicle whose use is expressly authorized by the authorized officer, or otherwise officially approved;

    (4) Vehicles in official use; and

    (5) Any combat or combat support vehicle when used in times of national defense emergencies.

    (b) Public lands means any lands the surface of which is administered by the Bureau of Land Management.

    (c) Bureau means the Bureau of Land Management.

    (d) Official use means use by an employee, agent, or designated representative of the Federal Government or one of its contractors, in the course of his employment, agency, or representation.

  198. #398
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ruthabagah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    204
    Interesting BLM news From:

    "William Perry Pendley serves as the Bureau of Land Management’s Deputy Director for Policy and Programs, exercising authority of the director."

    https://www.deseret.com/opinion/2019...ore-accessible

  199. #399
    Location: 10 ft from Hell Moderator
    Reputation: life behind bars's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,426
    Quote Originally Posted by ruthabagah View Post
    Interesting BLM news From:

    "William Perry Pendley serves as the Bureau of Land Management’s Deputy Director for Policy and Programs, exercising authority of the director."

    https://www.deseret.com/opinion/2019...ore-accessible





    Opinion pieces aren't "news".
    I ncredibly
    M yopic
    B ackstabbing
    A ssholes

  200. #400
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    2,889
    Quote Originally Posted by life behind bars View Post
    Opinion pieces aren't "news".
    When the author is capable of actually making actual changes to have policy align with his views it's not an "opinion piece". If you want to get mad at someone over that comment get mad at the editor for allowing the stock title template to be used.

    Sent from my SM-N975U1 using Tapatalk

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. State Rules regarding ebikes on Trails
    By Lemonaid in forum E-Bikes
    Replies: 72
    Last Post: 06-18-2019, 09:50 AM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-17-2016, 11:18 AM
  3. Rules? Rules? Who needs rules?
    By teamdicky in forum Singlespeed
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 03-25-2013, 12:53 PM
  4. Federal Trail Funding May Be Eliminated...
    By PscyclePath in forum Trail Building and Advocacy
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-18-2011, 11:26 AM
  5. Federal Law About Dating Beer
    By getagrip in forum Beer Forum
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 03-31-2011, 08:31 AM

Members who have read this thread: 293

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2020 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.