A few data points on trail conflicts between MTBs and eMTBs- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 24 of 24
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: RickBullottaPA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    487

    A few data points on trail conflicts between MTBs and eMTBs


  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    986
    Not even slightly surprised by their observations.

  3. #3
    IPA tester
    Reputation: Dirtrider127's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    1,238
    Never seen an issue myself and have/ride both
    "We'll ride it until they pave it."

    -Urban Yeti
    Dirttreaders.com

  4. #4
    Up In Smoke
    Reputation: Train Wreck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    2,720
    Wow, what an eye opener

  5. #5
    All fat, all the time.
    Reputation: Shark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    8,563
    That's good.
    I'll bet they would see similar results if bikes were allowed back into wilderness areas.

    Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

  6. #6
    Out spokin'
    Reputation: Sparticus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Posts
    10,539
    Personally Iím not surprised by this observation (screenshot from linked article):

    A few data points on trail conflicts between MTBs and eMTBs-b56dfe02-fe85-42ba-b4c8-8a94b54537a8.jpg

    A couple years ago I contributed to a thread here on MTBR (more like an argument) wherein I stated my belief that egos present the greatest resistance to ebikes. Several empty beer adherents were quick to reply that, in essence, no, ego has nothing to do with it. Itís all about increased impact and additional trail damage.

    Undisuaded, I still believe the resistance is primarily about ego.

    This is the trailbuilding forum and Iím a trailbuilder. Have been for over 30 years; Iíve laid out and helped build miles of singletrack here in the PNW. I believe very strongly that for the most part, mountain bikers as a group believe in giving back by building &/or maintaining trails. Here in the PNW, thereís no doubt that mountain bikers are the predominant trail user group that does the heavy lifting in this regard.

    So what? One might ask.

    Well, new trails are being constructed here. Within our National Forests. In response to a renewed desire by trail users, the predominant one being ó guess who ó mountain bikers. As demand for more singletrack increases and (at least one) user group steps up to build and maintain, land managers get on board with responding positively to the publicís needs and desires. They authorize new miles of singletrack.

    The point being if ebiking really does increase demand for singletrack in the backcountry, at least some of us believe that the answer will prove to be additional singletrack for all.

    I believe this, at least where I live & recreate.
    =sParty
    disciplesofdirt.org

    We don't quit riding because we get old.
    We get old because we quit riding.

  7. #7
    Į\_(ツ)_/Į SuperModerator
    Reputation: Klurejr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    7,225
    As long the speed differentials do not cause trail conflict and there are no trail conflict issues between eMTB and the existing trail users (Hikers, Trail Runners, MTB's and Horseback Riders), then there is no reason to ban them.

    I do not believe the more-miles = more-damage argument holds any water. Trail use is going to ebb and flow from year to

    Those studies state no conflicts were reported for JeffCo. That is great. Are the conditions for JeffCo the same as every other shared use trail system in the US? No.

    I think this sort of study will need to be done in more Urban area's (higher volume of trail users), high Equestrian use area's etc.

    But this study is good news for the eBike advocacy groups.
    Ride Bikes, Drink Craft Beer, Repeat.

    Know these before you post:
    MTBR Posting Guidelines

  8. #8
    Cycologist
    Reputation: chazpat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    6,479
    Quote Originally Posted by Klurejr View Post

    Those studies state no conflicts were reported for JeffCo. That is great. Are the conditions for JeffCo the same as every other shared use trail system in the US? No.

    I think this sort of study will need to be done in more Urban area's (higher volume of trail users), high Equestrian use area's etc.
    Bingo.

    I am not familiar with the trails in the study but looking at the picture in the article and looking at some online, the JeffCo trails look to be a lot more open, wider and not as twisty as the trails around me. It's a numbers thing, a few ebikes on my local trails will not be an issue. But if the numbers greatly increase, I think the trails will have to be widened to accommodate more passing. The majority of trails around me do not have horse traffic at all.
    This post is a natural product. Variances in spelling & grammar should be appreciated as part of its character & beauty.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: WHALENARD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    4,928
    Where I've experienced "conflict" are recreation oriented towns that now have 3 & 4 shops in town that advertise and rent e-bikes with a trail network nearby. Specifically you have people riding up one way trails. Yes they're marked.

    Something that chaps my ass are industry insiders using their long time, well earned, BICYCLE street cred to now use that platform as a brand ambassador to promote their sponsor's mopeds. Cough...Jeff Kendell Weed... cough.

    Sent from my moto g(6) forge using Tapatalk
    It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: tbmaddux's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    2,166
    I have a couple friends with ebikes and have met a couple people that I donít know personally going past me on forest road climbs on ebikes.

    I am profoundly unaffected by all of it, just as I am by friends and coworkers who have come out to me as homosexual or transgender. What other riders (of any sort, if you get my meaning) do really has no effect on me.

    Except that my friend on the ebike sometimes gets bored or even mildly frustrated that I wonít chase him up the hill. So, if anyone has an issue with him riding the ebike, itís him.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bizango's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    428
    Two recent ebike encounters on local trails highlight to me it is not the ebike so much as it is the rider. The first was on a climbing trail and three guys came flying up behind us. The one guy was going so fast that he couldn't make a turn and crashed in front of my girlfriend.

    The other encounter was with a group of the "older" guys and one was on an ebike and the other two weren't. You honestly wouldn't have known they were on different bikes based on how they were riding, but one probably was having a different experience.

    The first encounter with the high speed climbers made me ponder yielding etiquette. It was quite clear that they expected us to move and yield and get out of their way. Kind of like when a downhill rider expects the climber to yield when in fact the climber has the right of way. I don't know the answer to this conundrum other than that it would be most courteous to pass in a spot where it is not too hard to get going again.

    Things will continue to evolve and part of that evolution is establishing and educating regarding the added layer of responsibility when it comes to etiquette. The traditional signs that show the horse, hiker, and biker may need a fourth element.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    51
    Did you just call ebikers gay? Come on dude it is 2020 now.

  13. #13
    Į\_(ツ)_/Į SuperModerator
    Reputation: Klurejr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    7,225
    Quote Originally Posted by bizango View Post
    The traditional signs that show the horse, hiker, and biker may need a fourth element.
    That is an interesting proposal.
    Ride Bikes, Drink Craft Beer, Repeat.

    Know these before you post:
    MTBR Posting Guidelines

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    634
    So, the TL;DR of this is: Trail conflicts are caused by assholes, not by their chosen mode of transportation.
    Which we can pretty much distill down to: Conflicts are caused by assholes.

    Sounds about right!

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation: RickBullottaPA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    487
    Quote Originally Posted by Surestick Malone View Post
    So, the TL;DR of this is: Trail conflicts are caused by assholes, not by their chosen mode of transportation.
    Which we can pretty much distill down to: Conflicts are caused by assholes.

    Sounds about right!
    Shocking, right?

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    247
    Quote Originally Posted by TR Chensley View Post
    Did you just call ebikers gay? Come on dude it is 2020 now.
    Seriously, call them "white male professionals" if you really want to use a term that is considered offensive. :-)

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation: tbmaddux's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    2,166
    Quote Originally Posted by TR Chensley View Post
    Did you just
    No, I did not.

    The reaction of other people (not me) to ebikes/ebikers reminds me of the phobia that other people (not me) present towards members of the LBTQIA+ community.

    I am not saying that the ebikers are being persecuted in the same way as members of the LBTQIA+ community. I am not intending to diminish the struggles of the LBTQIA+ community with something as trivial as a bicycle.

    It's simply that one situation reminds me of the other, with respect to my friend (a straight cis white male ebiker), as I noted above.

    EDIT - just saw I forgot the "G" but rather than edit it away I'll just leave it and make fun of myself in a follow-up post.
    Last edited by tbmaddux; 04-30-2020 at 01:43 PM.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation: WHALENARD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    4,928
    Lol

    Sent from my moto g(6) forge using Tapatalk
    It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.

  19. #19
    Į\_(ツ)_/Į SuperModerator
    Reputation: Klurejr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    7,225
    Quote Originally Posted by Surestick Malone View Post
    So, the TL;DR of this is: Trail conflicts are caused by assholes, not by their chosen mode of transportation.
    Which we can pretty much distill down to: Conflicts are caused by assholes.

    Sounds about right!
    Quote Originally Posted by RickBullottaPA View Post
    Shocking, right?

    The real data points we need relate to how many of said A-holes have chosen Horses and eBikes over human powered bikes...... ;-)
    Ride Bikes, Drink Craft Beer, Repeat.

    Know these before you post:
    MTBR Posting Guidelines

  20. #20
    All fat, all the time.
    Reputation: Shark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    8,563
    Quote Originally Posted by tbmaddux View Post
    No, I did not.

    The reaction of other people (not me) to ebikes/ebikers reminds me of the phobia that other people (not me) present towards members of the LBTQIA+ community.

    I am not saying that the ebikers are being persecuted in the same way as members of the LBTQIA+ community. I am not intending to diminish the struggles of the LBTQIA+ community with something as trivial as a bicycle.

    It's simply that one situation reminds me of the other, with respect to my friend (a straight cis white male ebiker), as I noted above.
    Qia+ huh?

    Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    247
    Quote Originally Posted by Shark View Post
    Qia+ huh?

    Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
    https://lgbtqiainfo.weebly.com/acron...explained.html

    And yes, its become a letter salad for unrelated things. The "I" for instance, is intersex, that is those that from birth have some sort physical issue regarding their genitals or chromosomes, and can take in everything from ambiguous genitalia to conditions where you genetically one sex but completely another physically (Swyer syndrome). The "T" is for transgender, but that is a form of dysphoria, a mental condition unrelated to any physical or genetic condition. The "A" is asexual, but that one is really weird to lump in with the others as its not about attractions outside of hetero-normative, but a extremely or completely lacking sexual attraction (and when these individuals do have relationships, they are almost always hetero-normative). The "+" is, well, who knows. Its meant to capture a diverse range of gender and sexual experiences, but that is sort of what makes us human, so aren't we all (including the aforementioned groups) all "+"? There are plenty of conservative, hetero-normative persons that have attractions, interests or desires that might fall outside the norm. Your Baptist minister neighbor probably puts on a Japanese schoolgirl uniform and gets whipped by his wife. Don't know if that means we should create a new sexual/gender subcategory for that.

    With all the "categories" that have come along in recent years, I'm reminded of that line in the Incredibles, "If everyone is special, then no one is".

  22. #22
    All fat, all the time.
    Reputation: Shark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    8,563
    Wow learn something new everyday.

    I wish I was special but I'm pretty normal. Wait, maybe that is special now

    Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    634
    Quote Originally Posted by CycleKrieg View Post
    https://lgbtqiainfo.weebly.com/acron...explained.html

    And yes, its become a letter salad for unrelated things. The "I" for instance, is intersex, that is those that from birth have some sort physical issue regarding their genitals or chromosomes, and can take in everything from ambiguous genitalia to conditions where you genetically one sex but completely another physically (Swyer syndrome). The "T" is for transgender, but that is a form of dysphoria, a mental condition unrelated to any physical or genetic condition. The "A" is asexual, but that one is really weird to lump in with the others as its not about attractions outside of hetero-normative, but a extremely or completely lacking sexual attraction (and when these individuals do have relationships, they are almost always hetero-normative). The "+" is, well, who knows. Its meant to capture a diverse range of gender and sexual experiences, but that is sort of what makes us human, so aren't we all (including the aforementioned groups) all "+"? There are plenty of conservative, hetero-normative persons that have attractions, interests or desires that might fall outside the norm. Your Baptist minister neighbor probably puts on a Japanese schoolgirl uniform and gets whipped by his wife. Don't know if that means we should create a new sexual/gender subcategory for that.

    With all the "categories" that have come along in recent years, I'm reminded of that line in the Incredibles, "If everyone is special, then no one is".
    I imagine the point is that your "Baptist minister neighbor" would probably get shamed/feel shame for what he, and presumably his wife, enjoy and which hurts no one (other than the aforementioned Baptist minister but that's kind of the point of the whole exercise so...) much like the rest of the LBTQIA+ community have been taught to feel shame for something they have no control over and which has no bearing on their worth as a person.

    How did we get from trail conflicts to this? ;-)

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation: tbmaddux's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    2,166
    Quote Originally Posted by Surestick Malone View Post
    How did we get from trail conflicts to this
    I blame that guy a few posts up with his stupid acronym. He even forgot the "G", which as we all know stands for "Go ride your bike"

Similar Threads

  1. Moto guys take over MTBs --- KTM MTBs
    By NEPMTBA in forum Pennsylvania
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 08-16-2011, 11:21 PM
  2. 2 points Stan's Flows. 0 points Tald
    By tald in forum Turner
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 10-27-2007, 07:03 PM
  3. Replies: 7
    Last Post: 10-13-2007, 08:24 PM
  4. Replies: 19
    Last Post: 09-29-2005, 11:38 AM

Members who have read this thread: 134

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.