USFS e-bike Lawsuit - Page 2- Mtbr.com
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 201 to 346 of 346
  1. #201
    Cycologist
    Reputation: chazpat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    6,610
    Quote Originally Posted by tom erb View Post
    An entity that determines it can accommodate one or more types of OPDMDs in its facility is allowed to ask the person using the device to provide credible assurance that the device is used because of a disability. If the person presents a valid, State-issued disability parking placard or card or a State-issued proof of disability, that must be accepted as credible assurance on its face. If the person does not have this documentation, but states verbally that the OPDMD is being used because of a mobility disability, that also must be accepted as credible assurance, unless the person is observed doing something that contradicts the assurance. For example, if a person is observed running and jumping, that may be evidence that contradicts the person's assertion of a mobility disability. However, it is very important for covered entities and their staff to understand that the fact that a person with a disability is able to walk for a short distance does not necessarily contradict a verbal assurance -- many people with mobility disabilities can walk, but need their mobility device for longer distances or uneven terrain. This is particularly true for people who lack stamina, have poor balance, or use mobility devices because of respiratory, cardiac, or neurological disabilities. A covered entity cannot ask people about their disabilities.
    Or in other words, if they are allowed for the disabled, anyone can claim to be disabled and get away with riding an ebike. Ask them to show that they are actually disabled and you may face a lawsuit. Why do they require disabled tags for parking in handicap parking places, why don't we just trust everyone's word? Why does my mom have to show a card for the metal in her hip when she passes through airport security?
    This post is a natural product. Variances in spelling & grammar should be appreciated as part of its character & beauty.

  2. #202
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    5,511
    Quote Originally Posted by Tahoerog View Post
    Hi, I am new to this blog.
    I ride all the single tracks in the Tahoe basin where I live and the Carson Valley Pinenuts.
    I ride snowmobiles in the Winter and dirt bikes & mountain bikes in the Summer.
    Being a "local" I have learned to deal with other locals and tourists on the trails as a hiker, mountain biker and motocross dirt biker.
    In dealing with the Forest Service as a community trail organizer, I believe that there are environmental groups that look at bicycles to 4wds as destructive and erosive to the land especially in the Tahoe basin (TRPA).

    My point is this:
    Trail access will always be under attack from environmental concerns.
    It's a divide and conquer approach- allow hikers but not bikers or allow bikers not dirt bikers etc.
    I really don't care if I am on a trail with a Ebiker, hiker, horse rider ,dirt biker or 4wd as long as every one is considerate and the trail is big enough.
    I found the more people using a trail the easier it is to keep open when others try to close it.
    The latest issue is that USFS trails can be physically demanding and can only be accessed by younger people with the cardiovascular system to match their age.
    This ruling to limit Ebikes comes solely from the USFS and discriminates and limits the trail accessibly to seniors because USFS places Ebikes in same category as motorcycles, ATVs, 4WDs and other gas powered vehicles.
    I really don't have a strong opinion on this other than it would be nice to see people in their 60s enjoy and supporting keeping the trails open. Where I live there is room for everyone.
    Wait, what? Trails can be physically demanding? Who knew. That goes for any hiking trail, xc ski trail, mountaineering route, rope, climbing etc. Almost 56 here. At 60 we just become couch potatoes? Yikes. Did 44 Miles over 3 days at Nembafest and around 3K of vert, not huge numbers, but good for me. Kingdom Trails VT. No motorized vehicles allowed. One could always shuttle or take a lift for some sections though. It's a sport, just like any other. Conditioning, training, practice. I feel sorry for the younger generations, should be really cool in VR getting some KOM's with strava. What ev. Commuted by bike around 2K miles last year. Did 153 days of on bike rides of at least 1 hr. That's commuting, mt biking and bikepacking combined. Ever hear of a masters sports division in ANYTHING?

  3. #203
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    552
    Quote Originally Posted by Tahoerog View Post
    Hi, I am new to this blog.
    I ride all the single tracks in the Tahoe basin where I live and the Carson Valley Pinenuts.
    I ride snowmobiles in the Winter and dirt bikes & mountain bikes in the Summer.
    Being a "local" I have learned to deal with other locals and tourists on the trails as a hiker, mountain biker and motocross dirt biker.
    In dealing with the Forest Service as a community trail organizer, I believe that there are environmental groups that look at bicycles to 4wds as destructive and erosive to the land especially in the Tahoe basin (TRPA).

    My point is this:
    Trail access will always be under attack from environmental concerns.
    It's a divide and conquer approach- allow hikers but not bikers or allow bikers not dirt bikers etc.
    I really don't care if I am on a trail with a Ebiker, hiker, horse rider ,dirt biker or 4wd as long as every one is considerate and the trail is big enough.
    I found the more people using a trail the easier it is to keep open when others try to close it.
    The latest issue is that USFS trails can be physically demanding and can only be accessed by younger people with the cardiovascular system to match their age.
    This ruling to limit Ebikes comes solely from the USFS and discriminates and limits the trail accessibly to seniors because USFS places Ebikes in same category as motorcycles, ATVs, 4WDs and other gas powered vehicles.
    I really don't have a strong opinion on this other than it would be nice to see people in their 60s enjoy and supporting keeping the trails open. Where I live there is room for everyone.
    This is the smartest post I have seen in quite some time on this topic.

    Trail access doesn't get taken away because USFS or BLM get a wild hair in their butt. It gets taken because they are pressured by crazy environmental groups. And the best tactic they have is divide and conquer. Get the eBikers arguing with the MTBers and get the hikers to be pissed at all of them! That's a perfect formula for making an argument to close trails down for all vehicles.

    The rampant speculation is that eBikes will cause trails to be closed. But that is little more than just speculation. But I believe the truth is, not standing in solidarity with eBikers (i.e. allow your house to be divided) is far more detrimental to future trail access than eBikes are. Also, people are missing the most obvious point. With eBikes, there comes more people to the trails. Increased demand could actually result in MORE trail access.

    But grouchy people are just gonna be grouchy.

  4. #204
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    552
    I find it ironic that my post about grouchy people being grouchy was responded to by grouchy people with negative reputation comments.

    What a joke.

    Change is coming. It's gonna happen whether grouchy people get grouchy about it or not. The only question the MTB community has is, will we allow change to divide us, or will we embrace change and use it to our advantage?

  5. #205
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    5,511
    Increased demand results in more trail access how? More trail work? By who? More conflicts, more trail wear. This is a good thing? The 'WE" hmmm. You are assuming the mt bike community is now the pro motorized e bike community? Best of luck with your e bike advocacy. Really.

  6. #206
    Location: 10 ft from Hell Moderator
    Reputation: life behind bars's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,450
    Quote Originally Posted by Jim_bo View Post
    I find it ironic that my post about grouchy people being grouchy was responded to by grouchy people with negative reputation comments.

    What a joke.

    Change is coming. It's gonna happen whether grouchy people get grouchy about it or not. The only question the MTB community has is, will we allow change to divide us, or will we embrace change and use it to our advantage?



    There is no advantage for MTBers to align themselves with e-bikes. We don't have time to do the work (again) for access for e-bikes. If you want access go do the work yourselves, don't count on MTBers to do it for you. And yes, I negged you for being a whining twit that's butt hurt because you aren't getting your way.
    I ncredibly
    M yopic
    B ackstabbing
    A ssholes

  7. #207
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    552
    Quote Originally Posted by life behind bars View Post
    There is no advantage for MTBers to align themselves with e-bikes. We don't have time to do the work (again) for access for e-bikes. If you want access go do the work yourselves, don't count on MTBers to do it for you. And yes, I negged you for being a whining twit that's butt hurt because you aren't getting your way.
    You negged me because you can't find a rational argument to support your emotional bias. Keep making yourself feel good. Apparently my skin is much thicker than yours.

  8. #208
    Location: 10 ft from Hell Moderator
    Reputation: life behind bars's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,450
    Quote Originally Posted by Jim_bo View Post
    You negged me because you can't find a rational argument to support your emotional bias. Keep making yourself feel good. Apparently my skin is much thicker than yours.



    Atypical response when you get a reply you don't like. I negged you because you whine like a schoolgirl. My bias is anything but emotional. Enjoy riding your e-bike. Somewhere. Where I don't know but enjoy it none the less.
    I ncredibly
    M yopic
    B ackstabbing
    A ssholes

  9. #209
    mtbr member
    Reputation: FLYINW's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    90
    Quote Originally Posted by life behind bars View Post
    There is no advantage for MTBers to align themselves with e-bikes. We don't have time to do the work (again) for access for e-bikes. If you want access go do the work yourselves, don't count on MTBers to do it for you. And yes, I negged you for being a whining twit that's butt hurt because you aren't getting your way.
    Yet MTB groups will align themselves with hiker groups that will throw mountain bikers under the bus when they are through with you.

  10. #210
    Formerly of Kent
    Reputation: Le Duke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    11,745
    Quote Originally Posted by FLYINW View Post
    Yet MTB groups will align themselves with hiker groups that will throw mountain bikers under the bus when they are through with you.
    Iíll see if I can find it, but there are several non-MTB organizations that are using e-bikes against wheeled access as a whole.

    Sorry, but youíre on your own. Iím not going to hitch my wagon to yours.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Death from Below.

  11. #211
    Cycologist
    Reputation: chazpat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    6,610
    On most of the trails I ride, the hikers are fine with the mountain bikers as the trails were built and maintained by the mountain bikers. At my nearby NPS park, hikers and bikers work together to maintain the trails, lead by the park service and mountain bikers.

    The only complaint I've personally heard from a hiker was a guy who told me the parking lot was never full until they allowed mountain bikes. I pointed out that all the nearby parks that are hike only had had to expand their parking lots greatly over the years. And oddly enough, when I trail run there, I have a car parked in the lot. When I mountain bike, I often ride from home.
    This post is a natural product. Variances in spelling & grammar should be appreciated as part of its character & beauty.

  12. #212
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    552
    Quote Originally Posted by life behind bars View Post
    There is no advantage for MTBers to align themselves with e-bikes. We don't have time to do the work (again) for access for e-bikes. If you want access go do the work yourselves, don't count on MTBers to do it for you. And yes, I negged you for being a whining twit that's butt hurt because you aren't getting your way.
    There is no advantage in fanning the flames of discontent for ebikes. They are coming. And they look, and ride very much like an mtb when viewed by a hiker or other non mtber. So participating in developing inertia of vitriol towards them won't stop at them. Once you tell a non mtber they can discriminate based on some minor issue that has nothing to do with safety or environmental impact, then it will be hard to stop that momentum.

    My opinion is admittedly speculation. But so is the opinion "they are going to cause trail closures! " but the difference is that my opinion recognizes the inevitability of ebikes. Where the anti eBiker thinks that he can simply hate them away.

  13. #213
    Cycologist
    Reputation: chazpat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    6,610
    Quote Originally Posted by Jim_bo View Post
    There is no advantage in fanning the flames of discontent for ebikes. They are coming. And they look, and ride very much like an mtb when viewed by a hiker or other non mtber. So participating in developing inertia of vitriol towards them won't stop at them. Once you tell a non mtber they can discriminate based on some minor issue that has nothing to do with safety or environmental impact, then it will be hard to stop that momentum.

    My opinion is admittedly speculation. But so is the opinion "they are going to cause trail closures! " but the difference is that my opinion recognizes the inevitability of ebikes. Where the anti eBiker thinks that he can simply hate them away.
    Well, the "we're going to make them stealth so people can't tell them from real bicycles" attitude of the industry and a lot of the ebikers and "we're coming and you can't stop us" attitude and "bicycles now have motors but they aren't really motors because you still have to pedal" attitude isn't going to win over the mountain bikers. Maybe you need to consider a different approach.
    This post is a natural product. Variances in spelling & grammar should be appreciated as part of its character & beauty.

  14. #214
    Location: 10 ft from Hell Moderator
    Reputation: life behind bars's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,450
    Quote Originally Posted by Jim_bo View Post
    but the difference is that my opinion recognizes the inevitability of ebikes.



    This. Is where you lose the audience. They are not inevitable, I hear it once a week or more frequently. Land Managers don't like being force fed anything and e-bikers have attempted to do just that. You all have made enemies when you should have been making alliances. Good luck EVER getting access.
    I ncredibly
    M yopic
    B ackstabbing
    A ssholes

  15. #215
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Curveball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    3,643
    Quote Originally Posted by chazpat View Post
    On most of the trails I ride, the hikers are fine with the mountain bikers as the trails were built and maintained by the mountain bikers. At my nearby NPS park, hikers and bikers work together to maintain the trails, lead by the park service and mountain bikers.

    The only complaint I've personally heard from a hiker was a guy who told me the parking lot was never full until they allowed mountain bikes. I pointed out that all the nearby parks that are hike only had had to expand their parking lots greatly over the years. And oddly enough, when I trail run there, I have a car parked in the lot. When I mountain bike, I often ride from home.
    Which National Park allows mountain bikes?

    I think I read about one near Cleveland, but are there others?
    Riding Washington State singletrack since 1986

  16. #216
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Curveball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    3,643
    Quote Originally Posted by Le Duke View Post
    Iíll see if I can find it, but there are several non-MTB organizations that are using e-bikes against wheeled access as a whole.

    Sorry, but youíre on your own. Iím not going to hitch my wagon to yours.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Please let me know what you find. I'd be interested to see what the opposition is up to.

    Also, I like your phrasing. It sums up my feelings as well.
    Riding Washington State singletrack since 1986

  17. #217
    Cycologist
    Reputation: chazpat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    6,610
    Quote Originally Posted by Curveball View Post
    Which National Park allows mountain bikes?

    I think I read about one near Cleveland, but are there others?
    It's what the NPS calls a National Recreation Area; Chattahoochee River National Recreation Area

    https://www.nps.gov/chat/index.htm

    https://www.nps.gov/chat/planyourvisit/cycling.htm
    This post is a natural product. Variances in spelling & grammar should be appreciated as part of its character & beauty.

  18. #218
    mtbr member
    Reputation: FLYINW's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    90
    Quote Originally Posted by Le Duke View Post
    Iíll see if I can find it, but there are several non-MTB organizations that are using e-bikes against wheeled access as a whole.

    Sorry, but youíre on your own. Iím not going to hitch my wagon to yours.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    So you'd rather fight against them and let the hikers get both groups kicked out rather than band together and use the resources of a larger group.

  19. #219
    Formerly of Kent
    Reputation: Le Duke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    11,745
    Quote Originally Posted by FLYINW View Post
    So you'd rather fight against them and let the hikers get both groups kicked out rather than band together and use the resources of a larger group.
    Iíd rather the users be judged based on their own merits.




    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Death from Below.

  20. #220
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    2,769
    They are motorized. That's it. The end. Doesn't matter if you pretend to pedal, have a throttle, use electricity from burned coal, or if it burns gas. You have a motor....you are motorized. Stay off trails designated as Non-motorized. Special cases exist and can be dealt with by individual land managers. No one is entitled to any experience in this life. Ride while you can, one day you won't be able to. #ucking MTB industry has jumped the shark on this one. IMBA too. This is a simple issue being clouded by capitalist lust for a higher price point and a larger market. That's it.

  21. #221
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    552
    Quote Originally Posted by chazpat View Post
    Well, the "we're going to make them stealth so people can't tell them from real bicycles" attitude of the industry and a lot of the ebikers and "we're coming and you can't stop us" attitude and "bicycles now have motors but they aren't really motors because you still have to pedal" attitude isn't going to win over the mountain bikers. Maybe you need to consider a different approach.
    Are you really that dim to believe this is my approach? This is simply the evolution of technology. For God's sake, man... Take a look at the world around you!

  22. #222
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    552
    Quote Originally Posted by life behind bars View Post
    This. Is where you lose the audience. They are not inevitable, I hear it once a week or more frequently. Land Managers don't like being force fed anything and e-bikers have attempted to do just that. You all have made enemies when you should have been making alliances. Good luck EVER getting access.
    You too totally miss my point. I an not an eBiker. Nor am I an eBike advocate. I'm an mtber who recognizes that there's a better future for us embracing technology rather than resisting it!

  23. #223
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    552
    Quote Originally Posted by FLYINW View Post
    So you'd rather fight against them and let the hikers get both groups kicked out rather than band together and use the resources of a larger group.
    This guy gets it.

  24. #224
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    552
    Quote Originally Posted by DaveVt View Post
    They are motorized. That's it. The end. Doesn't matter if you pretend to pedal, have a throttle, use electricity from burned coal, or if it burns gas. You have a motor....you are motorized. Stay off trails designated as Non-motorized. Special cases exist and can be dealt with by individual land managers. No one is entitled to any experience in this life. Ride while you can, one day you won't be able to. #ucking MTB industry has jumped the shark on this one. IMBA too. This is a simple issue being clouded by capitalist lust for a higher price point and a larger market. That's it.
    You ever hear the term "luddite"?

  25. #225
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,048
    Quote Originally Posted by Jim_bo View Post
    This guy gets it.
    No, he doesn't. Neither do you.

  26. #226
    Cycologist
    Reputation: chazpat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    6,610
    Quote Originally Posted by Jim_bo View Post
    Are you really that dim to believe this is my approach? This is simply the evolution of technology. For God's sake, man... Take a look at the world around you!
    Based on your posts, yes. I haven't seen you post anything that would lead someone to think you're doing anything more, you even demonstrated more of it in this brief post.

    Motors were added to bicycles a long, long time ago. Why do people still ride road bikes; a lot of people still choose to ride road without a motor, despite having had that option for a long, long time. Just because the moped has evolved you think cyclist are going to quit riding bicycles? I'm sure you hate ebikes being called mopeds but that's exactly what they are, just an evolution of the moped. They don't run on gas? Neither does a Leaf but yet it's still a car.
    This post is a natural product. Variances in spelling & grammar should be appreciated as part of its character & beauty.

  27. #227
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    281
    Quote Originally Posted by chazpat View Post
    Based on your posts, yes. I haven't seen you post anything that would lead someone to think you're doing anything more, you even demonstrated more of it in this brief post.

    Motors were added to bicycles a long, long time ago. Why do people still ride road bikes; a lot of people still choose to ride road without a motor, despite having had that option for a long, long time. Just because the moped has evolved you think cyclist are going to quit riding bicycles? I'm sure you hate ebikes being called mopeds but that's exactly what they are, just an evolution of the moped. They don't run on gas? Neither does a Leaf but yet it's still a car.
    Sales of pedelecs has now outpaced the sales of non-pedelecs. While poor people will always gravitate towards the nonelectric there is a good chance almost everyone with disposable income will be on an assisted bike. Personally, I enjoy certain elements of both and will continue use of an unassisted bike if for nothing else, a different workout.

    The vast majority of pedelec riders are older, wealthy folks with lots of free time on their hands. If you don't want that group on your side, you don't understand how political influence works. It would not surprise me if in 10 years pedelecs have more trail access then non-pedelecs. The discriminatory posts here on MTBR could be used to justify keeping mtbers off trail for the exclusive use of the more tolerant pedelecs users.

    Play your stupid word games all you want, that doesn't bolster your argument, it highlights the fact that you are stuck in your own imagination and not participating in the real world. Seeking attention online is another symptom of an inability to function in the real world. There really isn't any rational reason to be so active in a discussion that has no connection to your personal interests then basic attention whoring.

  28. #228
    Location: 10 ft from Hell Moderator
    Reputation: life behind bars's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,450
    Quote Originally Posted by Jim_bo View Post
    You too totally miss my point. I an not an eBiker. Nor am I an eBike advocate. I'm an mtber who recognizes that there's a better future for us embracing technology rather than resisting it!




    That's your opinion and opinions are like........
    I ncredibly
    M yopic
    B ackstabbing
    A ssholes

  29. #229
    Cycologist
    Reputation: chazpat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    6,610
    Quote Originally Posted by Linktung View Post
    Sales of pedelecs has now outpaced the sales of non-pedelecs.
    In the US? Source, I find that doubtful. Yeah, they're great for commuting around town. But subtract out the non-emtbs and look again.


    Quote Originally Posted by Linktung View Post
    While poor people will always gravitate towards the nonelectric there is a good chance almost everyone with disposable income will be on an assisted bike. Personally, I enjoy certain elements of both and will continue use of an unassisted bike if for nothing else, a different workout.
    Maybe folks only ride walmart bikes where you ride but around me, people on the trails ride some pretty expensive bicycles, ones too expensive to have been purchased by "poor people". And what does the amount of disposable income have to do with this? You think so many of us ride bicycles because we can't afford motorized bikes?

    Quote Originally Posted by Linktung View Post
    The vast majority of pedelec riders are older, wealthy folks with lots of free time on their hands. If you don't want that group on your side, you don't understand how political influence works.
    Ah, here come the threats, just like Jimbo's approach.

    Quote Originally Posted by Linktung View Post

    It would not surprise me if in 10 years pedelecs have more trail access then non-pedelecs.
    Be prepared to be surprised.

    Quote Originally Posted by Linktung View Post

    The discriminatory posts here on MTBR could be used to justify keeping mtbers off trail for the exclusive use of the more tolerant pedelecs users.
    Go discuss ebikes on a non-bicycle site and maybe you'll get results more to your liking.

    Quote Originally Posted by Linktung View Post

    Play your stupid word games all you want, that doesn't bolster your argument, it highlights the fact that you are stuck in your own imagination and not participating in the real world. Seeking attention online is another symptom of an inability to function in the real world. There really isn't any rational reason to be so active in a discussion that has no connection to your personal interests then basic attention whoring.
    Ah, so you're saying that ebiking has no connection to a mountain bikers' personal interests. That's why they shouldn't be on this site whining about how they should be allowed on non-motorized trails. And thinking that "participating in the real world" requires a battery and motor is pretty sad.

    Are you an industry shill? What is your connection to the ebike industry?
    This post is a natural product. Variances in spelling & grammar should be appreciated as part of its character & beauty.

  30. #230
    mtbr member
    Reputation: FLYINW's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    90
    Quote Originally Posted by mountainbiker24 View Post
    No, he doesn't. Neither do you.
    So you'd rather be petty. Well once the hiker groups finally get us all kicked out I can say I told you so.

  31. #231
    Location: 10 ft from Hell Moderator
    Reputation: life behind bars's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,450
    Quote Originally Posted by FLYINW View Post
    So you'd rather be petty. Well once the hiker groups finally get us all kicked out I can say I told you so.



    "Us"? Lumping e-motorbikes together with bicycles is part and parcel of the strategy to gain acceptance but I've got news for you, ain't gonna happen. Cyclists are aware of the nefarious tactics being used by the less than honest e-motorbike contingent and will actively counter these attempts to coat tail their way into acceptance. After e-motorbikes fail to gain any meaningful access I can say that "I told you so".
    I ncredibly
    M yopic
    B ackstabbing
    A ssholes

  32. #232
    mtbr member
    Reputation: FLYINW's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    90
    Quote Originally Posted by life behind bars View Post
    "Us"? Lumping e-motorbikes together with bicycles is part and parcel of the strategy to gain acceptance but I've got news for you, ain't gonna happen. Cyclists are aware of the nefarious tactics being used by the less than honest e-motorbike contingent and will actively counter these attempts to coat tail their way into acceptance. After e-motorbikes fail to gain any meaningful access I can say that "I told you so".
    Yes "US". Other user groups don't care whether our 2 wheelers have motors or not, they want us all out. Any form of mechanized travel is not acceptable to them.

  33. #233
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    5,511
    Quote Originally Posted by FLYINW View Post
    Yes "US". Other user groups don't care whether our 2 wheelers have motors or not, they want us all out. Any form of mechanized travel is not acceptable to them.
    The lines are already drawn. Bikes are in at lots of places. Motorized have their place. Rules and regs are already laid down. Got a motor? Not a bike. Good luck with your agenda.

  34. #234
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    5,511
    Quote Originally Posted by FLYINW View Post
    Yet MTB groups will align themselves with hiker groups that will throw mountain bikers under the bus when they are through with you.
    MA rider here. We do trail work days with lots of hiker groups, friends of the forest and such. No issues. Common goals and such. More and better trails, boardwalks for crossings streams and wetlands.

  35. #235
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    5,511
    Quote Originally Posted by Jim_bo View Post
    Are you really that dim to believe this is my approach? This is simply the evolution of technology. For God's sake, man... Take a look at the world around you!
    Harley and Davidson already went down that road. A different road. Adding a motor is not an evolution, its something different, not better, imho.

  36. #236
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    552
    Quote Originally Posted by leeboh View Post
    Harley and Davidson already went down that road. A different road. Adding a motor is not an evolution, its something different, not better, imho.
    You're right. A 1/3hp battery powered motor is the same thing as a 103 cubic inch V Twin internal combustion engine.


    *** Sarcasm, in case you were confused****

  37. #237
    Cycologist
    Reputation: chazpat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    6,610
    Quote Originally Posted by Jim_bo View Post
    You're right. A 1/3hp battery powered motor is the same thing as a 103 cubic inch V Twin internal combustion engine.


    *** Sarcasm, in case you were confused****
    Model T and a Dodge Demon, different amounts of power, both are still cars.
    This post is a natural product. Variances in spelling & grammar should be appreciated as part of its character & beauty.

  38. #238
    Moderator Moderator
    Reputation: Harryman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    2,856
    Quote Originally Posted by Linktung View Post
    Sales of pedelecs has now outpaced the sales of non-pedelecs.
    Sales growth or total numbers? And where? Worldwide? EU? US? And you do realize that Pedelecs are a tiny portion of the worldwide ebike market, that they're just in the EU? Throttle ebikes rule everywhere else.

    Quote Originally Posted by Linktung View Post
    It would not surprise me if in 10 years pedelecs have more trail access then non-pedelecs.
    Lol. Maybe it'll be the same, maybe it'll be less ebike access, I wouldn't bet on either. I thought ebikes and bikes were the same in your universe, why wouldn't bikes always be able to ride where ebikes can?

    Only a tiny percentage of mtb people get involved with mtb advocacy, I expect that only a tiny percentage of ebike riders to do so as well, even if they're rich and old. Since they are an even smaller population, I don't expect them to hold a huge amount of political sway. I've been to a ton of advocacy meetings, some private, some public, you need numbers to make your wishes known, and past relationships/accomplishments before anyone will listen to you. It doesn't matter if you're advocating for ebikes, frisbee golf courses, or a dog park, an individual is politely ignored.

    Get cracking if you want to make a difference.

  39. #239
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    552
    Quote Originally Posted by chazpat View Post
    Model T and a Dodge Demon, different amounts of power, both are still cars.
    Firecracker and atomic bomb. They both explode.

  40. #240
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    552
    Quote Originally Posted by Harryman View Post
    Sales growth or total numbers? And where? Worldwide? EU? US? And you do realize that Pedelecs are a tiny portion of the worldwide ebike market, that they're just in the EU? Throttle ebikes rule everywhere else.



    Lol. Maybe it'll be the same, maybe it'll be less ebike access, I wouldn't bet on either. I thought ebikes and bikes were the same in your universe, why wouldn't bikes always be able to ride where ebikes can?

    Only a tiny percentage of mtb people get involved with mtb advocacy, I expect that only a tiny percentage of ebike riders to do so as well, even if they're rich and old. Since they are an even smaller population, I don't expect them to hold a huge amount of political sway. I've been to a ton of advocacy meetings, some private, some public, you need numbers to make your wishes known, and past relationships/accomplishments before anyone will listen to you. It doesn't matter if you're advocating for ebikes, frisbee golf courses, or a dog park, an individual is politely ignored.

    Get cracking if you want to make a difference.
    Exactly the point. If only 1% of riders are involved, 1% of mtbers plus 1% of e bikers is a lot more than just 1% of mtbers.

  41. #241
    Moderator Moderator
    Reputation: Harryman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    2,856
    Quote Originally Posted by FLYINW View Post
    Yes "US". Other user groups don't care whether our 2 wheelers have motors or not, they want us all out. Any form of mechanized travel is not acceptable to them.
    Actually, it seems that they consider ebikes to be motorized and not bicycles.

    https://americanhiking.org/policy-po...ion-statement/

    https://www.sierraclub.org/policy/road-use-bicycles

    I can only speak for my little area, but IME, there is crossover between all user groups. I know people that ride bikes, ebikes, trail run, hike and even ride horses, in all sorts of combos. I know very few that only do one thing.

    It's true that a decade ago, there was significant animosity between user groups, but that has vanished since we all make a point to work together to get more trails and maintain the ones we have. We are the leaders in making that happen in the area, and all users appreciate it. For sure here, no one will push to ban bikes if ebikes become a problem, it's clear to all those who would be involved in such a decision that bikes and ebikes are not exactly the same thing.

  42. #242
    Moderator Moderator
    Reputation: Harryman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    2,856
    Quote Originally Posted by Jim_bo View Post
    Exactly the point. If only 1% of riders are involved, 1% of mtbers plus 1% of e bikers is a lot more than just 1% of mtbers.
    Not really, 1% of next to nothing is nothing. When we had public meetings to discuss ebike policy in my city parks, which total 44,000 acres and 250 miles of trail, so a pretty significant trail system, with a hefty amount of users, there were zero advocates for emtbs, and three people who advocated for ebike access on bike paths. Two of them had garage businesses retrofitting kit bikes. Even the LBS's couldn't be bothered.

    My expectation is that the majority of emtb riders will be existing mtb riders, and almost all mtb riders don't give a crap about trails or how they get there. It's not like there will be a new group of politically engaged emtb riders entering the scene.

    Out of the hundreds of miles of trail available in my region, there's about 30 miles of emtb legal trail, I really don't expect a very big emtb community to grow.

  43. #243
    mtbr member
    Reputation: sfgiantsfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2,190
    Quote Originally Posted by Jim_bo View Post
    Firecracker and atomic bomb. They both explode.
    Both illegal in most places too.
    I'm sick of all the Irish stereotypes, as soon as I finish this beer I"m punching someone

  44. #244
    mtbr member
    Reputation: sfgiantsfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2,190
    Quote Originally Posted by FLYINW View Post
    So you'd rather be petty. Well once the hiker groups finally get us all kicked out I can say I told you so.
    So you're admitting that riding bikes with motors will get all bikes kicked out, but since you don't feel like riding a real bike, you are ok with that. Cool, tell me again why I would advocate for that.
    I'm sick of all the Irish stereotypes, as soon as I finish this beer I"m punching someone

  45. #245
    mtbr member
    Reputation: FLYINW's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    90
    Quote Originally Posted by sfgiantsfan View Post
    So you're admitting that riding bikes with motors will get all bikes kicked out, but since you don't feel like riding a real bike, you are ok with that. Cool, tell me again why I would advocate for that.
    You ASSume that I ride an ebike. Other user groups have been working to remove mountain bikers from the trails well before ebikes were even a thing. I don't see anything wrong with both groups joining together to fight for more access, but we would rather fight with each other than against a common enemy. I miss the days when mountain bikers were more laid back and not like uptight roadies.

  46. #246
    Cycologist
    Reputation: chazpat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    6,610
    Quote Originally Posted by FLYINW View Post
    You ASSume that I ride an ebike. Other user groups have been working to remove mountain bikers from the trails well before ebikes were even a thing. I don't see anything wrong with both groups joining together to fight for more access, but we would rather fight with each other than against a common enemy. I miss the days when mountain bikers were more laid back and not like uptight roadies.
    Maybe the fact that you consider other user groups to be an "enemy" causes some of your issues.

    It's kind of odd around here when there are so many arguing for ebikes who don't own ebikes while there are others here who own ebikes but realize what they are (not bicycles) and that they should be considered separate from bicycles.
    This post is a natural product. Variances in spelling & grammar should be appreciated as part of its character & beauty.

  47. #247
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    3,109
    Quote Originally Posted by chazpat View Post
    Maybe the fact that you consider other user groups to be an "enemy" causes some of your issues.

    It's kind of odd around here when there are so many arguing for ebikes who don't own ebikes while there are others here who own ebikes but realize what they are (not bicycles) and that they should be considered separate from bicycles.
    It's because some of us have been a part of access fights that have been going longer and are much more complicated financially, legally, legislatively, etc. than the mountain bike access battle. The environmental orgs taking a negative stance on e-bike access is not what it appears. It's a tried and proven tactic to put different groups at odds with each other. Why, because it is easier to fight each group separately, especially if a similar group is helping you fight the battle. Then when they move on to your group do you truly expect the group you were against to assist you?

    Not all trails are conducive to e-bikes. Just like not all trails are conducive to bikes. Or are conducive to Jeeps, tube buggies, side by sides, ATVs, dirt bikes, etc. That doesn't mean that all groups should be at odds with each other, that plays into those working against its hands. Instead it should be a case by case approach considering what makes sense where.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  48. #248
    Cycologist
    Reputation: chazpat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    6,610
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post

    Not all trails are conducive to e-bikes. Just like not all trails are conducive to bikes. Or are conducive to Jeeps, tube buggies, side by sides, ATVs, dirt bikes, etc. That doesn't mean that all groups should be at odds with each other, that plays into those working against its hands. Instead it should be a case by case approach considering what makes sense where.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
    I've said that many times. But I'm not going to tie my wagon to one with a motor and have to deal with their issues.
    This post is a natural product. Variances in spelling & grammar should be appreciated as part of its character & beauty.

  49. #249
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    3,109
    Quote Originally Posted by chazpat View Post
    I've said that many times. But I'm not going to tie my wagon to one with a motor and have to deal with their issues.
    Why? It's what the BRC does. There isn't "their issues" when ran that way.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  50. #250
    Location: 10 ft from Hell Moderator
    Reputation: life behind bars's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,450
    E-bikers making demands for mountain bikers to do their advocacy isn't helping their cause one iota, neither are their demands for blanket access. Until things change on the motor side they can expect nothing from mountain bikers. We've already got access battles of our own, don't need to be saddled with the dead albatross of e-motors.
    I ncredibly
    M yopic
    B ackstabbing
    A ssholes

  51. #251
    Cycologist
    Reputation: chazpat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    6,610
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    Why? It's what the BRC does. There isn't "their issues" when ran that way.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
    I have no idea what you are trying to say.
    This post is a natural product. Variances in spelling & grammar should be appreciated as part of its character & beauty.

  52. #252
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    3,109
    Quote Originally Posted by chazpat View Post
    I have no idea what you are trying to say.
    Honestly, that is part of the problem. No one wants to emulate, or even investigate what has been successful for other groups. The BRC is one of, if not the most, successful off-road lobby groups, they actually advocate for mountain bikes as well, in the country. Part of that is because if they deem something should be dirt bike only due to environmental, user groups, etc. that's how they advocate for it. There is no bleed over, "their problems". It's a case by case basis.

    Quite a bit of their mountain bike work is indirect but it is there. Probably the largest thing they do, in my opinion, is they have kept certain organizations so tied up with other access issues they cannot focus on mountain bikes. That's not to say that's the only thing they've done though.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  53. #253
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    3,109
    Quote Originally Posted by life behind bars View Post
    E-bikers making demands for mountain bikers to do their advocacy isn't helping their cause one iota, neither are their demands for blanket access. Until things change on the motor side they can expect nothing from mountain bikers. We've already got access battles of our own, don't need to be saddled with the dead albatross of e-motors.
    Did you read what I posted? That is basically the antithesis of what I said.

    Now if you are wanting them to make the first overtures that is understandable. Even if it does seem a bit pig headed in the cut off your nose to spite your face sense.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  54. #254
    Location: 10 ft from Hell Moderator
    Reputation: life behind bars's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,450
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    Did you read what I posted? That is basically the antithesis of what I said.

    Now if you are wanting them to make the first overtures that is understandable. Even if it does seem a bit pig headed in the cut off your nose to spite your face sense.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


    It's meant to be contrary to your fairytale. E-bikes are nothing but a liability. Why would any sane person want to commit hari kari going to bat for them is beyond any reasonable thought process. Carry on with your Unicorn hunt.
    I ncredibly
    M yopic
    B ackstabbing
    A ssholes

  55. #255
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    3,109
    Quote Originally Posted by life behind bars View Post
    It's meant to be contrary to your fairytale. E-bikes are nothing but a liability. Why would any sane person want to commit hari kari going to bat for them is beyond any reasonable thought process. Carry on with your Unicorn hunt.
    No, it's you not being able to understand the difference in a where it makes sense partnership verus a "ride or die" (sic) alliance. The former takes some higher level reasoning skills to wrap your head around. I highly recommend some research into the OHV lobby and what made them so successful. While you're doing that you should check out the damage that allowing user group fragmentation caused until people realized what was going on.

    If you think that aligning mountain biking from an optic perspective with Rampage or causing two similar, not identical, similar, to in-fight this much amongst themselves is a happy coincidence it is you that is living in fairy-tale land.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  56. #256
    Cycologist
    Reputation: chazpat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    6,610
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    Honestly, that is part of the problem. No one wants to emulate, or even investigate what has been successful for other groups. The BRC is one of, if not the most, successful off-road lobby groups, they actually advocate for mountain bikes as well, in the country. Part of that is because if they deem something should be dirt bike only due to environmental, user groups, etc. that's how they advocate for it. There is no bleed over, "their problems". It's a case by case basis.

    Quite a bit of their mountain bike work is indirect but it is there. Probably the largest thing they do, in my opinion, is they have kept certain organizations so tied up with other access issues they cannot focus on mountain bikes. That's not to say that's the only thing they've done though.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
    Well, if we're picking teams here, then I'd rather align with the non-motorized hikers than the ebikes. There's the BRC's access issue to keep focus off of mountain bikes, keeping motors off of non-motorized trails. And once again, I think ebikes are ok on some trails, just not all trails. I'm surprised you have issues with other trail users based on where you live. Is this coming from a dirt bike background? Just asking.
    This post is a natural product. Variances in spelling & grammar should be appreciated as part of its character & beauty.

  57. #257
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    3,109
    Quote Originally Posted by chazpat View Post
    Well, if we're picking teams here, then I'd rather align with the non-motorized hikers than the ebikes. There's the BRC's access issue to keep focus off of mountain bikes, keeping motors off of non-motorized trails. And once again, I think ebikes are ok on some trails, just not all trails. I'm surprised you have issues with other trail users based on where you live. Is this coming from a dirt bike background? Just asking.
    The problem there is the dissimilarity of the groups. Fragmentation of similar groups is what the larger environmental organizations are after. It makes their end game easier if they can encourage it.

    I'm coming from a Jeep/tube buggy background. Places like Moab, Johnson Valley, the Rubicon Trail, Moonrocks, etc. are all bucket list trips. From a mountain bike perspective I will probably never have to worry about access locally but that doesn't mean there are other places I do not want to ride.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  58. #258
    middle ring single track
    Reputation: Moe Ped's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    4,660
    Posted by Jim_bo
    Firecracker and atomic bomb. They both explode.
    Quote Originally Posted by sfgiantsfan View Post
    Both illegal in most places too.
    Exactly what I was going to say.

    I'll just throw out that on a power to weight basis today's 750 watt Class 1-2-3 e-bikes are more powerful than the first Harley-Davidson mopeds. Harley and Davidson were thrilled to have their bicycles called motorcycles.
    Content here does not officially represent the CA DPR.

    Windows 10, destroying humanity one upgrade at a time.

  59. #259
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    419
    Why not just have one all em-composing trail advocacy group? hikers, runners, mountain bikers, horse riders, atv, utv, moto, segway, etc.....

    The reason is passion. In order to be successful as a trail advocate, you have to be passionate. Trail advocacy is really hard and no one would do it unless they are passionate. While I am supportive of other trail user groups, I am not passionate about hiking, horse riding, trail running, etc... So those groups would be served poorly by counting on me to advocate for them.

    I am not passionate about e-bikes. I have promised land mangers that mountain biking is human powered only. Rolling e-bikes under mountain bikes would require me to go back on my word to land managers, which undermines my creditably. Our DNR has made it clear that they do not allow motorized bikes on mountain bike trails (including e-bikes). Getting e-bike access on Indiana State Park and Forest lands is a huge undertaking. I am trying my best not to burn out on mtb advocacy and in no way what to add more to my plate.

    Many current mountain bike advocates have expressed that they do not want to advocate for e-bikes. And the response typically is to criticize those advocates.

    My question for those who want e-bike access is why would you want those who aren't passionate about e-bikes to advocate for you. You should not want current mtb advocates to work for e-bike access. You should form your own advocacy groups made up of people who are passionate about e-bike access.

    There are many mountain bike advocacy world who would have been at least be helpful to the cause, but the more that e-bike proponents attach us, the less inclined we will be to help.

  60. #260
    Cycologist
    Reputation: chazpat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    6,610
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    The problem there is the dissimilarity of the groups. Fragmentation of similar groups is what the larger environmental organizations are after. It makes their end game easier if they can encourage it.

    I'm coming from a Jeep/tube buggy background. Places like Moab, Johnson Valley, the Rubicon Trail, Moonrocks, etc. are all bucket list trips. From a mountain bike perspective I will probably never have to worry about access locally but that doesn't mean there are other places I do not want to ride.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
    Please see Harryman's post and links #241 above. And indytrekracer's post. For mtb'ers to now say that bicycles now have motors, we will be damaging relationships we've built with existing trail user groups and land managers.
    This post is a natural product. Variances in spelling & grammar should be appreciated as part of its character & beauty.

  61. #261
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    3,109
    Quote Originally Posted by chazpat View Post
    Please see Harryman's post and links #241 above. And indytrekracer's post. For mtb'ers to now say that bicycles now have motors, we will be damaging relationships we've built with existing trail user groups and land managers.
    You're still not getting it and neither are they. High level the expectation is not that you are advocating for them. The passion argument falls flat on its face when viewed through the lens of the OHV lobby.

    Nowhere have I suggested you say that bicycles have motors. I've only said align where they make sense. Do you not see the direct and indirect advantages to this? It's not speculation to say that allowing the two groups of similar users, to have a massive wedge between them by groups, the links, that ultimately oppose both is playing right into the opposition's hands. It's a repeat of history using tactics they discovered years ago.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  62. #262
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    5,511
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    You're still not getting it and neither are they. High level the expectation is not that you are advocating for them. The passion argument falls flat on its face when viewed through the lens of the OHV lobby.

    Nowhere have I suggested you say that bicycles have motors. I've only said align where they make sense. Do you not see the direct and indirect advantages to this? It's not speculation to say that allowing the two groups of similar users, to have a massive wedge between them by groups, the links, that ultimately oppose both is playing right into the opposition's hands. It's a repeat of history using tactics they discovered years ago.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
    Seems the motorized crowd should stick together? E bikes, dirt bike. orv's etc. The only thing similar between an e bike and a mt bike is the wheels. Ya'll barking up the wrong tree. The 25-30 year mantra of mt bike advocacy ( at least here in New England) is that mt biking is a passive, human powered endeavor, no motors. So many land owners, conservation areas, open space and other stake holders have very specific wording regarding the NO motorized usages for the properties. New England specific, again. For me, in our area, it does not make sense to align with motorized vehicles, at all. Good luck with your advocacy. Seems like a long road ahead.

  63. #263
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    3,109
    Quote Originally Posted by leeboh View Post
    Seems the motorized crowd should stick together? E bikes, dirt bike. orv's etc. The only thing similar between an e bike and a mt bike is the wheels. Ya'll barking up the wrong tree. The 25-30 year mantra of mt bike advocacy ( at least here in New England) is that mt biking is a passive, human powered endeavor, no motors. So many land owners, conservation areas, open space and other stake holders have very specific wording regarding the NO motorized usages for the properties. New England specific, again. For me, in our area, it does not make sense to align with motorized vehicles, at all. Good luck with your advocacy. Seems like a long road ahead.
    Funnily enough I don't own an e-bike and have no interest in e-bikes so my advocacy is "your" advocacy... Your current situation aligns perfectly with everything I've said in this thread so I'm not sure if you are supporting me or against me. Since we are advocating for the same exact user group I'm going with support, so thanks for that.

    There are direct and indirect benefits to aligning do you know what they are? Again it's a story that has already played out and on a larger scale.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  64. #264
    Cycologist
    Reputation: chazpat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    6,610
    You can slice and dice it in various ways, to me it makes much more sense that mountain biking aligns with the hikers and trails runners; all are 100% human powered and do not use motors. I wouldn't expect the hikers to join up with a Segway group to advocate to gain access out of fear that not doing so would lead to other user groups using that division. As you said, "viewed through the lens of the OHV lobby"; that's not my lens. Around me, there is no big conspiracy by the hikers to boot mountain bikes out. If we aligned with the ebikes; that might change.
    This post is a natural product. Variances in spelling & grammar should be appreciated as part of its character & beauty.

  65. #265
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    3,109
    Quote Originally Posted by chazpat View Post
    You can slice and dice it in various ways, to me it makes much more sense that mountain biking aligns with the hikers and trails runners; all are 100% human powered and do not use motors. I wouldn't expect the hikers to join up with a Segway group to advocate to gain access out of fear that not doing so would lead to other user groups using that division. As you said, "viewed through the lens of the OHV lobby"; that's not my lens. Around me, there is no big conspiracy by the hikers to boot mountain bikes out. If we aligned with the ebikes; that might change.
    Your comments about lenses are out of context. Focusing on just your immediate area is also another route that is plagued with problems. Sure there will be areas where access is never threatened in some areas, ie where I live, but I would like to ride areas that are threatned. There may not be a "conspiracy" by hikers local to you but there are national groups working against it.

    Also, as evidenced by the fear you are showing, you are not grasping the concept of how this type of partnership works. I'm not sure if it's due to a fear of the unknown or a cut off my nose to spite my face prejudice against e-bikes.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  66. #266
    Moderator Moderator
    Reputation: Harryman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    2,856
    For the most part, all of advocacy is local. It certainly didn't used to be that way, but now, unless you're talking about Wilderness, it is. Which is one of the reasons that IMBA is increasingly irrelevant. Mtb orgs have matured over the last decade or two, they succeed because of the relationships they've built locally, not because of some umbrella organization.

    My local org has good relationships with all of the other user groups, motos and equestrians included, there isn't a whole lot of us vs them. If the Sierra Club tried to rally hikers agains mtbs, they'd get laughed out of town, we're all one and the same.

    Ofc, it can be really ugly in some places, but in many, if not most of the major riding destinations around the country, the situation is more similar to mine.

  67. #267
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    3,109
    Quote Originally Posted by Harryman View Post
    For the most part, all of advocacy is local. It certainly didn't used to be that way, but now, unless you're talking about Wilderness, it is. Which is one of the reasons that IMBA is increasingly irrelevant. Mtb orgs have matured over the last decade or two, they succeed because of the relationships they've built locally, not because of some umbrella organization.

    My local org has good relationships with all of the other user groups, motos and equestrians included, there isn't a whole lot of us vs them. If the Sierra Club tried to rally hikers agains mtbs, they'd get laughed out of town, we're all one and the same.

    Ofc, it can be really ugly in some places, but in many, if not most of the major riding destinations around the country, the situation is more similar to mine.
    Right now, I agree. However, I don't see it staying that way for the future. Several of the larger antagonists have been paying more and more attention to mountain bikers as a group. They're keying up for something. Also, local relationships will not matter nearly as much when going against the larger parties. They do not fight on an advocacy level. They fight to get things legislated from the bench. That is the reason that a larger, diversified group becomes more important.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  68. #268
    Moderator Moderator
    Reputation: Harryman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    2,856
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    Right now, I agree. However, I don't see it staying that way for the future. Several of the larger antagonists have been paying more and more attention to mountain bikers as a group. They're keying up for something. Also, local relationships will not matter nearly as much when going against the larger parties. They do not fight on an advocacy level. They fight to get things legislated from the bench. That is the reason that a larger, diversified group becomes more important.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
    Possibly? The Center for Biological Diversity, which is an organization that likes to try to create defacto wilderness by suing to close access, threatened the local USFS district with a lawsuit over a particular drainage and the claimed (unproven) damage the trails within were causing to the native fish. The USFS immediately caved and closed those trails for a year or so to everyone. Ultimately, with support from a working group of all the local user groups, they reopened them to non motorized, leaving motos out in the cold, which we objected to. Eventually, new trails (motorized) were constructed and the area reopened to them as well. Seven years of brain damage and almost a million bucks later. My point is, we responded to it as a community and the USFS was forced to deal with it.

    It sucked for us that those trails were closed, but in reality it was probably less than 3% of the trails around here open to mtbs. Within a 15 minute drive, I have trails on City Parks of 2 towns, County Park, Utilities land, State Parks and USFS. Roughly 500 miles of trails. Will whatever hiking org be willing to do that everywhere with all of the local land managers? Who already ride and support mtbs? I think it's unlikely.

    The demographics of recreation have changed, there are less and less people who anti bike, they are aging out. Most people are multi sport, or have grown up sharing trails with bikes and are happy to coexist. I really don't see the pendulum swinging against mtbs on a system wide level. If you know of something I don't though, I'd like to hear it.

    Unless we're talking about Wilderness, in that case I think ebikes have killed any chance of mtb access.

  69. #269
    Cycologist
    Reputation: chazpat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    6,610
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    Right now, I agree. However, I don't see it staying that way for the future. Several of the larger antagonists have been paying more and more attention to mountain bikers as a group. They're keying up for something. Also, local relationships will not matter nearly as much when going against the larger parties. They do not fight on an advocacy level. They fight to get things legislated from the bench. That is the reason that a larger, diversified group becomes more important.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
    Ok, please tell us about these "larger antagonists" that are "keying up for something" so that we can understand the issue and will understand why "The passion argument falls flat on its face when viewed through the lens of the OHV lobby" and why that viewpoint is relevant to the non-motorized lobby. Are we supposed to be joining the OHV lobby so that we can be a bigger group against the hikers?
    This post is a natural product. Variances in spelling & grammar should be appreciated as part of its character & beauty.

  70. #270
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    3,109
    Quote Originally Posted by Harryman View Post
    Possibly? The Center for Biological Diversity, which is an organization that likes to try to create defacto wilderness by suing to close access, threatened the local USFS district with a lawsuit over a particular drainage and the claimed (unproven) damage the trails within were causing to the native fish. The USFS immediately caved and closed those trails for a year or so to everyone. Ultimately, with support from a working group of all the local user groups, they reopened them to non motorized, leaving motos out in the cold, which we objected to. Eventually, new trails (motorized) were constructed and the area reopened to them as well. Seven years of brain damage and almost a million bucks later. My point is, we responded to it as a community and the USFS was forced to deal with it.

    It sucked for us that those trails were closed, but in reality it was probably less than 3% of the trails around here open to mtbs. Within a 15 minute drive, I have trails on City Parks of 2 towns, County Park, Utilities land, State Parks and USFS. Roughly 500 miles of trails. Will whatever hiking org be willing to do that everywhere with all of the local land managers? Who already ride and support mtbs? I think it's unlikely.

    The demographics of recreation have changed, there are less and less people who anti bike, they are aging out. Most people are multi sport, or have grown up sharing trails with bikes and are happy to coexist. I really don't see the pendulum swinging against mtbs on a system wide level. If you know of something I don't though, I'd like to hear it.

    Unless we're talking about Wilderness, in that case I think ebikes have killed any chance of mtb access.
    I see more and more of those suits happening and by more and more groups. Sadly fighting legal battles will be the future of advocacy in the future. That becomes a question of finances more than optics more often than not, especially at the beginning. Even with user crossover there are still organizations that think the Wliderness is too open to the public.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  71. #271
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    3,109
    Quote Originally Posted by chazpat View Post
    Ok, please tell us about these "larger antagonists" that are "keying up for something" so that we can understand the issue and will understand why "The passion argument falls flat on its face when viewed through the lens of the OHV lobby" and why that viewpoint is relevant to the non-motorized lobby. Are we supposed to be joining the OHV lobby so that we can be a bigger group against the hikers?
    Read Harryman's and my back and forth for your first answer.

    The passion argument is easy. You have dirtbikers, ATV riders, tube buggy enthusiasts, etc. that have little to no user cross over all banding together into a single, extremely successful group. There is no "passion burnout" there. It's just a group of people who decided to show strength in numbers and it works. Whether they have motors or not is inconsequential to the fact that disparate users can band together and not burn out, ergo that argument falls flat on its face.

    You may think you are different from OHVs and logically it makes sense. However, as these battles grow larger, more complex and move more into the court systems you are going to see more and more parallels to how they have to be fought.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  72. #272
    Cycologist
    Reputation: chazpat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    6,610
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    Read Harryman's and my back and forth for your first answer.

    The passion argument is easy. You have dirtbikers, ATV riders, tube buggy enthusiasts, etc. that have little to no user cross over all banding together into a single, extremely successful group. There is no "passion burnout" there. It's just a group of people who decided to show strength in numbers and it works. Whether they have motors or not is inconsequential to the fact that disparate users can band together and not burn out, ergo that argument falls flat on its face.

    You may think you are different from OHVs and logically it makes sense. However, as these battles grow larger, more complex and move more into the court systems you are going to see more and more parallels to how they have to be fought.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
    As a hiker, camper, kayaker, trail runner and mountain biker, that is who I align with, not dirtbikers, ATV riders, tube buggy enthusiasts, etc. Nothing against those groups within their areas. As Harryman asked, f you know of something, I'd like to hear it. Just a bunch of "they're out there and they're coming for your trails so you should accept motors to be part of a bigger group" type posts isn't convincing me of anything.
    This post is a natural product. Variances in spelling & grammar should be appreciated as part of its character & beauty.

  73. #273
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    3,109
    Quote Originally Posted by chazpat View Post
    As a hiker, camper, kayaker, trail runner and mountain biker, that is who I align with, not dirtbikers, ATV riders, tube buggy enthusiasts, etc. Nothing against those groups within their areas. As Harryman asked, f you know of something, I'd like to hear it. Just a bunch of "they're out there and they're coming for your trails so you should accept motors to be part of a bigger group" type posts isn't convincing me of anything.
    I didn't say you should align with the groups you listed in your not list...

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  74. #274
    Cycologist
    Reputation: chazpat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    6,610
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    I didn't say you should align with the groups you listed in your not list...

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
    Ok, ebikes belong in that same "not" list as far as I'm concerned, they are not ohv but they are motorized.
    This post is a natural product. Variances in spelling & grammar should be appreciated as part of its character & beauty.

  75. #275
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    3,109
    Quote Originally Posted by chazpat View Post
    Ok, ebikes belong in that same "not" list as far as I'm concerned, they are not ohv but they are motorized.
    I hear what you are saying but my opinion is that intentional opposition/antagonistic behavior towards them will be detrimental in the long term.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  76. #276
    Cycologist
    Reputation: chazpat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    6,610
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    I hear what you are saying but my opinion is that intentional opposition/antagonistic behavior towards them will be detrimental in the long term.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
    I don't really have anything against them, I just don't think they should be considered bicycles and that they should not just blanketly be allowed wherever bicycles are allowed. Situations vary.
    This post is a natural product. Variances in spelling & grammar should be appreciated as part of its character & beauty.

  77. #277
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    3,109
    Quote Originally Posted by chazpat View Post
    I don't really have anything against them, I just don't think they should be considered bicycles and that they should not just blanketly be allowed wherever bicycles are allowed. Situations vary.
    Then why are you so opposed to what I've been saying?

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  78. #278
    Location: 10 ft from Hell Moderator
    Reputation: life behind bars's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,450
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    Then why are you so opposed to what I've been saying?

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk





    Why are you so adamant that mtbers accept them?
    I ncredibly
    M yopic
    B ackstabbing
    A ssholes

  79. #279
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    3,109
    Quote Originally Posted by life behind bars View Post
    Why are you so adamant that mtbers accept them?
    Why can't you read?

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  80. #280
    Location: 10 ft from Hell Moderator
    Reputation: life behind bars's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,450
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    Why can't you read?

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk



    Why can't you post something more concrete than vague black helicopter theories and your "opinion"?
    I ncredibly
    M yopic
    B ackstabbing
    A ssholes

  81. #281
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    3,109
    Quote Originally Posted by life behind bars View Post
    Why can't you post something more concrete than vague black helicopter theories and your "opinion"?
    Considering we are talking about the future, only an utter buffoon or someone who is intentionally ignorant would not consider the future, how exactly do you propose talking about something "concrete". If you want to live in the now, not consider what may happen in the future and ignore things from the past that's on you, but it's an extremely foolish stance to take.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  82. #282
    Location: 10 ft from Hell Moderator
    Reputation: life behind bars's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,450
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    Considering we are talking about the future, only an utter buffoon or someone who is intentionally ignorant would not consider the future, how exactly do you propose talking about something "concrete". If you want to live in the now, not consider what may happen in the future and ignore things from the past that's on you, but it's an extremely foolish stance to take.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk




    More quaint parables, thanks for playing.
    I ncredibly
    M yopic
    B ackstabbing
    A ssholes

  83. #283
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    3,109
    Quote Originally Posted by life behind bars View Post
    More quaint parables, thanks for playing.
    In other words you are just spouting dismissive, meaningless phrases off without a clue of how they apply and are hoping something sticks. Got it, thanks.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  84. #284
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    3,109
    Asks for the future to be concrete, calls caution against ignoring the past, without an actual story, a parable. Pretty obvious this conversation is going a direction someone doesn't like...

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  85. #285
    Location: 10 ft from Hell Moderator
    Reputation: life behind bars's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,450
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    Pretty obvious this conversation is going a direction someone doesn't like...

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


    Yeah, you. Ta ta.
    I ncredibly
    M yopic
    B ackstabbing
    A ssholes

  86. #286
    Cycologist
    Reputation: chazpat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    6,610
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    Then why are you so opposed to what I've been saying?

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
    What, that mountain bikers should align with ebikes because some big group that you won't reveal is coming to take access from us all? I've explained that in posts above.
    This post is a natural product. Variances in spelling & grammar should be appreciated as part of its character & beauty.

  87. #287
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    3,109
    Quote Originally Posted by chazpat View Post
    I don't really have anything against them, I just don't think they should be considered bicycles and that they should not just blanketly be allowed wherever bicycles are allowed. Situations vary.
    Quote Originally Posted by chazpat View Post
    What, that mountain bikers should align with ebikes because some big group that you won't reveal is coming to take access from us all? I've explained that in posts above.
    Considering the first post of your's that I've quoted here is a paraphrase of how I said it needs to work I'm not sure what you have issue with.

    Align does not mean capitulate, or even advocate for both in every instance. It's a case base by case as you describe.

    As to what entities, the two that have been named here, in addition to the 150 opposing the wilderness ban are good starting points. Sure not all who opposed it are anti-mountain bike as a rule. However, again not all are pro bike either.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  88. #288
    Cycologist
    Reputation: chazpat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    6,610
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    Considering the first post of your's that I've quoted here is a paraphrase of how I said it needs to work I'm not sure what you have issue with.

    Align does not mean capitulate, or even advocate for both in every instance. It's a case base by case as you describe.

    As to what entities, the two that have been named here, in addition to the 150 opposing the wilderness ban are good starting points. Sure not all who opposed it are anti-mountain bike as a rule. However, again not all are pro bike either.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
    I have issues with the ebikers who are pushing for ebikes to be considered bicycles so that they can have access to mtb trails without the land manager having the ability to access their situation and make decisions. What I've said is that they need to advocate as their own user group and not try to latch onto mountain bikers. I'm not going to advocate for them, nor support them.

    And btw, "yours"; doesn't need an apostrophe, already possessive. Just saying because I know you like proper grammar and spelling.
    This post is a natural product. Variances in spelling & grammar should be appreciated as part of its character & beauty.

  89. #289
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    3,109
    Quote Originally Posted by chazpat View Post
    I have issues with the ebikers who are pushing for ebikes to be considered bicycles so that they can have access to mtb trails without the land manager having the ability to access their situation and make decisions. What I've said is that they need to advocate as their own user group and not try to latch onto mountain bikers. I'm not going to advocate for them, nor support them.

    And btw, "yours"; doesn't need an apostrophe, already possessive. Just saying because I know you like proper grammar and spelling.
    Thanks for the grammar lesson, the phone really appreciated it.

    You do realize that by giving them a seat at the table with mountain bikes you get quite a bit of leverage to control that narrative yes?

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  90. #290
    Location: 10 ft from Hell Moderator
    Reputation: life behind bars's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,450
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    Thanks for the grammar lesson, the phone really appreciated it.

    You do realize that by giving them a seat at the table with mountain bikes you get quite a bit of leverage to control that narrative yes?

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk



    The cost isn't acceptable for the minimal return on investment. If you are so vested in e-bike advocacy then you carry water for them.
    I ncredibly
    M yopic
    B ackstabbing
    A ssholes

  91. #291
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    3,109
    Quote Originally Posted by life behind bars View Post
    The cost isn't acceptable for the minimal return on investment. If you are so vested in e-bike advocacy then you carry water for them.
    What exactly is the cost I lost in the amount of detail you gave...

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  92. #292
    Location: 10 ft from Hell Moderator
    Reputation: life behind bars's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,450
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    What exactly is the cost I lost in the amount of detail you gave...



    The cost is "giving them a seat at the table". I see no need or reason to "give" them anything, including legitimacy.
    I ncredibly
    M yopic
    B ackstabbing
    A ssholes

  93. #293
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    3,109
    Quote Originally Posted by life behind bars View Post
    The cost is "giving them a seat at the table". I see no need or reason to "give" them anything, including legitimacy.
    You still haven't identified the cost by the way.

    Even so the reason are the benefits, direct and indirect to such a resolution.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  94. #294
    Location: 10 ft from Hell Moderator
    Reputation: life behind bars's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,450
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    You still haven't identified the cost by the way.

    Even so the reason are the benefits, direct and indirect to such a resolution.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk



    Jesus, for an alleged smart guy you sure are slow on the uptake.
    I ncredibly
    M yopic
    B ackstabbing
    A ssholes

  95. #295
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    3,109
    Quote Originally Posted by life behind bars View Post
    Jesus, for an alleged smart guy you sure are slow on the uptake.
    Or you just don't have a single valid point so you're being intentionally vague...

    Otherwise you could come up with a cost besides giving them a seat at the table which is actually easily a net profit.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  96. #296
    Cycologist
    Reputation: chazpat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    6,610
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    Thanks for the grammar lesson, the phone really appreciated it.

    You do realize that by giving them a seat at the table with mountain bikes you get quite a bit of leverage to control that narrative yes?

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
    I'm saying I'm not going to take that seat for them or make the arrangement for them to come to the table, they need to do that and not under the pretext that they are mountain bikers. This isn't that difficult to understand.

    And you have to spell it wrong for your phone to post it; spell it correctly and it will post that, too. I tried it and it doesn't correct the error. So maybe our phones aren't always so smart after all.
    This post is a natural product. Variances in spelling & grammar should be appreciated as part of its character & beauty.

  97. #297
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    3,109
    Quote Originally Posted by chazpat View Post
    I'm saying I'm not going to take that seat for them or make the arrangement for them to come to the table, they need to do that and not under the pretext that they are mountain bikers. This isn't that difficult to understand.

    And you have to spell it wrong for your phone to post it; spell it correctly and it will post that, too. I tried it and it doesn't correct the error. So maybe our phones aren't always so smart after all.
    It would not be the difficult to understand if it didn't seem as if it were simply a case of a bias clouding your judgement. Which after everything you've said in this thread that's all it boils down to.

    Actually no, no I don't have to spell it wrong for my phone to post it. I use a keyboard that works off of a neural network. It learns from not only myself but others that use it on their phones. But thanks for assuming you knew how I have my phone set up.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  98. #298
    Cycologist
    Reputation: chazpat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    6,610
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    It would not be the difficult to understand if it didn't seem as if it were simply a case of a bias clouding your judgement. Which after everything you've said in this thread that's all it boils down to.

    Actually no, no I don't have to spell it wrong for my phone to post it. I use a keyboard that works off of a neural network. It learns from not only myself but others that use it on their phones. But thanks for assuming you knew how I have my phone set up.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
    LOl, "clouding your judgement". Such drama. Seems pretty obvious you have an agenda you don't want to reveal.

    Maybe you need a better neural network that doesn't learn from, and adapt to, human error.
    This post is a natural product. Variances in spelling & grammar should be appreciated as part of its character & beauty.

  99. #299
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    3,109
    Quote Originally Posted by chazpat View Post
    LOl, "clouding your judgement". Such drama. Seems pretty obvious you have an agenda you don't want to reveal.

    Maybe you need a better neural network that doesn't learn from, and adapt to, human error.
    I've already explained my "agenda". Zero interest in e-bikes, high interest in a combined front and the power and benefits that brings. I'm not the one that rephrased how it could work and said I could agree with all these things but yeah, no, rather not...

    You do understand how neural networks work yes?

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  100. #300
    Location: 10 ft from Hell Moderator
    Reputation: life behind bars's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,450
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    I've already explained my "agenda". Zero interest in e-bikes, high interest in a combined front and the power and benefits that brings. I'm not the one that rephrased how it could work and said I could agree with all these things but yeah, no, rather not...

    You do understand how neural networks work yes?

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk





    A combined front with the motorized crowd damages too many long term relationships that mountain bikers have cultivated and developed over years and in some cases decades. Not worth putting those at risk for the benefit of a increasingly marginalized group.
    I ncredibly
    M yopic
    B ackstabbing
    A ssholes

  101. #301
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    3,109
    Quote Originally Posted by life behind bars View Post
    A combined front with the motorized crowd damages too many long term relationships that mountain bikers have cultivated and developed over years and in some cases decades. Not worth putting those at risk for the benefit of a increasingly marginalized group.
    Can you give some concrete examples of that?

    Seriously though, how would it? The purpose of a case by case basis is to avoid situations like you describe. And again, the issue is not the local, personal, relationships that you are describing here.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  102. #302
    Location: 10 ft from Hell Moderator
    Reputation: life behind bars's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,450
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    Can you give some concrete examples of that?

    Seriously though, how would it? The purpose of a case by case basis is to avoid situations like you describe. And again, the issue is not the local, personal, relationships that you are describing here.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk




    First you call for a combined front and then you want a case by case basis. Sorry, it doesn't work that way. Once aligned with motorized groups, always aligned with motorized groups. Advocacy is local and personal, the days of a national group advocating local issues are long gone.
    I ncredibly
    M yopic
    B ackstabbing
    A ssholes

  103. #303
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    8,825
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    Can you give some concrete examples of that?
    Every mountain bike trail built in New England over the past 20 years.
    Sinister Bikes
    Wraith Bicycles
    Sunday River Mtn Bike Park
    NEMBA
    Wachusett Brewing Co.

  104. #304
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    3,109
    Quote Originally Posted by life behind bars View Post
    First you call for a combined front and then you want a case by case basis. Sorry, it doesn't work that way. Once aligned with motorized groups, always aligned with motorized groups. Advocacy is local and personal, the days of a national group advocating local issues are long gone.
    Yes, it does work that way. Examples have been given. Sticking your fingers in your ears, stomping around the room, repeatedly saying "I can't hear you" does not change that fact.

    And thinking advocacy will not change is wishful thinking and willful ignorance. Some of the same groups, and some new ones, are beginning to employ the same tactics that have been used against other groups in the past.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  105. #305
    mtbr member
    Reputation: sfgiantsfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2,190
    I am a mountain biker and a hiker. Not a moped rider. That is why I would rather align with hikers in this case.

    I will try the theory next time I am a meeting trying for more single tracks for bikes. I will tell them that they should also allow bikes with motors and that bikes with motors don't actually have motors according to the vehicle code.

    One way, bike only trails, I am for mopeds on those trails. Hiking/biking trails, No.

    edited
    I'm sick of all the Irish stereotypes, as soon as I finish this beer I"m punching someone

  106. #306
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    3,109
    Quote Originally Posted by sfgiantsfan View Post
    I am a mountain biker and a hiker. Not a moped rider. That is why I would rather align with hikers in this case.

    I will try your theory next time I am a meeting trying for more single tracks for bikes. I will tell them that they should also allow bikes with motors and that bikes with motors don't actually have motors according to the vehicle code.

    One way, bike only trails, I am for mopeds on those trails. Hiking/biking trails, No.
    Your last statement is more inline with everything I've said in this thread, but by all means, please, keep miscategorizing "[my] theory" because of a bias.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  107. #307
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    3,109
    Quote Originally Posted by slapheadmofo View Post
    Every mountain bike trail built in New England over the past 20 years.
    New Hampshire not in New England any more?

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  108. #308
    Location: 10 ft from Hell Moderator
    Reputation: life behind bars's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,450
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    Yes, it does work that way. Examples have been given. Sticking your fingers in your ears, stomping around the room, repeatedly saying "I can't hear you" does not change that fact.

    And thinking advocacy will not change is wishful thinking and willful ignorance. Some of the same groups, and some new ones, are beginning to employ the same tactics that have been used against other groups in the past.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk




    Ahhhh, the phantom "other groups". Care to cite some verifiable examples of these groups using these nefarious tactics and against whom?
    I ncredibly
    M yopic
    B ackstabbing
    A ssholes

  109. #309
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    3,109
    Quote Originally Posted by life behind bars View Post
    Ahhhh, the phantom "other groups". Care to cite some verifiable examples of these groups using these nefarious tactics and against whom?
    I already have, multiple times.

    By the way your quoted "other groups" were groups tactics were being used against. Such high level reading comprehension makes me wonder the effectiveness of listing them again. Since, you know, you missed them the other times I've done it.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  110. #310
    Location: 10 ft from Hell Moderator
    Reputation: life behind bars's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,450
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    I already have, multiple times.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk



    No. You have not.
    I ncredibly
    M yopic
    B ackstabbing
    A ssholes

  111. #311
    Location: 10 ft from Hell Moderator
    Reputation: life behind bars's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,450
    How about one, from the last 6 months? Besides the IMBA sticking it in mtbers asses.
    I ncredibly
    M yopic
    B ackstabbing
    A ssholes

  112. #312
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    3,109
    Quote Originally Posted by life behind bars View Post
    No. You have not.
    Yes, I have the other groups are the BRC I've called out explicitly numerous times in this thread, and I have also mentioned the OHV lobby several times.

    I don't think those are the groups you wanted me to name but they are the ones you asked for so...

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  113. #313
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    3,109
    Quote Originally Posted by life behind bars View Post
    How about one, from the last 6 months? Besides the IMBA sticking it in mtbers asses.
    The BRC supports mountain biking.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  114. #314
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    3,109
    Quote Originally Posted by life behind bars View Post
    How about one, from the last 6 months? Besides the IMBA sticking it in mtbers asses.
    Go back, read what you asked for, ask for what you meant to ask for and I will answer.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  115. #315
    mtbr member
    Reputation: sfgiantsfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2,190
    It's great that the BRC "supports" mountain biking. Why wouldn't they? Any trail you could drive a quad on you could ride a mtb on.

    Most of us don't care about those type of trails for our mountain bikes. They don't advocate for mtb only trails do they?
    I'm sick of all the Irish stereotypes, as soon as I finish this beer I"m punching someone

  116. #316
    Location: 10 ft from Hell Moderator
    Reputation: life behind bars's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,450
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    The BRC supports mountain biking.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk




    Along with every other use. They are also I.C.E. centric, the last thing mountain bikers need to align themselves with. You wouldn't happen to sit on the board would you?
    I ncredibly
    M yopic
    B ackstabbing
    A ssholes

  117. #317
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    3,109
    Quote Originally Posted by sfgiantsfan View Post
    It's great that the BRC "supports" mountain biking. Why wouldn't they? Any trail you could drive a quad on you could ride a mtb on.

    Most of us don't care about those type of trails for our mountain bikes. They don't advocate for mtb only trails do they?
    They have in the past, yes. Is it their highest priority, no. However, they do support recreation in all forms, down to hiking and are pro access. They even acknowledge that there are usage restrictions that make sense on trails. That coupled with board members who mountain bike helps.

    Probably the biggest thing they do for mountain biking right now is help with the National Forest System Trail Stewardship Grants.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  118. #318
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    3,109
    Quote Originally Posted by life behind bars View Post
    Along with every other use. They are also I.C.E. centric, the last thing mountain bikers need to align themselves with. You wouldn't happen to sit on the board would you?
    Where have I suggested that mountain bikers directly align themselves with the BRC in this thread? No, I do not sit on the board.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  119. #319
    Cycologist
    Reputation: chazpat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    6,610
    Ok, I have it figured out, tuckerjt07 is a neural network that just talks in circles without really saying anything. Wow, that is pretty impressive, seemed like a real human for awhile. We all fell for it!

    These neural networks are getting where they work pretty well (except for some spelling issues apparently).
    This post is a natural product. Variances in spelling & grammar should be appreciated as part of its character & beauty.

  120. #320
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    3,109
    Quote Originally Posted by chazpat View Post
    Ok, I have it figured out, tuckerjt07 is a neural network that just talks in circles without really saying anything. Wow, that is pretty impressive, seemed like a real human for awhile. We all fell for it!

    These neural networks are getting where they work pretty well (except for some spelling issues apparently).
    Whatever helps you feel better about yourself man

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  121. #321
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    5,511
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    They have in the past, yes. Is it their highest priority, no. However, they do support recreation in all forms, down to hiking and are pro access. They even acknowledge that there are usage restrictions that make sense on trails. That coupled with board members who mountain bike helps.

    Probably the biggest thing they do for mountain biking right now is help with the National Forest System Trail Stewardship Grants.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
    It's so awesome to mt bike on ripped up, giant mud wallow " trails" that have been chewed to crap with atv's and jeeps, not. I see very little crossover with motorized vehicles and bikes.

  122. #322
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    3,109
    Quote Originally Posted by leeboh View Post
    It's so awesome to mt bike on ripped up, giant mud wallow " trails" that have been chewed to crap with atv's and jeeps, not. I see very little crossover with motorized vehicles and bikes.
    Who said anything about joining up or crossing over with the BRC? Well besides yourself...

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  123. #323
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    8,825
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    New Hampshire not in New England any more?

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
    What advocacy group are you claiming exists in NH that builds shared MTB/OHV trails?
    Sinister Bikes
    Wraith Bicycles
    Sunday River Mtn Bike Park
    NEMBA
    Wachusett Brewing Co.

  124. #324
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    3,109
    Quote Originally Posted by slapheadmofo View Post
    What advocacy group are you claiming exists in NH that builds shared MTB/OHV trails?
    You didn't mention OHV trails, that's your moving the goal post invention.
    You didn't mention an advocacy group, that's your moving the goal post invention.

    You said "EVERY" trail constructed in New England in the past 20 years banned e-bikes. Considering that NEMBA lists PRKR as allowing them I'd have to say you were incorrect.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  125. #325
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    8,825
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    You didn't mention OHV trails, that's your moving the goal post invention.
    You didn't mention an advocacy group, that's your moving the goal post invention.

    You said "EVERY" trail constructed in New England in the past 20 years banned e-bikes. Considering that NEMBA lists PRKR as allowing them I'd have to say you were incorrect.
    You are completely lost, in addition to annoying.
    Try again without putting any words in my mouth.

    Let me help you with your thoughts, but only this once:

    Go back and read post 301, to which I was responding. Note that LBH is talking about a united front with the motorized crowd. Now tell me what the majority of motorized trail vehicles are commonly referred to....yup, they're call OHVs! Now that we've made that connection nice and clear, maybe you can go back and do a few more by yourself! Yay for you!!!!
    Sinister Bikes
    Wraith Bicycles
    Sunday River Mtn Bike Park
    NEMBA
    Wachusett Brewing Co.

  126. #326
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    3,109
    Quote Originally Posted by slapheadmofo View Post
    You are completely lost, in addition to annoying.
    Try again without putting any words in my mouth.

    Let me help you with your thoughts, but only this once:

    Go back and read post 301, to which I was responding. Note that LBH is talking about a united front with the motorized crowd. Now tell me what the majority of motorized trail vehicles are commonly referred to....yup, they're call OHVs! Now that we've made that connection nice and clear, maybe you can go back and do a few more by yourself! Yay for you!!!!
    Try again, you quoted my post not post 301...

    That's your third attempt at moving the goal posts, three strikes and you're out?

    He was referring to e-bikes, per the post he responsed to, not the majority of motorized trail vehicles. So the only connection is the one that exists solely in your head.

    Let me try to help you. Despite the obfuscation and attempt to hide it you used "EVERY" trail in a manner that is patently, and easily proven, false. Furthermore, it was an ask for examples of damaged relationships. Obviously every relationship New England has not been damaged. Don't worry though there is always next time.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  127. #327
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    8,825
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    Try again, you quoted my post not post 301...
    301 WAS your post.
    It's sitting right at the top of this page, clear as day.

    You gonna get yourself thrown out of the wannabe lawyer club if this keeps up.
    Sinister Bikes
    Wraith Bicycles
    Sunday River Mtn Bike Park
    NEMBA
    Wachusett Brewing Co.

  128. #328
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    3,109
    Quote Originally Posted by slapheadmofo View Post
    301 WAS your post.
    It's sitting right at the top of this page, clear as day.

    You gonna get yourself thrown out of the wannabe lawyer club if this keeps up.
    You got me there. Now go...

    That's your third attempt at moving the goal posts, three strikes and you're out?

    He was referring to e-bikes, per the post he responsed to, not the majority of motorized trail vehicles. So the only connection is the one that exists solely in your head.

    Let me try to help you. Despite the obfuscation and attempt to hide it you used "EVERY" trail in a manner that is patently, and easily proven, false. Furthermore, it was an ask for examples of damaged relationships. Obviously every relationship New England has not been damaged. Don't worry though there is always next time.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  129. #329
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    8,825
    In New England, e-bikes are considered OHVs by the powers that be.
    Every mountain bike trail built in the past 20 years has been approved based in part on the fact that mountain bikes are strictly human powered and allowing them in no way equals allowing motorized access.

    Mountain bikers have zero to gain and lots to lose if they allow that line to be blurred, let alone erased.

    How is this even slightly complicated to some people?
    Sinister Bikes
    Wraith Bicycles
    Sunday River Mtn Bike Park
    NEMBA
    Wachusett Brewing Co.

  130. #330
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    3,109
    Quote Originally Posted by slapheadmofo View Post
    Every mountain bike trail built in the past 20 years has been approved based in part on the fact that mountain bikes are strictly human powered and allowing them in no way equals allowing motorized access.
    No, every, trail has not.


    Perhaps the confusion and subsequent complication is on your end due to you operating off of invalid information.


    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  131. #331
    mtbr member
    Reputation: sfgiantsfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2,190
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    No, every, trail has not.


    Perhaps the confusion and subsequent complication is on your end due to you operating off of invalid information.


    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
    Name a couple or move on
    I'm sick of all the Irish stereotypes, as soon as I finish this beer I"m punching someone

  132. #332
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    3,109
    Quote Originally Posted by sfgiantsfan View Post
    Name a couple or get lost
    I already have, read the thread or get lost.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  133. #333
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    8,825
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    You didn't mention OHV trails, that's your moving the goal post invention.
    You didn't mention an advocacy group, that's your moving the goal post invention.

    You said "EVERY" trail constructed in New England in the past 20 years banned e-bikes. Considering that NEMBA lists PRKR as allowing them I'd have to say you were incorrect.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
    Those trails are on private property.
    Kinda like me using my backyard as an example to prove that moto access is doing well in MA.

    But just hopefully to shut you up (unlikely as that obviously is), congrats! You found the needle in a haystack.
    Sinister Bikes
    Wraith Bicycles
    Sunday River Mtn Bike Park
    NEMBA
    Wachusett Brewing Co.

  134. #334
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    3,109
    Quote Originally Posted by slapheadmofo View Post
    Those trails are on private property.
    Kinda like me using my backyard as an example to prove that moto access is doing well in MA.
    Sure, great example. Can we see the picture of your backyard that can fit 22+ miles of trail? Just make sure you make your backyard open to the public at large 24/7/365 and convince public entities to help you fund it. Oh and you definitely need to get the equivalent organization to NEMBA to promote it for you if you want an apples to apples comparison.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  135. #335
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    3,109
    Quote Originally Posted by slapheadmofo View Post
    Those trails are on private property.
    You didn't provide a qualifier you said "every". How many times are you going to move the goalposts to try to bring your failed arguments back from the grave? Also, how exactly are we differentiating public and private property in this instance, free to use, unrestricted access, public funding, etc.?

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  136. #336
    mtbr member
    Reputation: sfgiantsfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2,190
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    You didn't provide a qualifier you said "every". How many times are you going to move the goalposts to try to bring your failed arguments back from the grave? Also, how exactly are we differentiating public and private property in this instance, free to use, unrestricted access, public funding, etc.?

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
    Did you really think we meant trails on private property? We are talking about trails that have a public input for their use. We are talking about multi use, hiker biker equestrian.Do you think that any public entities would have helped fund those trails if they were moto only? Of course you could ride a bike or hike any trail you could fit a quad on.
    I'm sick of all the Irish stereotypes, as soon as I finish this beer I"m punching someone

  137. #337
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    3,109
    Quote Originally Posted by sfgiantsfan View Post
    Did you really think we meant trails on private property? We are talking about trails that have a public input for their use. We are talking about multi use, hiker biker equestrian.Do you think that any public entities would have helped fund those trails if they were moto only? Of course you could ride a bike or hike any trail you could fit a quad on.
    What makes you think the trails I'm talking about allow quads? That's quite the red herring. The trails I mentioned are all community-driven, multi-use, completely open to the public and partially public funded in this case by the city. (Anything that's funded by the city technically has public input...) So your moto only question has no bearing on the topic.

    To highlight how little of what you've comprehended of what you've read, where have I mentioned advocating for access on public property? You do realize that public trails can and do exist on non-public property yes? No one has been interested in the how. They have been too caught up in slippery slope fallacies and resistance to change.

    Just to add, your attempt to pretend the entire conversation has been around public property adds some hilarity to this. Are you, and others, honestly asserting that broaching this topic with a private land owner somehow leads to access loss on public lands? If so, how?


    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  138. #338
    Location: 10 ft from Hell Moderator
    Reputation: life behind bars's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,450
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    What makes you think the trails I'm talking about allow quads? That's quite the red herring. The trails I mentioned are all community-driven, multi-use, completely open to the public and partially public funded in this case by the city. (Anything that's funded by the city technically has public input...) So your moto only question has no bearing on the topic.

    To highlight how little of what you've comprehended of what you've read, where have I mentioned advocating for access on public property? You do realize that public trails can and do exist on non-public property yes? No one has been interested in the how. They have been too caught up in slippery slope fallacies and resistance to change.

    Just to add, your attempt to pretend the entire conversation has been around public property adds some hilarity to this. Are you, and others, honestly asserting that broaching this topic with a private land owner somehow leads to access loss on public lands? If so, how?


    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk



    And there it is after all of the mental masturbation and contortions, you wish to confine your dubious discussion to private land which 99% of sensible people on this board don't even care about or discuss. Try again when you have points that actually concern themselves with public access, troll.
    I ncredibly
    M yopic
    B ackstabbing
    A ssholes

  139. #339
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    2,769
    Quote Originally Posted by slapheadmofo View Post
    In New England, e-bikes are considered OHVs by the powers that be.
    Every mountain bike trail built in the past 20 years has been approved based in part on the fact that mountain bikes are strictly human powered and allowing them in no way equals allowing motorized access.

    Mountain bikers have zero to gain and lots to lose if they allow that line to be blurred, let alone erased.

    How is this even slightly complicated to some people?
    It's not. The industry and affiliates are only here to cloud the issue. It's really is very simple. Muscles not Motors. The End.

    Some guy on FB tried to claim that e bikes have access to ALL state and Federal lands in Vermont based on a statute that gives motor assist bikes all the rights of a bicycle without being officially recognized as a motorized vehicle. Of course the statute is in regards to ROAD access. I explained to him that PEDAL bikes don't even enjoy that level of access. National forest, WMA, and other state land are illegal to MTBs but the douche was completely convinced he was right. Common sense people. EBikes are motorized....the end.

  140. #340
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    8,825
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    You didn't provide a qualifier you said "every". How many times are you going to move the goalposts to try to bring your failed arguments back from the grave? Also, how exactly are we differentiating public and private property in this instance, free to use, unrestricted access, public funding, etc.?

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
    Like I said, you've found the needle in the haystack.
    Feel free to rub your little troll hands together and cackle with glee at will over 20 miles of trail across 5 states. You worked really, really hard for it.

    Meanwhile, I still wouldn't care if all the trails were open to ebikes personally. Not at all interested in taking up their fight for them though. I've got actual trail to build and my time is better spent with shovel in hand than talking in circles with wanna be lawyers. Been there, won that already.
    Sinister Bikes
    Wraith Bicycles
    Sunday River Mtn Bike Park
    NEMBA
    Wachusett Brewing Co.

  141. #341
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    3,109
    Quote Originally Posted by life behind bars View Post
    And there it is after all of the mental masturbation and contortions, you wish to confine your dubious discussion to private land which 99% of sensible people on this board don't even care about or discuss. Try again when you have points that actually concern themselves with public access, troll.
    You have a serious flaw in your logic. Private land, as shown by the example at hand, does not preclude public access. In fact, any many instances it functions much as public property.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  142. #342
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    3,109
    Quote Originally Posted by slapheadmofo View Post
    Like I said, you've found the needle in the haystack.
    Feel free to rub your little troll hands together and cackle with glee at will over 20 miles of trail across 5 states. You worked really, really hard for it.

    Meanwhile, I still wouldn't care if all the trails were open to ebikes personally. Not at all interested in taking up their fight for them though. I've got actual trail to build and my time is better spent with shovel in hand than talking in circles with wanna be lawyers. Been there, won that already.
    Yep, a single Google search is hard work .

    As I've said your bias is clouding your vision when it comes to the benefits of working around with instead of against.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  143. #343
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    8,825
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    Yep, a single Google search is hard work .

    As I've said your bias is clouding your vision when it comes to the benefits of working around with instead of against.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
    What bias? You've obviously got a problem with your comprehension and bunker mentality.

    I have little to no problem with sharing trails with e-bikes, as I've said a thousand times. Also have a shed full of motos, ATVs and snowmos, and my 14 year old pretty much lives with a throttle in his hand. Motors do not scare me. But...

    I don't feel like taking up the torch for them as far as access fights though; I see zero benefit to MTBers in aligning with any sort of motorized toys and have spent enough time in uncomfortable chairs getting yelled at by old hippies that don't want anyone else in the woods but themselves. E-bikers want to fight for access, I won't be there fighting against them, but I sure as hell am not interested in doing all their heavy lifting for them. I have enough experience to know that they've got a multi-year uphill battle in store, and I'm much more interested in building trails than arguing with assholes.

    Speaking of...rain just quit and I had 20 yards of perfect dirt delivered to our town pumptrack project yesterday, so have fun tilting at e-windmills. I'm off to build something really cool in the woods.
    Sinister Bikes
    Wraith Bicycles
    Sunday River Mtn Bike Park
    NEMBA
    Wachusett Brewing Co.

  144. #344
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    3,109
    Quote Originally Posted by slapheadmofo View Post
    What bias? You've obviously got a problem with your comprehension and bunker mentality.

    I have little to no problem with sharing trails with e-bikes, as I've said a thousand times. Also have a shed full of motos, ATVs and snowmos, and my 14 year old pretty much lives with a throttle in his hand. Motors do not scare me. But...

    I don't feel like taking up the torch for them as far as access fights though; I see zero benefit to MTBers in aligning with any sort of motorized toys and have spent enough time in uncomfortable chairs getting yelled at by old hippies that don't want anyone else in the woods but themselves. E-bikers want to fight for access, I won't be there fighting against them, but I sure as hell am not interested in doing all their heavy lifting for them.
    Now we're getting somewhere. You don't need to do their heavy lifting. By partnering with them you can even reduce the number of old hippies yelling at you, which seems to be a driver of the bias.

    The first step would be more places like PRKR, something you do not have to personally advocate for but simply not oppose. Places like that there is less bureaucratic red tape to cut through. Opening that up provides two immediate benefits. First, with a legal place to ride rationalizing poaching becomes harder and should happen less putting less access pressure on other trails. Second, their actions can begin to speak for themselves and the argument moves into a practical realm rather than its current theoretical state. There are other less immediate benefits as well.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  145. #345
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    8,825
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    Now we're getting somewhere. You don't need to do their heavy lifting. By partnering with them you can even reduce the number of old hippies yelling at you, which seems to be a driver of the bias.

    The first step would be more places like PRKR, something you do not have to personally advocate for but simply not oppose. Places like that there is less bureaucratic red tape to cut through. Opening that up provides two immediate benefits. First, with a legal place to ride rationalizing poaching becomes harder and should happen less putting less access pressure on other trails. Second, their actions can begin to speak for themselves and the argument moves into a practical realm rather than its current theoretical state. There are other less immediate benefits as well.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
    Or, I can go build trails. Which is what I'd much rather do.
    You can feel free to go sit through all the interminable meetings and write all the emails you want. I've done enough of that; I'm all set. My time is better spent building; there are a lot more people that can hold down chairs and spend endless hours on the computer than there are who can sculpt dirt into really cool shit. You do what you're good at, and I'll go do what I'm good at.
    Sinister Bikes
    Wraith Bicycles
    Sunday River Mtn Bike Park
    NEMBA
    Wachusett Brewing Co.

  146. #346
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    3,109
    Quote Originally Posted by slapheadmofo View Post
    Or, I can go build trails. Which is what I'd much rather do.
    You can feel free to go sit through all the interminable meetings and write all the emails you want. I've done enough of that; I'm all set. My time is better spent building; there are a lot more people that can hold down chairs and spend endless hours on the computer than there are who can sculpt dirt into really cool shit. You do what you're good at, and I'll go do what I'm good at.
    And if that's what you want to do that's great. You've said you do not wish to actively oppose, or even advocate at all any more, so this topic really has no pertinence to you.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 59
    Last Post: 04-03-2018, 09:54 PM
  2. Mountain bike lawsuit here in OR
    By Woodman in forum Oregon
    Replies: 118
    Last Post: 02-07-2015, 10:47 AM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-08-2014, 11:55 PM
  4. Sierra Club Joins Lawsuit Against Mountain Bike Park !
    By YETI_Chris in forum Colorado - Front Range
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 05-23-2013, 11:13 AM
  5. Specialized Lawsuit - At it again?
    By Diesel~ in forum California - Norcal
    Replies: 267
    Last Post: 10-15-2012, 03:05 PM

Members who have read this thread: 3

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.