Kenetrek Boots

E-bike Access?

Do you support allowing e-bikes (electric motor assisted) into non-motorized areas?

  • Yes

    Votes: 38 14.9%

  • No

    Votes: 212 83.1%

  • Unsure

    Votes: 5 2.0%
  • Total voters
    255
Hammsolo

Hammsolo

Well-known member
Joined
May 16, 2020
Messages
2,874

Regulations.gov

www.regulations.gov www.regulations.gov

Follow the link and comment. This is a huge evolving issues. I am an avid hunter, mountain biker and conservationist. I am a member of RMEF and the Lands Council out here is Spokane.

E-bikes, technically electric motor assisted bicycles, should not be allowed in non-motorized areas like some are pushing for. They have a place, but not there. They are faster, cause more erosion, and will spook more game. I believe mechanical bicycles should be given more access. They cause little erosion, while still being human powered. This will damage the efforts to gain access for bicycles.

What are your thoughts? Silence = Acceptance. Let the powers that be know your opinion.
 
This has already been covered pretty exhaustively on here. I think the general consensus is in alignment with you. I’m in the minority on the issue, and don’t necessarily agree that “They are faster, cause more erosion, and will spook more game”. My opinion is they should be allowed anywhere traditional bikes are allowed. Let my thrashing begin!
1591553028596.png
 
Quoted from link:

"Under new paragraph (d) of this section, e-bikes being used on roads and trails where mechanized, non-motorized use is allowed pursuant to a decision by an authorized officer will be given the same rights and privileges of a traditional, non-motorized bicycle and will be subject to all of the duties of a traditional, non-motorized bicycle. While the BLM intends for this proposed rule to increase accessibility to public lands, e-bikes would not be given special access beyond what traditional, non-motorized bicycles are allowed. For example, e-bikes would not be allowed on roads or trails or in areas where traditional, non-motorized bicycle travel is prohibited, such as in designated wilderness."

Just another box checked for the progression of technology. A bicycle tire is a bicycle tire in regards to erosion damage and yes this will increase with any added use. I have buddies in Oregon that swear by their e-bikes as they have allowed them to push deep into gated areas with extensive road systems. They pull trailers for their camp gear and also for the meat removal and are chomping at the bit to get e-bikes legalized throughout all of our public lands.

I have used standard pedal bikes to access areas that have now become closed via gate placement many, many times. While an e-bike might have made these trips easier, the tire marks on the road would have been the same. I am betting that this issue will get clarified and legalized with all of our public land agencies in the next few years.

All I know for sure is that any bike will become damn scary during the return trip down the mountain.
 
Wildabeast said:
This has already been covered pretty exhaustively on here. I think the general consensus is in alignment with you. I’m in the minority on the issue, and don’t necessarily agree that “They are faster, cause more erosion, and will spook more game”. My opinion is they should be allowed anywhere traditional bikes are allowed. Let my thrashing begin!
View attachment 142916
Click to expand...

I posted again to get people to comment. I’m curious why? I’m by no means anti-Ebike. They are motorized though. What’s the difference between one and be of these 2 cycle mo-ped mountain bikes I’ve seen running around? I believe they have their place, and that that’s in areas where motors are allowed. Thanks for the input.
 
Mtnhunter1 said:
Quoted from link:

"Under new paragraph (d) of this section, e-bikes being used on roads and trails where mechanized, non-motorized use is allowed pursuant to a decision by an authorized officer will be given the same rights and privileges of a traditional, non-motorized bicycle and will be subject to all of the duties of a traditional, non-motorized bicycle. While the BLM intends for this proposed rule to increase accessibility to public lands, e-bikes would not be given special access beyond what traditional, non-motorized bicycles are allowed. For example, e-bikes would not be allowed on roads or trails or in areas where traditional, non-motorized bicycle travel is prohibited, such as in designated wilderness."

Just another box checked for the progression of technology. A bicycle tire is a bicycle tire in regards to erosion damage and yes this will increase with any added use. I have buddies in Oregon that swear by their e-bikes as they have allowed them to push deep into gated areas with extensive road systems. They pull trailers for their camp gear and also for the meat removal and are chomping at the bit to get e-bikes legalized throughout all of our public lands.

I have used standard pedal bikes to access areas that have now become closed via gate placement many, many times. While an e-bike might have made these trips easier, the tire marks on the road would have been the same. I am betting that this issue will get clarified and legalized with all of our public land agencies in the next few years.

All I know for sure is that any bike will become damn scary during the return trip down the mountain.
Click to expand...

Scary!?! That’s the fun part! There are many factors that effect trail wear and tear. Contact patch size, shape of contact, material contacting, applied force, and on and on.... E-bikes apply a greater force through the same tire increasing erosion. I’m fighting not getting to sciency.
 
My point in previous threads was almost exclusively about hunting. Essentially my argument was:
1. They have no greater impact than traditional bikes
2. From a fairness standpoint it would put those of us who are not in a position to have horses or pack animals on a more level footing, with little to no additional impact on the environment
3. I don’t think you’d all of the sudden see a huge increase in hunters on e-bikes if they were allowed
4. I’d only support it if there were restrictive definitions On the bike such as wattage, max speed, must be assist only, etc. A lot of this is already in place with state/local gov’ts to determine whether they are considered “motor vehicles” From a licensing standpoint.


That being said, I’ve since started thinking more broadly and considering impacts from the non-consumptive users. I think that would have a much bigger impact, and has caused me to soften my position on the issue. There’s a subset of folks who are hardcore mountain bikers in the backcountry. It’s hard work. E-bikes would likely draw quite a bit more peopl

I occasionally hunt using my bike where it makes sense to do so. An e-bike would,make that easier and make it more feasible to hunt a few areas that I currently don’t hunt. Those areas are heavily dominate by the horse crowd. But for the areas I currently hunt on foot, an e-bike wouldn’t really be any more feasible than a regular bike.

They are currently banned by specific policy on most state and federal non-motorized trails, and just for clarity, I do not support anyone violating that policy. Rules are rules and should be followed whether one agrees with them or not.
 
Wildabeast said:
My point in previous threads was almost exclusively about hunting. Essentially my argument was:
1. They have no greater impact than traditional bikes
2. From a fairness standpoint it would put those of us who are not in a position to have horses or pack animals on a more level footing, with little to no additional impact on the environment
3. I don’t think you’d all of the sudden see a huge increase in hunters on e-bikes if they were allowed
4. I’d only support it if there were restrictive definitions On the bike such as wattage, max speed, must be assist only, etc. A lot of this is already in place with state/local gov’ts to determine whether they are considered “motor vehicles” From a licensing standpoint.


That being said, I’ve since started thinking more broadly and considering impacts from the non-consumptive users. I think that would have a much bigger impact, and has caused me to soften my position on the issue. There’s a subset of folks who are hardcore mountain bikers in the backcountry. It’s hard work. E-bikes would likely draw quite a bit more peopl

I occasionally hunt using my bike where it makes sense to do so. An e-bike would,make that easier and make it more feasible to hunt a few areas that I currently don’t hunt. Those areas are heavily dominate by the horse crowd. But for the areas I currently hunt on foot, an e-bike wouldn’t really be any more feasible than a regular bike.

They are currently banned by specific policy on most state and federal non-motorized trails, and just for clarity, I do not support anyone violating that policy. Rules are rules and should be followed whether one agrees with them or not.
Click to expand...

I appreciate your thoughtfulness. Have you ridden one? Good e-bikes are expensive and make a huge difference. Generally you can change the percentage of assist on them. Some of them even go up to 100% assist.... It’s amazing what 30% does. A Santa Cruz Heckler starts at $7500 and climbs like a mountain goat; very fun but not in non-motorized areas.
 
I have an e.bike. I wouldn't take it on a trail, but I do use it on roads. As far as speed goes it helps me go up hills faster, as I would be walking with a regular bike, and going slow with an e.bike. By far the fastest I go is down hill, powered by gravity, no motor, so it's just as fast with a regular bike as with an e.bike. More erosion? How can that be? Actually my e.bike has fat tires ans leaves much less of a trail than my regular bike with thin tires. If you want to see real erosion on a trail or a road, look at what horses do to them.
 
Yes. Was seriously considering buying one a couple of years ago with the incorrect assumption that if DMV’s didn’t consider them motorized vehicles, then BLM, FS, etc. didn’t either. After doing more research, I discovered that was not correct. I wonder how many current “violators” are ignorant of the differentiation vs. knowingly violating the rules.

Bakcou is based here in UT and I went up to their operation in Ogden and met with the owners and test drove a few bikes. I’ve not seen any bikes e-bikes over $5k. But given what good mountain bikes cost these days, $4k for an e-bike isn’t that far into the stratosphere from a price perspective. I likely would have bought one back then if I could have used it for hunting. But instead ended up buying a Salsa Mukluk fat bike and outfitting it with paniers and tail rack/bag for hauling gear. Getting weight lower on the bike vs. in a backpack is key to being able to safely hunt from a bike. I likely would have gotten a trailer if I bought an e-bike, but do not use one with my regular bike. So I’d still have a multi-trip pack out if I ever got something while bike hunting.
 
mtmuley said:
Erosion and tire tracks aren't even on my radar as to why E-Bikes do not belong on any NON MOTORIZED road or trail. Pretty self explanatory. mtmuley
Click to expand...

^^^^^ THIS ^^^^^^

I can legally push a four wheeled non-motorized wagon down a gated closed road. By this proposed new BLM logic, I can then attach an electric motor to each wheel and it's still a 4-wheel wagon that is non-motorized??? Where do we draw the line....
 
The Federal government has already “drawn a line” as it relates to what is or is not an e-bike:

A 2002 law enacted by Congress, HB 727, amended the Consumer Product Safety Commission definition of e-bikes. The law defined a low-speed electric bicycle as “A two- or three-wheeled vehicle with fully operable pedals and an electric motor of less than 750 watts (1 h.p.), whose maximum speed on a paved level surface, when powered solely by such a motor while ridden by an operator who weighs 170 pounds, is less than 20 mph.” The federal law permits e-bikes to be powered by the motor alone (a “throttle-assist” e-bike), or by a combination of motor and human power (a “pedal-assist” e-bike).

State and local governments have adapted this to their own regulations. It appears to me that the intent is to cap the performance to be on par with non-motor assisted bikes.

The above is from a DMV standpoint, not whether they should/should not be allowed on non-motorized trails (although some local governments have applied the standard for recreational trails under their jurisdiction). I only included to indicate that there are ways to draw a line.
 
Yea no E-bikes on non-motorized trails. There's a big push to open federally designated Wilderness to mountain bikes. Hypothetically, if mountain bikes are allowed into Wilderness areas (under some extreme lapse of judgement) and E-bikes are considered the same as mountain bikes, we all of a sudden have motorized access into Wilderness areas.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
Motorheads: the noisy new force in the west
2 3
Replies
46
Views
8K
Muledeer4me
M

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
119,630
Messages
2,232,380
Members
38,946
Latest member
Haycraftky

Share this page

Back
Top