Electric Bike Thread

[Dantheman]

Wow, it appears DOI just reclassified all Class 1/2/3 ebikes as non-motorized vehicles and legalized them on all DOI-administered lands (BLM, NPS, USBR) where bicycles are currently allowed.

https://www.apnews.com/d22c8bb8a83c4...ZJa56mxjab%20Y
https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/fi...kes_-508_0.pdf

Lawsuits are sure to follow. I definitely did not see this coming.

[rideit]

All it means for us here is that they can now ride 16 miles of paved, multi-use bike path legally.

[Dantheman]

Big deal in Utardia. Most of the southern half of the state is either BLM or NPS. There were some really stupid policies in place that excluded ebikes from 4x4 roads in Arches and Canyonlands so fixing that is definitely a good thing. Probably going to be some serious hullabaloo for all the non-motorized BLM singletrack, though.

I wonder if USDA has a parallel order in the works for USFS-administered land? Stock up on popcorn.

[adrenalated]

Big deal in Utardia. Most of the southern half of the state is either BLM or NPS. There were some really stupid policies in place that excluded ebikes from 4x4 roads in Arches and Canyonlands so fixing that is definitely a good thing. Probably going to be some serious hullabaloo for all the non-motorized singletrack, though.

Yep. A lot of the Moab riding is affected by this as well as Fruita, Grand Junction, etc.

[toast2266]

Hoping the ensuing kerfluffle will take some of the pressure off of mountain bikes. Let the Wildernuts devote their attention to ebikes for a little while.

And for the record, I think this is a good thing. If there are problems on specific trails, let the local land managers exclude e-bikes on a case by case basis.

[adrenalated]

If there are problems on specific trails, let the local land managers exclude e-bikes on a case by case basis.

I am not a dentist, but in my reading of the order, there is no provision for land managers to allow pedal bikes but exclude e-bikes. It's all bikes, or no bikes.

b) E-bikes shall be allowed where other types of bicycles are allowed; and
c) E-bikes shall not be allowed where other types of bicycles are prohibited.

[rideit]

Yeah, this could be a potential major blow to MTB access going forward.

[toast2266]

I am not a dentist, but in my reading of the order, there is no provision for land managers to allow pedal bikes but exclude e-bikes. It's all bikes, or no bikes.

Hmmm. Hadn't read the actual language in the order. Agreed - that seems like it'll create problems (as does the failure to allow for distinctions between e-bike classes).

Curious to see if the Forest Service follows suit. They're usually more conservative, so I'd be surprised if they adopted the BLM rule verbatim. But, hey, anything's possible with the reality show white house.

[toast2266]

Also, anyone figure out where to submit comments? I did a super quick search but didn't find an obvious link.

[Dantheman]

I am not a dentist, but in my reading of the order, there is no provision for land managers to allow pedal bikes but exclude e-bikes. It's all bikes, or no bikes.

Near-term, yes, I think that's the correct interpretation. Farther out, Section 5(b) and 5(c) might lead to that becoming a bit more nuanced:

b) Within 30 days of the date of this Order, submit a report to the Secretary including:
i) A summary of the policy changes enacted in response to this Order;
ii) A summary of any laws or regulations that prohibit the full adoption of the policy described by this Order; and
iii) A timeline to seek public comment on changing any regulation described above.

c) Within 30 days of the date of this Order, provide appropriate public guidance regarding the use of e-bikes on public lands within units of the National Park System, National Wildlife Refuge System, lands managed by BLM, and lands managed by BOR.

Near-term shitshow potential is huge.

[Telemarketeer]

Just bought a fat bike that I'm gonna throw a Bafang BBSHD on and use as a commuter mainly. However, it would be pretty fun to rip around on some singletrack every once in a while. There's a few singletrack trails that I could use on my commute too. Pretty sure a few of them would be legal.

[grinch]

BC just updated their policy

"The policy says that those with Class 1 e-bikes can ride on any B.C. Parks trail where mountain bikes or other cycling is already allowed, but those with Class 2 and 3 e-bikes can only ride on trails and roads designated for motorized vehicles."

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbc.ca/amp/1.5262734

I have to check if local cycling associations still restrict certain areas. I envision a big segment of the local population possibly considering to get an eeb for an ez transition on to the trails. Thatd be a boon for local shops and popular local opinion. For example, i could see a lot of the cp rail guys or active fzmilies that donrt ride mtb's at this point, getting a bike and occasional get out for a pedal. The problem is for that user group is that theyre not able to ride the dh trails where emtb's are allowed. It could be a huge segmdnt of tge local population. Thatd give mtb big influence in trail access and infastructure projects. Im quickly learning tgat there is no way i could go even close to max speed on the ups . Even the steep of boulder mt fsr i was 15kph in boost. I could see possible conflict on frisby ridge with higher speeds , on average , up and down for all bikes. I think there could be access to macpherson xc trails with the tops of some trails reached by road. A bit of signage would fix that. Generally people seem quite accepting but mainly curious. Maybe the class 2 and 3 have a spot somewhere but i dont see thrm fitting in quite so seemless

Sent from my SM-G950W using TGR Forums mobile app

[babybear]

also surprised by this ruling - the timing and the decision
I like that pathways in the parks were opened up to ebikes as that was a no brainer and one way to ease into the situation for land mgrs- but I'm definitely surprised at the broad bikes ok=ebikes ok equivalency on trails.
Seems like there would have been a little more nuance there but guess I shouldn't not expect anything out of the crazy house these days
Can't wait for andrew to get home to talk about it as he sits on the trails/pathways Board and knows a little more about what levers land managers may have.

[Vegetable Lasagna]

Wish insurance companies would follow suit and include them on homeowners insurance like any other bike.

[grinch]

Soo, a vegan, a ski guide, an eeber and a peta member walk into a bar..........

[gravitylover]

I don't think class 2 should be allowed anywhere other than motorized vehicle areas and class 3 should be on a case by case basis. Unfortunately once the cat is fully out of the bag it will be tough to put it back in. I just don't think the resources are there to enforce those distinctions. Hopefully the initial shit show doesn't last too long and there are more smart users rather than otherwise but I won't hold my breath...

[Redsmurfer]

Who did Specialized pay off?

I am retreating to my fortified, off grid, compound with my guns! God help us

or

start a new thread " which new emtb should I buy"

tough decision

[grinch]

The red one duh. Now back to uour outrage/click click click

Sent from my SM-G950W using TGR Forums mobile app

[adrenalated]

Soo, a vegan, a ski guide, an eeber and a peta member walk into a bar..........

At the end of the night, the only girl walks out with the bartender

[grinch]

Props fpr them lasting to the end of the night, after getting their ears talked off

Sent from my SM-G950W using TGR Forums mobile app

[Bunion 2020]

Lots of interest in this ruling around here and what it will mean.

My take is that a clear decision was needed regarding where E-bikes are allowed, this is far from clear but it is a start towards addressing them. It remains to be seen if they will be lumped in as just another Bike.

If the Gov. Agencies try that tack then no telling what will happen. Maybe they want pedal bikers and E-bikers fighting among themselves. Maybe they want pedal bikers and E-bikers to join together to fight for access. Who knows but this will be interesting. I expect to see more E-bikes at Copper City now that they are allowed on BLM trails and in my view it is an area perfectly acceptable for E-bikes.

[jono]

Maybe they want pedal bikers and E-bikers fighting among themselves. Maybe they want pedal bikers and E-bikers to join together to fight for access.

Or C, maybe they want pedal bikers' interests further misaligned from other non-mechanized users.

This certainly does what lifting the blanket W ban would do in terms of making natural allies out of "competing" groups. Lumping e-bikes with bikes may just be more about lumping bikes with e-bikes (in certain quarters).

[grinch]

Canmore crew in for a visit. 3 laps on 5620 was the treat

Sent from my SM-G950W using TGR Forums mobile app

[adrenalated]

Eh. I think the motivations behind the decision are pretty easy to understand, and have nothing to do with a desire to drive the conversation/debate between ebikes and pedal bikes. The current administration wants to loosen regulation as much as possible. This was a really easy one that they figured they could easily do. They don't give a fuck about ebikes, it was just a way to make things less regulated.

The potential impact on the conversation about access, for both pedal bikes and ebikes, is huge however.

I'm not anti ebike, and agree that managing them the same way as motos doesn't make sense. But they ain't the same as pedal bikes either, and equating the two doesn't make sense. Hopefully the end result will be that sensible distinctions and management strategies will be drawn between pedal bikes, ebikes. and motos, but the way the order is written doesn't give me a lot of hope.

[jono]

I certainly didn't mean to imply that I thought the current administration was one of those quarters. But the amount of resistance this sees might be quite small given the "upside."