| Previous :: Next Topic |
| Author |
Message |
Tom
Admin
Joined: 15 Dec 2001
Posts: 16547 | TRs
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joseph
Joseph
Joined: 13 Jun 2018
Posts: 114 | TRs
Location: Seattle
|
| Tom wrote: |
| Joseph wrote: |
| Tom wrote: |
| I'm confused. What are you opposed to? Bikes in national parks? Or allowing e-bikes where bikes can go? You don't seem to really know where e-bikes can ride. |
if your question is directed at me (not sure since you didn't quote anything), then my answer is that I think I made it pretty clear that I'm opposed to these e-bikes in national parks. Let me know if you need further clarification. |
You responded to your claim of "lots of places where people can enjoy riding the e-bikes and get out in the wilderness." with "anywhere you can legally ride a regular pedal bike". That didn't make much sense because it isn't legal to ride an e-bike anywhere you can ride a regular pedal bike. The order you seem opposed to gives discretion to allow this. I am confused why you are opposed since you seem to be in favor of allowing people to ride e-bikes where they can legally ride a regular pedal bike. I am guessing you just don't want to see bikes in national parks. |
Yes - that's correct. I do not want e-bikes in national parks or in wilderness areas (such as alpine lakes, etc). Other areas are fine and there's other places where people can ride the e-bikes as the poster who posted on the loup loup indicated. So I guess anywhere you can ride the e-bikes other than national parks and wilderness areas. Kind of channeling my inner Harvey Manning. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mb
Member
Joined: 11 Aug 2002
Posts: 502 | TRs
|
So much definition confusion here.
And implied definitions!
Like why does National Park or Wilderness mean crowded? For sure, Mt Rainier and Alpine Lakes have very crowded areas. Basically all of Mt Rainier NP is also designated Wilderness outside of the roads. But remote National Parks, or even remote parts of popular ones, are not that crowded. Same with Wilderness, there's tons of it which has either minimal access or minimal nearby population and no crowds.
What is a 'natural surface trail'? Usually it does mean one cut w/a blade and... minimally improved. But they are often hardened for short distances with rock (local or imported). I've even seen bound decomposed granite called a 'natural surface' trail, though of course it's no more natural than a graveled abandoned rail bed.
What's a motor? (Haha that's not a question. But motorized bicycle vs ebike vs bicycle vs motorcycle sure is confusing.)
What does that mean for access for e-bikes? Dunno, but I'd sure like to see it done on a basis other than random politics. In either rule making direction. Not blanket restricted because someone thinks all trails are crowded with hikers and it'll cause conflict. Not blanket-allowed because someone likes e-bikes or maybe has a financial stake in them being popular.
(And someone should create a poll "who has ridden e-bikes". I have and think they are both cool and going to cause problems.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tom
Admin
Joined: 15 Dec 2001
Posts: 16547 | TRs
|
It would be interesting to know the politics behind this. The media is touting this as a move by the "trump administration". I scratch my head on that one as Trump hasn't been very friendly to the e-bike market in terms of tariffs.
Nothing will change without the issue being forced. The Forest Service just punts to the 2005 Travel Management Rule which defines motor vehicles as any vehicle that is self-propelled, with the exception of a vehicle that travels on rails or fits the vehicle criteria for “mobility use” for mobility impaired individuals. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pahoehoe
Member
Joined: 12 Oct 2017
Posts: 563 | TRs
|
| treeswarper wrote: |
E bikes have no large lobbying group, yet. People For Bikes supports e bike riding and has done a bit to help legislate, but for the most part, it can be compared to when snowboarders started up on ski hills, except e bikes don't fall off chairlifts and trip up others who are on the chair with them. Which brings up another matter. Isn't having your mountain bike ferried up the hill on a chairlift "cheating"? |
Snowboards dont have motors. Big difference from ebikes versus bikes.
Bike parks, where people pay money to ride chair lifts to ride trails in developed, populated, non wilderness areas, many of which are machine built, are very different from local mountain bike trail systems as well as different from more remote back country rides.
Because some mountain bikers like to go to bike parks doesnt mean all mountain bike trails should be open to some or all motorized vehicles. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mb
Member
Joined: 11 Aug 2002
Posts: 502 | TRs
|
My guess: it's just generally part of the current stance of deregulation.
Or the boss has an e-bike / owns (or a friend owns) e-bike stock. The current admin is all about 'guy at the top is always right and need not follow procedure'.
This seems to have caught many people by surprise. Including advocates who should have been at least given a heads up. And likely all the local managers dealing with it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ski
><((((°>
Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 11320 | TRs
Location: tacoma
|
| Tom wrote: |
| A good bit of the confusion comes down to the title of the article being disingenuous and intended to mislead rather than highlight e-bikes will only be allowed where bikes are already permitted and that superintendents are given discretion to determine what’s appropriate for their park. |
(* emphasis added *)
Olympic National Park allows e-bikes only on the Spruce Railroad Trail and where bicycles are currently allowed.
Bicycles are currently allowed on ONP roads only. Bicycles (and e-bikes) are not allowed on any trail in ONP other than the Spruce Railroad Trail.
(* source: ONP/PD/phone/09/09/19 )
--------------
"I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach.
I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Backpacker Joe
NWH Joe-Bob
Joined: 16 Dec 2001
Posts: 23595 | TRs
Location: Cle Elum
|
Hey Tom, do e-bikes have to have pedals to qualify?
--------------
"If destruction be our lot we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen we must live through all time or die by suicide."
— Abraham Lincoln |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Randito
Snarky Member
Joined: 27 Jul 2008
Posts: 7481 | TRs
Location: Bellevue at the moment.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kiliki
Member
Joined: 07 Apr 2003
Posts: 1663 | TRs
Location: Seattle
|
| Quote: |
| It would be interesting to know the politics behind this. The media is touting this as a move by the "trump administration". I scratch my head on that one as Trump hasn't been very friendly to the e-bike market in terms of tariffs. |
It is political and it is a move by this administration. The political appointees that came into Interior after the inauguration immediately started talking about opening up national parks to a wider range of uses. I know they specifically asked why mountain biking isn't allowed in parks. NPS staff there pointed out that the agency runs 419 units and accommodates a wide range of uses; you can do all sorts of things in NPS-managed units like national recreation areas, national seashores, etc (like jet ski and mountain bike) that you can't necessarily do in the 61 national parks. That seemed to mollify them momentarily but not for long. As someone else pointed out it has to do with a general disdain for regulations; there's also an emphasis on anything people can make money off of (so the study of NPS campgrounds is being led by the RV industry, which will undoubtedly find that NPS campgrounds don't accommodate big RVs, RV hookups, etc well enough). Remember the e-bike lobby (there is such a thing) lobbied hard for this. Maybe if tariffs are hurting them it's a way to get them on board with the administration's agenda in general.
I also suspect it has to do with fragmenting or creating conflict among NP users to reduce their influence.
I've seen a lot of support for the e-bike rule in social media threads, and what generally happens is that as people (many self-described seniors) figure out there aren't good places to ride their bikes in places like Yellowstone or Mt Rainier, where roads are without shoulders and are congested, people start to get excited about the construction of new paved bike paths. So I imagine there will be an effort to construct those. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Cyclopath
Faster than light
Joined: 20 Mar 2012
Posts: 4533 | TRs
Location: Seattle
|
| Tom wrote: |
| It would be interesting to know the politics behind this. The media is touting this as a move by the "trump administration". I scratch my head on that one as Trump hasn't been very friendly to the e-bike market in terms of tariffs. |
The orange fool hasn't been very friendly to anything in terms of tariffs, eBikes are no exception.
Trump has been consistently antagonistic to the concepts of land management and conservation. Allowing vehicles powered by motors is a wedge to weaken regulation. Today it's that eBikes are basically bikes, tomorrow it'll be that dirt bikes are basically eBikes. It's about allowing more and much broader uses in wild(ish) places. A few years ago Orrin Hatch sponsored a bill that would have allowed MTBs in Wilderness, while it's a good idea that should be implemented on a selective basis, Hatch doesn't give a damn about bikes or cyclist access. It's about weakening protections, without appearing to be about that.
Also this is to divide and conquer the people who visit and value these places. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Cyclopath
Faster than light
Joined: 20 Mar 2012
Posts: 4533 | TRs
Location: Seattle
|
| kiliki wrote: |
| I also suspect it has to do with fragmenting or creating conflict among NP users to reduce their influence. |
| Cyclopath wrote: |
| Also this is to divide and conquer the people who visit and value these places. |
Great minds think alike! 😉 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MyFootHurts
Huge Member
Joined: 22 Nov 2011
Posts: 891 | TRs
Location: Kekistan
|
| Cyclopath wrote: |
The orange fool hasn't been very friendly to anything in terms of tariffs, eBikes are no exception.
Trump has been consistently antagonistic to the concepts of land management and conservation. Allowing vehicles powered by motors is a wedge to weaken regulation. Today it's that eBikes are basically bikes, tomorrow it'll be that dirt bikes are basically eBikes. It's about allowing more and much broader uses in wild(ish) places. A few years ago Orrin Hatch sponsored a bill that would have allowed MTBs in Wilderness, while it's a good idea that should be implemented on a selective basis, Hatch doesn't give a damn about bikes or cyclist access. It's about weakening protections, without appearing to be about that.
Also this is to divide and conquer the people who visit and value these places. |
>An ebike on the Carbon River Rd
>Divide and conquer
Yeah you're completely normal. Not unhinged at all.
E-bikers deserve "protection" too.
The very title of this thread is fake news. First off ebikes don't even hum. At least its not even audible over the sound of the tires moving against the ground.
And e-bikes aren't going to be allowed on trails.
I hope one day I ride my ebike by you so can feel all divided and conquered 
Speaking of D&C, I find your post to be divisive and antagonistic against anyone who with a different opinion. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Brian R
Member
Joined: 10 Feb 2018
Posts: 341 | TRs
Location: Fircrest WA
|
Well said, Foot. Apparently, being on the emerald cult side of divisive garners no yellow card here. I'm (not) surprised that Cyclo's post has stood for as long as it has. Seattle blinders.
As for the topic, re national parks, around here we're really only talking about Westside and Ipsut Creek Roads--and maybe a few decommissioned miles inside ONP and NCNP. Dose and Elwha come to mind. Others? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tom
Admin
Joined: 15 Dec 2001
Posts: 16547 | TRs
|
| Be the example you want to see here. I'd dispense with the noble certainties. The Trump dig was inappropriate. That's the kind of stuff we ask people to check at the door. Believe it or not, happens on both sides. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
