Forum Index > Trail Talk > Electric bikes soon to be humming along national park trails
Previous :: Next Topic  
Author Message
RandyHiker
Snarky Member



Joined: 27 Jul 2008
Posts: 6728 | TRs
Location: Bellevue at the moment.
RandyHiker
  Top

Snarky Member
PostTue Dec 03, 2019 8:39 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Pahoehoe wrote:
I said a bike with a motor is different from a bike without a motor and should be evaluated for access as such.

It appears the the district ranger for the Okanogan Wenatchee National Forest agrees with you.  Perusing various entries in the forests trail catalog I'm seeing items like this:

USFS wrote:
No motorcycles on this trail. E-Bikes (with full electric motor power or pedal assist) are not allowed.

and

USFS wrote:
Restrictions: Motorized use prohibited

Numerous trails in the Cle Elum ranger district are open to MTB, eBike and ORV usage.

I haven't found a trail in the Cle Elum RD that is open to MTBs and eBikes, but not ORVs.  Perhaps there are some.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
MtnGoat
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 11325 | TRs
Location: Lyle, WA
MtnGoat
  Top

Member
PostTue Dec 03, 2019 8:56 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Pahoehoe wrote:
I havent said anything about where anyone should be excluded from.

I said a bike with a motor is different from a bike without a motor and should be evaluated for access as such.

Let's see if we can address that first issue, you can give us a clear statement for other folks to judge.

In your opinion, should e bikes be excluded from any bike trails?

If so, what bike trails should ebikes be excluded from?

--------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock. - Will Rogers
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
treeswarper
Alleged Sockpuppet!



Joined: 25 Dec 2006
Posts: 9174 | TRs
Location: Don't move here
treeswarper
  Top

Alleged Sockpuppet!
PostTue Dec 03, 2019 9:01 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
An example of common sense.  A speed limit has been set, which would apply to both ebikes and acoustic bikes.  I'm not sure why class 3 bikes are not acceptable.

https://www.montereyherald.com/2019/12/02/pacific-grove-moves-to-regulate-e-bikes/?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_content=fb-montereyherald&utm_campaign=socialflow&utm_medium=social&fbclid=IwAR3MjUp8Dxz1DUs44JgKL5G2_kxzi7qRWJDJgD4tZdKAqiigh3l22QhhuhU

--------------
What's especially fun about sock puppets is that you can make each one unique and individual, so that they each have special characters. And they don't have to be human––animals and aliens are great possibilities
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
treeswarper
Alleged Sockpuppet!



Joined: 25 Dec 2006
Posts: 9174 | TRs
Location: Don't move here
treeswarper
  Top

Alleged Sockpuppet!
PostTue Dec 03, 2019 9:03 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
RandyHiker wrote:
It appears the the district ranger for the Okanogan Wenatchee National Forest agrees with you.  Perusing various entries in the forests trail catalog I'm seeing items like this:

Which district?

--------------
What's especially fun about sock puppets is that you can make each one unique and individual, so that they each have special characters. And they don't have to be human––animals and aliens are great possibilities
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
Doppelganger
Gorecrow



Joined: 09 Feb 2006
Posts: 1590 | TRs
Location: Pessimising
Doppelganger
  Top

Gorecrow
PostTue Dec 03, 2019 9:17 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Pahoehoe wrote:
Period.  End of subject.

I get the feeling we aren't to that point yet

FYI, did not find any reference to the names of the Washington ebike legislation while cruising the EMBA site, and did not find any links to the WA ebike legislation itself. Someone want to pass that info long to them that is fine.

https://app.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=46.61.710

https://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=46.04.071

https://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=46.20.500

https://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=46.04.169

Pahoehoe wrote:
A vehicle with a motor that provides propulsion or assistance in propulsion is a motorized vehicle.

So...?
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
JVesquire
Member
Member


Joined: 28 Jun 2006
Posts: 911 | TRs
Location: Pasco, WA
JVesquire
  Top

Member
PostFri Dec 06, 2019 8:18 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Lawsuit filed
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
Pahoehoe
Member
Member


Joined: 12 Oct 2017
Posts: 472 | TRs

Pahoehoe
  Top

Member
PostFri Dec 06, 2019 8:52 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
JVesquire wrote:
Lawsuit filed

This is one of the main reason mountain bikers do not want ebikes lumped with us.

It's more leverage to take away hard won access.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
MtnGoat
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 11325 | TRs
Location: Lyle, WA
MtnGoat
  Top

Member
PostFri Dec 06, 2019 9:33 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Pahoehoe wrote:
This is one of the main reason mountain bikers do not want ebikes lumped with us.

It's more leverage to take away hard won access.

Talk about inversion with full intent. It's as if we're not supposed to notice that words mean things. Here you are arguing that ebikes should not have access because you don't like them in spite of zero empirical reason shown that they take anything from you other than pride in your accomplishments, for some reason....while you claim that someone else's attempt to take access from ebikes, something you *agree* with,  represents some kind of lumping.

Your argument has never demonstrated any principled basis from the start, and it's only getting more byzantine as you keep trying to evade stating the obvious, plainly...you don't want them there because somehow, their peddling less than you impacts you on an emotional level, because it cannot impact you on a sound or exhaust level.

--------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock. - Will Rogers
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
Brian R
Member
Member


Joined: 09 Feb 2018
Posts: 227 | TRs
Location: Fircrest WA
Brian R
  Top

Member
PostFri Dec 06, 2019 10:29 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Once again, PEER is obnoxious and proves that public sector bureaucrats view themselves as being above the rest of us.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
MtnGoat
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 11325 | TRs
Location: Lyle, WA
MtnGoat
  Top

Member
PostFri Dec 06, 2019 10:43 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
This is a systemic problem which needs to be culled, and thoroughly, throughout the federal and state govts. I work with some of these folks in the FCC and the arrogance is astounding. It has nothing to do with technical expertise. It is the attitude that they, not the little people, are the bosses.

--------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock. - Will Rogers
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
MultiUser
Member
Member


Joined: 16 Feb 2011
Posts: 186 | TRs
Location: United States
MultiUser
  Top

Member
PostFri Dec 06, 2019 10:58 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
MtnGoat wrote:
It's as if we're not supposed to notice that words mean things.

So, does nonmotorized mean no motors, or does it mean only quiet, low impact motors?
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
Tom
Admin



Joined: 15 Dec 2001
Posts: 16141 | TRs

Tom
  Top

Admin
PostFri Dec 06, 2019 11:24 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Frequent rationale for non-motorized designation is to reduce user conflicts.  In an area where bikes are allowed but not motorcycles it would seem the "conflict" is more likely from noise and fumes.  I suppose you could argue speed but I don't believe that is typically a complaint.  I'd think if someone doesn't like e-bikes they don't like bikes either so not allowing e-bikes doesn't solve that conflict.  Just read through this thread, most people objecting either think it's allowing bikes where they aren't allowed, or it's bikers that don't like e-bikes.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
MultiUser
Member
Member


Joined: 16 Feb 2011
Posts: 186 | TRs
Location: United States
MultiUser
  Top

Member
PostFri Dec 06, 2019 11:49 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
IMO, it is very much as a case of a technology that is not addressed by the land management structure in existence.  ebikes are clearly motorized.  They are also closer in impact to the nonmotorized types of activities (certainly far less impact than horses).  ebike users argue they have no more impact than a regular bike, and are probably correct.  Both lawsuits to date (USFS in Tahoe and the latest re NPS) argue they are motorized, and the required processes to permit them were not followed.  Also probably correct.

AFAIK, the 'user conflicts' that nonmotorized designations seek to avoid are purely conflicts from those unwilling to share trails with motors.  Speed is definitely mentioned in those complaints, as is dust and noise.  It will be interesting to see if the absence of noise is better or worse in this regard as emotos become common in the future.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
MtnGoat
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 11325 | TRs
Location: Lyle, WA
MtnGoat
  Top

Member
PostFri Dec 06, 2019 11:50 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
some bikers don't like ebikes even though they have non of the empirical drawbacks demonstrably present when motorized inherently indicated internal combustion motors.

that no longer being the case, the bans need to be updated to include internal combustion, but not ebikes. An impact to feelings of self worth or something is not sufficient reason to exclude other tax paying users with little to no demonstrable empirical impact on the resource from the bike itself.

--------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock. - Will Rogers
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
Tom
Admin



Joined: 15 Dec 2001
Posts: 16141 | TRs

Tom
  Top

Admin
PostFri Dec 06, 2019 1:36 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Here is one discussion defining "use conflict".  Key drivers seem to be noise and environmental impact.  I didn't see speed mentioned but perhaps in other discussions.

https://books.google.com/books?id=bZ42AQAAMAAJ&pg=SL14-PA134&lpg=SL14-PA134
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
  Display:     All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Forum Index > Trail Talk > Electric bikes soon to be humming along national park trails
  Happy Birthday Flash Gordon, raz2sea!
Jump to:   
Search this topic:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
   Use Disclaimer Powered by phpBB Privacy Policy