Kapusta

Go back and read the conversation you are responding to. Are you suggesting that ebike riders will do triple the trail-work of the average non-ebike mtb rider? Be three times more likely to support their mtb club than the average non-ebike mtb rider?

prj71

Yup.

Whenever access is made easier, more people show up to trash the place rather than take care of it. It's some kind of immutable law of human nature. E-bikes, by virtue of being easier to ride and to ride further and more often will lead to higher rates of trail degradation, due to higher mileage use on the trails.

Happy Feet

I don't think there is any correlation between the amount of time manual mtbrs spend riding on trails and how much time they spend maintaining them so why would anyone expect different from e mtbrs.

I also highly doubt e bike riders are accounting for triple the distance manual riders are, averaged out.

Those that do feel engaged. Pushing e mtbrs away doesn't help engage them. It's not rocket science.

Funny how tribalism always wants to draw the line just past ones own involvement to exclude others. The woods would be a lot better off without any mtbrs at all but no one wants to call for our exclusion.. just the other guy.

Kapusta

I don’t expect they would, which is exactly my point.

Again, go back and follow the conversation you were responding to. I am not saying what you seem to think i am saying.

Go read post #21.

Happy Feet

Done.

I understand your reply but I don't think it plays out that way IRL.

Triple use doesn't mean triple wear. Someone more nervous, like an older person on an e bike might cause less wear than an aggressive manual rider. Someone unskilled might slide out switchbacks more than skilled etc... It's not a direct correlation between bike and user behavior.

I know the concern is for maniac e dirt bikers ripping up the trail but there are maniac manual riders as well and e bikers who are just trying to get out and enjoy nature. I look at behavior more than bikes.

FastJake

Late to the, uhh, "party" but here's my two cents: I think e-bikes are not allowed on the MTB trails around here, but I'm not 100% sure. I can definitely see the benefit for road use in terms of a long commute, cargo bikes, and old or out-of-shape people. If an e-bike keeps someone out of a car, well, I would much rather someone e-bike than drive.

But that premise doesn't hold up to singletrack because it's strictly a recreational activity. No one is driving their car or gas powered motorcycles there, so why should we allow electric motorcycles? They are evolving way too quickly to say "no throttle, no this, no that." If you allow e-bikes, you allow all e-bikes. Because no one is going to be out there policing what kind of e-MTB you have.

Canker

I'd like to have one just for trail work lol. A bob trailer + ebike would be awesome.

DMC707

Yes sir -- A lot of the E-bikers i know fit the bill of "recreational cyclists" and might ride 2 times a week x even if they are going triple their usual distance. My racing buddies OTOH, are out there almost every day going the same distance and 2-3 mph faster --- singletrack speed is terrain limited and the 20 mph limit for a stock e bike is an attainable speed in the open for strong conventional cyclists easily.

Youre exactly right - triple the mileage does not equate to triple the wear. The best example i can think of is a motocross racer because i have a background in that (years ago) . A recreational rider who likes to ride trails and can hang with a beginner or novice class at the track can stretch tire wear to about 30 hours and clutch wear to maybe 50 or 60 -- but a pro can wear out both a clutch pack and a rear tire in a 30 minute moto

FastJake

Triple use DOES mean triple wear, by definition. Unless you want to argue they're going to ride slower on an e-bike than on a regular one. If someone is riding 3x further than they normally ride, they are doing 3x more wear than they normally do.

Comparing a novice to a pro is a pointless straw man argument.

prj71

That's just it. Once you open the door to pedal assist e-bikes then the crowd that has throttled e-bikes will want in next. Silent sports (mountain biking, canoeing, hiking, skiing etc.) need to remain human powered.

The FLX Trail is a hardtail cross country style electric mountain bike with quiet Bafang Max Drive 350-watt mid-drive motor, adjustable top speed upwards of 35 mph...

prj71

Speeds up to 45 mph...

https://hpcbikes.com/pages/scout-landing-page

Kapusta

These comparisons of beginner eBikers to pro MTBers is silly.

The point is, eBikes can increase the distance covered by ANY rider be it beginner, intermediate, advanced or pro. Beginner eBikers will cover more distance than beginner MTBers. Expert eBikers will cover more distance than an expert MTBer.

Geez, is this really a debatable point? The ability to cover more distance with the same exertion level is one of the “benefits” of eBikes I hear touted regularly.

Happy Feet

I wouldn't debate that point but who really cares how far one rides? I have never heard someone chastise a manual bike rider for "doing too much riding on the trails and wearing them out". I would debate that more distance doesn't necessarily equal more wear. I think aggressive riding plays more into that than anything.

My perspective is the big tent philosophy. Right now this talk of exclusion only works if manual bike riders have the numbers to maintain control of the playground. Once e mtb becomes more popular (which it will) then the balance of power shifts to that user group. If we want the emerging group to reflect our ethos about trail use we should include them under our tent where we can influence their way of thinking. If we castigate or vilify them, they may reject us as well, along with our outlook regarding trail use. Better in the long run, seeing as they are not going away, to include them in associations and user forums, develop a dialog and work together to develop a hybrid system that serves both user groups.

If they are part of the collective in a respected way they will be more likely to buy into the established ethos and work towards self regulation, just as manual riders do. There are no bicycle police on our trails now but we mostly follow rules of behavior because we feel we use a shared resource. Pushing one user group outside the tent isn't going to encourage that.

If I were king that's what I would do. Locally I would include e mtbrs as part of the collective whole of trail users, along with hikers and trail runners, look at a long term plan for our trail system, develop multi use and manual only trails that serve people and encourage participation to develop them. Then some e mtbrs would be engaged in the process and more likely to self regulate others.

prj71

Using this logic we should work with the motor bikers also so they can ride on the mountain bike trails and the horse people also so they can ride on our trails.

My local trails have a problem with horse people riding on them even though there are signs that indicate no horses on the trails. And every once in while a stray motorbiker uses them.

There is no reason at all to include e-bikers on the human powered trail systems.

Happy Feet

All of this is just someone arguing from their own perspective. Many mtbrs use Fsr's, jeep trails and horse trails. We have many systems in the interior that follow cattle trails on grazing land. Those user groups could make the same complaints about mtbrs. Horse riders, logging truck drivers, cattle ranchers... many probably don't like mountain bikers. Fortunately, they don't control the narrative.

Someone said earlier there is no practical need for e bikes on single-track as it's recreational. Once you take a step back one can argue there is no need for any bike on singletrack. It's all optional.

What you express is not new. "I want what I want - but want to deny you what you want." That only works while you control the narrative. As soon as e mtbs become popular enough to influence policy you will wish to be able to influence how they act but that opportunity is now, not then.

Marginalize them enough and they will create their own associations, their own influencers, and their own ethos. It might be ours, it might not. If we want a shared ethos we should work with, not against this growing power base.

People who create comprehensive policy work towards consensus. Orherwise it's all just shaking your fist at clouds.

That won't stop what's coming. It just pushes that group beyond our influence.

FastJake

Around here, unless specifically allowed, bicycles are NOT allowed on private farm roads, horse trails, etc. So we ride elsewhere or risk getting in trouble for trespassing.

Just like gas powered motorcycles are not allowed on MTB trails. You're making it sound like there is no point in having rules at all, because whatever is popular will just steamroll over the rules no matter what. Personally, I'm glad I don't live in a place like that.

Happy Feet

Quite the opposite.

If you want to create rules for multiple user groups the best strategy is to include them in the decision making process so there is more buy in for the end result. Refusing to work with them when they are a minority is the best strategy to ensure they ignore you when they are a majority. Be cruel to your children when they are young and they will be cruel to you when you are old. Don't expect different.

We have this multi user concept in place locally right now. Very little conflict and, for the most part, mutual compliance. Unfortunately compromise gets a bad rap these days in other areas with predictable results.

I'm just being pragmatic. The numbers will increase. The group will gain power. They will influence use. How the currently established group reacts to that will dictate how much control it has over the final result.

Happy Feet

An example of how that might work just on forums alone is as follows:

If e mtb riders try to post in a mtb sub forum but are made to feel unwelcome and told to post instead in the e bike sub forum (exclusion), the mtb forum loses any chance it has to influence the behavior of the e mtb rider.

They instead, are influenced by the e bike users in their forum who may be more interested in maximizing power and speed than in trail conservation or backcountry ethics.

prj71

E-mountain bikers will never be the majority. The majority of folks that get into road cycling or MTBing are in it for the physical fitness and challengeing aspect of it, and I don't see that changing. E-bikes bring out a whole new group of people who would never be on the trails otherwise because pedaling up hills or longer distances is too hard. The assist lures otherwise wary riders into a sport perceived as “too hard.”

And there is no reason to include E-bikers in the decision making process as far as trails are concerned. Those of us that pedal having been doing fine all along without that user group.

Happy Feet

Good luck with that whistling past the graveyard, revisionist, polarizing rhetoric stuff. How's it working in every other aspect of modern life. People getting along?

Fwiw, I've been "pedaling" longer than you have both recreationally and vocationally and I have no problem with them when used correctly. I would rather have some say in that use than shake my fist at clouds impotently.

You only speak for yourself and represent no one other than that. Same as me.

DMC707

You are spot on until the lasr sentence. These folks have enough numbers now to matter

Happy Feet

I think two things are happening to create a convergence of use.

1. Older people are staying recreationaly active far longer than at any other point in history. This is so apparent locally on our trails where older men and women riding mtb almost match the young. The older crowd also has a lot of disposable income to spend on new tech.

2. Tech has evolved to create e assist mtbs that closely mimic manual FS bikes.

The barrier of entry or sustainability has allowed more people to participate. Older people, people with health issues... They can either begin easier by using e assist or not drop out as soon by using e assist.

No one has to like it but vilifying e assist users as a group with some sort of adrenalin fueled motocycle rider A-hole moniker misses the mark for the most part. The more strident one is in that regard, It's really out of touch with who is using e assist for the most part.

The last two bike shows I attended before covid had e assist as the largest segment on display. Every major manufacturer had them, they created the most buzz. they people with the most money to spend were interested in them. Most of those people were older and looking to remain engaged in adventure activities.

In my father's day someone my age was looking to buy a lazy boy and a winnebago. At 57 I just bought yet another paddleboard, have two kayaks, several sets of dive gear and seven bikes of different genres to ride. Looking forward I'm thinking of the next bike to buy, not dropping out of the activity.

Kapusta

Why did you leave out equestrians and dirt bike riders?

Happy Feet

Because I hates them.. they're always trying to steal my precious.

Oops inside voice.

Because they don't use my local trail sysyem. If they did, I would.

In another local area there are extensive co existing dirtbike and mtb trails though. Two user groups on the same mountain side co existing.

That's because both have a large enough lobby group that they can't exclude the other so they cooperate instead. It's a crazy notion...

Kapusta

So you include and welcome user groups (equestrians and dirt bikers) AFTER they gain access.

But untill then, you don’t.

How is this any different than lobbying to keep eBikes out of areas they are not currently allowed?

You know darn well that the only reason you don’t share those systems with horses and dirtbikes (especially the latter) is because someone decided they were not allowed. And if dirt bikers starting petitioning to be allowed to ride in all those places, hikers, mtbers, and eBikers would be opposing it.

Lobbying to keep eBikes out of a trail system does not preclude working with them if they eventually do gain access. It is just being pragmatic.