USFS proposed rule to revamp eMTB access (Sept. 2020)

[grinch]

Assiniboine Lodge is not ACC. Kokanee may be but is posh. Point being, none of those are allowed in US Wilderness. No huts of any kind. Canada is overall more in favor of non primitive, motorized recreation in their mountains. Look at all the bc huts there compared to the US.

Theyre provincial parks not national parks. Just another example of ignorant posts purporting to be fact in an ebike thread. Sadly thats the majority of the posts

Sent from my SM-G950W using TGR Forums mobile app

[Dee Hubbs]

Canada's density population = 10 ppl per sq. mile. (185th of 194 countries)
Unites Stares density population = 87 ppl per sq. mile.

Canada Land ownership: Private = 11%. Federal = 41%. Provincial = 48% (Government managing 3,431,000 sq miles of land)
USA Land Ownership: Private = 60%. Federal = 33%. Other = 7% (Government managing 1,518,000 sq miles of land)

Trying to compare how Canada manages its recreational lands vs how the USA manages them is like comparing Apples to Potatoes.

[Bunion 2020]

Only in the ebike threads do you get cementhead type posts en masse. Its like you just spew anything out there off the top of your head because it fits your bias and you know you have a bunch of like minded kooks to back you. Just ridiculous posts. A shit ton of them too.
News flash- emtb is taking over so you better get used to whining or find a "reasonable" approach to the arrival of emtb, and by reasonable it will have to be fair to all citizens and fact based. I predict class1 will have full access and the ignorant will continue whining. I'll update you on your whining level as we go. Tissue?

Sent from my SM-G950W using TGR Forums mobile app

More opinion that you call fact. Why do you even bother?

[altasnob]

Trying to compare how Canada manages its recreational lands vs how the USA manages them is like comparing Apples to Potatoes.

True. But the southern half of BC and Alberta (where everyone actually lives) are actually very similar population density-wise, and mountain-wise, as say, Washington, Idaho, and Montana.

[Dee Hubbs]

True. But the southern half of BC and Alberta (where everyone actually lives) are actually very similar population density-wise, and mountain-wise, as say, Washington, Idaho, and Montana.

Washington Idaho and Montana have a combined SqM of 295,000 and a combined population 9,589,000 people. Density = 32ppl/sqM.
BC is 356,186 SqM for 4,400,000 ppl. Population density = 12 ppl/SqM
Alberta is for 247,136 SqM for 3,645,000 ppl. Population density = 14ppl/SqM

Even if we divided those areas in half, (or doubled the density) the population density still below those 3 states.

The Canadian government is responsible for managing 3,431,000 SqM of land for 37,500,000 tax payers.
The Untied States Government is responsible for managing 1,518,000 SqM of land for 328,200,00 tax payers.

[altasnob]

I was curious which country conserves more of their land. According to the world bank, US is ranked #137 for total percentage of land conserved versus 156 for Canada.

http://wdi.worldbank.org/table/3.4#

In Washington State, nearly every single alpine environment is in a wilderness area, so off limits to biking. The national parks in Washington are also designated as wilderness areas, or at least the areas without roads. When I recreate in BC, I am amazed at how much more of their alpine environment is open to snowmobiles, biking, heli-skiing and drops, and has bc lodges. Of course, BC has much more alpine environment than WA, even if you just look at the southern part of BC, but it still noticeable how different the two areas manage their land. And to me, southern BC is very similar for all practical purposes as Washington State.

Biking took off on the North Shore because of Canada's more laisez-faire attitude to land management (and tort liability laws). Washington is slowly catching up. You can thank Evergreen MTB Alliance for their advocacy and trail building. Most of the new trails in WA are on state, not federal, land.

[grinch]

Canada's density population = 10 ppl per sq. mile. (185th of 194 countries)
Unites Stares density population = 87 ppl per sq. mile.

Canada Land ownership: Private = 11%. Federal = 41%. Provincial = 48% (Government managing 3,431,000 sq miles of land)
USA Land Ownership: Private = 60%. Federal = 33%. Other = 7% (Government managing 1,518,000 sq miles of land)

Trying to compare how Canada manages its recreational lands vs how the USA manages them is like comparing Apples to Potatoes.

Ok now do germany, italy and the uk in comparison to the states.

Sent from my SM-G950W using TGR Forums mobile app

[grinch]

More opinion that you call fact. Why do you even bother?

Look at europe with the higher density population. Wouldnt that be a compelling fact?

Sent from my SM-G950W using TGR Forums mobile app

[altasnob]

Look at europe with the higher density population. Wouldnt that be a compelling fact?

I don't want my public lands managed like Europe's with roads, towns, trails, lodges, ski lifts, and people all over them. Europeans flock to hike to the Pacific Crest Trail every year because they don't have that kind of wilderness experience in Europe.

[Bunion 2020]

Look at europe with the higher density population. Wouldnt that be a compelling fact?

Sent from my SM-G950W using TGR Forums mobile app

That is actually one of the rare facts (that Europe has a higher population density than the US) you have ever posted.

Maybe you could do a search and see the number of accessible trail miles (or KMs if you wish) in Europe VS the US.

I'll make it easy for you. Here is a start.

https://www.singletracks.com/singlet...nces-to-enjoy/

https://e360.yale.edu/features/on_bi...ns_from_europe

[grinch]

I don't want my public lands managed like Europe's with roads, towns, trails, lodges, ski lifts, and people all over them. Europeans flock to hike to the Pacific Crest Trail every year because they don't have that kind of wilderness experience in Europe.

I would think there should be room for people to recreate. Parks and nature reserves arent exactly the same thing. We need both. Its important to have areas where people can recreate outdoors especially now in these covid times. There are a number of outdoor sports people can do. Cycling is positioned as one of the best. Emtb has been shown to get people that otherwise wouldnt be active. I don't see a ton of them on the trail but im amazed at how many i see whizzing around town smiling from ear to ear. Older locals that are generally classified as hard working family people. I also hear other like minded people noticing these people and talking of getting bikes themselves. Theyre asking about my bike. They see me going everyday on it or going in my truck to the park with my p bike. Theyre actually making note that the convenience of the emtb and the park right in town contributes to health and fitness. Both the park and emtb is relatively new to town and theres a buzz in the air. If these people ,that have had nothing to do with cycling or sports in the past, are noticing i take that as a net positive for the population.
Story- i may have told this but it sticks in my mind. I was riding through town and noticed a girl about my age , not huge but maybe thicc, that looked to be a local mother and not sporty at all. A hockey or soccer mom look thatd be watching sports that their kids were participating in and any sports she actually participated in were in her high school years. I noticed she was on a step through commuter ebike. She was steering back and forth across her lane, having fun with this big smile just pedaling and steering her bike, oblivious to anything going on around her on our quiet town streets. At the last moment as i was pedaling the other direction way across the road she snapped out of her giddy childlike ebike enthusiasm and the look on her face was almost embarassed. She was just having so much fun on a bike and it was out of her norm and she was embarassed and surprised that it showed. I had to smile for atleast the next km.Its contagious. I see it almost everyday now. Obviously people that wouldn't otherwise be outthere exercising. Its a great start. Most we'll never see on the trails but i see the same thing with locals on the trail on emtb. Some old dogs that i see on the ski hill are now venturing on to the trails. Just nice people. Much like the bike park. Its brought families and other locals i never thought id see out there having fun on a bike. All ages and demographics. I think its the best when i see someone totally out of their element checking it out. Huge out of shape railway workers(not that old some of them) out with buds or with their kids on the hill or emtb. They rent emtb's at the hill so that helps. The scariest part for me is the full in tomato head some of them have after the heart rate gets up.
Also the most injuries i saw was closing day at the park and that looked to be all experienced locals on p bikes

Sent from my SM-G950W using TGR Forums mobile app

[jono]

Ya well i guess you need more time on one to get past your bias. Your arguement loses all credibility if its based on ignorance, no matter how many other ignorant anti eeb cultists join in your pissing match. It doesn't further any discussion to remain willfully ignorant

For clarity
https://www.bosch-ebike.com/us/every...-ebike-system/
750w is peak power but the bias of all the uninformed because their bias blinders only allows them to use the 750w number.

All class 1 pedal assist motors and bikes that emtbers are buying are "equipped with an auxiliary electric motor having a maximum continuous rated power of less than or equal to 250 W". Again "250w of continuous rated power"
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.uci...EVUcDk2SEFFPQ2


Sent from my SM-G950W using TGR Forums mobile app

I definitely have no anti e-bike bias, you're just spinning in these threads without noticing the context of the conversation south of you.

Nevertheless, my mistake: I should not have used the term "peak output" since that has a specific meaning for electric motors and that's (apparently) not what is used. Peak power only occurs under acceleration and is therefore not continuous. What I meant to say was check your motor at your bike's maximum setting. If your bike puts out 250W in Turbo or whatever then the proposed USFS reg would triple that and leave your bike without another class for land managers to use to grant you access. Point being, if 750W bikes are harder on trails than 250W bikes it would be better to have a class that sets a 250W limit--which would be more appropriate on most MTB trails.

[grinch]

I definitely have no anti e-bike bias, you're just spinning in these threads without noticing the context of the conversation south of you.

Nevertheless, my mistake: I should not have used the term "peak output" since that has a specific meaning for electric motors and that's (apparently) not what is used. Peak power only occurs under acceleration and is therefore not continuous. What I meant to say was check your motor at your bike's maximum setting. If your bike puts out 250W in Turbo or whatever then the proposed USFS reg would triple that and leave your bike without another class for land managers to use to grant you access. Point being, if 750W bikes are harder on trails than 250W bikes it would be better to have a class that sets a 250W limit--which would be more appropriate on most MTB trails.

I agree, apart from not noticing the context. In the end whats fair for all matters. A lot of the reasoning and narratives put forward ,at its root, is the poster trying to put their rights above other users rights

Sent from my SM-G950W using TGR Forums mobile app

[altasnob]

No one is against ebikes on roads or trails where dirt bikes are allowed. Their concerns are on trails where mountain bikes, but not dirt bikes, are allowed. Evergreen summarizes their concern with emtbs well:

-To allay concerns by our partners in joint non-motorized recreation planning efforts;
-To prevent potential loss of current trail access if land managers choose to close trails to all “bikes” because e-bikes may not be deemed compatible with other non-motorized trail uses;
-To protect funding eligibility for future state, federal, and local "non-motorized" grants; and
-To ensure the ability for land managers to enforce the regulations.

They also provide a map of where you can legally emtb in Washington:

https://www.evergreenmtb.org/ebikeaccess

[grinch]

No one is against ebikes on roads or trails where dirt bikes are allowed. Their concerns are on trails where mountain bikes, but not dirt bikes, are allowed. Evergreen summarizes their concern with emtbs well:

-To allay concerns by our partners in joint non-motorized recreation planning efforts;
-To prevent potential loss of current trail access if land managers choose to close trails to all “bikes” because e-bikes may not be deemed compatible with other non-motorized trail uses;
-To protect funding eligibility for future state, federal, and local "non-motorized" grants; and
-To ensure the ability for land managers to enforce the regulations.

They also provide a map of where you can legally emtb in Washington:

https://www.evergreenmtb.org/ebikeaccess

I know, its been gone over a million times and still you refuse to look whats going on elsewhere in the world for a direct reference to any implied issue. Murica trying to reinvent the fkn wheel........again. its been proven that class1 emtb and mtb can coexist on the same trails in countries with much greater population density. Make up all the shit you want. Youre wrong

Sent from my SM-G950W using TGR Forums mobile app

[altasnob]

I don't think you understand how difficult it is to build a new trail in a pro-environment, tree hugger state such as Washington. You can't bike in wilderness. This will not change in any of our lifetimes, so forget about that. So for federal mountainous lands, you are limited to national forest. There is very little new trail building going on in national forests, both for biking and for hiking. In the Cascades of Washington, Oregon, and Northern California there is a ban on logging in national forests due to the spotted owl settlement. There is also a ban on any new road construction in these national forests. This also will likely not change in our lifetimes. So with federal land a no go, that leaves state land. There is not that much state land in Washington state (most public land in Washington is federal land, as is the case in all Western US states). But the state is more willing to allow new trails to be built than the federal government. The main reason for this is the public state land in Washington is "trust land." The trust land is not managed for conservation, or even recreation, it is primarily managed to help fund the public schools through timber sales. So who cares if mountain bikers build trails on it if we are going to clear cut it anyway. Everygreen has worked really hard to get to the point where the state is allowing new bike trails on state land. For every bike trail they build, they also build or maintain hiking specific trails to try to keep the hikers happy. I both hike and mountain bike and always thought how dumb the hikers are who hike on these second growth clear cut scrub forests when we have so much better hiking available, but they are out there. Emtbs are allowed on a few of the state land trails but not all. Emtbs are also allowed on trails in national forests that are open to dirt bikes (and there are a lot of these too, especially on the east side of the Cascades). To me, all of the above is a good balance between wilderness conservation, non-motorized recreation, and motorized recreation. I actually like the status quo.

I go to Canada to heli in to ski lodges, I go to Europe to take ski lifts up crazy mountains and hike village to village staying in mountain hostels, and I stay in the US when I want more primitive recreational experiences. I like it this way.

[grinch]

I don't think you understand how difficult it is to build a new trail in a pro-environment, tree hugger state such as Washington. You can't bike in wilderness. This will not change in any of our lifetimes, so forget about that. So for federal mountainous lands, you are limited to national forest. There is very little new trail building going on in national forests, both for biking and for hiking. In the Cascades of Washington, Oregon, and Northern California there is a ban on logging in national forests due to the spotted owl settlement. There is also a ban on any new road construction in these national forests. This also will likely not change in our lifetimes. So with federal land a no go, that leaves state land. There is not that much state land in Washington state (most public land in Washington is federal land, as is the case in all Western US states). But the state is more willing to allow new trails to be built than the federal government. The main reason for this is the public state land in Washington is "trust land." The trust land is not managed for conservation, or even recreation, it is primarily managed to help fund the public schools through timber sales. So who cares if mountain bikers build trails on it if we are going to clear cut it anyway. Everygreen has worked really hard to get to the point where the state is allowing new bike trails on state land. For every bike trail they build, they also build or maintain hiking specific trails to try to keep the hikers happy. I both hike and mountain bike and always thought how dumb the hikers are who hike on these second growth clear cut scrub forests when we have so much better hiking available, but they are out there. Emtbs are allowed on a few of the state land trails but not all. Emtbs are also allowed on trails in national forests that are open to dirt bikes (and there are a lot of these too, especially on the east side of the Cascades). To me, all of the above is a good balance between wilderness conservation, non-motorized recreation, and motorized recreation. I actually like the status quo.

I go to Canada to heli in to ski lodges, I go to Europe to take ski lifts up crazy mountains and hike village to village staying in mountain hostels, and I stay in the US when I want more primitive recreational experiences. I like it this way.

I get that. Fair enough. I just dont want to see a user group(whatever user group that may be) being excluded if there is no legit reason to do it. Whats good for the goose is good for the gander

Sent from my SM-G950W using TGR Forums mobile app

[jamal]

The other thing is the forest service can't afford to maintain their existing trails, so around here for example you just flat out can't build something new on national forest land. There is one workaround there, which is finding old trails on maps that aren't used or maintained and going and clearing them. Bonus points if motorized use is allowed. So, there you go e-bikers, a way to make a "new" trail you can use on NF land.

Also take a look at your usfs motor vehicle use maps, it will show which trails you can ride. Looking at my local ones, there's stuff that i was not aware was open to e-bikes.

The way most of our new trails have been built in the last few years, however, is not that. It's all been on timber company land that was bought by land trusts, and our mtb group has a role in planning and building the trails there. The last project was actually all mtb specific trails up above the pro xc course (which is private property).

Those both seem like better ways for e-bikes to get trails built that they can use vs whining on the internet that they should be able to ride their mopeds wherever they want.

[jono]

I agree, apart from not noticing the context. In the end whats fair for all matters. A lot of the reasoning and narratives put forward ,at its root, is the poster trying to put their rights above other users rights

I have a right not to read your ad for tapatalk but I'm coping. Do you have a lot to say about the right to smoke weed in Singapore, too? Political shit is about political processes. Sometimes that's going to require compromises. That's the context.

It would be actually useful if these discussions could move beyond context to actual substance. Trolling in Sprockets? Just no.

[toast2266]

Those both seem like better ways for e-bikes to get trails built that they can use vs whining on the internet that they should be able to ride their mopeds wherever they want.

But that would require ebikers to actually organize and advocate for their interests rather than just piggy backing off decades of work by mountain bikers and acting like they're entitled to the benefits of that work because it's "good for the gander."

[grinch]

Again your bias is showing. Theyre the same fkn group. Ive probably been riding mtb twice as long as you. Many of those years i put in trail. Everyone i know with one is in that same categpry. The future will have kids on them shredding and building trail.
It is telling that the bike tester doesnt know about the blevo app on "his wifes" bike when its dead simple to install and use and widely in use. How can you have a bike in the house and don't know the functions?

Sent from my SM-G950W using TGR Forums mobile app

[grinch]

I have a right not to read your ad for tapatalk but I'm coping. Do you have a lot to say about the right to smoke weed in Singapore, too? Political shit is about political processes. Sometimes that's going to require compromises. That's the context.

It would be actually useful if these discussions could move beyond context to actual substance. Trolling in Sprockets? Just no.

You have a hard time being wrong eh? Id suggest avoiding forums because "discussions". Ya i know! Crazy! Shit gets discussed. Don't you want to be better informed before you send your "feelings" to the usfs?

Sent from my SM-G950W using TGR Forums mobile app

[Bunion 2020]

Again your bias is showing. Theyre the same fkn group. Ive probably been riding mtb twice as long as you. Many of those years i put in trail. Everyone i know with one is in that same categpry.

Assume much? Bought my 1st mtn bike in 1984 but that is immaterial to the discussion, how long anyone has been doing anything is a smokescreen for your butthurt.

Quick question and then you can carry on carrying on.

Do you sell e-bikes or have some reason for your evangelical zeal beyond just wanting to be treated (as you see it) equally?

Thank you in advance.

[jono]

He's actually sponsored by the Sierra Club's Mickey V soon-to-be Memorial scholarship. Sent here to sow dissent and be counterproductive to his alleged cause. Brilliant psy-op on their part, actually. DD would be proud.

[toast2266]

Again your bias is showing. Theyre the same fkn group. Ive probably been riding mtb twice as long as you. Many of those years i put in trail. Everyone i know with one is in that same categpry. The future will have kids on them shredding and building trail.
It is telling that the bike tester doesnt know about the blevo app on "his wifes" bike when its dead simple to install and use and widely in use. How can you have a bike in the house and don't know the functions?

Sent from my SM-G950W using TGR Forums mobile app

The fact that there is overlap in the ridership does not mean they're the same group. Lots of guys that ride mountain bikes also ride dirt bikes, but they're not the same group either (even though the interests of those two groups often overlap).

Doesn't mean people can't advocate for mountain bikes and ebikes simultaneously, but I haven't seen that kind of advocacy happening in most places. What's mostly happening is people advocating for mountain bikes, and then the ebikers come in and talk about how they're entitled to that access. Most of the mountain bike advocates I know (the ones that are actually doing the work on the ground, not just bitching on the internet) are not advocating for ebike access. They're generally not opposed to the idea of ebikes, but they're not excited about the complications to access that ebikes bring, and therefore they're not advocating for them.


*edit - and I don't know about the ebike app because I don't really ever ride that bike. It's in the garage and I have access to it, but it's not as fun as a mountain bike. I've maybe ridden it 5 times this year. If I need some app on my phone to appreciate the bike, then yeah, maybe that's why ebikes aren't for me.