According to a
statement from the United States Department of the Interior, eBikes, including eMTB, will now be classified as non-motorized bikes and will have the same rights and access to federal trails in many national parks and other federally managed lands, at least those managed by the DOI which accounts for about 75% of public lands in the US.
So what does this exactly mean? The full text of
order 3376, entitled
"Increasing Recreational Opportunities through the use of Electric Bikes" is a couple of pages long, but to sum it up, any bike trail in a National park or on federally managed land under the Department of the Interior that is open to mountain bikes is now open to pedal-assist eBikes. It's worth noting that US Forest Service lands are managed under the Department of Agriculture and are not covered by this statement.
National Park Service Deputy Director Dan Smith issued a statement on Friday saying, “e-bikes make bicycle travel easier and more efficient, and they provide an option for people who want to ride a bicycle but might not otherwise do so because of physical fitness, age, disability or convenience.”
According to the NPS, the move is designed to help clarify the classification of what an eBike is and help to improve the internal management of the department. The National Parks Service, National Wildlife Refuge System, BLM, and BOR are given 14 days to work out changes to their rules and comply with the provision that "eBikes shall be allowed where other types of bicycles are allowed" and "eBikes shall not be allowed where other types of bicycles are prohibited."
The order encompasses class 1, 2, and 3 bikes. eBikes and eMTB are categorized, by definition, due to their motor size and and capabilities:
Class 1: eBikes that are pedal-assist only, have no throttle, and a maximum assisted speed of 20mph.
Class 2: eBikes that have a maximum speed of 20mph but are also throttle assisted.
Class 3: eBikes that are pedal-assist only, do not have a throttle, and have a maximum speed of 28mph.
Canada also Clarifies e-Bike Trail Access in BC Interestingly enough, British Columbia's parks system also just implemented
a policy allowing class 1 e-bikes on trails open to bicycles but restricting class 2 and 3 bikes to trails for motorized vehicles.
Check out the full order on the US Department of the Interior
website and let us know how you feel about it in the comments below.
And don’t even get me started on cross country skiers!
Republicans do not care about preservation or the environment. They never have. This may seem trivial but the implications will be far reaching. If a number of Republicans are trying to change rules relating to land protections, you better look at who they are and who they are receiving contributions from, like Mike Lee who has been fighting for this for a few years.
This is absurd.
PLEASE tell me how allowing Ebikes into federal land has literally ANYTHING to do with environmental protection?
Land managers worry about safety and sustainability. Ebikes don’t even register on either radar. I’m sorry but your political conspiracy theory is crap.
There’s actually real conversations being held about closing horse trails and opening them for Ebike use because of these two concern areas.
that statement is so not angry
I'll say it again, you are short-sighted only for your own personal gains. Pathetic.
@railin: never been to Utah. I hear it’s a nice place tho.
It’s really simple. Good decision or bad decision? Explain your answer. That’s not political unless you make it so.
The idea that there are competing interests for resources, i.e., land use, is so obvious, you're either disingenuous or tragically ignorant.
Enjoy your down arrow serotonin rush.
Or the idea that pp would want develop natl forest land for profit is a crazy political conspiracy theory.
It's about setting precedence. Both sides of the aisle use these tactics all the time.
I don’t know if they will be successful...I only know they will never stop trying. Oh and by the way Democrat’s aren’t off the hook from this critique...one could argue that George Bush senior was a better steward of the environment than Bill Clinton, for example.
I have first hand experience with the concerns and expectations of the land managers at least in Cherokee and I promise you that Ebikes are nowhere near their area of concern.
I can understand how the term appeals to the hipsters, but a bicycle is not a musical instrument.
And they are so rich and politically connected they still get the priority despite being outnumbered by other trail users 100:1.
They damage the trails, don’t do a lick of trail maintenance, leave huge piles of crap everywhere they go, and aggressively yell at mtn bikers to yield to them even when given a 50 yard berth.
There is a place where e-bikes are truly the best possible vehicle available to transport a human. For example a typical North American commuting to work for the day. E-bikes are even better than public transit for this. Maybe this will breathe a new life into USA’s NPS and is the first step to eliminating idling engines in the National Parks.
I completely agree with you about commuting to work though, an ebike would be rad if it meant I didn't have to use roads and could use regional paved trails instead. I don't trust sharing the road unless I have a cage of metal protecting me.
All that is to say you should never have to worry about 30mph mtbs on your trails.
TFOH with this thread, it just proves how toasted we are as humans.
Politics aside, when have specialized sued anyone? I’m actually curious.
I live an hour from Yellowstone - we only go in the winter these days.
Just make sure you school them on the way down
#gravitydoesntneedamotor
Supposedly Joshua Tree NP has some purpose built singletrack trails for MTBs, but nobody's allowed to ride on them because congress hasn't approved MTBs on singletrack in national parks. I wonder if this new ruling will make it easier or harder to get congress to allow MTBs on singletrack.
that's all I got on such short notice
While change is needed, this seems like a ham-fisted, hastily considered policy change by people that aren't sufficiently familiar with the nuances of the situation.
Second. From a safety and erosion standpoint. Ebikes are no different from acoustic and that’s all managers care about. They are not concerned with whether or not it offends you that someone passed you on the uphill.
I hike there with the dog and have never seen a mountain bike, or even a tread mark.
The article does note that this policy applies to other DOI lands, but highlighting National Parks int he title is a poor choice of emphasis imho. And while the article does mention that "forest service" lands aren't included (does this mean all National Forests??) it would have been helpful to tell us exactly what this does apply to . . . BLM, for example?
The article statement that "DOI manages 75% of public lands in the US" is also wrong. DOI manages 420M acres while the NFS manages 193M acres . . . and we haven't even counted state-owned public lands (~200M acres). So DOI manages more like 50% of all public lands, not 75%.
once the battery life expires on an Ebike…… then what?
DISCLOSURE - I do not own or ride an EMTB
Not f*cking mtbs
2) For all those who think all ebikers are fat and lazy, ride one for 3 hours. Its a better full body workout!
3) Many people with less visible disabilities such a autoimmune disorders benefit from ebikes.
3) This will most likely be challenged in court. Hopefully only class 1 is allowed.
4) Get over it. 90% of people can't tell the difference between an ebike and regular mtb.
5) Go ride!