Moab Utah USA: Local BLM requests comments about a proposal for Allowing E-bike Use

[vman]

The Moab comments site is a promising initiative. I commend your efforts to secure access for cyclists in Moab. If successful, I strongly recommend implementing enforcement measures on popular trail routes shared with hikers to maintain this access. Proper trail etiquette is crucial for the success of multi-use trails.

Key points to enforce include:

1. Cyclists slowing down when approaching horses or hikers
2. Clear communication from cyclists before passing other trail users

Without a period of active enforcement, a small number of cyclists demonstrating poor trail etiquette can lead to problems. Even a few negative encounters can prompt concerned hikers to contact well-funded local environmental groups, potentially resulting in access restrictions for cyclists.

It's worth noting that some hikers advocating for restrictions may be less concerned about environmental protection and more interested in limiting trail access to non-hikers. Their goal might be to avoid sharing public resources with cyclists rather than genuine conservation efforts.

Establishing and enforcing good practices early on can help ensure continued access and positive relationships between all trail users.

 

[Porcupine Slim]

Hi,
I had a conversation with one of the BLM planners yesterday and learned that there has been some pointed and well reasoned opposition to e-bikes during the first weeks of the commenting period.
The comments have not been officially reviewed, but there have been numerous ancillary verbal statements directed toward the staff from members of the public that provide insight into the types of responses that are being collected.

If you have not yet voiced your support for e-bikes on Moab's bicycle trails, and you think e-bikes and pedal bikes can co-exist, please consider placing a comment at the e-planning website.

Thank you!

 

[Mabman]

Just ride where these dweebs do, not alot of difference in terrain really and the same views and you won't get the stink eye, but maybe the stink.......

The fact that there is even an issue with eBikes in Moab is a joke! As I said in another post, SlickRock was pioneered by motorcycles and the area is rife with 4 wheeled internal combustion vehicles roaring around all over the place. BLM can take the "pointed and well reasoned opposition to e-bikes" and put it where the sun don't shine.

 

[Bengy22]

Hi,
I had a conversation with one of the BLM planners yesterday and learned that there has been some pointed and well reasoned opposition to e-bikes during the first weeks of the commenting period.
The comments have not been officially reviewed, but there have been numerous ancillary verbal statements directed toward the staff from members of the public that provide insight into the types of responses that are being collected.

If you have not yet voiced your support for e-bikes on Moab's bicycle trails, and you think e-bikes and pedal bikes can co-exist, please consider placing a comment at the e-planning website.

I would love to hear about the pointed and well-reasoned opposition to this issue and the arguments they proposed. Personally, I can't think of a single reason that raises a significant concern that couldn't also occur with a normal bike, such as bad behavior. Studies have already shown that trail damage does not significantly increase with Class 1 eMTBs, and the concerns about damage and danger to trails that are also open to horses I find funny.

The best arguments I've encountered that make sense on the surface but ultimately fall apart include the claim that allowing class 1 eMTBs would permit electric motorcycles, like Surrons, on the trails. However, these are clearly motorcycles and are currently only allowed on motorized trails, so they wouldn't be permitted on non-motorized trails anyway even if class 1's were allowed. Moreover, they look nothing like bicycles, making enforcement straightforward.

Another argument involves the potential for increased fire risk. While I concede that this is a fair consideration, we lack substantial data on how often these bikes actually catch fire, especially those from reputable manufacturers with proper certifications. Additionally, most people carry other devices, like phones, which have batteries that, while less powerful, still pose a risk. However, examining the frequency of fire incidents related to those devices suggests that this concern is not significant enough, in my opinion.

 

[Porcupine Slim]

Hi,
As disclosed previously, I want to ride my e-Bike on the bicycle trails... so please don't shoot the messenger:

One argument against the use of e-Bikes on non-motorized trails that I will personally admit seems quite compelling is this:

"e-Bikes have motors"

If you know of studies that have concluded that e-Bikes contribute no more impact than pedal bikes it would be incredibly helpful if you cited them while making a comment. Please consider adding a pro e-Bike comment, and share the info you have about impacts.

Thank you!

 

[vman]

Hi,
As disclosed previously, I want to ride my e-Bike on the bicycle trails... so please don't shoot the messenger:

One argument against the use of e-Bikes on non-motorized trails that I will personally admit seems quite compelling is this:

"e-Bikes have motors"

If you know of studies that have concluded that e-Bikes contribute no more impact than pedal bikes it would be incredibly helpful if you cited them while making a comment. Please consider adding a pro e-Bike comment, and share the info you have about impacts.

Thank you!

 

[dumpy]

The problem you have is the higher speed limits allowed on EBikes in the US. It's why I advocate that in Australia, the 15mph limit is maintained.

Whilst I 100% disagree with the limit. It reduces the argument to ban EMTBs from MTB trails. Which is far more important. 15mph is better than ZERO mph.

So perhaps part to the comments provided, would be to only allow 15mph limited EBikes. This would greatly improve the chances of getting change.

Best of luck with it.

the speed is fine. eu bikes are just a tad too slow. the problem usually is that you allow ebikes but you get mortocycles (as in no pedaling electric dirt bikes) because people

 

[vman]

I would love to hear about the pointed and well-reasoned opposition to this issue and the arguments they proposed. Personally, I can't think of a single reason that raises a significant concern that couldn't also occur with a normal bike, such as bad behavior. Studies have already shown that trail damage does not significantly increase with Class 1 eMTBs, and the concerns about damage and danger to trails that are also open to horses I find funny.

The best arguments I've encountered that make sense on the surface but ultimately fall apart include the claim that allowing class 1 eMTBs would permit electric motorcycles, like Surrons, on the trails. However, these are clearly motorcycles and are currently only allowed on motorized trails, so they wouldn't be permitted on non-motorized trails anyway even if class 1's were allowed. Moreover, they look nothing like bicycles, making enforcement straightforward.

Another argument involves the potential for increased fire risk. While I concede that this is a fair consideration, we lack substantial data on how often these bikes actually catch fire, especially those from reputable manufacturers with proper certifications. Additionally, most people carry other devices, like phones, which have batteries that, while less powerful, still pose a risk. However, examining the frequency of fire incidents related to those devices suggests that this concern is not significant enough, in my opinion.

Hopefully the below helps - we have a lot of ebike negative folks in California that try to use the same weak arguments to restrict accees.

1. Class 1 vs. Class 3 E-bikes: a demonstration is the most effective way to show land management staff the practical differences between these classes. Experiencing firsthand the effort required to climb hills on Class 1 e-bikes will highlight how they differ from the more powerful Class 3 models. Class 1 e-bikes, which provide pedal assist only up to 20 mph, are often misunderstood as having similar impacts as Class 3 e-bikes, which can reach higher speeds with more power. Direct experience should drive home that Class 1 e-bikes aren’t as capable of causing trail damage or other issues.
2. Fire Risk: The argument around e-bikes causing fires is often brought up, yet there is little evidence supporting this claim. E-bikes, are rarely left unattended in vulnerable conditions, which reduces fire risk greatly. Also, many of the same folks who oppose e-bikes might leave their Tesla’s unattended at trailheads, which, have an established track record of battery-related fires (yet no one is banning Tesla’s from being parked near trail heads.
3. Trail Damage: The concern that Class 1 e-bikes cause more trail damage compared to regular bikes is another common one, the actual difference in power output (watts) isn’t as dramatic as some might think. E-bikes do help riders go uphill more easily, but this doesn’t necessarily translate to excessive wear on trails, especially downhill. In fact, top cyclists on traditional bikes often produce much higher wattage bursts than what a typical e-bike rider would produce. From a Watts perspective a pro or highly trained young rider can put down over 1,000 watts in a sprint and sustain over 300 to 400 watts – which is not much less than your average rider on an ebike.

 

[Brian VT USA]

Have they banned motorcycles from the Slickrock Trail? I used to ride mine there before MTBs were even much of a thing. And Porcupine Rim. And 5 Miles of Hell. Etc., etc., etc. I also rode out there on my 1989? Specialized Hard Rock MTB. No suspension. And my motorcycle was a 1978 Bultaco Pursang 250.
We used to camp at mile marker 11 on the river. I heard that is banned now. :-(