#!markdown
I think to a large extent we are on the same page JW. I don't live in Terrace,
Golden, Smithers, Moab, or Tchermany so it's important but secondary to me how
the bikes are perceived in other places. I'm primarily concerned about local
access to the activity I love and the mental and physical exercise I crave in
the place I moved to ride bikes - the North Shore.
That said: Prohibition doesn't work. Don't be Eliot Ness.
Better to take the conciliatory approach and - after erecting signage
explaining that motorized vehicles are not allowed on trails in North
Vancouver, which is the current law (thanks Mark Rowe doing the leg work
sorting that out) - identify some climbs where passing isn't much of an issue
(Old Buck, Mountain Hwy) and trails were user conflicts and erosion would be
less of an issue (Ned's, Espresso, assuming signing those trails as one way DH
trails and MTB primary) and then open those trails up for E-MTB before it
becomes an issue.
Then people who spend 6-10k on an E-MTB will have somewhere legitimate to ride
it. The added benefit is a controlled environment to see how user conflicts
really do play out.
Will everyone follow that recommendation? No. But I'd bet if signage was good
explaining where you can ride an E-MTB the majority would follow it.
.
Mountain bicycles are simple, freeing, and beautiful machines. They don't need
to be "improved" upon by adding a motor. There is nothing rationale for grown
men and women taking bicycles into the woods and riding them slowly up and
down technical trails where they can get injured for no reward. That's what
most of us are doing. Making it X% faster isn't really the point.
E-MTB's are not Mopeds or Motor Bikes and they are definitely not Mountain
Bikes. They have mountain bike parts and can be ridden on mountain bike
trails. It's not even that they aren't fun. But I really think they accomplish
the same goal while the rider ends of robbing themselves of the greater
experience.
I think at the end of the day most locally sold E-MTBs will end up being
expensive commuters or dust collectors or novelty sometimes solo bikes in
large quivers. Maybe some utility bikes - like E-Fat-MTBs for accessing
hunting or fishing.
My point is, I think the best thing riders can do to protect access to trails
is be positive ambassadors of our activity to all other trail users. I think
there's a good chance that riders who do find there way to the sport (new
mountain bikers) via E-MTBs will end up feeling they've wasted money - and buy
regular person/gravity powered bikes - once they realize the experience
they're missing.
Maybe that's naive or elitist?
Dec. 23, 2016, 1:26 a.m. - DrewM
#!markdown I think to a large extent we are on the same page JW. I don't live in Terrace, Golden, Smithers, Moab, or Tchermany so it's important but secondary to me how the bikes are perceived in other places. I'm primarily concerned about local access to the activity I love and the mental and physical exercise I crave in the place I moved to ride bikes - the North Shore. That said: Prohibition doesn't work. Don't be Eliot Ness. Better to take the conciliatory approach and - after erecting signage explaining that motorized vehicles are not allowed on trails in North Vancouver, which is the current law (thanks Mark Rowe doing the leg work sorting that out) - identify some climbs where passing isn't much of an issue (Old Buck, Mountain Hwy) and trails were user conflicts and erosion would be less of an issue (Ned's, Espresso, assuming signing those trails as one way DH trails and MTB primary) and then open those trails up for E-MTB before it becomes an issue. Then people who spend 6-10k on an E-MTB will have somewhere legitimate to ride it. The added benefit is a controlled environment to see how user conflicts really do play out. Will everyone follow that recommendation? No. But I'd bet if signage was good explaining where you can ride an E-MTB the majority would follow it. . Mountain bicycles are simple, freeing, and beautiful machines. They don't need to be "improved" upon by adding a motor. There is nothing rationale for grown men and women taking bicycles into the woods and riding them slowly up and down technical trails where they can get injured for no reward. That's what most of us are doing. Making it X% faster isn't really the point. E-MTB's are not Mopeds or Motor Bikes and they are definitely not Mountain Bikes. They have mountain bike parts and can be ridden on mountain bike trails. It's not even that they aren't fun. But I really think they accomplish the same goal while the rider ends of robbing themselves of the greater experience. I think at the end of the day most locally sold E-MTBs will end up being expensive commuters or dust collectors or novelty sometimes solo bikes in large quivers. Maybe some utility bikes - like E-Fat-MTBs for accessing hunting or fishing. My point is, I think the best thing riders can do to protect access to trails is be positive ambassadors of our activity to all other trail users. I think there's a good chance that riders who do find there way to the sport (new mountain bikers) via E-MTBs will end up feeling they've wasted money - and buy regular person/gravity powered bikes - once they realize the experience they're missing. Maybe that's naive or elitist?