Why I don’t want an ebike (but I don’t hate them)

It's pretty cut and dry. What powers the bike, simply legs or legs plus a motor? E-bikes are motor(ized)bikes. We're gonna see nothing but issues regarding access here over the next few years if this trend continues.

Unless you have a physical disability, suck it up and pedal your damn bike. Don't forget what brought you to this sport. It's not supposed to be easy. Man and bike in the woods, riding alone or with friends. No motor, just your lungs and legs. It's not a technological improvement, it's a marketing ploy for lazy fuckers.

Posted by: PembyRocks

It's pretty cut and dry. What powers the bike, simply legs or legs plus a motor? E-bikes are motor(ized)bikes. We're gonna see nothing but issues regarding access here over the next few years if this trend continues.

Unless you have a physical disability, suck it up and pedal your damn bike. Don't forget what brought you to this sport. It's not supposed to be easy. Man and bike in the woods, riding alone or with friends. No motor, just your lungs and legs. It's not a technological improvement, it's a marketing ploy for lazy fuckers.

My question is who made anti ebike advocates the arbiter of how someone gets to spend their time or what interests them? 

I would probably be less concerned or interested over the whole thing if there wasn’t so much vitriol being projected towards/against people who want to take advantage of a different form of recreation.  

My suggestion for the opponents of ebikes on the existing trail networks is to build a strong case as to why they should not be allowed. If that can be done then I may be willing to support it. I think there are some legitimate concerns about ebikes, but I personally don’t see them as reason enough to outright ban them. I do however support the idea of limiting usage of them.

Posted by: syncro

Posted by: PembyRocks

It's pretty cut and dry. What powers the bike, simply legs or legs plus a motor? E-bikes are motor(ized)bikes. We're gonna see nothing but issues regarding access here over the next few years if this trend continues.

Unless you have a physical disability, suck it up and pedal your damn bike. Don't forget what brought you to this sport. It's not supposed to be easy. Man and bike in the woods, riding alone or with friends. No motor, just your lungs and legs. It's not a technological improvement, it's a marketing ploy for lazy fuckers.

My question is who made anti ebike advocates the arbiter of how someone gets to spend their time or what interests them? 

I would probably be less concerned or interested over the whole thing if there wasn’t so much vitriol being projected towards/against people who want to take advantage of a different form of recreation.  

My suggestion for the opponents of ebikes on the existing trail networks is to build a strong case as to why they should not be allowed. If that can be done then I may be willing to support it. I think there are some legitimate concerns about ebikes, but I personally don’t see them as reason enough to outright ban them. I do however support the idea of limiting usage of them.

They are bikes with motors. We ride mountain bike trails that have been designated non-motorized. Years and years of politics, time and effort with municipalities and the province have gone into this. Want to ride your e-bike? Stick to the pavement. You're all gonna cause big access issues when mountain bike get lumped together with motorbikes. If you can't see that, you're too blind to ride trails anyway. Gas or electric, it's a motor. Keep it off mountain bike trails and on to the pavement.

Posted by: PembyRocks

They are bikes with motors. We ride mountain bike trails that have been designated non-motorized. Years and years of politics, time and effort with municipalities and the province have gone into this. Want to ride your e-bike? Stick to the pavement. You're all gonna cause big access issues when mountain bike get lumped together with motorbikes. If you can't see that, you're too blind to ride trails anyway. Gas or electric, it's a motor. Keep it off mountain bike trails and on to the pavement.

Yes, they are bikes with motors. Of course they are not throttle controlled bikes and when non-motorized designations where put forth the idea of pedal-assist bikes didn't exist, but I realize that point is not up for debate for those who oppose them.  I do hear the claims of access issues get used a lot where the idea seems to be that all trails will get closed to mtb's, but there is never any support offered for this argument. Has any land manager come out and said that they are going to close the trails to mtb access if ebikes are used? I haven't seen anything of the sort and I highly doubt it exists because if it did it would be splashed all over every thread where this debate comes up. The only caveat of course is that I'm referring to BC and particularly the S2S corridor, but realize that in other jurisdictions that things may be different.

Posted by: syncro

Posted by: PembyRocks

They are bikes with motors. We ride mountain bike trails that have been designated non-motorized. Years and years of politics, time and effort with municipalities and the province have gone into this. Want to ride your e-bike? Stick to the pavement. You're all gonna cause big access issues when mountain bike get lumped together with motorbikes. If you can't see that, you're too blind to ride trails anyway. Gas or electric, it's a motor. Keep it off mountain bike trails and on to the pavement.

Yes, they are bikes with motors. Of course they are not throttle controlled bikes and when non-motorized designations where put forth the idea of pedal-assist bikes didn't exist, but I realize that point is not up for debate for those who oppose them. I do hear the claims of access issues get used a lot where the idea seems to be that all trails will get closed to mtb's, but there is never any support offered for this argument. Has any land manager come out and said that they are going to close the trails to mtb access if ebikes are used? I haven't seen anything of the sort and I highly doubt it exists because if it did it would be splashed all over every thread where this debate comes up. The only caveat of course is that I'm referring to BC and particularly the S2S corridor, but realize that in other jurisdictions that things may be different.

Given the current climate in the S2S with potential access issues in Pemberton, Squamish and the constant battle in West and North Van, do we need to introduce another reason for the naysayers to strengthen their arguments?

Also, what about increased erosion on trails? The use of e-bikes allows many more laps of trails in the same riding session. What if we all do that? Trails get hammered. It's not the bike park. There's not a dedicated paid trail crew fixing up the trails after hundreds of riders shred them multiple times a day.

And the issue with e-bikes flying past other riders and hikers on the trails. I've had my bars clipped from these things passing me, ignorantly, on climb trails. What about public perception and acceptance on multi use climb trails? These incidents do not help us at all. Sure, some fly downhill just as ignorantly, but ripping past people legitimately climbing their pedal bikes, and those hiking on the same access trails is bullshit.

Regardless of access issues, people just need to man up and pedal their bikes. The bicycle is a very efficient machine. Like I said, unless there is a physical disability, there is no reason to need an assist bike. Ride more, get stronger, suck it up.

Posted by: PembyRocks

Given the current climate in the S2S with potential access issues in Pemberton, Squamish and the constant battle in West and North Van, do we need to introduce another reason for the naysayers to strengthen their arguments?

Also, what about increased erosion on trails? The use of e-bikes allows many more laps of trails in the same riding session. What if we all do that? Trails get hammered. It's not the bike park. There's not a dedicated paid trail crew fixing up the trails after hundreds of riders shred them multiple times a day.

And the issue with e-bikes flying past other riders and hikers on the trails. I've had my bars clipped from these things passing me, ignorantly, on climb trails. What about public perception and acceptance on multi use climb trails? These incidents do not help us at all. Sure, some fly downhill just as ignorantly, but ripping past people legitimately climbing their pedal bikes, and those hiking on the same access trails is bullshit.

Regardless of access issues, people just need to man up and pedal their bikes. The bicycle is a very efficient machine. Like I said, unless there is a physical disability, there is no reason to need an assist bike. Ride more, get stronger, suck it up.

I can't speak to the access issues in Pemby, but Squamish seems to be doing okay and I am aware they have trails where pedelec access is legitimate.

Re erosion, I do agree that the potential for increased erosion is there. However if erosion from increased trail use is to be considered a legitimate argument against pedelecs then one also has to look at the total number of bikes on the trails as well. More riders = more erosion, so does that mean there is going to be a limit on the number of people allowed on the trails, including pedal only bikes?

I also agree with you about the bad behaviour aspect but as you say you get ignorant people on pedal bikes as well as pedelecs. I question whether it's fair to ban all people from a certain form of recreation based on the notion that some people are going to act irresponsibly.

Finally I agree about the physical aspect and part of why I love mtb'ing is for the physical challenge. However I've worked in the health and fitness industry long enough to know full well that a lot of people are not interested in pushing their limits or riding more, getting stronger and sucking it up. Many people are happy doing just enough to get by or to be able to do something in a manner they enjoy. This kinda comes back to one of my first points about who gets to decide how people choose to recreate?

I think that there is some sort of middle ground or compromise that can be achieved where a lot of people will be happy. Not everyone is going to be completely happy and we're going to have to deal with some asshats, but I think that's a better approach that just outright banning pedelecs. I definitely think that it's better for the mtb community to have this discussion in a balanced and reasonable manner than to scream and yell about it online. Either way, I will be happy to grind up a difficult or technical climb and I won't mind who's riding next to me as long as they're showing good trail etiquette and being respectful and responsible. After that I am with you in that I don't want to see trail access damaged, but I haven't seen any evidence yet to support that happening simply due to the use of pedelecs.

I will say that the best reason I have seen so far for limiting pedelec access is a story related by Grant Lamont where a Whistler trail was getting hit because people were doing a ton of laps on a trail that was easily accessed via pedaling up a road. There may be a number of different ways to solve that and I get that banning pedelecs from all trails represents the easiest solution, but unless there is a provincial ban on the sale of pedelecs the same type of nitwit that's riding a trail into the ground now is going to be doing it anyway even if there is a ban. I think the chances of the province banning the sale of pedelecs altogether is zero as is people not using them even if there is a ban, so it seems to make sense to look for alternative solutions.

Also, just wanted to say thanks for the good discussion as I recognize it's a contentious topic to deal with.

well put!

It would be helpful to hear more from trailbuilders who have some first hand experience of pedelecs actually causing more trail damage. Is it because of extra usage, the weight of the bike, the experience level of the rider?

Posted by: craw

It would be helpful to hear more from trailbuilders who have some first hand experience of pedelecs actually causing more trail damage. Is it because of extra usage, the weight of the bike, the experience level of the rider?

As someone who has done some trail building I can say:

1. The weight issue is a poor reason simply because the 10lb difference of a pedelec is insignificant compared to the variation in body weights of riders. If you use that difference as a reason to ban pedelecs then you would also need to set a weight limit for riders.

2. Experience level of the rider as a reason to ban pedelecs would of course mean that all riders must pass a minimum threshold of experience, effectively banning any new riders from the trail whatever they’re riding.

3. Extra usage raises a valid concern, but if we go down that road then we have to place a usage limit on all riders and have to cap the number of riders allowed on the trails.

As a builder I have far more concern with things like riders braiding trails, going off trail, riding sensitive trails in the wet, locking up the back brake and doing cutties to get around corners.

Posted by: syncro

I agree that it's a tough conversation that would require a fair bit of diplomacy and tact. I can only suggest maybe having a convo over beers or another activity that's not mtb'ing that delves into the issues with emtbs and then offer ways that he can bridge that gap if he wants to come out with you guys - ie some sort of trail maintenance/advocacy. I appreciate that you may be apprehensive though as this seems like opening the door to allow ebikes full access to the trails.

My opinion is that the nitwits are going to be nitwits no matter what the rules are (and no matter what they're riding), but there are a lot of people that would respond positively to the right education to embrace the same ideals that a lot of pedal folks have.

What I was alluding to is that in practice it's beyond a tough conversation. I've had that conversation. There is a very wide gulf between what an mtb is and what a motorized mtb is and that is not lessened by diplomacy.

For your second point I would say it's not realistic that an e-mtb rider will embrace the same ideals the pedals folks have. Spend 8 grand on a motorzed powerhouse and then embrace the ideals of carefully plodding uphill watching for hikers around every blind corner? Bench cut the climbs so they're not too steep and prevent erosion? Chit chat with hikers climbing with you?

Or roost uphill at 30k/hr and rip out multiple laps. 🤘

Waiting until the disease is terminal to form an opinion is not a real option. And every trail is susceptible to access issues.

Posted by: Hepcat

What I was alluding to is that in practice it's beyond a tough conversation. I've had that conversation. There is a very wide gulf between what an mtb is and what a motorized mtb is and that is not lessened by diplomacy.

For your second point I would say it's not realistic that an e-mtb rider will embrace the same ideals the pedals folks have. Spend 8 grand on a motorzed powerhouse and then embrace the ideals of carefully plodding uphill watching for hikers around every blind corner? Bench cut the climbs so they're not too steep and prevent erosion? Chit chat with hikers climbing with you?

Or roost uphill at 30k/hr and rip out multiple laps. 🤘

Waiting until the disease is terminal to form an opinion is not a real option. And every trail is susceptible to access issues.

Yes there is a gulf, I just don't see it as wide as you do. Along the same line I think pedelec riders can and more importantly should share the same ideals that pedal riders have. I also don't see a valid reason why they can't. As for opinions I have formed mine as have you have yours, but I don't see the disease as terminal. What we both (all) seem to be waiting on is action from the land managers on how pedelecs will be regulated. In that repsect there are municipal elections today, but I don't recall seeing much chatter about pedelecs being an election issue or the issue being forced on the candidates. Why not? This seems like it would have been the perfect opportunity to steer the conversation and management of pedelecs on the trails in a specific direction.

Hepcat I was thinking a bit about your post when I went for my ride yesterday in relation to something craw and Xy9ine said before about the advantages of a pedelec in terms of using it to get to the trails instead of driving. What do you say to those people, or is there even a distinction to be made between the people that do use their pedelecs responsibly and those that don't? I know it's a slippery slope argument. Right now I'm erring more on the side of freedom of choice than greater erosion fear of access loss issues. That comes from a desire to want to believe that more people will do the responsible thing than not, but it does get challenged with some of the riding behaviour I see out there.

This is the same argument as the SUP vs the surfers. The SUP community says they are a surfboard, same class as a swimmer. The Surf community said they are a boat/vessel due to the paddle. In many places SUP is not allowed near the surfers because they are deemed a vessel, other places not.

This ebike argument is exactly the same. It will go on forever until the land managers step in and make the call, they probably can't be bribed like our local trail Assn...If not in 5 years these current ebikes will be obsolete compared to the new tech that will come out. It will be harder to spot a mtb moped and when the trail conflicts go down the the no mtb signs will go up.

BTW saw a kid half my age riding a Divinci ebike up NQ Friday aft. He spun out twice in front of us, way too much throttle, oh wait it's pendelec, not a motorbike.

SUP at crowded spots want what they want and that's that. Tow-in surfers would be an even better analogy. Rich guys with sleds show up and shut down the spot for all the locals.

Syncro, kudos for having such an even keel. 🍻 I think if motorized bikes and bikes are considered basically the same though, then there's no logic to stand on to go from there. 

The difference between the vehicles really is as stark as a tow-in surfer with a jetski and somebody paddling in.

Oh, and the commuting to the trail head topic was covered a bit on pg.2. Basically, I think it's just another marketing angle. Get some fitness, lighten up the rotating mass instead.

There is a great vid on GCN in which one of the presenters revisits a climb he PR'd back in his pro road cycling days. This time he hits it on an e-bike...and comes in minutes slower.