Keeping it Legal for the Common Good, Staying Within the Legal Classes

[J.R.]

I agree with everything that you said. That was part of the reason for starting this thread. I have seen posts where people openly brag about doing as they like simply because they have determined that the laws are not reasonable in their mind. My concern being that those in authority can ban us more easily than regulate us.

I think that there may be some misconceptions. Public paths and multi-use are a completely different animal than multi-use trails that allow motorized vehicles, public streets or dirt and logging roads.

I would never say that a class 3 should be kept off of public roads and appropriate trails. I would also think that unlimited modes are probably fine any place that a motorized vehicle is allowed.

I think that what J.R. was pointing out is that the e-bike community really has no leverage when it comes to privileges. Bike paths and bike lanes existed for bicycles. That said, if someone is tooling along at 15 mph while riding a class 2 or class 3 on a bike path or in a bike lane, they are pretty unlikely to be hassled by anyone.

It‘a a lot like speeding in your car. You may feel that you are driving at an appropriate speed and that the law is unreasonable, but if you get caught doing it, making that argument will get you nowhere.

It is cheap and easy to ban. Under a ban, any ebike is illegal and subject to a criminal charge of trespassing. My county it's an $880 fine. Some states confiscate the bike if it's a non compliant vehicle. They'd make money with a ban.

Pennsylvania is one of the most rural states in the country. Top 10 I believe. People think of Philly. Philly is more a part of NJ and NYC. The rest is pretty rural. People are surprised to know of all the places in PA that don't have police departments. Very low crime outside of cities. People here don't want or need police departments. And they aren't willing to pay for something not needed. Twisty rural 2 lane roads are often posted the max 55 mph. You can't drive that fast, but they don't need to enforce it that way.

I could ride any bike I want on the trails and probably wouldn't have any issues. Most people want to obey the law, that's why we wanted the ban lifted.

 

[Djangodog]

Yeah, it was silly to us. These agencies are stuck with trying to please everyone. Environmental groups claim heavy bikes damage trails; parents and grandparents worry about a heavy bike hitting a kid, so the result is compromise. 75 probably covers the vast majority of class 1 bikes.

I don’t want to get too sidetracked with the details, but I do understand that regulators have to set limits somewhere. The same thing happened with the FAA regarding ultralight aircraft, (power, weight and fuel capacity). Some argued that the weight limit meant that the aircraft would be less heavily built, (dangerous), and that less power reduces climb rate making the aircraft more dangerous as well. The thing is that you don’t really want to make those points too loudly because the FAA might agree that those underpowered and lightly built aircraft are not airworthy, so poof, no more ultralight aircraft.

Regarding operator vs vehicle weight. A heavy person tends to be a pliable mass where the vehicle is solid. The combined mass of heavy person and heavy bike is more dangerous than that same heavy person on a lightweight bike.

 

[J.R.]

Nor is the state budget or any of the other excuses you list

You say that as if it were fact. Similar to me "pushing" something. It's always about the money. We would go to a public meeting and listen to all the testimony. Then I'd have to prepare a rebuttal for the next meeting. Nothing I wrote is an excuse. These are the issues and the blueprint of testimony in every state where I could talk to other advocates. What I wrote are just some of the issues debated.

I have no reason to mislead anyone here, I have nothing to gain. For anyone wishing to understand, attend a few meetings where regulations are discussed. It's an eye opener and you just might make a difference.

 

[DaveMatthews]

Yeah, it was silly to us. These agencies are stuck with trying to please everyone. Environmental groups claim heavy bikes damage trails; parents and grandparents worry about a heavy bike hitting a kid, so the result is compromise. 75 probably covers the vast majority of class 1 bikes.

I get it.
My Stance is about 54lb and I'm 230lb.
A 76lb bike with a 150lb rider is certainly not out of the question, and that's less than me.
Something tells me a 54lb bike hitting anyone is going to be traumatic no matter the age, never mind if I hit the kid.
That said rules are rules.

 

[kevinmccune]

Regulatory agencies, rangers and citizen advisory boards would just ban all ebikes without classes and limits on power.

I am all for motorcycles, light and heavy, big and powerful and mini. On bike paths, trails, multi use paths and bike lanes the authorities have 2 options, classes or ban ebikes. I don't say that because of what you like and own. I have owned MC's my whole life and still do. I say that after 2 years of work opening up trails for ebikes.

There isn't the money to enforce speeds or alter the infrastructure and environment to allow anything over a 20 mph ebike. The trails are designed for 15 mph. My county has 3 fulltime rangers for greater than 5000 acres of county forest land and more than 200 miles of trails. Average pay is 86 grand plus at least another 86k for benefits and pension. We are a rural farm county. Taxpayers given the choice to pay for speed enforcement or ban, they'd choose a ban.

One of the biggest hurdles is insurance for these trials and paths. In most instances they are use at your own risk venues. As long as the authorities take reasonable precautions to keep people safe they can't be sued. The insurance is fairly cheap due to low risk. I've been told this is one of the reasons for Class 1 only regs on trails. With higher risk the cost goes up. The costs to include all would be staggering. Speed limits work on roadways due to enforcement. In order to have enforcement there has to be registration and licensing for penalties to be assessed. And in order to keep the states or counties from being sued for injury, the rider will be forced to have insurance. In order for insurance to be reasonable the standards for infrastructure will be raised.

No, before speed limits and enforcement happens, we will all be banned. The money isn't there! And I sure don't want to pay for insurance and registration for my ebike.

In my lovely, bucolic county the Forest Service and Game Commission owns 172800 acres you for the most part you cannot do much on( they stole the private land early on, plus something called the"big survey" where they came in and literally took all the high ground) no dedicated MTB trails,you can ride on the logging roads where wheeled vehicles are permitted, thats basically it.The Forestry office has a mix of Male and Female employees, the gals seem to inhabit the office, none of them seem to do much of anything ,the logging roads are in such horrid condition that I stop regularly and rock pick stretches of road. I suspect you could be ticketed rather easily knew a Ranger or employee or two that seemed to enjoy that, there will probably be rules here so you can receive tickets.

 

[Elkman]

At the heart of the problem is the increased number of older people starting to bicycle with the advent of e-bikes and many of them are clueless. Cities were long ago taken over by the auto interests with their buying up and then dismantling light rail operators across the USA. As a result both bicyclists and pedestrians are put in harms way in this country. I have seen badly thought out bike lanes and bike paths for the past 50 years in California where the city and state traffic engineers create hazardous conditions out of negligence and incompetence. When freeways were first being built and traffic fatalities increased dramatically the highway engineers blamed the motorists. Then an independent study was done and it concluded the most of the incidents were the result of bad freeway designs.

The idea that someone with an e-bike is going to travel at high speed and present more of a risk is wrong. In my teens the cyclists would go down State Street in Santa Barbara on their road bikes and go over 50 mph and the ones that got a ticket from a speed trap got bragging rights. For my part 50 mph is my maximum speed and that is on a regular racing level road bike with no motor.

The problem is when pedestrians who are seldom aware of their surroundings (watch people in a grocery store with their shopping carts) and busy chatting on their cell phones will walk in front of bicycle at the last moment which results in a collision. Bicyclists at 15 mph are not "speeding" but have a braking distance that is longer than pedestrians appreciate. It is so much of a problem that my wife and I avoid the bike paths and prefer city streets where we can bicycle faster and without pedestrians. On bike paths we have people with baby strollers and people walking dogs, on and off a leash, and toddlers roaming across the path. I can come over a hill on a path and find people chatting and standing directly in the path and who are bothered when I suggest that they stop blocking the path.

The only solution is to do what cities in Europe have done and that is to prohibit motor vehicles from many city streets during the day. In many cases removing the taxpayer subsidized street parking would be a great help instead of putting bike "lanes" alongside parked cars and having car doors opened suddenly in front of bicyclists. But this requires intelligence and integrity with our city officials and engineers and planners which is sadly lacking.

 

[AHicks]

At the heart of the problem is the increased number of older people starting to bicycle with the advent of e-bikes and many of them are clueless. Cities were long ago taken over by the auto interests with their buying up and then dismantling light rail operators across the USA. As a result both bicyclists and pedestrians are put in harms way in this country. I have seen badly thought out bike lanes and bike paths for the past 50 years in California where the city and state traffic engineers create hazardous conditions out of negligence and incompetence. When freeways were first being built and traffic fatalities increased dramatically the highway engineers blamed the motorists. Then an independent study was done and it concluded the most of the incidents were the result of bad freeway designs.

The idea that someone with an e-bike is going to travel at high speed and present more of a risk is wrong. In my teens the cyclists would go down State Street in Santa Barbara on their road bikes and go over 50 mph and the ones that got a ticket from a speed trap got bragging rights. For my part 50 mph is my maximum speed and that is on a regular racing level road bike with no motor.

The problem is when pedestrians who are seldom aware of their surroundings (watch people in a grocery store with their shopping carts) and busy chatting on their cell phones will walk in front of bicycle at the last moment which results in a collision. Bicyclists at 15 mph are not "speeding" but have a braking distance that is longer than pedestrians appreciate. It is so much of a problem that my wife and I avoid the bike paths and prefer city streets where we can bicycle faster and without pedestrians. On bike paths we have people with baby strollers and people walking dogs, on and off a leash, and toddlers roaming across the path. I can come over a hill on a path and find people chatting and standing directly in the path and who are bothered when I suggest that they stop blocking the path.

The only solution is to do what cities in Europe have done and that is to prohibit motor vehicles from many city streets during the day. In many cases removing the taxpayer subsidized street parking would be a great help instead of putting bike "lanes" alongside parked cars and having car doors opened suddenly in front of bicyclists. But this requires intelligence and integrity with our city officials and engineers and planners which is sadly lacking.

Well said!! MANY pieces of this absolutely spot on.

On the bold, couldn't agree more, and as far as I'm concerned the more the merrier.

 

[Cowlitz]

In my lovely, bucolic county the Forest Service and Game Commission owns 172800 acres you for the most part you cannot do much on( they stole the private land early on, plus something called the"big survey" where they came in and literally took all the high ground) no dedicated MTB trails,you can ride on the logging roads where wheeled vehicles are permitted, thats basically it.The Forestry office has a mix of Male and Female employees, the gals seem to inhabit the office, none of them seem to do much of anything ,the logging roads are in such horrid condition that I stop regularly and rock pick stretches of road. I suspect you could be ticketed rather easily knew a Ranger or employee or two that seemed to enjoy that, there will probably be rules here so you can receive tickets.

If you are talking about the feds, there are books out there on the history. For instance, the upper part of Wisconsin was homesteaded early on, homesteaders could not make a living as the land was poor and left. The Forest Service took it on. It was called The Land Nobody Wanted and was reforested. A really good read that goes into the history a bit, is The Big Burn which was also made into a PBS documentary. Your version is a lot different.

The west had what was called Forest Reserves. Foresters were concerned about the cut and run habits of the big timber companies so land was put in this reserve to be used or not in a reasonable way--protecting it from over cutting. Gifford Pinchot, who studied forestry in Germany, was the head of it.

I'm one of the "gals" that worked for the FS. Didn't stay in the office much. I was out working on timber sales. And yes, the FS here does have MTB trails. A local ski area is trying to capitalize on that. It's fairly new but the bike trails have existed for a bit and are cross country ski trails in the winter. E bikes are considered to be motorized by the FS so are not allowed on bike trails.

 

[kevinmccune]

If you are talking about the feds, there are books out there on the history. For instance, the upper part of Wisconsin was homesteaded early on, homesteaders could not make a living as the land was poor and left. The Forest Service took it on. It was called The Land Nobody Wanted and was reforested. A really good read that goes into the history a bit, is The Big Burn which was also made into a PBS documentary. Your version is a lot different.

The west had what was called Forest Reserves. Foresters were concerned about the cut and run habits of the big timber companies so land was put in this reserve to be used or not in a reasonable way--protecting it from over cutting. Gifford Pinchot, who studied forestry in Germany, was the head of it.

I'm one of the "gals" that worked for the FS. Didn't stay in the office much. I was out working on timber sales. And yes, the FS here does have MTB trails. A local ski area is trying to capitalize on that. It's fairly new but the bike trails have existed for a bit and are cross country ski trails in the winter. E bikes are considered to be motorized by the FS so are not allowed on bike trails.

I knew I would get a reaction, the FS around is so poor they cannot even grade the access roads, down at the "Gathright" lake and rec area they run a group of volunteers off that were doing their work for them( said they were trespassing( public anyone?) they said they didn't have money to repair the storm damage so they simply closed it, seems like they have plenty of personnel but little money for the lightning[thunder is impressive.,] around here they basically grabbed land from poor people, the "Big survey, et al" had an uncle they "bought" His land for 25 cents an acre, People around here were so poor they could barely scrape by on their little 'sustanence farms" I do not need a book I had first-hand testimony from a lot of the oldsters, the Eastern decidouis forests just hang on by a thread anyway( the dry summers are taking a toll on the oaks and what have you) climate change seems to be working on the Hemlocks, White Walnuts, and other species, Google what happened to the "Hollow People" when it was decided to take their land to build a scenic byway and those atrtocous "clear cuts" have took a toll on the forests, they are never the same for at least a few generations. Some the first"clear-cuts in this area have never recovered, this is not the "Shenandoah Valley". The "Feds " were usually looked upon with suspicion, they certainly were not the good guys early on( My brother married an ex govt employee(FS) and she sure has some strange ideas( ask Her how much melting ice will raise the water levels if it is already floating -answer zero-tell Her that)- Shalom Monster ebikes should be banned not the little 250-500 watt styles.

 

[Solarcabin]

The Forest Service currently allows e-bikes on all Forest Service roads that are already open to motorized vehicles, as well on 60,000 miles of motorized trails, which represent 38% of all trails the agency manages.

USDA Forest Service Issues Guidance to Manage Future E-Bike Use on National Forests and Grasslands | US Forest Service

The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Forest Service is announcing that internal guidance on how future e-bike use is managed on national forests and grasslands has been finalized. The updated guidance clarifies existing policy and provides guidelines to local Forest Service employees that may be...

www.fs.usda.gov

 

[Cowlitz]

I knew I would get a reaction, the FS around is so poor they cannot even grade the access roads, down at the "Gathright" lake and rec area they run a group of volunteers off that were doing their work for them( said they were trespassing( public anyone?) they said they didn't have money to repair the storm damage so they simply closed it, seems like they have plenty of personnel but little money for the lightning[thunder is impressive.,] around here they basically grabbed land from poor people, the "Big survey, et al" had an uncle they "bought" His land for 25 cents an acre, People around here were so poor they could barely scrape by on their little 'sustanence farms" I do not need a book I had first-hand testimony from a lot of the oldsters, the Eastern decidouis forests just hang on by a thread anyway( the dry summers are taking a toll on the oaks and what have you) climate change seems to be working on the Hemlocks, White Walnuts, and other species, Google what happened to the "Hollow People" when it was decided to take their land to build a scenic byway and those atrtocous "clear cuts" have took a toll on the forests, they are never the same for at least a few generations. Some the first"clear-cuts in this area have never recovered, this is not the "Shenandoah Valley". The "Feds " were usually looked upon with suspicion, they certainly were not the goodY guys early on( My brother married an ex govt employee(FS) and she sure has some strange ideas( ask Her how much melting ice will raise the water levels if it is already floating -answer zero-tell Her that)- Shalom Monster ebikes should be banned not the little 250-500 watt styles.

Yup just a "gal" in the office working on one of them un maintained roads thinking "don't drop the saw." That's a bridge. Here's the office.

Now, a real world story on the gutting of the FS. When I first started working on a district in Western WA, there were 5 ranger districts. That was in the mid 1980s. Our district, which had the fewest people, could put together and ship out 3 fire crews of 20 people each. If you were a field going person, you went out on fires no matter what department you worked in. Now, I returned to work there in 2005. The 5 districts had merged into three. The budget had been cut 10% many times as announced by the various administrations and Congress so not many folks were available to send out. Road maintenance, which was once performed as part of the timber sale program by timber sale purchasers, was really cut back as only a smidgeon of timber was being sold. You want budgets cut, you will get services cut. That's the way it is.

A book for you to read, if you actually care to learn more on the topic outside of your eastern world, is The Greatest Good. That along with The Big Burn, gives a more unbiased look at the history of the FS.

I am thankful for all the gubmint land. It provides me with places to recreate in. The alternative can be seen on the private lands, where no trespassing signs abound. I used to cut firewood and pick berries out in the forest so it also provided those. I usually head up with my travel trailer and camp for $4 a night. If I didn't want to pay that, there are places where I could camp for free. Much better than some gazillionaire owning the land, fencing it, and keeping it for their private playground.

 

[Ken M]

I don’t want to get too sidetracked with the details, but I do understand that regulators have to set limits somewhere. The same thing happened with the FAA regarding ultralight aircraft, (power, weight and fuel capacity). Some argued that the weight limit meant that the aircraft would be less heavily built, (dangerous), and that less power reduces climb rate making the aircraft more dangerous as well. The thing is that you don’t really want to make those points too loudly because the FAA might agree that those underpowered and lightly built aircraft are not airworthy, so poof, no more ultralight aircraft.

Regarding operator vs vehicle weight. A heavy person tends to be a pliable mass where the vehicle is solid. The combined mass of heavy person and heavy bike is more dangerous than that same heavy person on a lightweight bike.

Is there any data that supports you rider weight + bike weight claims? Probably not.

 

[mschwett]

Is there any data that supports you rider weight + bike weight claims? Probably not.

try this:

have someone drop your 10lb ebike battery on your foot from 20 feet.

then repeat with a 10lb cat.

which hurts more?

 

[Djangodog]

Is there any data that supports you rider weight + bike weight claims? Probably not.

Is there any data that supports you rider weight + bike weight claims? Probably not.

Basically, getting hit by something soft, (overweight person), causes less damage than a hard object would, (heavy bike).

I’m sure that the data exists, but the concept seems to be obvious enough. You are of course welcome to show data to the contrary. Maybe you can show that getting hit by a pillow traveling at 100 feet per second would cause the same damage as a rock of equal mass moving at the same velocity, but probably not.

 

[kevinmccune]

Yup just a "gal" in the office working on one of them un maintained roads thinking "don't drop the saw." That's a bridge. Here's the office.

View attachment 133637
Now, a real world story on the gutting of the FS. When I first started working on a district in Western WA, there were 5 ranger districts. That was in the mid 1980s. Our district, which had the fewest people, could put together and ship out 3 fire crews of 20 people each. If you were a field going person, you went out on fires no matter what department you worked in. Now, I returned to work there in 2005. The 5 districts had merged into three. The budget had been cut 10% many times as announced by the various administrations and Congress so not many folks were available to send out. Road maintenance, which was once performed as part of the timber sale program by timber sale purchasers, was really cut back as only a smidgeon of timber was being sold. You want budgets cut, you will get services cut. That's the way it is.

A book for you to read, if you actually care to learn more on the topic outside of your eastern world, is The Greatest Good. That along with The Big Burn, gives a more unbiased look at the history of the FS.

I am thankful for all the gubmint land. It provides me with places to recreate in. The alternative can be seen on the private lands, where no trespassing signs abound. I used to cut firewood and pick berries out in the forest so it also provided those. I usually head up with my travel trailer and camp for $4 a night. If I didn't want to pay that, there are places where I could camp for free. Much better than some gazillionaire owning the land, fencing it, and keeping it for their private playground.

 

[kevinmccune]

Don't think you are going to find that here.I really do not care to worry about what happens out west,I seen how bad the exploitation is around here, the first clearcut in this area is still devastated, the clearcuts come up in blackberry briars and locust thorns finally enough poplar and various other tree spouts come up, these woods will never be the same and I love those"controlled" burns in the spring oft times they become uncontrolled, the National "forest' around here is a joke, finally they have started select cutting which is a lot better. IF you are into History of the Forests read "Tumult in the Mtns", which details the destruction of the Eastern Spruce Forest( along with many other species of course the gov't wasn't responsible for that The Gov't "owns" too much land as it is, my county is half government and you really can't do much of anything there if you camp in one spot to long they will run you off. I think Ronald Regan was right sale off some of that so called "public land" at least the counties can get a little tax revenue then( Little secret, I have never seen a Female Government employee with a chainsaw in hand, the only People I have seen marking timber were Men. We were building access roads for one Guy from Florida and the going got so rough you couldn't find a boundary blaze or mark of any kind. Get some people owning some land again everybody cannot be stuck in the coming "New Order" cities with the connecting roads heavily policed I would imagine.
The last forestry roads I helped build were "d" level roads a cheap and nasty way of getting to the wood, back in the seventies we built roads for the government that were higher spec than most rural state roads, now they don't even grade roads they install little tiny markers designating them as a "trails" and hiking paths Ebikes are a no-no, the crazy thing is Horses are generally allowed( back in the day, Horses were not even allowed on closed roads-guess they understood how much damage Horses do to a trail) I know its true because I used to take the time to read the closure signs, now I think Horses are permitted were foot travel is permitted. And as far as I could tell when I inquired about building "bike paths" the Head office dweller was not on board with it, I went as far as I could with it, She said no, be happy to use the roads where motor vehicles are allowed( think it has a lot to do with lack of funding and a Warrior shortage-
As far as to letting some land back into Public hands( this could be a real plus if done correctly) covenants and reversion clauses could keep the land safe from "Land Hogs" This would open Forest lands with access for fire control and what have you, thats all I am going to say .

 

[kevinmccune]

This is riding like a jack a$$......

there is no way that thing is even remotely a bicycle

 

[kevinmccune]

I don't like to judge, but I've read data over the years indicating that though SOME, perhaps even MANY, drivers of large trucks (and SUVs) have a legitimate need for them, MOST do not. True, I never know which group an indivudual fits into, but, most of the time, it's pretty safe to guess .

it never made no sense to me to see a jacked up truck that required a stepladder to mount having handicapped plates, not to mention most of those monsters are hard to park in one place.

 

[kevinmccune]

nope. never once in 10,000 miles has a roadie (wearing lycra or not) caused me or my kids to fall off our bikes. i can’t even recall a close call… and i live pretty much at ground zero for roadies.

… and if you think a pseudo-pro analog rider is putting down 500+ watts of power for more than a very short burst, you are mistaken. no doubt there are assholes of all types out there on bikes of all types, but an asshole on an analog bike simply has much, much less ability to be unsafe because they are limited to roughly the same speeds as everyone else, which also happen to be the speeds that bike parts and bike infrastructure were designed for.

dont know about the wattage output of some,my estimations changed considerably when i saw a guy( cadet probably) running full tilt up "observatory hill" at uva while piggy backing a full grown adult, some people are beasts!

 

[kevinmccune]

@mschwett, Interesting? There could be voluntary third party registration and certification in some municipalities. They would apply a QR to that serial number. It would pre-emptively avoid 'class of bike' disputes, help secure ownership rights, and facilitate transfers. All voluntarily. IMO the overpowered 'bikes' are very expensive to maintain because bike parts are not meant to do that, so they will be self-eliminating from the gene pool. 120-160Nm Ultra Bafangs are falling apart in a matter of months. Drive trains and hubs explode. Some do not even pedal these. When you need to spend much more than a bike is worth to maintain it each season, people will give up on them. With some such as the 100-pound fat folders, tires seem to last merely a few weeks.

i like wider tires,not the 4-4+ fatties,have reduced the width on a bike and it worked very satisfactory,my friend pointed out some of the disadvantages for normal riding,i think he was right only in the mud and snow these things shine(imo) doubtful if i will ever own another fattie but let the people that like them enjoy them( seems to be rather faddish)