• For more information on how to avoid pop-up ads and still support SkiTalk click HERE.

An Open Letter to All Mountain Bikers: "Why Can't We All Just Get Along?"

Nonmotorized access laws were instituted to limit trail access for gas-powered motorcycles, quads/four-wheelers, and other off-road vehicles that are noisy and damage trails. Other levels of access exist for such human-powered activities as hiking, trail running, mountain biking, and, in some regions, horses. These distinctions were clear and well-defined for years, until the recent introduction of a class of mountain bike that seems to blur the lines. That new segment is electric mountain bikes, or eMTBs. Such bikes have an electric-assist motor, but one that is activated only under human power, not like a throttle on a traditional motorized vehicle. Now the question is, Should this new segment of mountain bikes be allowed on mountain bike trails or limited to motorized access trails. Well, who is actually asking the question, and where does the problem arise?

Traditional mountain bikers are fighting with eMTB riders about trail access and the definition of a motorized vehicle. Hikers, trail runners, and horse lovers are watching what is essentially a spat between step-siblings. This division is just what other groups could exploit and say, “These two groups that have more in common than not can't agree on their own bikes, so until they figure it out, why even allow them on the trails?” Such results would hurt access for all MTB riders.

In doing research and talking to dozens of people over the past two years both in person and on-line, the question of eMTB access is not really even coming from hikers and equestrians; it's coming from traditional mountain bikers -- the segment that would actually increase and gain strength by including pedal-assist bikes in their numbers. I have been following the discussion on this site along with many others since I tried my first eMTB. I immediately saw pushback from traditional mountain bikers saying that eMTBs are not allowed on the trails; some even claimed possessively that “they built” the trails, so eMTB riders need to build their own. Most of this resentment has been online, not what I hear when talking to people out on the trails. For the past two years, 90% of my riding has been using my regular mountain bike, and the other 10% has been testing e-bikes to review. If I saw an eMTB, I would stop and ask about their experiences with hikers, horseback riders, and other mountain bikers. The replies I received were pretty interesting and somewhat consistent: the vast majority of negative replies were from other mountain bikers, not hikers, runners, and riders, who view an e-bike as just another bike.

This is where I believe that traditional mountain bikers need to take advantage of the strength in numbers and accept that eMTBs are here to stay. Adding more bikes and more support will make things better for all mountain bikers. We should be united, not divided into subsegments. As I mentioned earlier, when talking to eMTB riders, almost every one of them was a long-time mountain biker; many had shed their own sweat and blood (and/or money) in order to build to the trails that they were riding. All understood trail etiquette, and unless you noticed the oversized down tube or bulbous bottom bracket, you would never know their bikes had a motor. Electric MTBs are mountain bikes, and no matter why people ride them, their goals are the same as those who prefer a traditional drivetrain.

Here are the idealistic notions that some traditional mountain bikers are holding to:
  • E-bikes are cheating. This isn’t a race, unless we are actually talking about a race. Seriously, who are they cheating? If someone uses a vehicle shuttle to a peak for a downhill or even to access a trailhead, couldn't that also be considered cheating?
  • It’s illegal. To the letter of the law, you are right, on some trails. I am questioning the spirit of the law. I will be glad to have the “legal” conversation with anyone who has never gone over the speed limit, come to an incomplete stop at a stop sign, driven after having one too many, smoked something before it was legal, taken more than one when it was “one per customer," etc. etc. Plus, laws change.
  • Because they are heavier, eMTBs will do more damage to the trails. Is there a weight limit on trails? If someone weighs 220 lb and rides a 30lb bike, Isn’t that doing more damage than someone else being 180 and riding a 50lb e-bike? If someone is going to ride 20 mi, which is better: riding the same trail four times at 5 mi each, or doing one long 20-mi ride and not repeating the same trail? *IMBA study on the environmental damage to trails, HERE.
  • E-biking is not exercise. Some people ride to just ride. They are out for different reasons or may not have time for a 3- or 4-hr ride. Any, yes, aski anyone who has spent significant time on an eMTB, if they are getting a workout.
  • E-bikes are too powerful. This I can agree with. There is a valid concern that a 625Wh battery and a 85Nm motor can be too much, but rarely do most riders get out of the lowest two power levels when actually on the trails. Whenever I have used the highest levels of the assist, it is not on the trails but on the roads to access the trails. And this point can be combined with the next one: power does not equate to speed. Some cars have 100 hp and others have 700 hp, and they coexist on the roads just fine. It comes down to the operator.
  • E-bikes are too fast. I am nowhere near as fast as a high-level racer on a trail or even someone looking to beat their best Strava time. Many downhill trails easily see speeds exceeding 25 mph; eMTBs have a max assist of 20 mph. I have followed Strava times, and the average eMTB rider is not close to the top riders.
  • E-bikes are motorcycles. Just stop it. That is a response for when you cannot come back with an intelligent response.
  • Their riders have poor etiquette and are inexperienced. Most eMTB riders I have run into are actually experienced riders who are aware of proper trail etiquette. They are no less polite and are actually more aware of their surroundings; they give the right of way because they know they can restart easier. As far as inexperienced riders, I have seen more on traditional bikes in the past few months than on e-bikes. Riders in general just need more education.
  • They change trail flow. Actually they can help trail flow. Instead of someone stopping on the trail in front of another rider and impeding their momentum, the eMTB rider can actually keep the flow going.
  • You have to “earn” your way to better trail access. Ah, the hazing mentality that some riders cling to …“I had to bust my ass to get on tougher trails, so you do, too.”
  • People will be riding more and the trails will be more crowded. Isn't getting people off the couch and out in nature a good thing? Because of Covid 19, right now there are simply more people on the trails. This has nothing to do with eMTBs -- they are just an easy target.
Most bike brands are doubling down with eMTBs because that is where the industry sees the growth. Santa Cruz, a traditional and well-respected brand, just announced that by the middle of the decade, 50% of its production will be eMTBs. Electric MTBs are an evolution, just as mountain bikes evolved from 60lb modified beach cruisers in the mountains outside San Francisco to what they are now, sub-30lb 180mm-travel full-suspension mountain-crushing machines. Will the traditional riders also evolve? In skiing, we had traditional straight skis, and some said they would never use those newfangled parabolics -- but most everyone has succumbed. I don’t see the same acceptance from all the purist mountain bikers, but the percentage will be higher than most are currently willing to admit.

Moving forward, everyone wants more trail access, no matter what your preferred type of bike. Let's work to build a bridge toward a common goal rather than a wall of division, which is how all mountain bikers could lose access to the trails we love to ride.

*Added 7/24/20
About author
Philpug
I started skiing in the mid-70s in the Pocono Mountains of Pennsylvania; from then on, I found myself entrenched in the industry. I have worked in various ski shops from suburban to ski town to resort, giving me a well-rounded perspective on what skiers want from their gear. That experience was parlayed into my time as a Gear Review Editor and also consulting with manufacturers as a product tester. Along with being a Masterfit-trained bootfitter I am a fully certified self proclaimed Gear Guru. Not only do I keep up with the cutting edge of ski gear technology, but I am an avid gear collector and have an extensive array of bindings as well as many vintage skis.

Replies

It's not mountain bikers again mountain bikers. It's mountain bikers against motorized mountain bikes. Big difference.

And no, making the sport bigger by adding motors to a non-motorized sport is never going to be supported by many traditional mountain bikers.

The way we can all get along is for e-bikers to agree that mountain bike access and e-bike trail access should be managed separately. Simple.

Where I ride, there are two types of trails I believe should remain non-motorized:
  1. Trails that are already overcrowded, there is an existing conflict between mountain bikes and other trail users, and adding e-bikes will put mountain bike access at additional risk.
  2. Backcountry trails that have been built over decades at great effort to specifically be non-motorized and to avoid existing non-motorized trails.
I'm sure there are other cases where trails should remain non-motorized. Those are the ones where I ride.

Can the big e-bike industry and their advocates agree that motorized and non-motorized access should be determined separately by local trail managers?
I was just listening to an interesting radio show and one of the topics that was discusssed was how in these times people need to be flexible because all of the changes that we need to make now, from being required to wear masks and social distancing to businesses having to completely change their models to not only succeed but survive. People and businesses that are rigid and inflexible and unwilling to adopt chance are going to have the most difficulty. I really reminded me of some of the counterpoints I have read on this topic.

As far as the "Big e-bike industry"...sorry to say, it is the same as the regular bike industry, same companies, same check books...same industry.
 
Thanks. I'm aware I could have done that. I just thought it was funny, as a regular Strava user, that you can post an activity I'd never even heard of before.
I had to google it, so I thought I'd make a joke out of it, too. Ride on!
 
It's not mountain bikers again mountain bikers. It's mountain bikers against motorized mountain bikes. Big difference.

I think @tball is touching on a thing that I'm not sure anyone has come out and said, but that I suspect is behind a lot of the resistance that the e-bike folks may be having difficulty getting their heads around.

Let me put it this way. I like to paddle - paddleboard, kayak, canoe, whatever. At the core of what I love about paddlesports is the quiet - the retreat from the roar of everyday life in the America of the 21st century. And it's not just the aural quiet, it's the mental quiet that comes with the simplicity of the activity: One boat with - generally - no moving parts, one paddle with no moving parts, one person providing all the power, and a deep history and identity with place.

If you accept this, then maybe you can also accept that it's actually not all that easy, anymore, to find a place where you can actually execute on this retreat. The suspension of disbelief is too hard when there are trucks rolling down an invisible interstate tucked just behind the riverbank trees, or jet-skis cavorting loudly at the other end of the lake, or a pontoon boat full of raucous partiers putt-putting by trailing a plume of 2-cycle smoke and coconut-scented Coppertone.

Happily there are a few bodies of water that have been designated "no motors." Even though the vast majority of lakes and ponds DO allow motors, there is nevertheless constant pressure from people who want to bring their motorized watercraft into these "non-motorized" places as well. Their basic argument is, "We are totally fine with you paddling in Desirable Lake. Why can't you share? We're not interested in keeping YOU out. We don't need any "motors only" lakes or rivers; why should you selfishly insist on ones that are designated "no motors"? In short, "Why can't we all get along?"

My answer is fundamentally an aesthetic one: There is something special and valuable about going under your own steam and only under your own steam, in an environment where that's the only option... For the motor boaters, all boating is boating. It's just boating. For me, not so much. Call me an elitist. Call me a snob. You won't be the first.

Now, I don't, personally, have anywhere near the antipathy toward e-bikes, when I'm on my mountain bike, that I do toward growling motor boats when I'm in my canoe. For one thing, both bikes are absurdly high tech, and to try to argue anything else is disingenuous. But in my "paddler shoes" I can totally see the groaning "OMG is nothing sacred?" reaction that some mountain bikers might have in the face of e-bikers wanting to ride mtb trails whose right to exist was hard fought for, based partly on the fact that bikes are human-powered and therefore compatible with wilderness aesthetics as many understand them. I suspect THAT is, in part, behind some the positions that tball references.



NOTE: This is NOT my canoe, much as I might wish it were.

IMG_2045c.jpg
 
^^So are these unloved by avid mountain bikers? Do some mountain bikers really want and need smooth trails?

Liquidfeet, avid mountain bikers love those type of trails!
Taking roots and rocks out of trails like that is sacrilege!
That is mt biking. Prior to this ebike thing, there was a movement in trails toward, "flow" trails and other things many of us long timers don't like. IMBA's idea of removing all roots and rocks is one of the points I pointed to as misguided, along with Strava, skinnies 12 ft off the ground, etc... ebikes do have a role, but power needs to be controlled imo.

Those who have said you have riders on all kinds of tools with bad attitudes are correct, but at the moment, on Tahoe Trails, I experience a lot more of the ones Phil points out from his facebook group flipping the finger to the rules and the people who created these trails and then chose to categorize them.

James,
I don't think see a more traditionalist point of view as "moral superiority", that feels a bit insulting. Was that your point? There are already competitions.

Cheers!
Wade
 
Liquidfeet, avid mountain bikers love those type of trails!
James,
I don't think see a more traditionalist point of view as "moral superiority", that feels a bit insulting. Was that your point?

Cheers!
Wade
Maybe "moral superiority" is a bit strong but there is an air of it with "Oh, they are cheating", "You have to earn your way", "I suffered, so you will have to too", "We built these trails, make your own" and other condesending comments from traditionalists. Just go through the replies here and many other comments in various threads on the site, there is a consistancy in tone.
 
Preamble: I'm not criticizing anyone about e-bikes.

Today I went for a straight forward ride with my friend that was injured but now is doing better. A couple of single track rides and she's smiling again. At the TH we saw a group meeting up, all but 2 on e-bikes. No biggy, despite the official line being that the local trail system is non-e-bike and clearly marked as such. But hey, people will ride that they feel they need to ride.

Our ride started on an old two-track and we got passed then I caught up with them as they waited for one of their non-e-bike riders. A trad rider in their group was strong so they were chasing him.

We all moved on to singletrack next. I was ahead with KT while they waited for a slow rider in their group. KT was passed, apparently multiple times on the singletrack, by the group; they'd pass then regroup, she'd pass them and then they'd overtake.

While I waited for KT at a junction one of the e-bikers caught me up and also waited for his fellow riders. I had passed him on the last singletrack section by saying 'I'd like to pass when it is convenient for you'. Pretty much the same thing I say to hikers I overtake. He and I had a conversation about his saddle height (he was a looong way from full extension) as well as the mine tailings we had just crossed. Others of his group arrived, we spoke about trails. KT showed up ahead of their slowest rider and a bit of tension arose. One of their group explained how the head of Town of Breck recreation told him that if you have a disability or are old, you are exempt from e-bike restrictions. I presume his remarks were due to some ill feeling express by KT at being overtaken so many times. KT responded that she had been forced off the trail by their group numerous times.

The discussion ended as KT and I resumed our ride, back on a smooth jeep road climb. She was aggravated (to put it mildly) by their behavior. We discussed that the issue wasn't that they were e-bikers but they showed no courtesy: they failed to announce themselves far enough in advance for KT to yield the right of way at her convenience, they forced her off the single track by passing before she could yield (there often isn't room to pass safely while both are riding on this trail) and they repeated the lack of consideration multiple times in a 2 mile section of trail.

We came to the understanding that it wasn’t the gear, it was the rider. Kind of like skiers v snowboarders. I had earlier opined that e-bikes were going to get more inexperienced riders farther out in the field. The inexperienced part was reinforced by today's encounter. Here's hoping that people just venturing out in any fashion on the trails can learn trail etiquette before more 'us vs them' situations come up.

I've sent an email with the same (different words) comments to the of Town of Brecks' rec department, since he was identified in the discussion, and volunteered my time on public hearings on e-bikes on our trails.

What I learned today was to look at actions, not the vehicle.
 
It will be interesting to hear what kind of response you get. In general, I believe the way the response was presented was incorrect. I don't believe it has anything to do with age or disabled. There are caveats though. If you are on mountain, like Copper or even Breck, I believe class 1 ebikes are allowed on those trails. Only class 1. If you are not within the ski area boundary I believe they are not allowed. Not sure they would be allowed on the Colorado Trail even though it is within the boundary.

I have someone I can ask.
 
@Doug Briggs That is an unfortunate situation. As usual, you handled yourself with poise and intelligence.
We'll be waiting to hear what happenes with the town of Brek.
 
@Doug Briggs That is an unfortunate situation. As usual, you handled yourself with poise and intelligence.
We'll be waiting to hear what happenes with the town of Breck.

@Tricia, this was the Town's response.

(be sure to click the quote to view the whole reply)

Thanks for your input, Doug and sorry that you had that interaction. It’s funny, because I’ll bet that I know who those folks were. They made a big point at our open house about how ebikes should be allowed on our entire system. I know the Summit Mountain Bike group- they are a non-profit that works across the County to improve mountain bike access. They volunteer for a lot of trail building efforts and many of them are a little older and starting to beat the drum of e-bike access.

The Town already has an e-bike policy which allows e-bikes anywhere a motor vehicle would be allowed (public roads, double tracks, motorized singletracks) and only class 1 e-bikes are allowed on the recpath. Council has pointedly told us (for now) to prohibit e-bikes on all non-motorized trails. Since we have so many options for e-bikes/motorcycles, Council does not feel the need to extend permission to the non-motorized trails. Summit County is also consistent with this policy.

There is some degree of truth in what the e-bike group said to you. E-bikes would be considered “Other Power Driven Mobility Devices” and would be allowable on any trail for someone who has a mobility impairment. Additionally, staff and law enforcement officers are not allowed to ask, “so, what is your impairment?” It is a gray area and one that has existed for many years. This applies to all open, public trails and recpaths. So, someone in the know could ride their e-bike wherever on the basis that they have some undefined mobility impairment. There is no enforcement or “proof” that would verify their claim.

I hope that provides some background. You are welcome to comment further to me, Open Space staff, BOSAC, or Council, but that is the current status of e-bikes on our system. Please let me know if you need more information on this. Thanks again for your input.

I'm not really pleased this gray area exists. The group I encountered claimed they (in general) were old and some had medical conditions. What it really comes down to is they need to consider their impact on their fellow trail users and avoid the pass, stop, pass cycle that frustrated KT.

If I am in the same situation in the future I'll ask them to regroup at trailheads or to stay behind and regroup when the caught me, not after they've passed me. I'll also yield to overtakers when it is safe for me to do so. Since this isn't a race situation, the overtaken has the ROW until they yield it, particularly when it is single track with no place to easily step off the trail.
 
@Doug Briggs By reading your story and their response, my impression is that there wouldn't have been need for the letter if they had simply used proper trail etiquette, especially the bits about overtaking KT without warning or in a safe place.

You would expect better etiquett from people who are savvy about bike trails and stewardship.

This from the first paragraph in their response to you:
Thanks for your input, Doug and sorry that you had that interaction. It’s funny, because I’ll bet that I know who those folks were. They made a big point at our open house about how ebikes should be allowed on our entire system. I know the Summit Mountain Bike group- they are a non-profit that works across the County to improve mountain bike access. They volunteer for a lot of trail building efforts and many of them are a little older and starting to beat the drum of e-bike access.
 
E-bikes would be considered “Other Power Driven Mobility Devices” and would be allowable on any trail for someone who has a mobility impairment. Additionally, staff and law enforcement officers are not allowed to ask, “so, what is your impairment?” It is a gray area and one that has existed for many years. This applies to all open, public trails and recpaths. So, someone in the know could ride their e-bike wherever on the basis that they have some undefined mobility impairment. There is no enforcement or “proof” that would verify their claim.
I am wondering if my recent heart issues and @Tricia's cancer qualifies as impairments. I agree, the gray area is big with this one.
 
I am wondering if my recent heart issues and @Tricia's cancer qualifies as impairments. I agree, the gray area is big with this one.
I think they would. I wouldn't care as long as you passed with care. I'm glad you guys are out an enjoying the trails as well as helping build new ones. One of these days I will get out on the road and ride with all the great people on this site.
 
Sounds a lot like the old skiers at Alta, Deer Valley, etc mentality against snowboarders
 
Can't imagine trying to muscle a e-bike on more technical terrain, even the basic log hops...
 

Article information

Author
Philpug
Views
23,063
Comments
101
Last update

More in Cycling

More from Philpug

Top