I’m not sure that state laws have precedence over national forest/national park trails. The status of e-bikes on trails on such lands is really murky. Trails marked like this at the very least suggest that e-bikes are not allowed at all:
I can certainly imagine seeing such a sign and thinking that this person was breaking the rules regardless of their disability status.
They really need to make the rules explicitly prohibit e-bikes except in the case of disability and have the signage reflect this.
There’s a significant difference between someone in a modified mobility ebike and a quad ATV. The first weight between 50-100lbs, quad ATVs are about 700 lbs, and much wider.
To me, that does seem like indirect discrimination against people who require motorized vehicles to get about. Maybe this is something that the National Parks could do with addressing?
I don’t know the specific rules about these trails, but if there is one that simply says ‘no e-bikes/pedal assist bikes allowed’ (as opposed to dirtbikes), there is a reckoning coming:
How much of that growth is in e mountain bikes though? Is e mountain biking really a thing? “I want the experience of dirt biking but I want to be very fuel efficient” or “I want to be a mountain biker but my legs are too wimpy”. Neither of those seem like big groups of people. Most people with e-bikes are commuting.
That’s funny, I don’t have to “threaten” anyone, but I do have to point out to parents that if their child decides “I want to ride the great dane” I’m going to have to deal with the situation myself…
EDIT: “Dealing with the situation myself” generally entails asking the child how they’d like it if the 175 lb dog decided he wanted to ride them instead. The testosterone laden “threatening” of others vs. say, talking to someone is exactly why things like the encounter in this video happen. People need to start realizing that all those other meat puppets you see walking around are also human beings with their own point of view.
Any time I’ve had to deal with an owner with a misbehaving off-leash dog – and since most encounters occur when the dog gets ahead of them as we’re passing one another – I just tell them that I saw a rattlesnake a couple hundred yards up the trail. Dog goes right on the leash. Out in the East Bay hills, that’s plenty common (rattlesnakes, that is)
Probably they turn around? Once on a trail I saw an old man who had accidentally driven his scooter into a pond, and I can confirm what happens then. People helped him take it out, get it running again, and send him on his way. Because people here are happy to stick together and want everyone to have the chance to enjoy nature safely…which I take it is not universal then.
why? Riding a pedal assist e-bike on a trail has no adverse effects that wouldn’t be caused by riding a regular mountain bike. Why would there need to be any sort of e-bike ban?
I guess my feeling is that people will do their best to game whatever is allowed such that it will effectively allow electric motorcross bikes on trails and I don’t really see any advantage to allowing them except for people with disabilities. Frankly, I wish that fewer of the trails permitted bikes as is.
I know someone who is too old to really bike or walk anywhere far, but isn’t actually disabled and can still enjoy our local forest with pedal assist. Nice to think people like him shouldn’t just in case there are some other people who might try to abuse their privileges. That’s not a line of thinking that routinely impoverishes people’s lives, no sir.
I don’t really understand what the e-bike adds to enjoying the local forest in that case though. I’m also not sure what I think about the not being able to walk “far” but not being “actually disabled”. Do the bike prohibited trails also impoverish his life?
Well, they definitely would if they were the only ones available; the point is there are at some places he can go. And yeah, it’s actually not unusual for seniors only to be able to do so much exercise without hurting for the rest of the day, without that counting as a disability.
But it feels weird to have to defend him when the concern is hypothetical. Just don’t take things away from people unless there’s actually a problem from them. We’ve all seen people who attack services on the off chance they could be abused, and I don’t think you want to be one of them.
And how exactly is he supposed to turn around? It looks like what he’s riding would not fit crosswise on the trail, even if it can turn in place he is not going to be able to turn around without assistance.
And while people are generally quite helpful in the wilderness you should not put yourself in a position where you have to rely on passing strangers. What happens if nobody comes along?
I’m saying that an e-bike would allow an elderly/mildly disabled person the ability to enjoy a bike trail in much the same manner that you or I can enjoy it now.
I also don’t see how allowing such an activity would diminish my own ability to enjoy such a bike trail.
That man is obnoxious. The bipedal one, I mean. At least he didn’t try to citizens arrest him or citizens fine, citizens citation, or all the other penal nonsense those bipedal types are good at.
As to the question of where his law and order and screw manners attitude comes from, perhaps it’s the unconscious rejection of the rules and law we all drown in day to day? I mean, beyond the moralistic laws, the bylaws, the compacts, the federal rules, state laws, county and city codes? Can’t mow lawn on Tuesday, can’t paint it that color, can’t grow crop foods in the front lawn, must have blueprints in imperial units, blah blah blah, must wear preposterous shirt while riding two wheels to get a half mile speed increase or else.
Anarchy might be asking for too much borne because of someone who loudly proclaims their fetish for rules but just pondering the source.
