"E mtn bikes r us" (rock n road) boycott?

Status
Not open for further replies.
The single biggest threat to MTB trail access is the growing popularity of MTB in general. There's traffic in them dar' hills! Trail access will be threatened with the increasing trail use from human-powered bicycles, though Ebikes clearly will exacerbate bipedal resentment toward other trail users.
If electric assist cycling enables even more two-wheeled trail users than under the "business as usual" scenario, trail access will be threatened sooner than later.
Thank a post-modern progressive civil-ization for the two-wheeled affirmative action some of us enjoy in developed nations. If you want to selectively pressure cycling, organize a ride in the mountains of Kabul or Rio de Janeiro and see who really is at the top of the food chain.
 
I'm sick of the words "hater", and the way people throw around the word "racist", and people trying to shove down my throat blatant ridiculous mis truths like, and not limited to that E- bikes are bicycles! Please just STFU already!
 
DangerDirtyD said:
The single biggest threat to MTB trail access is the growing popularity of MTB in general. There's traffic in them dar' hills! Trail access will be threatened with the increasing trail use from human-powered bicycles, though Ebikes clearly will exacerbate bipedal resentment toward other trail users.
If electric assist cycling enables even more two-wheeled trail users than under the "business as usual" scenario, trail access will be threatened sooner than later.
Click to expand...

Yup. That about sums it up right there. Thank you.
 
I saw one of these specialized e-bikes at snow summit last friday:

electric-mtb-specialized-brose-580x372.png


I thought a park would be the last place I'd see one.
 
hill^billy said:
I'm sick of the word "hater"...
Click to expand...

Couldn't agree more. "Hater" is thrown around the interwebs at anybody who offers constructive criticism or challenges anybody else's thinking. The opposite of that would be to remain docile and accepting of everybody else's interpretation of their "rights" - which sounds great if your right to swing your arm never meets my right to not be punched in the face. It's easier to label people as haters than to dig in and come up with appropriate compromises that are necessary in a pluralistic society.

It is impossible to simultaneously accept everybody's interpretation of how a limited resource should be used. My right to peace and quiet and your right to listen to loud music or noises cannot possibly co-exist in the same space and time without some form of compromise (like earbuds or noise ordinances). My right to clean water and air, and your right to earn a living through manufacturing processes that damage water and air cannot possibly coexist in the same time and space without a compromise.

So round and round we go. Post #94 by Triple D hit the nail on the head as far as this debate is concerned. Accelerating access could eliminate a resource. So where will the fence be built, and by whom?
 
herzalot said:
My right to clean water and air, and your right to earn a living through manufacturing processes that damage water and air cannot possibly coexist in the same time and space without a compromise.

So where will the fence be built, and by whom?
Click to expand...
Unless you live in a society that just realized a planted seed will grow into food, no one should have a right to earn a living through manufacturing processes that damage water and air...that behavior is a privilege for which permits, mitigation, and prayer are necessary.

Oh the irony about building a fence (or wall) to protect habitat for the inhabitants.

BTW, I'm just blowing hot air and methane. If you think about it, I too have been on a bicycle on single track trails from time to time.

An anecdote: In order to get P-Tribe and S-Tribe or T-Tribe and SM-Tribe to work in conjunction on a construction project, you assert a volunteer program and an alternating schedule. If MTB trail access becomes scarce, the land managers should coordinate alternating access days/times. Major European cities do it for automobiles. Or you can do what @mike does and ride big mountains (without a motor) at night where it's too steep for the average hiking enthusiast to trek.

This discussion regards the dynamic between hikers and bicycles. Ebikes can have the bike lanes in the City. Oh those poor roadies are next.
 
The solution is to never restrict trail access but push for more trails to be built. The Irvine Company turned over Blackstar Wilderness Park to the county years ago. Where is that new trail access to ride. Infighting is futile and gives our distractors excellent arguments against us. MTBers are totality capable of getting kicked off trails without the help of E-Bikes. Illegal trail building, poaching, night riding, bombing downhill, no bells around blind corners, injuries...ect.

Mike is right about the goal of his site...division has ruined other MTBing websites. (Goaters vs the shuttlers) Ride your bike treat others well and all will be good. The fight is for more trails not fighting over what we have and how we ride it.

Dean
 
hill^billy said:
I'm sick of the words "hater", and the way people throw around the word "racist", and people trying to shove down my throat blatant ridiculous mis truths like, and not limited to that E- bikes are bicycles! Please just STFU already!
Click to expand...
This direction, is the concern I'm developing towards this forum debate:
1. "Hate" and "Haters" are words some people use to describe people that don't agree with their personal agenda or direction of thinking.
2. STFU is a response out of emotional frustration.
None of this is productive, positive, or helpful.
I'm not picking on H^B here, just using it as the example.
Focus on facts and the issues and we will be fine. Otherwise, imtbtrails will be just like the rest of those trash talk forums.
I will close imtbtrails down before I will let our awesome site become like that.

Break out the love, go ride your bikes. We all know how everybody feels now. Take it off public line if you guys still want to discuss.
nothing to see.jpg
 
ridinrox said:
I used the word "EHaters" primarily as a joke but you don't know me so I understand your misinterpretation.

This thread, along w others of the same topic has a tone of disdain and contempt, to me, reflects hate.

I left surfing bc of the vibe out in the water - I'm feeling the same vibe here. What a bummer ..
Click to expand...
 
@herzalot if it wasn't a decent analogy, I wouldn't have given it any thought. It's all good brother.

What is interesting here is that the e Mtn bike shops want to have their cake and eat it too. Sell to the tribe, and sell the e Mtn bike user. (I am presuming that these are different populations, maybe I am wrong). I don't own a bike shop. I don't know the economics of it. I know that it ain't easy. And that if a new whiz bang product with higher margin and more frequent repair comes along, you want a piece of that action. So maybe point of sale education (and general education as you suggested earlier in the thread) is the answer. (if there is an answer)

The surf shops would not TOUCH SUPs for the most part, and advocated for their demise. See the infamous Rusty ad from a few years ago. They knew that they could not sell to both user groups... And hung with their core user group, the surfer. The surfshops were selling a "lifestyle" and the middle aged kook in reef booties with a Gilligan hat on an SUP (stereotype alert) was not the "lifestyle" that they were selling.

Ride Often. Have fun. Don't freak out. (Like I did).
 
How about creating a team of snitches and stooges that rat out e-bikers every time we see them on a non-motorized trail? This might work to minimize offending use of these motorized bikes on non-motorized trails.

A GoPro camera would be the perfect device to gather the evidence including vehicle license plate at trailhead, pictures of offender without his/her helmet and most importantly video of the offender on the non-motorized trail. After all evidence has been captured, including Strava information if available, deliver the information to local land managers for further action. Also give this information to the Sierra Club. They are well organized and have a good legal team and they will know what to do with the info.

Maybe we can invite Sierra Club members to this forum and ask them for their input on this subject.
 
I didn't really take a look at the owner of the bike. I only saw it on my first time going up on Chair 1. It was busy for a Friday.
 
Serious post time. Geesh, I like posting memes way more but I'm feeling soapboxy today.

I don't mean this to get all argumentative as I have no intention of following up after this post and will take my flaming like a man. LOL. This is just my thought and opinion as I put more thought into this issue of ebikes and "Trail Access". Really, I have put a lot of thought into this and I kind of got stuck on the following train of thought (sorry to those of you with bigger brains that think this is dumb).

It seems that the Sierra Club Type Hiker Person (SCTHP) are used in nearly every argument against ebikes and trail access at least once as they seemingly represent our biggest enemy. I can't help but wonder if the SCTHP knows or could even really perceive the difference between an ebike and regular bike? Let me expand that thought, please hang with me here for a minute. Do you think ANYBODY on an ebike other than maybe Aaron Gwin is going to go down RockIt or Rattlesnake FASTER than me on my Uzzi? (ya, ya, there's probably a few but you get the point) Do you think that the SCTHP will view bikes and their speed (read safety, ect) any differently depending on which way they are going on the trail, up vs down? Does it make any sense that all of a sudden someone doing 15mph uphill is more "offensive" than a 260lb wheezing gorilla doing 30mph dowhnill? To the anti ebike guys, do you really believe an older outta shape grey haired dude on a little whizzy ebike going uphill is what's going to bring riding as we know it to a halt? If I'm candid, and not to be offensive, but I find that argument and thought completely absurd. A bike is a bike as a bike is a bike.

All arguments of the whos, hows and whys aside, and since it's been brought up numerous times as well. I do believe THIS WILL END UP IN COURT because it is a matter of law. I'm no lawyer, heck, I'm not even all that smart but I can read, and I have read AB1096 several times over and looked at the other propaganda that was created for end users and government agencies from it. Any court of law, there is no debate that the rules have been changed. An e-bike IS NOT a "motorized bike" PERIOD. That's a fact jack, deal with it. I understand that's not logical, but we're not talking about logic, we're talking about LAWS. (insert government and/or lawyer joke here)

I think I understand AB1096 rather well, and I understand it's intent regarding "bike pathways" and that it's actually about insurance, licensing and traffic enforcement, but it was left a little vague and does include language that includes "state park system" and "county park". It could easily be argued that any trail where bikes are allowed wether on street or state or county park, is a "bike pathway" and that Type 1 and Type 2 "electric bicycles" are legal unless specifically outlawed by state or local agencies with proper signage. Again, "no motorized vehicles" does not apply to "electric bicycles". This is the grey area, I've yet to see a sign that says "no e-bicycles" anywhere.

AB1096 - Read it here - https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160AB1096

The guidelines for "Agencies" document created by peopleforbikes.org - notice page 2 paragraph 1 and the language "path or TRAIL" Again, I think this issue will end up in court, and I think ebikes will win the undisputable right to be anwyehre a traditional bicycle is - http://b.3cdn.net/bikes/59ea4b73c415907426_uxm6iyv9u.pdf
 
1) There are trails in Irvine that state "no electric bicycles". Perhaps they're presuming the "worst".
2) IMO almost any individual on an eMTB will descend slower than on a similarly equipped MTB because the extra weight is unwieldy.
3) Agree that we should coalesce as a group with the common goal of insuring that areas that are open stay that way, and increasing our "acreage" What happened to dirt bikes, while not exactly analogous, should be a cautionary tale --- there were trail riders, enduro riders, trials riders ...; now, there are none.
4) Expecting to enlist the Sierra Club as allies against anything is like inviting a rattlesnake into your rabbit hutch.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top