Paved trails at Cape Cod National Seashore, such as the Province Lands Bike Trail, seem reasonable for eBikes, but the Park Service needs to study all aspects of increased eBike access/NPS
Interior Secretary David Bernhardt is forcing the National Park Service's hand by telling the agency to give greater access to eBikes with just 30 days to study the matter, a time period that doesn't possibly allow park staff to thoroughly consider all the facets of the issue.
Point in case: Cuyahoga Valley National Park on Monday announced a week-long public comment period on whether the motorized bikes should be allowed on trails that are open to muscle-powered bikes.
One week. Never can we recall such a short public comment period for any issue in the park system, let alone one that could have profound impacts.
At least Cuyahoga Valley is offering a public comment period. Bryce Canyon National Park officials apparently used the eBike template the Washington, D.C., headquarters provided. But on Monday when they announced that eBike riders could use the park's Shared Use Path, their website still said eBikes were banned from the path because they "are considered motor vehicles under 36 CFR, they are not permitted on the Shared Use Path."
There's little, if any, doubt that eBikes make the outdoors more accessible for individuals with limited mobility, be it due to arthritis or some other medical condition. Indeed, quite a few comments on past eBike stories on the Traveler have pointed out how the bikes have improved their users' quality of life.
But at the same, there also are studies pointing to the dangers of eBikes in general. Problems related to motors with lithium batteries that can catch fire, riders accidentally pulling the throttle too much, eBikers coming up silently on pedestrians or other trail users (In China they have been dubbed the “Silent Killers” because many times a pedestrian will walk in front of an electric bike without hearing it coming.).
In August, an eBike rider was killed in New York City when they collided with a pedestrian in Central Park. In Switzerland, officials reported that "deaths and serious injuries for users of e-bikes went up" in 2018 over the year before.
There are other stories that raise concerns.
"Older men on e-bikes behind rising death toll among Dutch cyclists" read the headline from a 2018 story in The Guardian.
"E-bikes not more dangerous but elderly are more at risk" headlined a story in the Dutch News.
"E-bikes, other motorized vehicles voted down on JoCo parks trails," reported the Kansas City Star back in December 2018. "...the majority of the board expressed concerns about safety, speed and whether even the county’s paved trails are wide enough to carry walkers, regular bikers and motorized vehicles," the article noted. "They also said they warned that allowing e-bikes and e-unicycles on the trails would eventually lead to groups asking for a wider range of even more powerful and disruptive devices."
Google "ebike accidents" in news stories and you'll find more stories, pro and con, concerning eBike use.
The point, of course, is that the Park Service can't possibly do a complete review of the safety of these motorized bikes to their users, and other trail users, in a week. And decide whether trails should be open to all three classes of eBikes, including motorized mountain bikes that can reach 28 mph, or just some of the classes. Most recreational cyclists on their muscle-powered mounts don't come close to reaching 28 mph. Does it make sense to allow e-MTN bikes on trails with pedestrians and slower traditional bikes?
There very well may be some trails where eBike use makes complete sense. The paved Province Lands Bike Trail at Cape Cod National Seashore might be a great candidate. The Mammoth Cave Railroad Bike and Hike Trail at Mammoth Cave National Park might not be a good one, as park staff notes that "this is not a uniformly flat, level trail. You are traveling in hilly country, and must ascend and descend grades that can in places be steep and difficult." Another good one could be the Westside Road at Mount Rainier National Park, where a bit more than 9 miles are closed to vehicular traffic but open to cyclists and pedestrians.
But should eBikes be allowed on the asphalt Lone Star Trail at Yellowstone National Park, or along the paved path that runs from Old Faithful Inn down to Morning Glory Pool? If both are opened to eBikes, how many eBikes can those pathways, popular with pedestrians, handle?
Indeed, in parks where there are trails open to muscle-powered bikes, and so under consideration for eBikes, the Park Service needs to determine how many businesses will jump at the chance to rent eBikes, and in turn how many eBike cyclists might descend on the trails. Will such a possible increase generate conflicts with other users?
Aging does diminish our reflexes and our strength, and health issues that otherwise might keep eBike users from cycling on trails could increase risks, as some of the news stories cited above underscore. On the other end of the age spectrum, might young children who have not yet fully developed skills to ride eBikes also contribute to safety risks?
No doubt, there are areas within the National Park System where eBikes can be accommodated. But giving the parks just 30 days to look into all the related issues, and the general public as little as seven days to raise comments, seems shortsighted.
As with any other new use in the parks, the question of where eBikes can travel, and all the impacts they might pose, need to be thoroughly studied before that access, if merited, is granted.
Comments
Remember that the technology for eBikes will get better and better making them faster and faster- after all they ARE acctually motorcycles!
Yes, that's a good point; there truly do differ only by degree, not by kind, from what we all generally call motorcycles and it's now even more only a technical difference since there are electric motorcycles, quite powerful electric motorcycles, out there. And, the usual knuckleheads can cynically quibble about how questions are or aren't asked, maybe try to claim that millions of votes were cast by illegal immigrants, whatever; but, the roughly 77% majority who opposed allowing electric motorbikes on the trails in the recent Bozeman Daily Chronicle survey still constituted a 77% majority. I could understand some skepticism if those survey results had been less lopsided; but, a 77% majority is way too much of a majority to just handwave away and ignore.
This is the most condescending and insulting article I have ever read. It's also packed with outright falsehoods--lies.
Class-1 Pedal Assist e-bikes enable the elderly and the disabled to ride bikes WITH their families and friends--the bikes offer cycling equality. They don't win races.
Class-1 Pedal Assist e-bikes are just bikes--the motors and software DO NOT propel the bike, they only offer assistance with pedaling to make people who need the assistance more like people who don't. When the software detects that the rider is struggling, the motor engages to give some assistance with pedaling--like crutches for an individual who has difficulty walking.
Class-1 Pedal Assist e-bikes are NOT morotized vehicles because they are NOT self-propelled. They must be pedalled to make them move. THERE IS NO THROTTLE.
Class-1 Pedal Assist e-bikes do not exceed 20 MPH (not 28 MPH as the article falsely states). An able-bodied person pedalling an ordinary bike can travel faster than 20 MPH.
We older Americans can handle our bike riding just fine, thank you--please don't tell us that we are a danger or in danger.
And lithium batteries? Are we really to believe that an elderly person riding an e-bike is in danger of the battery spontaneously combusting on a National Park trail?
This magazine must stop its campaign against Class-1 Pedal Assist e-bikes--its losing all its credibility.
The bottom line of this article seems to be that e-bikes will bring many more Americans into the national parks and onto the trails, and we can't have that! We should discriminate against the riders of Class-1 Pedal Assist e-bikes so that we can reduce the number of people who can enjoy the national parks that their taxes have paid for.
Elitist, eh?
Karen, Secretary Bernhardt's directive didn't tell the NPS to ONLY allow Class 1 eBikes; he opened it to ALL classes, including eMTN bikes, which can reach 28 mph (and maybe more on downhill stretches).
Then perhaps you should be campaigning for the enthusistic allowance of Class-1 Pedal Assist e-bikes?
Perhaps we should also at least in some way consider the wishes of the roughly 77% majority who oppose electric motorbikes on the trails.
Rumple, if you'd create an account in the Traveler, your comments would post as you save them, not when someone OKs them. And you don't need to reveal your name, though I'm really curious....
Rump - You take one "survey" of unknown nature, taken in one geographic area and apply the results to a national majority? Next thing you know you will be telling us 97% of scientists believe man is the primary cause of climate change.