BLM Advocating for increased EBike use

[Tradewind]

Respectfully, I am not sure this is true. I've been following SWMMBA (Southwest Montana Mountain Biking Association) and other groups for a while, and often when those groups mention anything negative about ebikes they get eaten alive by their members. Not a scientific study at all, but I am starting to see a movement and attitude from most mountain bikers that is indifferent to ebikes, and views them as just another flavor of mountain biking. They're not concerned about the progression of technology, or the effects of increased recreation on wildlands. They are focused on trails. It's their bread and butter. I've talked to a fair amount of them, particularly when researching issues in the Elkhorns. I would agree that mountain bikers can be treated unfairly at times, but what I think many have yet to wake up to is that mountain bikers as an advocacy group, are probably more powerful than hunters at this point in terms of manipulating and informing land management and projects moving forward. Land managers want "wins" under their belt, and Mtn Bikers are more organized and well funded than any others. I've heard it from the mouths of agency employees.

To the OP, I am grateful that the USDA still views e-bikes as motorized. Pendley is a fox guarding the henhouse, and this type of BS is expected behavior from this administration. But to my earlier point, say they do put it out for public comment. I predict that comments in support of ebikes on nonmotorized trails will exceed the desired restriction of them or at the very least it will be a wash.

Unfortunately i think you are correct. I ran across a guy using mechanized equipment ( I wouldn't call it heavy) 'opening up' new trails in an areas where I elkhunt. this was for dirt bikes. but said he generally is hired
to do it for the mountain bike crowd as they have more money and are better organized to get public land "opened up".

the progrression as I see it is, Hiking trails, then opened up for the peddle bikebecause they shouldn't be left out. Then the motor bike crowd pushes in piggy backing on the peddle assist, eventually you will have everything, including atv's. Unfortunately, I think it is just a mater of time

 

[noharleyyet]

What's the SSS forest cred bounty on a NR E-biker up to...

 

[Straight Arrow]

What's the SSS forest cred bounty on a NR E-biker up to...

know good!

 

[BuzzH]

Back to what I've said over and over.

The motorized/mechanized crowd has a vast, vast majority of the Forest, BLM, USFS lands open for their use.

That's not good enough, lets take the little amount that's left where we don't have to dodge bikes, game carts, dirt bikes, atv's, cars, trucks, and turn it into just "another place"...

So it will go until the last public land acre has an oil well, wind mill, atv trail, passenger car road, timber sale, motorcycle trail, etc. etc. etc. on it. Then everything will be "perfect" and we can all just get along.

 

[Sytes]

What's the SSS forest cred bounty on a NR E-biker up to...

Price of a tree dog pelt.

 

[Straight Arrow]

Kept on encroaching, de-wilding until "They paved paradise and made it a parking lot." Then I could speed to the ridge on my ebike or hunt from my Big Yellow Taxi !!!

 

[sschultz]

E Bikes need to be in the same classification as motorcycles. The presence of pedals don't mean a fricken thing. mtmuley

Saw that coming

 

[mtmuley]

Saw that coming

Wondered when you would show up. mtmuley

 

[sschultz]

Wondered when you would show up. mtmuley

Slightly off topic but I'm using my stimulus money to buy my fat tire back. See you in eastern Montana this fall ( if your governor lets non-residents in )

 

[VikingsGuy]

What level of gaslighting is it when an agency advocates for one thing and then at the very end mentions they’ll be going through a “thorough public comment process” on the issue?

Specifics of e-bikes aside, this is exactly how federal rule making in all agencies works. The agency starts with a preference and then seeks comment by rule.

 

[mtmuley]

Slightly off topic but I'm using my stimulus money to buy my fat tire back. See you in eastern Montana this fall ( if your governor lets non-residents in )

I tend to stay out of Eastern Montana. Too many non residents out there. mtmuley

 

[Jape]

Here is an interesting quote, "We’re working hard to implement Secretary Bernhardt’s directive wherever possible on the 245 million acres of public lands managed by the BLM because we believe these lands are managed in trust for all citizens, and that people of every ability should be able to explore them to the greatest extent possible."

This comment is the typical appeal to emotion. The insinuation is that if you oppose ebikes in these areas then you don't want to share public lands with disabled vets. While that is untrue it raises the issue of how "easy" we should make access to public lands. I would argue that the majority of our public lands are incredibly accessible; more so than at any other time. Some places should be left wild, and if someone does not have the physical ability to see that in person that's ok. At some point, we can't subvert the management of a resource to the rights of one person.

 

[Trial153]

I am for ebikes, everywhere, all public lands. Makes easier to acess the lands I cant get tags to hunt, and the rivers I cant acesss to fish. Might as well join few hundred of my ebike buddies and peddle ( do e bikes even have peddles? ) off into the not so wild wilds and look at the sunset, windmills and oil pads. Maybe we will spot some auction tag Posse members scoping out a big one. Please dont think less of me if i get all teary eyed from the nostalgia of the whole scene.

 

[Schaaf]

Specifics of e-bikes aside, this is exactly how federal rule making in all agencies works. The agency starts with a preference and then seeks comment by rule.

Can’t say I’ve seen this approach when it comes to land management. I’ve seen requests for public comment relevant to Alternatives A,B,C.. I can’t recall a time when the head of the BLM has gone to such steps to let it be known his stance.

I could very well be wrong.

 

[BuzzH]

Can’t say I’ve seen this approach when it comes to land management. I’ve seen requests for public comment relevant to Alternatives A,B,C.. I can’t recall a time when the head of the BLM has gone to such steps to let it be known his stance.

I could very well be wrong.

I don't believe you're wrong at all...we aren't in usual times. All this is going to do is cause a gigantic pendulum swing when the next guys ramrod their agenda...and it wont be pretty.

 

[Honeybear68]

I can see both sides who are for and opposed to e-bikes. One needs to look back and try to understand the reasons that some areas are closed to “motorized” vehicles. Be that of protecting watersheds, vegetation habitat etc. It’s similar to many lakes not allowing motorized boats but one may use pack in style boats with electric motors. The question I have is, will the area being protected by said rule be compromised by the allowance of e-bike users? It’s certainly a tough subject.

 

[Wildabeest]

The question I have is, will the area being protected by said rule be compromised by the allowance of e-bike users? It’s certainly a tough subject.

If regular bikes are already allowed, I can’t see how e-bikes would be any different from an impact standpoint. Again, assuming there are limits on the wattage or speed.

 

[406dn]

If regular bikes are already allowed, I can’t see how e-bikes would be any different from an impact standpoint. Again, assuming there are limits on the wattage or speed.

It's the increased number of people who would be riding bikes on the trails. An analogy is how many bow hunters would there be if compound bows, sights and releases were not legal. When you make something easier, you can expect more of it.

 

[VikingsGuy]

It's the increased number of people who would be riding bikes on the trails. An analogy is how many bow hunters would there be if compound bows, sights and releases were not legal. When you make something easier, you can expect more of it.

And while reduced access may serve some legacy hunters, it doesn't exactly build a broad tent to save multi-use public lands.

 

[406dn]

And while reduced access may serve some legacy hunters, it doesn't exactly build a broad tent to save multi-use public lands.

I guess it depends what the meaning of save is.

Greatly increasing the amount of traffic an area gets, generally lessens its wildlife value.