Moab Bans Electric Bikes on Mountain Bike Trails 57

bturman
11/21/2014 11:05am

In a move that could set the precedent for the rest of the USA, the Moab Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has banned the use of electric bikes on mountain bike trails. A recent update to their website clearly states their viewpoint:

"The Moab BLM has determined that motor assisted bicycles (electric, gas or diesel) are motorized vehicles. Use of motor assisted bicycles is only allowed on motorized trails. Please visit the motorized recreation pages for trail information. The use of motor assisted bicycles is NOT allowed on mountain bike trails."

Photo: Drunkcyclist.com

E-bikes are still allowed on trails/roads where motorized vehicles were previously allowed, but not on singletrack. E-bike bans are in effect on these well known trails and trail areas:

  • Amasa Back Area
  • Bartlett/Jedi Slickrock
  • Gemini Bridges/Mag 7 Area
  • Klondike Bluffs Area
  • Klonzo Trails
  • Kokopelli Trail
  • Lower Monitor and Merrimac
  • Moab Brands (Bar M)
  • Pipe Dream
  • Porcupine Rim
  • Slickrock Bike Trail

Trails shown in blue are now designated as "Single Track Mountain Bike Trails" and are off limits to e-bikes. You can view a full size map of the area here.

via MTBR, via Moab BLM

Related:
Moab, Utah
E-Bike
57 comments

View replies to: Moab Bans Electric Bikes on Mountain Bike Trails

c50 profile 1487817150
bturman
9 years ago
St. George, Utah has followed Moab's lead - http://www.blm.gov/ut/st/en/fo/st__george/recreation/non-motorized_trai…

"Motor Assisted Bicycles: Motor assisted bicycles are prohibited on all non-motorized trails managed by the BLM St. George Field Office.

The BLM St. George Field Office has determined that motor assisted bicycles (electric, gas, or diesel) are motorized vehicles. Use of motor assisted bicycles is only allowed on roads and trails open to motorized use. Please visit our motorized recreation web page for information on motorized trails managed by the St. George Field Office.

Regulations found at 43 CFR 8340.0-5(a) define an off-road vehicle as "...any motorized vehicle capable of, or designed for, travel on or immediately over land, water, or other natural terrain...." Furthermore, regulations found at 43 CFR 8342.1 direct the BLM to designate routes as either available for or not available for off-road (motorized) vehicles.

Since electric assisted bicycles have a motor, they fit under the definition provided in 43 CFR 8340.0-5(a) as off-road vehicles. Thus, electric assisted bicycles are allowed only on routes designated for off-road (motorized) vehicle use and prohibited from routes that have been designated only for non-motorized use.

At this time, there is no other BLM guidance specific to managing electric assisted bicycles, so the BLM St. George Field Office is managing the use as motorized based on the rationale described above. This policy is consistent with the policy recently implemented by the BLM-Moab Field Office."
avatar.png?VersionId=TkOXSLqxgAC412Y 1F6UyzOaMSkN
techietom
9 years ago
In the same way non-motorised bikes are allowed on the road - because its generally accepted that its fair shared use and minimal disruption to normal use of the resource.

The same way that people are free to wear what they wish while riding, they should be allowed to ride what they wish too.

It isn't an arbitrary decision, there has to be actual reasons why it would be necessary to ban some users from the trails. If they are causing any damage, or increasing risk for others, then say so, and offer proof, otherwise lay off individuals right to pursue happiness in the manner of their choosing.

You might as well ban mountain bikes from the road if you're going to simply ban other kinds of bicycles for no good reason.
Its not unreasonable to ask for a list of the reasons for the ban, otherwise, like a lot of people when faced with a stupid unjust and unjustified law, they'll just ignore it.
1
c50 greenriver4.6.2013
Scott_Townes
9 years ago
It took many years just to prove that mountain bikes weren't more damaging to trails than horseback riders or hikers. IF you want electric motorized bikes on human powered, non-motorized trails (and they are clearly marked as trails for non-motorized vehicles), then its the electric bike community that has to come up with the proof they don't cause more damage. That's how the real world works. Its not up to the ones who established the trails and rules to provide proof, its up to the e-bikers to prove they can be an exception to the rules without causing unnecessary damage. Go ahead, prove to us that e-bikes don't cause more damage through scientifically sound, peer-reviewed studies and while you're at it, come up with guidelines as to which e-bikes are OK and which aren't. Until then, respect the trails and the ones who made them exist in the first place. Good luck and don't be a dick like you suggested in your last sentence.
3
avatar.png?VersionId=TkOXSLqxgAC412Y 1F6UyzOaMSkN
techietom
9 years ago
The laws are clear as mud (with varying legislation in different locations) with regards to what constitutes a bicycle and what is a motorcycle, according to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_bicycle_laws#Utah its still a bicycle (assisted) up to 1000w of electric power.

Who are you speaking for by the way, yourself? Or the MBLM? Is that an actual given reason for the ban?
If so, that's something that can be worked with, and in time refuted. However, to unilaterally ban something which is being used already, without studies to show that its current use is destructive or damaging at all, is overbearing and rude, and I seems unconstitutional (though to be fair I'm not full bottle on the constitution).

Tell me, did you think it fair to ban bicycles from horse trails in the first place? Are bicycles and horses able to share the same trails? If so, why not ebikes and pedal bikes? The footprint, you'll find, is the same.
c50 greenriver4.6.2013
Scott_Townes
9 years ago
You don't get it. The bans on trails are not for just motorcycles, there's a ban on all MOTORIZED vehicles. Battery systems like this are considered as motorized. It's clearly marked in Moab that the trails are only for non-motorized use only. Its very simple. Its always been this way even before e-bikes came on the market so its not a ban created just for e-bikes, its them enforcing the rules that were already established and applying them correctly to new tech. You saying its unconstitutional really shows how ignorant you are about this whole situation so I'll leave it at that. Have fun riding your e-bike on motorized trails!
c50 avatar92
Nicholast
9 years ago
This is great news, but I'm a little surprised they need to spell out the obvious; why would anything with a drive motor be allowed on non-motorized trails? I'm even more surprised that anyone thinks that motor-assist bikes should be allowed on non-motorized trails.
1
c50 Barent Hoffman 1416851985.jpg?VersionId=7kR.JoRLAS.NGz9q1VC
barent
9 years ago
Would you even know I'm on an electric bike if I wasn't acting like a jerk on the trails? I don't see what the problem with electric assist bikes is.
avatar.png?VersionId=TkOXSLqxgAC412Y 1F6UyzOaMSkN
MotoSC
9 years ago
You don't see what the problem is? It is simple, they are MOTORcycles.
c50 greenriver4.6.2013
Scott_Townes
9 years ago
This ban isn't based on looks of your bike, bud. Go educate yourself about trail access issues facing mountain bikes and how big a part trail degradation plays in that. And yes there's a massive difference between human powered and motor-powered
avatar.png?VersionId=TkOXSLqxgAC412Y 1F6UyzOaMSkN
techietom
9 years ago
So Scott_Townes, what you're suggesting is that trail degradation is the reason for banning e-bikes?
Please point us at your references, so we too can educate ourselves as to how ebikes degrade trails more than pedal only bikes do. If you're unable to provide accurate references bud, perhaps its your education that is lacking.
Perhaps also some actual study into the effects of ebikes on trails is required?

It doesn't seem unreasonable to request that prejudices be backed up by facts before discriminating against what is a fast growing group of trail users?
c50 greenriver4.6.2013
Scott_Townes
9 years ago
Yes go make a study and prove to us that e-bikes can be an exception to the non-motorized rule on bike trails in Moab. Its up to the people who want to be an exception to prove they can be. Quit your bitching and go do something about it like MTBers have for years.
avatar.png?VersionId=TkOXSLqxgAC412Y 1F6UyzOaMSkN
techietom
9 years ago
What exactly is the problem with them?
Gets more people out on the trails - good thing right?
Gets people of their couches enjoying a sport they otherwise wouldn't want to do - again, good thing right?
Collision danger? - what more than putting slow moving ebikes on motorised bike trails?
Danger to individuals ill prepared for the trails - how's that change exactly other than that they may be making it further into the trail before coming to grief?

I'm at a loss, what exactly is the problem with them?

Performance enhancement is nothing new. What's next? Separate tracks for suspension bikes vs hard-tails?
Seriously, what, other than ignorant idea's about the fitness levels of people using them, is the problem with ebikes using trails?
c50 greenriver4.6.2013
Scott_Townes
9 years ago
If you think comparing motorized bikes to regular bikes and comparing full suspension to hard tails is appropriate, then you're just further reinforcing the point that the people who are against this ban are seriously ignorant.
1
c50 10615589 10204404031288080 5139697083266090436 n 1416605315
skyungjae
9 years ago
As I've stated before, it's probably a good idea for Moab, but I'm curious what made them come to this conclusion.

1. Are e-bikes actually a problem in Moab?

2. Is this a preemptive ban since e-bikes are getting more popular?

3. Is it okay to ride e-bikes there without the battery (since it would be 100% human powered)?
avatar.png?VersionId=TkOXSLqxgAC412Y 1F6UyzOaMSkN
ryguy79
9 years ago
Allowing e-bikes just encourages our nation to be even more fat than we are already. Good job.
1
1
avatar.png?VersionId=TkOXSLqxgAC412Y 1F6UyzOaMSkN
Ablacker
9 years ago
Give people some freedom. Let people exercise their right to adventure. Americans are so twisted when it comes to rules especially ones (e-bikes) that aren't hurting anyone. I would probably never ride one, but I am not going to judge the man next to me who is. Let him ride his toy who wants to because we should all be free to ride whatever we want and build whatever the F we want too.
3
3
c50 greenriver4.6.2013
Scott_Townes
9 years ago
Yes, let people exercise their right to adventure! Hell let's just allow quads and dirtbikes on mtb trails! America is twisted in a lot of ways but this decision makes complete sense. You're acting like people who choose to use e-bikes are like a different culture or demographic. It has nothing to do with judging someone, it has everything to do with keeping motorized vehicles off non-motorized trails. Go ride a multi-use mtb trail that allows motorized vehicles then come complaining about treating some lazy fatass fairly. It's pretty simple actually and there are plenty of trails for motorized vehicles. I'm sorry but your view of this decision is completely off base and misinformed.
3
1
c50 10615589 10204404031288080 5139697083266090436 n 1416605315
skyungjae
9 years ago
I imagine the same people who put this law into effect are also people who want to band assault rifles since they look scary. e-bikes, that fall under the legal federal definition, don't produce enough power to make up for their added weight. That being said, it probably makes more sense to pay for a lighter bike with gearing suited for climbing. e-bikes = segways... pointless ban, but necessary to keep jackass high power e-moto riders trying to say their rides are legal on the trails.
2
c50 greenriver4.6.2013
Scott_Townes
9 years ago
People want to ban assault rifles because they're completely unnecessary but that has nothing to do with e-bikes so why bring it up? E-bikes do produce more than enough power to easily compensate for the added weight or else chubby chub chub wouldn't see any benefit from riding one. Not to mention there are plenty here that have tried a heavy e-bike and go way faster than they ever would on a light hard tail. Its not pointless at all because of what you wrote right after writing its pointless haha.
3
1
c50 10615589 10204404031288080 5139697083266090436 n 1416605315
skyungjae
9 years ago
A lot of people think cycling in general is unnecessary too. Keep in mind that not everyone rides for the same reasons you do. Also keep in mind that ebiking still takes a lot of effort for chubby chub cbub, so the couch is likely more appealing. I think the ban is a good thing, but also unnecessary, which is why i drew the parallel to assault weapons which are rarely used in crimes. People who can take advantage of ebike tech are not the people who wil buy them. Chubby chub chub may buy them and take them out once or twice, but they'll end up in the garage for years or on Craigslist.
2
c50 Screen Shot 2015 03 09 at 2.10.12 PM 1425936051.jpg?VersionId=RClhlm1GiTEPMPegVFCjJxwA22d
sspomer
9 years ago
at outdoor demo this year (bootleg canyon) i sat trailside for about 45-minutes watching at least 100 riders pass through a buff and easier-than-intermediate piece of trail. what i remembered most from that observation was how many riders on ebikes seemed ill-equipped for the mountain bike ride they were going on and how (seemingly) over their heads they were in terms of riding skill. the electric assist got these riders further into a trail than they would have ever been under their own power. there are plenty of people who pedal into trails that get over their heads too, but ebikes are opening up a lot of terrain that beginning-level riders may have never been able to experience. is that good or bad? probably both.
c50 greenriver4.6.2013
Scott_Townes
9 years ago
Bad. Its like giving people motorized skins and allowing gapers to travel into the backcountry. That fool in your picture would be screwed if he got a flat or tipped over on his e-bike. No protection, probably only carrying a minimal amount of water and food and obviously has no friggen clue what he's doing. This is very bad for mtbing. Keep them on motorized trails and let dirtbikers/quad riders deal with that trash. I'm all for people enjoying the pleasures of ripping single track but it should never be an instant gratification without any work put into it.
3
c50 atSchladming7 1372954193.jpg?VersionId=iM.wYH6A
onenerdykid*
9 years ago
It is kind of funny that a lot of the American objections are based around ebikes only being used by people who are fat and/or lazy. While I am sure that those who may ride an ebike are sometimes fat or lazy, the ebikers that I see here in Europe (where ebikes are far more popular AND there are far less land usage issues) are usually older people and/or people with some sort of disability/condition that limits their aerobic activities (like asthma, for example). These bikes allow them to get out and enjoy nature when they couldn't do so on a normal pedal bike.

As for instant gratification, people could easily buy a lift ticket and ride downhill trails. I see lots of fat, out-of-shape people DHing and no one complains. Is it because it's the norm not to have to pedal up that makes it ok? In this situation, what's the difference between an ebike and a lift or a shuttle?

Ebikes are going to allow a lot of people the chance to get out and enjoy the trails that would be unable to on a normal pedal bike. This, to me, is a huge benefit rather than having them stay at home and play video games. As for North America's land-access battles (which is what I see most objections pertaining to), that is a problem of the state and not one inherent to ebikes.
1
1
c50 Screen Shot 2015 03 09 at 2.10.12 PM 1425936051.jpg?VersionId=RClhlm1GiTEPMPegVFCjJxwA22d
sspomer
9 years ago
i think your points about capable riders using the ebike to an advantage are fair. the fat/lazy thing isn't a factor to me, it's the ability/prepartion of a rider getting into a place a lot further out than they normally could get. the comments about ill-prepared riders on lifts at bike parks is fair too, they make me cringe and i always hope they make it down in one piece. w/ a bike park, they're (usually) in a patrolled in environment, and if they're on the lifts, they're probably not going too far. i think ebikes have their place on and off road, but i don't fault moab's decision at all. moab is a gnarly, harsh, desolate place, where getting lost is way too easy if you're not careful.
1
c50 greenriver4.6.2013
Scott_Townes
9 years ago
"people could easily buy a lift ticket and ride downhill trails"
true but that has nothing to do with XC trails in Moab that are not in a resort, not DH specific for 99% of the trails and are not on private, company/corporate land. Also lifts/shuttles don't rip up the trails people are trying to ride down.

Yes there might be less land use issues in Europe but comparing Europe to Moab is nonsensical.Go read up on Moab and the land use/access issues that surround it. I guarantee you its nothing like Europe... even though Europe is quite the blanketed term.
c50 atSchladming7 1372954193.jpg?VersionId=iM.wYH6A
onenerdykid*
9 years ago
Is this the same bootleg demo that was held for Interbike? Isn't that not open to the public, meaning that these were "industry" affiliated people and usually buyers for shops trying out the bikes? If that is so, many of them might be ill-equipped since they are here for the tradeshow and simply trying out bikes for their shop, rather than a sample population for potential buyers. There are many buyers who are absolute rubbish at riding bikes and this is most likely one such person.
c50 Screen Shot 2015 03 09 at 2.10.12 PM 1425936051.jpg?VersionId=RClhlm1GiTEPMPegVFCjJxwA22d
sspomer
9 years ago
yeah, outdoor demo for interbike. i feel if people who work in the bike industry (whether they ride well or not) don't understand that a helmet is necessary on a trail ride, that's a solid representation of the general public, whether they want an ebike or not. my point is that the unequipped rider who tries out MTB on a pedal bike will not have the ability to get as far/deep/exposed as quickly as a rider on an ebike. does this matter for all trails? no, but in moab, i think it's important. i think about slickrock trail (which i havent' ridden for a good 10+ years and i thought motos were allowed on it). take the same unequipped rider on a pedal bike vs an ebike on slickrock trail. the rider could get way out there pretty easily on an ebike w/o realizing how far they've gone. i think blowing past the paint dots/trail markers on an ebike is more easier too. on a pedal bike you're going to be blown out on the steep, quick climbs as a noob and won't get nearly as far out. it seems less likely to miss the trail markers on a pedal bike too. it's not a blanket statement about one being better/worse than another, but i think the restriction is worth thinking about, especially in an exposed wilderness area like moab that draws a lot of first-time or unexperienced riders.
c50 Sharp jedi 3 copy
Mr. P
9 years ago
This is an interesting point on the e-bike riders over their head much deeper into the trail, I hadn't thought of that. Current trail system design has the advanced trails deeper in the system to help filter out the less skilled riders - for their own safety and as a selling point to the land managers for more well designed trails (= less exposure to litigation).

P
avatar.png?VersionId=TkOXSLqxgAC412Y 1F6UyzOaMSkN
motostrano
9 years ago
It's inevitable that e-bikes will be banned on some trails, but as the bikes become more and more popular, as they will, more and more trails will open up to e-bikes as well. The US MTB community complaining about e-bikes are being very short sighted about their future growth. Additionally, look for many OHV trails to become more and more popular with e-bikes and less so for motocross/jeep access.
2
1
c50 Sharp jedi 3 copy
Mr. P
9 years ago
One of the issues that we will face is already coming to fruition: The e-bike looking the same as a mountain bike. Other trail users experiences with e-bikes will be seen as a mountain bike experience (or blame mountain bikers is the other way to put it). As e-bikes are starting to look identical to mountain bikes.

In the future, with improved technology like smaller and stronger motors, and smaller and stronger batteries, all e-bikes will look just like us. Except they will be doing 20mph up the trail.

P

This is an e-bike:


"Looking at the Annad Power E-bike, you’d never know it had a motor, which is why it won an award. That, and the fact that it only weighs 32 lbs (14.9kg), which for an e-bike is quite light."
- bikerumor.com
4
c50 81A32570 05CB 4619 9B1D FDA52BA44048 1608972423
T-Dawg
9 years ago
Where is the electric generator/motor at? I see in other pics the hub is very big, but don't see how that by itself could create the force to get a 200lb man up a hill.
1
c50 Sharp jedi 3 copy
Mr. P
9 years ago
Did you read my full comment? Most e-bikes will look like this in 10 years - almost no different looking than what we ride. Bike technology is advancing at a stupid-fast pace.

P
c50 m sanshill ranch 2004 tn
mp
9 years ago
Bravo. E-bikes are motorized vehicles and should not be on bicycle trails.
9
2
c50 Hip Jump 1411979669
F1234K
9 years ago
You better not show up on my trails with a Di2 or iCD or E:i Shock or.... hell anything else I might not like because it's not on my bike.
3
c50 10615589 10204404031288080 5139697083266090436 n 1416605315
skyungjae
9 years ago
Though all legal e-bikes pose no issue, there are too many over-powered ones commercially available/home grown that try to use the laws as a loop hole to ride. It makes sense to ban all of them altogether. It's a good thing I prefer my pedal bikes to e-bikes in general.
1
1
avatar.png?VersionId=TkOXSLqxgAC412Y 1F6UyzOaMSkN
WaffleStomp
9 years ago
Good, here's to hoping this sets the proper precedent: e-bikes = motorized vehicles.

Also, let me forestall the barrage of ignorant criticisms: yes, I have ridden an e-bike. I think they're a great invention, and they are a cool piece of technology. For xmas, I'm seriously thinking of getting one as a commuter ride. That being said, and anyone who has ridden one can confirm this, e-bikes are motorized vehicles, plain and simple. That awesome feeling of scrabbling up a loose, steep slope at 20 mph or accelerating out of turns faster than even the pros is not something you can recreate on a normal bicycle, no two ways around it.

Edit: oops, looks like the butt-hurt e-bikers have found this article. Grow up (and maybe just get a dirt bike while you're at it).
5
2
c50 10615589 10204404031288080 5139697083266090436 n 1416605315
skyungjae
9 years ago
I don't know man. What e-bike have you ridden? All the ones that fall under the federal definition on what's actually an e-bike are pretty much glorified segways. I think to most average and above riders, the added weight doesn't make up for the extra wattage.
avatar.png?VersionId=TkOXSLqxgAC412Y 1F6UyzOaMSkN
WaffleStomp
9 years ago
There's a local powersports shop that does custom jobs on Santa Cruz frames, I've ridden ones on Tallboy LTs (2013 model I think), the new 2015 Nomads, and the 2014 V10. The motors are all right at the federal legal limit of 750 W at up to 20 mph before the assistance cuts out (my state has no explicit limits and uses the federal one). I think the total weight comes to about 55 lbs including battery pack, so that really makes for a hell of a lot of power for the weight. Basically, between me (a reasonably fit rider) and the extra 750 W from the motor, there's really no excuse for ever doing less than 20 mph all the time. I think the biggest difference for me was I could run a stupid huge chainring up front (42T on the V10) for a pretty high top speed and still have enough torque to fly out of the corners. Climbing was just silly, you can open the assist wide open and scream up anything way, way faster than a normal bike.

All in all, a hell of a lot of fun, but then again, so is a dirt bike.
1

Deals

See All »