Interior Secretary David Bernhardt late Thursday issued an order to allow eBikes to use the same trails in the National Park System that are open to muscle-powered mechanical bikes.
"E-bikes shall be allowed where other types of bicycles are allowed; and E-bikes shall not be allowed where other types of bicycles are prohibited," read the order, released Thursday evening in Washington, D.C.
In issuing the order (attached below), Bernhardt said the decision "simplifies and unifies regulation of electric bicycles (e-bikes) on Federal lands managed by the Department and also decreases regulatory burden."
The policy change came without public disclosure and without an opportunity for the public to comment on the proposal before it is implemented, moves that appear in conflict with the Code of Federal Regulations. The secretarial order calls for the policy to be adopted "unless otherwise prohibited by law or regulation" within two weeks. It also calls for public comment, after the fact, some time in the future.
Secretary Bernhardt's order adds that within 30 days of the order agencies within the department should "provide appropriate public guidance regarding the use of e-bikes on public lands within units of the National Park System, National Wildlife Refuge System, lands managed by BLM, and lands managed by (Bureau of Reclamation)."
At the National Parks Conservation Association, Senior Vice President of Government Affairs Kristen Brengel told the Traveler on Wednesday that implementing a change in where motorized vehicles, including eBikes, can go in the park system requires the Park Service to embark on a rulemaking process, as required under 36 CFR 1.5.
Except in emergency situations, a closure, designation, use or activity restriction or condition, or the termination or relaxation of such, which is of a nature, magnitude and duration that will result in a significant alteration in the public use pattern of the park area, adversely affect the park’s natural, aesthetic, scenic or cultural values, require a long-term or significant modification in the resource management objectives of the unit, or is of a highly controversial nature, shall be published as rulemaking in the FEDERAL REGISTER.
"If eBikes are to be used on trails already designated for bikes, that is completely contrary to the Park Service’s current policy," said Brengel, adding that a change in policy should be formally reviewed to ensure there are no conflicts with existing user groups.
“How does this affect the rest of the public visiting a park? We want to make sure everyone has a great experience," she added. “What does (an eBike) do to everyone else’s experience there? That’s why there needs to be a rulemaking and public comment. Depending on what this policy says, it could be completely violating the Park Service’s own regulations and policies.”
National Park Service staff in Washington, D.C., could not immediately be reached Thursday evening to say what process the agency would follow in opening trails to eBikes.
After the order was released Thursday, Brengel said that "(T)he Interior Department is rushing guidance on a use they haven’t properly evaluated for potential impacts to park natural and cultural resources, visitors or wildlife. Sadly, this new policy was created behind closed doors and with no public involvement. E-bikes have a place on national parks’ roads and motorized trails. But this announcement disregards well-established policies for how visitors can enjoyably and safely experience the backcountry in national parks."
The suddenly hot-button topic of where eBikes could travel in the National Park System arose this summer out of Acadia National Park, where staff made the decision that the motorized bikes couldn't travel the park's iconic carriage roads. Fines for those caught on the roads start at $130, according to the park's website.
Reaction to that decision drew dozens of comments to a Traveler article, and opposition to allowing eBikes on non-motorized trails in the federal lands system came from dozens of conservation groups, who fear permitting the motorized bikes on those trails will create a "slippery slope" that will lead to future problems with managing those trails.
Bernhardt referred to the controversy in his order.
Uncertainty about the regulatory status of e-bikes has led the Federal land management agencies to impose restrictive access policies treating e-bikes as motor vehicles, often inconsistent with State and local regulations for adjacent areas. The possibility that in some cases e-bikes can be propelled solely through power provided by the electric motor, a function often used in short duration by older or disabled riders as an assist, has contributed to confusion about e-bike classification. Further, Federal regulation has not been consistent across the Department and has served to decrease access to Federally owned lands by e-bike riders.
According to NPCA, so far Arches and Canyonlands national parks in Utah specifically ban eBikes from trails in the parks that are open to bicycles. Additionally, the park advocacy group notes that:
To designate a Park Service trail as appropriate for e-bikes and other kinds of motorized vehicles, a superintendent would need to evaluate the suitability of the trail and the costs involved, conduct an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement evaluating potential harm to the trail, allow a public comment period, and show that the use of the vehicle is appropriate using the agency’s five criteria for “appropriate use”:
Consistency with applicable laws, regulations and policies
Consistency with existing park plans for public use and resource management
The actual and potential effects on park resources and values
The total costs to the Park Service
Whether the public interest will be served
There are three "classes" of eBikes:
* Class 1: eBikes that are pedal-assist only, with no throttle, and have a maximum assisted speed of 20 mph.
* Class 2: eBikes that also have a maximum speed of 20 mph, but are throttle-assisted.
* Class 3: eBikes that are pedal-assist only, with no throttle, and a maximum assisted speed of 28 mph.
"Class 2 may not be suitable for singletrack mountainbike trails - it has been shown that they pose greater physical damage to trails due to the throttle-actuation," writes eBike manufacturer Bosch on its website. "Class 2 may be better suited for multi-use OHV trails designed for more rugged off-road vehicles.
"Class 3 eBikes are typically allowed on roads and on-road bike lanes (“curb to curb” infrastructure), but restricted from bike trails and multiuse paths. While a 20-mph maximum speed is achievable on a traditional bicycle, decision makers and agencies consider the greater top-assisted speed of a Class 3 eBike too fast for most bike paths and trails that are often shared with other trail users."
In his order, the Interior secretary didn't differentiate between the three classes, and directed the Park Service, Bureau of Land Management, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to "exempt all e-bikes ... from the definition of motor vehicles."
Comments
FYI if you look up the federal code, its very explicit when it defines what an ebike is, and that it defines it as a bicycle and specifically not a motorized vehicle. But allows states and other agencies to regulate use of bicycles and ebikes as necessary.
I never understood the legal validity of the national parks position that an eBike was a motorized vehicle since it seemed specifically at odds with the federal code.
Which is not to say that they don't have the responsiblity to regulate as necessary, but they don't have a right to call a bicycle, ebike a motorized vehicle when the federal law specifically states that it is not.
I think when ebikes first came out there was a lot of fear about them, people didn't understand what they were. Now that they're becoming more common people have less fear and are more accepting. I've put just over 7K miles on my hardtail bike in the past 2 years.
What's the definition? The only thing I could find was a regulation made by the Consumer Product Safety Commission (and a law that seems to mirror the regulation) that allowed it to regulate "low speed electric bicycles" but didn't otherwise specify that any other federal agency was bound to accept them as they would a human powered bicycle.
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2003-02-12/html/03-3423.htm
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2011-title15/html/USCODE-2011...
My e-bike enables me to ride as I did 10 years ago. I was no problem then and I was allowed on the trails.
As defined by the Consumer Product Safety Commission, E-bikes are "pedal-assist" meaning the rider must be pedaling for the electric motor to engage.The experience is entirely different from riding a gas scooter or motorbike. The electric assistance is perfectly smooth and SILENT, and complements rather than supplants human power. The bicycle's low-speed electric motor provides a boost of power to climb hills, extend the range of trips, or allow users to bike more often and farther. Low-speed e-bikes are as safe and sturdy as traditional bicycles and move at speeds similar to conventional bikes.
Various studies show very little difference in the average travel speeds and average top speeds for e-bikes versus traditional bikes. "With few exceptions, riders of e-bikes behave very similarly to riders of bicycles." Also, electric bikes open up cycling to a whole slew of people who would otherwise be driving a car. It's wrong for cyclists to assume that anyone can ride a bike. Many people find it impractical or impossible because of hills, distance, health reasons, knee problems, or aging. E-bikes suddenly make biking a whole lot more accessible to the 98% of our population who aren't cyclists.
E-bikes are emissions-free, low impact and operate silently. E-bikes resemble traditional bicycles in both appearance and operation and do NOT function similarly to mopeds, scooters and other motorized vehicles. E-bikes are a cost-effective and environmentally friendly transportation option. I'm not sure how riding my E-bike on a trail will "have potential harm to wildlife" any more than a traditional bike will, or what the "long-term, harmful consequences" might be. By implying allowing e-bikes on trails and suggesting that users of e-bikes will lead to future problems with managing those trails, is simply ludicrous.
Janice et al eBike proponents, some things to keep in mind during this period of reviewing where eBikes can go in the National Park System:
* eBikes, by their very definition, are motorized. There are NPS regulations against allowing motorized vehicles on trails;
* In his directive, Interior Secretary Bernhardt did not say only Class 1 eBikes would be allowed; he left it open to all three classes of eBikes;
* There have been reports of increasing injuries, and even some fatalities, related to eBikes:
Also:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/sep/14/e-bike-crash-death-prompts-debate-over-safety-on-uk-roads
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S000145751830174X
https://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/nyc-crime/ny-bicylist-critical-after-striking-pedestrian-central-park-20190827-3sfdl2zvqbehtoungcbqeptzhq-story.html
https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/road-deaths-and-injuries_serious-e-bike-injuries-increase-by-more-than-a-third/44874308
https://azdailysun.com/news/council-pedals-toward-more-stringent-regulat...
The issues highlighted in the above-cited study and news stories are why the NPS needs to proceed carefully in evaluating the use of eBikes on trails. This is not to say accidents only happen to eBike users. It simply underscores why the proper evaluation called for by federal regulations needs to be done, whether the topic is expanded access for eBikes, mountain bikes, scooters, or even equestrians.
I'm certainly not anti-bicycle nor anti-eBike, but they have their purpose. The regulations around eBikes are really about regulating their safety. They're not specifically treated as motorcycles where they would have been regulated by the Dept of Transportation and subject to FMVSS rules. However, that doesn't make them the same as human-only powered bicycles. That's the same reason why the powered toy cars aren't regulated as motor vehicles. It's simply not relevant to the discussion of NPS policies.
Kurt, it would be interesting to see those statistics in the context of similar studies for standard bikes. Tough to make a judgement when we don't know if they are worse or better than the manual counterpart.
This is great news for all mountain e-bikers. There are many miles of trails and plenty of room for hikers and bikers in Utah. I would encourage all e- bikers to be courteous on the trail the so we don't loose this great privilge.