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
Has National Parks Traveler lost sight of its mission?
The magazine is National Parks TRAVELER--encouraging people to travel to their parks, see more of their parks, see their parks more often.
The e-bike is the means to that end!
Now, for the first time, ALMOST EVERYONE can tour their national parks without a car. Families and groups of different physical abilities, young and old, can all ride bikes together through their parks--some on regular bikes, some on e-bikes making them more equal to the abilities of better, more fit riders. Group rides become possible.
No longer will Grandma have to be driven from scenic view to scenic view. No longer will Grandpa be left in his wheelchair in the parking lot, waiting for his family to return from their bike ride through the park.
The e-bike is the answer to the National Park Service's prayers--only the e-bike holds the promise of getting more people out of their cars and touring their parks in a more natural and environmentally friendly way.
Can you see that future? Less traffic, less cars, less exhaust, less noise? Can you see an almost car-free National Park?
The National Park Service should be encouraging the use of e-bikes--they should be building bike pathways and lanes exclusive for bikes in an effort to get people out of their cars. Imagine: You park your car outside the park, rent an e-bike (or bring your own) and ride into the park.
And National Parks Traveler magazine? Well, they SHOULD be writing articles encouraging people to visit their parks in this new way, telling their readers about the best bike pathways, the best e-bike tours, encouraging people to ride as groups on e-bikes and see the parks more naturally.
Yosemite National Park has so much car traffic that they had to implement a shuttle service in the park. Is that the future we really want? Or do we want to get people out of their cars and into the parks in a quieter, more environmentally friendly way?
The e-Bike is the answer.
I couldn't agree with you more. I am glad you took the time to respond, I didnt know where to start, there were so many foolish things mentioned. I was almost run over by a tandem on a denver path Sunday. The muscle bikes never pay attention to the speed limit of 15mph, constantly putting most riders and pedestrians in danger, I have close friends that say they never do and they average around 22-25mph on the paths. One of the best examples was when I came down the grade from Copper Mountain going into Frisco CO, those guys were easily hitting 40mph, and there are families with kids on that path, its pathetic to say they are safer in someway compared to ebikes. I can barely get to 15 with my class2 ebike. I have traveled all over the country in the last 5 years with my ebike, and yet to see someone out of control. If these people would actually just ride one they would know they are not a threat. Look at the demographics for ebikes, yes all of 50,60,70,80 somethings are true and wild daredevils...NOT!!
SPECIAL MAINSTREAM MEDIA NEWS ALERT: Recently uncovered evidence confirms that 97% of scientists believe that climate change is real and that man is the primary cause. This evidence also confirms that roughly 77% of those scientists strongly agree with the roughly 77% majority who opposed allowing electric motorbikes on the trails in a recent Bozeman Daily Chronicle survey. These scientists urge caution on changes to current electric motorbike policies until such time that the impacts of electric motorbikes are fully and properly assessed, the specific types of electric motorbikes that can be allowed are properly defined, and appropriate regulatory guidelines for their use can be developed and proposed. Unfortunately, all requests by the US House of Representatives to obtain and review this new evidence in order to proceed with said assessment and regulatory development are being refused by the administration pending adjudication of executive privilege assertions. Subsequent efforts to gain access the the evidence by subpoena are being blocked by the Department of Justice. More on this later in tonight's broadcast.
Rump - purveyor of fake news at its best.
that is why they have classes. Class 2 bikes only go to 20mph. Instead of banning ebikes just put a speed limit on the trails. I have an ebike and usually average 14-16mph. I have had plenty of human powered bikes fly by me.
It is not accurate to classify all e-bikes in the same category as motorcycles. Motorcycles are self propelled, Class 1 pedal-assist electric bikes are not self-propelled. They can't go any faster than a strong rider on a conventional (mechanical assist) bicycle can go. The discussion around e-bikes in National Parks is referring only to pedal assist bikes. In the same way, but with different technology, these bikes allow older or handicapped people to ride bikes on steeper uphill grades by magnfying human effort. If you are opposed to that principle, then you should include mechanical assist bikes (gears) in your opposition. It is different technology that accomplishes the same purpose, albeit more effectively.
The only logical reason people would oppose Class-1 Pedal Assist bikes on trails is that they don't want to share the space with more riders. In this case, those 'more riders' are people like me who have been trail riding for years and due to age and some disabilities can't do the steep hills and rough terrain on a traditional bike any longer. A Class-1 Ebike allows me to stay out there. My tax dollars also go to support the Parks and without a compelling safety or environmental reason to disallow Class 1 Pedal Assist bikes, those of us who want to ride in the National Parks on bike trails should be as welcome as anybody.
Kurt- There are also Class 1 E Mountain Bikes (eMTN), restricted to 20 MPH. I don't think any of these Pedal Assist E-Bikes can go faster than a conventional bike when going downhill. Those of us who ride E-Mountain Bikes generally aren't speed demons anyway. We're just trying to stay upright and negotiate rough terrain.