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
ec, you omitted the letter T from your post.
TRump - purveyor of fake news at its best.
There, fixed it.
The fastest growing bike segment in the US are ebikes. They're here to stay so let's stop the hand-wringing, get on one and have fun!
https://www.npd.com/wps/portal/npd/us/news/press-releases/2018/the-us-bi...
These articles along with all the previous ones on this site are quite hilarious and probably the least responsible journalism I've ever seen, but thats the norm for ebike haters. No reasonable facts, all propaganda. They only want to raise issues trhough panic not reasonbale conversation. Let me point out one of the most rediculous examples.
Go to the article and you will see this "Last year in Switzerland 79 people died in cars, 42 on motorbikes, 27 on bicycles and 12 on e-bikes. In addition, 43 pedestrians were killed, the Federal Roads Office said on Thursday."
So double the the people died on bikes and almost 4 times the people who were walking died then on ebikes. No mention of the AMOUNT of people who use this transportation or the amount of time doing it? No average rate of deaths per rider..... See the problem?
Also no mention of the fact that ebike riding has tripled or quadrupled easily in the last years so of course it would increase!! I do data analytics for a living and this is the perfect example of "circumstantial evidence". This is akin to saying that there are way more car deaths than ebike deaths, so ebikes are safer... of course not, more people use cars. You have to compare the averages not totals, Duh!
At least they included this which says the exact truth!! "These e-bike figures are the highest ever recorded and reflect the increasing popularity of e-bikes in Switzerland."
Again one ebike rider vs how many deaths for standard bikes in new york???
This is all silly and frivolous reporting and like it was said already "hand wringing" . The really sad part is that likely the biggest consumer of this site is conservative older people and yet they are alienating their largest consumer by "alarmist" propaganda... so sad!
Doug, all we're saying is that the NPS needs to do its due diligence as required under the Code of Federal Regulations. Indeed, we haven't taken a stand one way or another, and even pointed to some trails where eBikes might work just fine.
But at the same time, if there's no issue, why are people so opposed to have NPS conduct its due diligence?
Then say that... I am totally in support of conversation but thats not the "slant" of your arcticle, and you are actually not being truthful. You are touting a message that is biased. Saying that the only place a "motorized" vehicle should be allowed is on a motorized trail (which is what your laast article mentioned" is completley archaic, rules change as new technologies come out). As you mentioned its about speed. You can clearly see that the speed of a bike may cause issues to hikers but cant see that forcing a 20 mph ebike on to a road with Vehicles going 60mph would be WAY more dangerous. Its myopic, selfserving and biased. Saying that people call them "silent killers" is alarmist in nature and using to support your argument is sad. Are you saying that bicycles make more noise?
Your last article was not about open discussion. Would you say this gave equal representation to ebikes benefits? https://www.nationalparkstraveler.org/2019/08/dozens-conservation-groups... like using quotes to propel an agenda.
If you were being truthful you would mention all the benefits that ebikes have in addition to the things you are saying.
The impact of ebikes is non existant
Saying that people call them "silent killers" is alarmist in nature and using to support your argument is sad. Are you saying that bicycles make more noise? Are you saying that we want noisy vehicles in our national parks that would impact wildlife? LOL
What you should be promoting is that ebikes are coming and have many many benefits but NOW is our chance to be part of a conversation to make sure they are safe, regulated and have the exact same rights that everyone has. After all they are called Public lands, no small group has any more rights than anyone else does. Do we really need to make new trails just for Emtn bikes, because they have just as many rights as bikes do? thats working in reverse...
How about this...
Are you really going to tell emnt bike riders that need paved roads? or that a non-uniformly flat or level trail is not suitable for an Emnt bike with 200mm of suspension travel? LOL
Go back to your horse and buggy and start enforcing 10 mile an hour speed limits on the freeway...
Lets see the make up of your responders and see how they view your article. They will be in two groups:
1 Crackpots talking about how ebikes explode... LOL
2 people offended at the obvious "slant" of the article, perfectly represnted by this commenter:
These 2 "knuckle heads" are even better... lol. Absolutley nowhere are electric motorcycles allowed on these trails that were approved. The ignorance of people who open their mouths and have no idea what they are talking about is quite amusing..
So Doug, are you, or are you not, in favor of the Park Service doing its due diligence?