eBike riders are getting more access in some national parks/NPS
With days to spare to meet Interior Secretary David Bernhardt's directive that eBikes quickly gain greater access in the National Park System, more parks are expanding that access, though there are some restrictions.
It was August 29 when the Interior secretary called for more access for the motorized bikes, signing a directive that said "eBikes shall be allowed where other types of bicycles are allowed..."
Bernhardt gave the agencies under his direction 30 days to "provide appropriate public guidance regarding the use of eBikes 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)."
Among the first parks to expand the access was Bryce Canyon National Park in Utah. Soon thereafter Glacier, Grand Teton, and Yellowstone national parks also expanded eBike access. Late last week Acadia, Arches, and Canyonlands national parks, as well as Natural Bridges and Hovenweep national monuments, gave the OK. At Golden Gate National Recreation Area in California, officials have proposed greater access for the motorized bikes, pending public comment.
In Acadia, Class 1 eBikes, those in which the motor provides assistance only when the rider is pedaling and which shuts off when the bicycle reaches 20 mph, are now being allowed wherever muscle-powered mechanical bikes are allowed, including the park's carriage roads. That drew the ire of the National Parks Conservation Association.
"Without properly evaluating impacts, and without adequate time for the public process to help inform this decision, the park is opening itself to unnecessary visitor conflicts," NPCA's Lauren Cosgrove said late last week. "Consistently named as one of the most visited national parks in the country, people travel from all over the world to experience Acadia National Park and especially at this time of year. Now a place where visitors go to walk, hike and ride to find solitude and to escape the sights and sounds of the modern world will be mixed with bikes that could buzz by, traveling up to 20 miles per hour."
John D. Rockefeller, Jr., designed the carriage roads "to create a network of woodland roads and stone bridges that allow visitors to enjoy the park through non-motorized transportation," added Natalie Levine, a member of NPCA's government affairs team. "The carriage roads require extensive labor and continual financial investment to maintain and were meticulously engineered so the roads could blend in with the scenery of the park and preserve the authentic Acadia experience."
While Acadia did expand access for Class 1 eBikes, officials kept intact a ban on Class 2 and Class 3 eBikes from accessing the 45 miles of carriage roads and the Schoodic bike paths. Park staff also reduced the maximum speed limit on those routes to 20 mph from 25 mph. They also pointed out that the Island Explorer shuttle buses and Bike Express trailers "are not transporting e-bikes at this time due to load limitations."
In Utah, Arches, Canyonlands, Natural Bridges and Hovenweep expand eBike use on Tuesday.
"Bicycles and e-bikes are allowed on paved and unpaved roads that are open to the public. Bicycles and eBikes are not allowed on any trails in the parks," the parks pointed out. "There are no charging stations in the parks. Generators are not allowed in the backcountry. This change in eBike policy applies to private and commercial use in the parks."
At Golden Gate, draft revisions to the park's compendium, the on-the-ground management guide for park officials, called for eBikes to be allowed "on all routes open to traditional bicycles, including certain designated trails and paths in Marin, San Francisco, and San Mateo counties. The draft compendium lists trails and routes that would be open to e-bikes. Like traditional bikes, operators of eBikes may not ride off-trail."
The park also noted that cyclists must observe speed limits of 15 mph in most places and 5 mph in high-congestion areas. Comments to the proposed change at Golden Gate are being accepted through October 28.
While NPCA did not voice similar objections to eBike use in parks other than Acadia, the group was encouraged that the other parks retained “the right to limit, restrict, or impose conditions of bicycle use and e-bike use in the future in order to ensure visitor safety and resource protection.”
That said, NPCA staff said they continue "to believe that park managers have not had adequate time to review the impacts of e-bikes on park resources, visitors, wildlife and trail conditions, or properly solicit public input."
Stories about:
Story Categories:
A copy of National Parks Traveler's financial statements may be obtained by sending a stamped, self-addressed envelope to: National Parks Traveler, P.O. Box 980452, Park City, Utah 84098. National Parks Traveler was formed in the state of Utah for the purpose of informing and educating about national parks and protected areas.
Residents of the following states may obtain a copy of our financial and additional information as stated below:
- Florida: A COPY OF THE OFFICIAL REGISTRATION AND FINANCIAL INFORMATION FOR NATIONAL PARKS TRAVELER, (REGISTRATION NO. CH 51659), MAY BE OBTAINED FROM THE DIVISION OF CONSUMER SERVICES BY CALLING 800-435-7352 OR VISITING THEIR WEBSITE. REGISTRATION DOES NOT IMPLY ENDORSEMENT, APPROVAL, OR RECOMMENDATION BY THE STATE.
- Georgia: A full and fair description of the programs and financial statement summary of National Parks Traveler is available upon request at the office and phone number indicated above.
- Maryland: Documents and information submitted under the Maryland Solicitations Act are also available, for the cost of postage and copies, from the Secretary of State, State House, Annapolis, MD 21401 (410-974-5534).
- North Carolina: Financial information about this organization and a copy of its license are available from the State Solicitation Licensing Branch at 888-830-4989 or 919-807-2214. The license is not an endorsement by the State.
- Pennsylvania: The official registration and financial information of National Parks Traveler may be obtained from the Pennsylvania Department of State by calling 800-732-0999. Registration does not imply endorsement.
- Virginia: Financial statements are available from the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, 102 Governor Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219.
- Washington: National Parks Traveler is registered with Washington State’s Charities Program as required by law and additional information is available by calling 800-332-4483 or visiting www.sos.wa.gov/charities, or on file at Charities Division, Office of the Secretary of State, State of Washington, Olympia, WA 98504.
National parks and their natural resources belong to you. The National Parks Traveler works to ensure you know how these essential places are being cared for.
Sign Up For Our Weekly Newsletter
Unsubscribe at any time.
INN Member
The easiest way to explore RV-friendly National Park campgrounds.
Here’s the definitive guide to National Park System campgrounds where RVers can park their rigs.
Our app is packed with RVing- specific details on more than 250 campgrounds in more than 70 national parks.
You’ll also find stories about RVing in the parks, tips helpful if you’ve just recently become an RVer, and useful planning suggestions.
Comments
As a Maine native, a life-long visitor and a tour guide in Acadia National Park for the past eight years, I can say that the decision to allow ANY motorized apparatus on any of Acadia's beloved Carriage Roads is a gross mistake. John D. Rockefeller, Jr. designed and constructed these roads at his own expense and gave them to us to provide quiet, uninterrupted access to special places in the park, and designated them off-limits to all motorized vehicles. Redefining the term "Motorized" to allow Electric bicycles of any power level flies in the face of his intent when building these roads. It was to protect the interior of Acadia from the intrusion...yes INTRUSION of motor-driven vehicles. Proponents of providing access to these areas by people of lesser means is not an adequate or appropriate defense against the flagrant disregard for Mr. Rockefeller's original intent when he spent millions of dollars of his own money, and expended over three decades of effort to provide what he saw as necessary protection for these special places. Not to mention the issue of enforcement, an additional burden on an already overtaxed and underfunded cadre of dedicated rangers whose jobs are already challenged by the burgeoning annual attendance numbers in Acadia. I say no...it is a poor decision, made by bureaucrats at the Federal level, forced upon those who manage this fabulous National Treasure, with no consideration for the harm it will do to the beauty, serenity and charm of Acadia. It is a gross mistake and I support any and all efforts undertaken to overturn this damaging and poorly-conceived decision. In fact, I believe that the Rockefeller's themselves should take up this challenge in court on the basis that it negates the intentions of their forbear, without whose efforts, forethought and generosity, this, the sixth most visited National Park in the country, would not exist today.
Good for Acadia for differentiating a class 1.
It's unlikely my comments will sway the anti-ebike crowd, but here goes:
Please take the opportunity to ride a Class 1 e-bike. Talk to the individuals who ride them and how they open up their lives to bicycling opportunities that they thought were lost to their youth. Talk to them about how now they can keep up (still sometimes barely) with their younger family members.
These bikes weigh a lot--and to reach speeds over 15mph takes a great deal of pedaling--note the word pedaling. My not-at-all-scientific observations are that cyclists on those awesome carbon frame road bikes leave us e-cyclists eating their dust on trails. (And no slight to them 'cause I certainly wish I could still ride like that.)
Enforce the speed limits and enforce the Carriage Road rules --I'm sure that there will always be those individuals who will disregard them--fine them and publicize the fines.
Thank you for opening up the availability of the roads to those who otherwise were limited in how they could be enjoyed.
How do you recognize a Class 1 eBike versus a Class 3 eBike when they are going down the trail? They all seem to look the same to this 70 year old who still uses a regular mountain bike. I think this visual recognition difficuty would be a problem for law enforcement. I read on the Bosch eBike Systems website that the Class 1 and 3 eBikes do not have a throttle and they are pedal assisted to speeds of 20 and 28 mph respectively. The Class 2 has a throttle but that may be hard to see as it goes down the trail. I appreciate National Parks Traveler's coverage of this issue. It is not a simple issue that can be readily solved and it will take time to work out.
After reading the many articles and comments in NPT regarding electric bikes (ebikes) I am personally ambivalent about whether ebikes are appropriate for use on designated bicycle trails within units of the National Park System. Based on descriptions provided by some NPT readers who use ebikes, I could reasonably understand Class 1 ebikes being authorized for use on most park bike trails, but not Class 2 or 3 ebikes.
However, the fact remains that bicycles with any motor assistance do not meet the current definition of “bicycle” in the Code of Federal Regulations applicable to NPS units. 36 CFR Section 1.4 states: “Bicycle means every device PROPELLED SOLELY BY HUMAN POWER upon which a person or persons may ride on land, having one, two, or more wheels, except a manual wheelchair.” Even the so-called “pedal assist” ( Class 1) ebikes, which really are “motor assist” bicycles, are precluded by the NPS definition. If NPS wants to allow Class 1 or any other class of ebikes on designated bicycle trails, then NPS should go through the rulemaking process to amend its definition of “bicycle” to include whatever classes of electric bicycles it proposes to allow. If ebike supporters want the new NPS ebike policy to survive likely legal challenge, then they should encourage NPS to properly codify the change through the rulemaking process.
Some commenters have alluded to the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) definition of “bicycle,” which was amended in 2003 to include “low speed electric bicycles.” These are defined in CPSC regulations as a “two- or three-wheeled vehicle with fully operable pedals and an electric motor of less than 750 watts (1 h.p.), whose maximum speed on a paved level surface, when powered solely by such a motor while ridden by an operator who weighs 170 pounds, is less than 20 mph.” It seems to be a misconception among some commenters that the CPSC definition in federal regulations means that ebikes must be legal to use anywhere “bicycles” are legal to use, which is NOT the case.
It is important to understand that the CPSC regulations apply ONLY to the manufacture and initial sale of electric bicycles, NOT where, when or how they can be operated. Think ...consumer…product…safety (i.e., safety standards for the manufacture and sale of a product), which is where CPSC’s expertise and jurisdiction lies; not in regulating where, when and how a product may be used after it has been purchased. In other words, the CPSC definition does NOT preempt applicable state laws, local ordinances, or NPS regulations regarding the USE of electric bicycles. For more detail, see this article about "confusion over ebike regulations" in a bicycle industry trade publication:
https://www.bicycleretailer.com/opinion-analysis/2013/07/29/legal-analys...
I have ridden traditional bikes for years and recently started ebiking.
All this handwringing around ebikes is misguided. The most dangerous cyclists I have ever encountered are hardcore cyclists trying to maintain their speeds and beat their times. Ebikes in my experience are more courteous probably in part because the motor lessens the physical costs of stopping / starting and makes the experience more about the travel and the journey and less about best times, heart rates zones and so forth.
Regarding ebike class enforcement...I suspect that polite class3 riders will go unchecked and problematic riders of any class (electric or traditional) will get a closer look. Good road bikers can hit 50mph going downhill and often have mechanical brakes with poor stopping power. An ebike rider going keeping their speed in check with higher end hydraulic brakes (as is pretty standard for ebikes) isn't really a public menace.
the ebikes without throttle only work if you peddle, they are peddle assist. Greater access into the back country is possible because of these bikes. As an older person I can not make it on a regular bike if there are hills. The evoke is still a workout and enables me to climb hills to access areas that previously I could not. It opens up so much more of the parks to more people and thereby a greater appreciation for these parks. Go try one, it will change your life.
@ Mike Murray on October 3, 2019 - 12:26pm.
I appreciate your reasonableness and I understand your viewpoint based on the facts you provided. It’s very important to have an open mind in this discussion, and unfortunately most do not.
I do not expect to change your mind, but I would like to offer some counters to some of the things you have mentioned in hopes of clarifying some of the issues you seem to believe are “black and white”.
Even the so-called "pedal assist" ( Class 1) ebikes, which really are "motor assist" bicycles, are precluded by the NPS definition.
I agree with you the rules should be changed, but again this not the black and white rule you make it out to be. You will notice that “EVERY device” not “PROPELLED SOLELY BY HUMAN POWER upon which a person or persons may ride on land, having one, two, or more wheels, except a manual wheelchair." are restricted from access. This is not the case in almost all parks. Electric Wheelchairs, Larkes, Segways and numerous other low powered electric vehicles are allowed in numerous different applications throughout the NPS. Sometimes for handicapped only, other times not. I am not taking one side or the other on these vehicles, but clearly low powered electric vehicles are handled differently than motorcycles and quads. For the most part these are regulated by the parks based on use, safety, and impact, and in my opinion isn’t about the “motor vs non motor” argument that has only been propagated against ebikes. Should the rules be changed? sure. Does this mean they can only occupy motorized roads with busses and quads going 50mph? (which is the only answer that non ebikers on here have) obviously not. Why in the world someone, can see the safety issue with a bike going 20 mph on a hiking trail, but expect them to share a road with vehicles that could be going three times as fast, and deadly to them, is beyond me…. It’s pretty clear that their “motivation” isn’t about safety.
The issue has never been “motor”.
The REAL issue is safety, and impact to the environment.
A rubber band twisted a hundred times is a motor.
A horse is not “PROPELLED SOLELY BY HUMAN POWER”, can go faster, and have more impact on the environment than an ebike.
In my opinion, when people start talking about the actual “issues” and not motor vs non motor (which was just a convenient line in the sand 60 years ago) then there will be some actual progress made. Of course, that would require “reasonableness”.
Notice excerpts from the webpage I am providing from the NPS’s own Yellowstone site.
https://www.nps.gov/yell/planyourvisit/wheelchairmobility.htm
Motorized Personal Vehicles
Motorized wheelchairs and scooters that are designed solely for use by a person with a mobility impairment are allowed.
Stand-up Devices
Visitors who would otherwise need to use manual or motorized wheelchairs are allowed some use of the Segway® Personal Transporter and similar stand-up personal vehicles. Although wheelchairs are allowed wherever pedestrians are allowed in Yellowstone National Park, standup personal vehicles do not meet the description of a wheelchair and their use is limited for safety reasons.
Obviously, the old rules were not written with the numerous low powered motorized and motor assist vehicles of today in mind. Therefore “reasonableness”, like with handicapped vehicles, would be both welcome and necessary. Nothing about that guideline or regulation would state that ebikes should be considered any differently, after all they are both “Motorized”.
Some commenters have alluded to the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) definition of "bicycle," which was amended in 2003 to include "low speed electric bicycles."
I’m not going to go too deeply into the federal law as its even more gray, and I am not a lawyer or expert, but I assume you aren’t either. The determining factor here is "on road and off road". This is where the confusion lies as the “NHTSA defined (and regulated) “motor vehicles” (and still does today) as a “vehicle driven or drawn by mechanical power and manufactured primarily for use on the public streets, roads, and highways…”. ( this quote taken from the exact article you referenced)
So when many people are saying that a class 1 ebike is not a “motor vehicle” under federal laws, they are partially correct when it comes to “on road use”. Thus, the clarification to be under the CPSC jurisdiction. However, as far as I can tell, this is still extremely grey. Which is what that article was pointing out for the majority of the comments, (albeit from 2013 which is exactly “recent”.)
I completely agree that obviously the CPSC isn’t mandating or even has the authority to mandate “usage” requirements. In the end it is primarily up to the state in nonfederal situations. But if you want a very recent and thorough definition of that, please see this article:
http://www.ncsl.org/research/transportation/state-electric-bicycle-laws-...
In the end you will see that “The District of Columbia and 33 states in some manner define an electric bicycle”… “In the remaining states, electric bicycles lack a specific definition and may be included within another vehicle class such as “moped” or “motorized bicycle.” For the majority of the states you will see that an ebike more closely resembles a muscle powered bike in my opinion. And 13 of those states use the “3 class system”.
Single track usage has been the one area that has been contested to a degree, however even that has seen a complete reversal in most locations as many myths and propaganda has been debunked.
As a 62 year old 5'1 lady I will say this. I had my first street/trail motorcycle at 17. Sold it at 24 with first baby. Have biked on regular bike since. Tried my husbands 3 class e bike. Pedal assist was nice but when I did the throttle my first empression was Holy Cow, it's like being on a motorcycle with less control. Having said this I will also say I'm able on my own to reach a high speed, though I don't keep it up, I would like to stay in one piece.
Like wise, I have almost been run over by "race, physical fitness, thrill" riders many times on bike paths. To say that all ebike riders, many who are my age and up, cruise along at 28 is not a accurate statement. My husband barely charged his battery last summer. The idea is exercise and enjoying the outdoors.
Now that retirement is in the future I was looking forward to seeing the country and its parks with bikes in tow. But I guess not. It seems like people just want to hoard the parks and trails for their own personal use instead of sharing.
Shame on you.