Do eBikes belong on the mountain?

[Captain Fastbastard Mayhem]

"gets double the descending" = trail take double the traffic / time unit

 

Good example of why E-Bike are welcome, but need to contribute proportionally to funds/costs that do are used for trail maintenance.

erm, no.

 

Are we going to make the faster / fitter riders pay more? I'm pretty sure Nino would have done the same amount of distance as Nixon on a normal training ride, without having assistance. 

 

Builders build and maintain. As a previous member of the TokaiMTB committee, and part-time volunteer builder of many of the trails in Tokai, I would help maintain & improve the trails. A guy who knows how to ride, riding an e-bike, would have far less impact on a trail than a noob who drags his brakes all over the place, or the rain that falls on the trail. Making an e-biker pay more just because they cover more distance in the same amount of time is ridiculous. The ONLY place they make up time is on the uphills. Down, it's all the same unless you're able to put a couple of pedal strokes in out of the corners and get a teensy bit of assistance to get you back up to speed. 

 

Maintenance is maintenance. You're not going to need to do more just because more riders are on e-bikes. You're going to need to do more when there are more beginners, more weather, more braking where you shouldn't and so on. Plus, the requirement for maintenance never stops. Charging one subset of users more than another just because they cover more distance is ridiculous. 

Edited March 18, 2019 by Captain Fatbastard Mayhem

[Zatopek]

erm, no.

 

Are we going to make the faster / fitter riders pay more? I'm pretty sure Nino would have done the same amount of distance as Nixon on a normal training ride, without having assistance. 

 

Builders build and maintain. As a previous member of the TokaiMTB committee, and part-time volunteer builder of many of the trails in Tokai, I would help maintain & improve the trails. A guy who knows how to ride, riding an e-bike, would have far less impact on a trail than a noob who drags his brakes all over the place, or the rain that falls on the trail. Making an e-biker pay more just because they cover more distance in the same amount of time is ridiculous. The ONLY place they make up time is on the uphills. Down, it's all the same unless you're able to put a couple of pedal strokes in out of the corners and get a teensy bit of assistance to get you back up to speed. 

 

Maintenance is maintenance. You're not going to need to do more just because more riders are on e-bikes. You're going to need to do more when there are more beginners, more weather, more braking where you shouldn't and so on. Plus, the requirement for maintenance never stops. Charging one subset of users more than another just because they cover more distance is ridiculous. 

 

Traffic contribute to trail damage. More traffic = more damage. (up/down/direction is not important - take a circular loop for the argument)

 

The same skills distribution between newbies and expert are going to be on ebikes for this argument. ( At least, I'm NOT even arguing that e-bikes might have more newbies on top)

 

Look at the words that you used in your post to indicate "disruption" and the factors mentioned - It indicate a significant change in traffic volume.

 

The maintenance costing model will need to be addressed if ebike numbers increase. At least increased for everyone right? Or are there other models that is more fair?

[Captain Fastbastard Mayhem]

The maintenance costing model will need to be addressed if ebike numbers increase. At least increased for everyone right? Or are there other models that is more fair?

Traffic isn't nearly as large a driver of trail wear as you think it is. It's mainly improper technique and weather. Yeah, okay - more **** riders = more wear, but it's only a portion of the driver ito total trail wear.

 

As for the Maintenance Model, it's perfectly fine at the moment (except at Tokai where there's no money for maintenance thanks to Parks) and Patrick et al do a good job given the amount of trail they need to maintain. IMO they actually do too MUCH maintenance of trail at the moment, especially on trails such as Cobra which run far better when they're open to the elements and not smoothed over every 6 months. The maintenance requirement won't increase as a result of e-bikes being allowed on the trails. What will increase it is excessive rain, wind, bad braking practices (creating ruts) & more distance on the trails. 

 

Still - in response to your assertion of unequal pay for different riders / classes of bikes, it's a solid no. Will your model allow for the extra impact that skinny tyres have due to their smaller contact patches and lower levels of grip (which encourages skidding etc)? Or faster riders? A cost per lap? Per kilogram over a certain level? 

 

No. A single cost per user will always be the best option. 

[DirtyFrank]

I have an old army buddy who used to be a fairly serious athlete, Iron man, Dusi, cycling etc. Had his right leg amputated above the knee due to bone cancer. This weekend someone lent him an e-bike(assisted peddling) and he managed to ride properly with a big group of mountainbikers and keep up! Seeing the immense joy he got from this tells me e-bikes have a definite place on our trails.

[Zatopek]

Traffic isn't nearly as large a driver of trail wear as you think it is. It's mainly improper technique and weather. Yeah, okay - more **** riders = more wear, but it's only a portion of the driver ito total trail wear.

 

As for the Maintenance Model, it's perfectly fine at the moment (except at Tokai where there's no money for maintenance thanks to Parks) and Patrick et al do a good job given the amount of trail they need to maintain. IMO they actually do too MUCH maintenance of trail at the moment, especially on trails such as Cobra which run far better when they're open to the elements and not smoothed over every 6 months. The maintenance requirement won't increase as a result of e-bikes being allowed on the trails. What will increase it is excessive rain, wind, bad braking practices (creating ruts) & more distance on the trails. 

 

Still - in response to your assertion of unequal pay for different riders / classes of bikes, it's a solid no. Will your model allow for the extra impact that skinny tyres have due to their smaller contact patches and lower levels of grip (which encourages skidding etc)? Or faster riders? A cost per lap? Per kilogram over a certain level? 

 

No. A single cost per user will always be the best option. 

 

You cant separate improper technique / bad braking practices from traffic volume - they are related.

 

If traffic was as low a driver than you think, then no one would ever complain about trail condition the day after an event with only 1000 riders went over it right? Or Western Cape trail will not deteriorate as fast in the dry summer months when it don't rain.

 

Patrick can do maintenance because trail fees got (substantially) increased to supply a budget - everybody pays equally to make it happen - currently.

 

I did not mention tyre width or rider weight - those will occur on both sides of the fence in equal proportions.

 

The only classification I use in my argument is ebikes - and only because that classification make such a big difference in traffic that you made a post to highlight that difference.

 

Multiply the [small] contribution of traffic to maintenance cost with this big difference that e-bikes make that you pointed out and then it might not so small anymore...

[rorydewet]

You cant separate improper technique / bad braking practices from traffic volume - they are related.

 

If traffic was as low a driver than you think, then no one would ever complain about trail condition the day after an event with only 1000 riders went over it right? Or Western Cape trail will not deteriorate as fast in the dry summer months when it don't rain.

 

Patrick can do maintenance because trail fees got (substantially) increased to supply a budget - everybody pays equally to make it happen - currently.

 

I did not mention tyre width or rider weight - those will occur on both sides of the fence in equal proportions.

 

The only classification I use in my argument is ebikes - and only because that classification make such a big difference in traffic that you made a post to highlight that difference.

 

Multiply the [small] contribution of traffic to maintenance cost with this big difference that e-bikes make that you pointed out and then it might not so small anymore...

so according to you ebikes increase traffic

 

and you anti that

 

i would have thought more people riding was the aim regardless of what they riding

 

so according to your model the less people riding the better?

[anybody seen george?]

(And its not even Friday yet!  )

Edited March 18, 2019 by anybody seen george?

[Grease_Monkey]

so according to you ebikes increase traffic

 

and you anti that

 

i would have thought more people riding was the aim regardless of what they riding

 

so according to your model the less people riding the better?

Although I don't agree with his point you have missed it completely. He is not saying more traffic is a bad thing, he is saying more traffic = more maintenance needed, so those users (ebikers) should pay more trail fees.

[Jewbacca]

Although I don't agree with his point you have missed it completely. He is not saying more traffic is a bad thing, he is saying more traffic = more maintenance needed, so those users (ebikers) should pay more trail fees.

But is it a valid point?

 

Most trail networks only maintain the trails once a year. At a stretch twice.

 

Not cutting trees/clearing, but actually rebuilding berms etc.

 

In the WC after summer when it's been dry and blown out and before/during early rains so it beds.

 

Whether that is 50000 or 60000 bikes through there per annum it won't really change.

 

With MTO pulling funding in Jonkers it will also likely go back to the 'once a year' model if that.

[Captain Fastbastard Mayhem]

Although I don't agree with his point you have missed it completely. He is not saying more traffic is a bad thing, he is saying more traffic = more maintenance needed, so those users (ebikers) should pay more trail fees.

following that logic, it should be scaled on a per km ridden basis, if that's what he's worried about (extra use / impact)

 

IE the fitter you are, and more distance you cover, the more you need to pay for trail maintenance. 

 

My answer to that: fkoff. A single pricing structure is key. If Joe Bloggs who rides an e-bike needs to pay R 1,500 per year vs my non e-bike's R 400, then no. What if JB has an e-bike AND another bike? Some sort of middle ground? What if JB on the e-bike still only does the same amount of distance as I do? Or if I do more? That means I, the non e-biker, does more distance and "has a higher impact on the trails" - do I pay more, then? 

 

Just... No. 

[Grease_Monkey]

But is it a valid point?

 

Most trail networks only maintain the trails once a year. At a stretch twice.

 

Not cutting trees/clearing, but actually rebuilding berms etc.

 

In the WC after summer when it's been dry and blown out and before/during early rains so it beds.

 

Whether that is 50000 or 60000 bikes through there per annum it won't really change.

 

With MTO pulling funding in Jonkers it will also likely go back to the 'once a year' model if that.

I'm on the fence about it.... I don't really believe ebikes increase traffic more than normal bicycle users. Take for example my pops who buys a year pass for Jonkers to ride his ebike 3 times around the circle route - does he get a discount? Do I need to pay more if I go +/-50 times a year on my normal bike.

 

Some ebike users ride many laps, some ride next to nothing, the same can be said for riders of normal bikes.

 

Now the next question must be asked, if I buy an ebike - do I need to buy seperate permits for my normal bike and ebike? So effectively I pay more than twice what I do now (since the ebike permit is more expensive than mtb permit) to ride maybe a little bit more?

 

Personaly I think increasing fees just divides the community further and puts people off buying permits. My opinion (and it's just an opinion) is that permits bought by ebikers at normal price contributes more than their use of the trails detract from the quality of trails.

Edited March 18, 2019 by Grease_Monkey

[Zatopek]

But is it a valid point?

 

Most trail networks only maintain the trails once a year. At a stretch twice.

 

Not cutting trees/clearing, but actually rebuilding berms etc.

 

In the WC after summer when it's been dry and blown out and before/during early rains so it beds.

 

Whether that is 50000 or 60000 bikes through there per annum it won't really change.

 

With MTO pulling funding in Jonkers it will also likely go back to the 'once a year' model if that.

This is actually a very valid argument 

 

[Maybe?] one can argue that if a certain technical section can take 'x' amounts of runs before it require repairs / taped off, then that will just happen earlier in the summer? Counter that with: a) building more trails to spread the traffic volume,

b) use artificial material to increase the carrying capacity

c) or build trails that is more sustainable  

 

Actions that could cost money...

 

For the record, I don't argue to tax a high mileage person - it takes effort to become fit or do more miles. Humans are lazy, so the traffic volume are self regulating at the top end of mileage. (I'm NOT saying that laziness are the reason for the existence of ebikes )

 

Except you now have a technology that with the press of a button shift (not remove) that self-regulation chart profile drastically to the right, specifically for the 'capable' riders that buy an ebike to get more runs / time unit.

 

That said, the administration and regulation of different licenses for different bike classifications will be near impossible. I have no idea how to implement that.

 

The fact remains: increase in traffic volume / time unit WILL happen in the next couple of years and the topic require some thought - at the very least prepare for an increase in trail fees to everyone, while ensuring that children or people with a lower income can still enter the sport.

 

I strongly believe that everyone that want to ride should be welcomed and trail fees should allow that to happen. (Be that on an ebike or a 10 year hold second hand bike)

[Thor Buttox]

following that logic, it should be scaled on a per km ridden basis, if that's what he's worried about (extra use / impact)

 

IE the fitter you are, and more distance you cover, the more you need to pay for trail maintenance.

 

My answer to that: fkoff. A single pricing structure is key. If Joe Bloggs who rides an e-bike needs to pay R 1,500 per year vs my non e-bike's R 400, then no. What if JB has an e-bike AND another bike? Some sort of middle ground? What if JB on the e-bike still only does the same amount of distance as I do? Or if I do more? That means I, the non e-biker, does more distance and "has a higher impact on the trails" - do I pay more, then?

 

Just... No.

Some of us are steam rollers, some of us 18 wheelers, some are bakkies, some are mopeds and some are bicyclists. Fees should definitely be based on weight, with a discount for ground compacting ability on new trail. Edited March 19, 2019 by Thor Buttox

[mazambaan]

He he all good fun; when does an e bike become an e (motor) bike (KTM e-sx, Alta etc)?

 

Asking for a friend.

[BigDL]

He he all good fun; when does an e bike become an e (motor) bike (KTM e-sx, Alta etc)?

 

Asking for a friend.

Well, presumably it becomes a motorbike as soon as you have a motor assisting. Not sure that there is any difference between a KTM ebike and a KTM 990 for the purpose of bicycle v motorbike

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GaryP]

Well, presumably it becomes a motorbike as soon as you have a motor assisting. Not sure that there is any difference between a KTM ebike and a KTM 990 for the purpose of bicycle v motorbike

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Surely there are many differences between a KTM 990 and a KTM ebike?