WDFW going around law makers ????????????

[trophyhunt]

Rather than ban E-bikes, quads, dual sports, etc. etc. etc......wouldn't be easier to just designate "walk in only" areas.  If there is a gate on the road post the gate.  If there is a trailhead, post the trailhead.  Idaho does this and it appears to be working.  Some of Idaho's gates only allow horseback or foot traffic, others allow quads uder 50"...and some are open to whatever you want to drive or ride on it. 

Next thing you know, the same hunting group that hates e-bikes will be wanting to ban equestrian travel.  Then it will be gate all roads and only the elite athlete has the right to hunt.   Where does it end?   

For the record, I am not an e-bike owner.

this is my point.

[bornhunter]

Not an e bike hater but don't like the attitude that some owners have. Had a conversation this weekend on the coast with a couple that was going to ride in behind a closed gate/non motorized area. Lets just say they where very passionate about their bikes. Needless to say they moved on when I pointed out the area may or may not have active enforcement and surveillance in place.

If you own one ride it on designated orv trails. Simple. But non motorized areas means non motorized. It means that I train all year so I can access gated areas 6,8,10 miles either on mnt bike, foot, or a combo of both. I know after a couple miles I've separated myself from most hunters.

If e bikes where legal I can only imagine how many people would be accessing these areas.

Spot on!

[Jonathan_S]

Rather than ban E-bikes, quads, dual sports, etc. etc. etc......wouldn't be easier to just designate "walk in only" areas.  If there is a gate on the road post the gate.  If there is a trailhead, post the trailhead.  Idaho does this and it appears to be working.  Some of Idaho's gates only allow horseback or foot traffic, others allow quads uder 50"...and some are open to whatever you want to drive or ride on it. 

Next thing you know, the same hunting group that hates e-bikes will be wanting to ban equestrian travel.  Then it will be gate all roads and only the elite athlete has the right to hunt.   Where does it end?   

For the record, I am not an e-bike owner.

I believe this misses the mark. Horses are not new technology, ebikes are. This is just the process of figuring out where they fit in the scheme of (motorized) travel.

No dog in this fight, but why would it matter if it was a horse or an ebike? Both provide an advantage to the user vs the walk in guy. Both damage trails, both allow some people to access an area that they may not otherwise be able to access. I do not see a real big difference?

There are horse trails and bike trails and there are motorized trails. Sometimes they overlap and sometimes they don't. I don't think it's a big difference either but it is a difference and I think ebikes are finding their place which is motorized travel 

[trophyhunt]

Well Hawks33, as an atv owner you should have a dog in this fight.  How do you like the limited riding places in our state already, they make us buy tabs for what?  What's next if they ban a bike that assist the rider a little bit, you don't think ATV's are a bigger problem with how people use them behind gates?  I have both, and this myth that an ebike is like a motorcycle is from people who have never ridden one.  The bike assist you on your ride, you can just push the throttle and go on flats, but if you go up any steep hills, you have to pedal and they don't last 20 miles like they advertise.  I took mine up a 6 mile incline, peddling all the way, and my battery was about 80% dead, it's a brand new 750.  I think people that don't own these bikes don't have a clue about them.  This is just another example of user groups against each other.  If private timber wants to ban all ebikes, that's one thing, but the state banning them on public land is total BS.  I know you have seen what horses do to trails, tell me a bike is worse?  I'm not wanting to point you out on this at all, my post if for all the ebike haters.  If ebikes get banned, maybe horses should too???  And to be clear, I am not for breaking the walk in only rules behind gates, But their are plenty of walk in only gates and gates that you should be able to ride your bike in.  Haters hate, some hate rifle, some hate archery for the amount of animals that don't get found and go off and die!  Some hate muzzy's with 209 and someday scopes.  Lets just keep fighting each other and pretty soon we won't see disabled, or older hunters in the field at all.  I'm sure when I was a younger guy I'd hate ebikes too, but as age creeps up slowly, it's nice to work smarter not harder.  Last rant, what about our damn rights people?  we live in America, we kick azz, we explore, our population is expanding so yeah, there will be more hunters, hikers, anti's , pros......   Get over it, it's a bike with battery, if some guy/gal peddles by you, they could be riding right past that record book blacktail, you never know.  Hunting is exploring, and it's a lot of luck, quit friken crying about what others do, unless they are out to take away your damn rights!

I don't see anybody "crying" except for the EBike owners 

I beg to differ Jon, ebikes have always been complained about on this site and others.  I just see more damage from other groups and think people don't have a clue about ebikes till they ride one.  Also, just to put it out there again, I'm not saying we should ride behind walk in only gates, we should have gates like idaho that keep vehicles out but other uses are welcome. 

They should be allowed wherever dirtbikes are. I can see them offering an advantage over a dirtbike in many situations i.e. walking over unrideable trail portions and easier to hide, more reliability in some cases too.

Now answer me this...You say they don't offer much of an advantage over a mountain bike. Why spend the money then? How can somebody who hasn't ridden one not have a clue what they're talking about but an Ebike doesn't offer an advantage? How can those things both be true?

I have both, I use my regular bike in non motorized areas, I’m new to the ebike hunting, just bought it this year and have only used it on a roads that are open to them.  I just see people hating another hunter group which doesn’t help anyone.  I still wonder how many people have been affected in a negative way by ebikes? Like was said, horses cause way worse damage, I don’t see damage by my bike going down a trail I’m allowed to ride on.

[trophyhunt]

I’m not arguing here for ebikes being allowed in walk in only areas, I’m saying there should be a place for them as well as other means of hunting.  Roads with gates that allow ebikes, horses, walking, and walking only areas like someone mentioned that has been working in Idaho very well.

[huntnphool]

 I’m waiting for Elon to produce a single seat quad drone you can sit in and fly using your cell phone, now that will be a interesting thread to read.

[trophyhunt]

I’m waiting for Elon to produce a single seat quad drone you can sit in and fly using your cell phone, now that will be a interesting thread to read.

seriously, how cool would that be!!  Especially for getting to work! 

[jrebel]

Rather than ban E-bikes, quads, dual sports, etc. etc. etc......wouldn't be easier to just designate "walk in only" areas.  If there is a gate on the road post the gate.  If there is a trailhead, post the trailhead.  Idaho does this and it appears to be working.  Some of Idaho's gates only allow horseback or foot traffic, others allow quads uder 50"...and some are open to whatever you want to drive or ride on it. 

Next thing you know, the same hunting group that hates e-bikes will be wanting to ban equestrian travel.  Then it will be gate all roads and only the elite athlete has the right to hunt.   Where does it end?   

For the record, I am not an e-bike owner.

I believe this misses the mark. Horses are not new technology, ebikes are. This is just the process of figuring out where they fit in the scheme of (motorized) travel.

No dog in this fight, but why would it matter if it was a horse or an ebike? Both provide an advantage to the user vs the walk in guy. Both damage trails, both allow some people to access an area that they may not otherwise be able to access. I do not see a real big difference?

There are horse trails and bike trails and there are motorized trails. Sometimes they overlap and sometimes they don't. I don't think it's a big difference either but it is a difference and I think ebikes are finding their place which is motorized travel 

I think the responses to my post are focused on the wrong aspect....being the horse....I use it only as an example of travel that gives the hunter an advantage over the hiker.  My only point is that....there are many different forms of travel and non are inherently good or bad, just different.  The argument that an e-bike gives the end user an advantage over a hiker, thus it should be banned, is ridiculous.  If you allow that argument we would need to ban all modes of travel except for foot (thus making hunting a sport only for the young / in shape athlete).  If the hiker wants an advantage, hike where an e-bike cannot travel. 

Again, I think Idaho has done it right....label the trailheads with what is allowed and fine the people that brake that law.  If the law currently states e-bikes under so many watts are considered "bikes" then allow them where you would allow other bikes.  If you don't like competing with them, then buy one yourself or go where they are not allowed.....simple really. 

[blackpowderhunter]

seems super simple to me.
e bike has a motor right? shouldn't be allowed in non motorized areas.
solution? get a regular bike as well or find another area to hunt that allow motorized vehicles.  The lands are still public, they just have laws.  they aren't keeping you out of the land.  public roads have speed limits and laws about what types of vehicles are allowed on them right?
 

[JimmyHoffa]

I go back and forth with ebikes. I dont have one, therefore, I'm not biased by an investment into to something being called into question.  I do have atvs and I could get an ebike, but anymore, it seems like it's too easy to get 10 miles into the backcountry or behind gates.  If we truly want to protect this resource, do we want to continue to make it easier to get to animals? You still have to hunt and do the boot work after the ebike ride, I'm just not sure I'm a fan.

There are some places that everyone shouldn't be able to go and after the massive influx of hikers etc into the forests this year, I feel even more strongly about that. The massive amount of garbage being one reason (my experience).  Just seems like we need to limit the "the spread" of hunters into our forests and give mother nature a chance to take care of her critters.  I'll get off my soap box now

I've been on the fence on getting one.  Mostly haven't due to not getting any clear answers on use.  Really, though, it isn't the hunting part that's the concern.  The pack out is where I think it would mainly be an asset.  When you get a few miles behind a gate, then a mile off the road--it might take a couple full days to get an animal out.

[arees]

It was claimed, correctly, that current battery technology limits the advantage of an ebike over a normal bike.  The one thing I can be sure of is that battery technology will get better.  It will probably get better rapidly.  Battery improvements are why we are talking about ebikes at all.

If you declare ebikes to be non-motorized vehicles just because the current version has a limited battery, what do you do when ones with better batteries appear on the market?  That single seat quad drone is already in testing.  Is it non-motorized because it has a limited range?

If it has a motor, it is motorized.  Use it in the areas where motorized vehicles are allowed.

[buckfvr]

I know private property owners (timber cos) can ban anything they want and Hancock has posted gates near me that clearly state no e-bikes, so maybe wdfw is aligning with some of their largest private holdings partners in order to eliminate any confusion on whether or not they can be used here but not there.

[JimmyHoffa]

seems super simple to me.
e bike has a motor right? shouldn't be allowed in motorized areas.
solution? get a regular bike as well or find another area to hunt that allow motorized vehicles.  The lands are still public, they just have laws.  they aren't keeping you out of the land.  public roads have speed limits and laws about what types of vehicles are allowed on them right?
 

Part of the issue is that the laws don't consider them motorized until they hit a certain speed or power or other features.  Until that point they are considered electric assisted bikes.  We all know it has a motor, but legally it isn't. 

[Jonathan_S]

Mr. @trophyhunt, Jerry, I asked this earlier can you please give me your thoughts?

Now answer me this...You say they don't offer much of an advantage over a mountain bike. Why spend the money then? How can somebody who hasn't ridden one not have a clue what they're talking about but an Ebike doesn't offer an advantage? How can those things both be true?

[blackpowderhunter]

It was claimed, correctly, that current battery technology limits the advantage of an ebike over a normal bike.  The one thing I can be sure of is that battery technology will get better.  It will probably get better rapidly.  Battery improvements are why we are talking about ebikes at all.

If you declare ebikes to be non-motorized vehicles just because the current version has a limited battery, what do you do when ones with better batteries appear on the market?  That single seat quad drone is already in testing.  Is it non-motorized because it has a limited range?

If it has a motor, it is motorized.  Use it in the areas where motorized vehicles are allowed.

and people cant use the "limited range" argument to say it should be allowed (this is not directed at you).
Quads, side by sides, dirt bikes, hell even trucks have a "limited range" based on their fuel capacity.
Battery is the fuel for the e bike.  This is all semantics at this point.
OP is pissed he cant take his e bike where he thought he could because when they were developed there was no law regarding them, now lawmakers and WDFW are working to adjust to newer tech.
Same thing happened with drones when they first came out.
20 years ago you shouldnt have to have laws about these things with hunting, now when you can buy a sweet drone at costco or on amazon, it becomes available to the masses.