I am a 75-year -old resident of Bend who recently purchased an e-mountain bike. I use the Phil’s Trail area to ride both my e-bike and my traditional mountain bike. I ride the e-bike only on the Forest Service roads within the area managed by COTA and Deschutes National Forest. I use my nonassisted bike on the singletrack trails.
I support the restrictions prohibiting e-bikes on the singletrack trails in this trail system. However, I encourage the Forest Service to review all trails to allow some for use by e-bikes while keeping some separate for traditional bikes. This would be in keeping with the current multiple use plans that include separate trails for horses, hikers, ORV, skiers and mountain bikers.
— Tom Leach, Bend
If e-bikes are allowed on Forest Service trails, then so should dirt motorcycles. With today’s technology, e-bikes have really just become motorcycles in disguise. Witness the people I’ve seen around Bend riding their e-bikes in the bike lane at over 30 mph. I’m having a very difficult time drawing the line between what is a motorcycle now and what is an e-bike, other than motorcycles require a license (and some training) while e-bikes do not.
I am opposed to any extension of e-bike usage on Forest Service trails, other than what is now allowed for vehicles and motorcycles.
— Larry Gregerson, Bend
They’re electric mopeds is what they are. … Keep them out of the trails.
— Jim Leander, Bend
Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the Bulletin editorial “Should debate about transportation be a one-way street?” (Oct. 21). First, I am grateful there is still a community paper for this discussion. Of course transportation policy should be debated and in fact has been for many years.
To continue the debate, I support the Bend Metropolitan Planning Organization decision to sponsor the Charles Marohn talk. What I don’t find useful is to debate trivial and cynical topics such as “the war on cars.” Not to worry, the transportation debate has been predominantly one -sided in favor of transportation and land use patterns that fund and encourage the use of the automobile. I certainly enjoy the ease, comfort, mobility and, at times, certainty of the auto. However, these benefits have changed. Our seemingly favored form of transportation is now one of the leading causes of global warming while its efficiency and safety wane.
The Bend MPO is right to sponsor speakers that encourage us to adapt and change the transportation and land use system in favor of our environment and in a way that promotes safety and equity. We are beyond the debate about automobile pros and cons. The auto had its time. It was a good run; let’s move on.
— Nick Arnis, Bend
The photograph in the Oct. 26 Bulletin of the homeless man sitting underneath an overpass as his campsite was removed was a poignant reminder of what it is like to live without housing.
What if a homeless camp could be constructed at a former KOA campground?
I have lived here long enough to remember when the vacant land north of Cooley Road and between Hunnell Road to the west and U.S. Highway 97 to the east was a KOA campground. For many years these 16 tax lots were owned by the Dickey Family Trust. According to Deschutes County DIAL, this property was sold to Walmart in 2006. It is ironic that Hunnell Road is now one of Bend’s main parking spots for RVs and cars belonging to the unhoused.
I don’t know how many of the services are still functional after 15 years of neglect but at one time there was electricity, sewer and water available for the campsites. The property is enclosed by a chain link fence and would make a secure campsite for the unhoused.
As I recall the city required Walmart to pay for improvements to the turn lanes off Highway 97 before it could build a super center there.
The tax lots are zoned commercial. Returning the area to a campground for RVs would be a blessing for “non-recreational campers.”
It is indeed ironic that campers now park on Hunnell Road rather than the old KOA.
— Andy Tillman, Terrebonne