E-bike users now excluded from receiving a Compostela

[Bradypus]

The Santiago cathedral has begun issuing a new version of its credencial. The new wording of the demand for two sellos per day every day has caused a lot of online debate. There has been less comment on another change which is far less ambiguous. The credencial now states that cyclists must cover a minimum of 200km (as before) but adds that electric bikes are excluded. The photo below was posted on Facebook by Johnnie Walker earlier today. My highlighting.

 

[PelegrinNikolai]

Great to see inside the lastest credencial, thank you for posting.
And the fact that I can kind of read it means my Camino prep is going well

 

[JabbaPapa]

Thanks for posting this !!

Some of the prose is clearly impoverished by space constraints, but I think that the 2/day thing is qualified by the context of the various distances mentioned for the various types of pilgrimage.

The same context would for example suggest that motor boat pilgrims are not typically eligible.

There are a few exceptions, but as these concern a very tiny minority of pilgrims, they remain rightly undetailed. One pilgrim I met this year was suffering from a genuinely morbid obesity, corrected in part by an operation, but enough to constitute an officially recognised physical handicap. In his case, it was either an e-bike Camino or no Camino at all.

Some contents of this document also seem to contradict Catholic doctrine, Canon Law, and the general Spanish National legal definition of "the Camino" - - but as I am currently very far away from my keyboard, I would advise those reading that opinion to take it with more salt than usual.

It possibly also contradicts EU Law in its establishment of "the Camino" as being a "European Cultural Route", by making it excessively Spain-centric.

The no e-bikes thing is anyway unenforceable mostly, though I could envisage some outcome whereby such machines might end up being forbidden in the various kinds of public Albergues ?

 

[Grousedoctor]

The no e-bikes thing is anyway unenforceable mostly, though I could envisage some outcome whereby such machines might end up being forbidden in the various kinds of public Albergues ?

As a cyclist, I would suggest that this requirement is enforceable to the degree that people either tell the truth or lie upon presenting themselves to the Pilgrim’s Office. The simple question is, what type of bicycle did you ride on your Camino? If they are honest and state that they rode an e-bike, then they qualify for a distance certificate, nothing more. And if they are untruthful to the Church, well then their Compostela is nothing more than a meaningless tourist souvenir.

One pilgrim I met this year was suffering from a genuinely morbid obesity, corrected in part by an operation, but enough to constitute an officially recognised physical handicap. In his case, it was either an e-bike Camino or no Camino at all.

And, I would hope this type of accommodation could be addressed. However, I fear that the pilgrim @JabbaPapa met is really the exception to the rule not the typical e-biker on the Camino.

 

[jerbear]

Keep e bikes out of municipal albergue!

 

[Pafayac]

It's a bit tough: they could deliver them a virtual, e-Compostela !

 

[JustOneGuy]

I don't know how much I care about getting the credentials. However, my humble opinion, as an ebike user who had previously planned to do a camino with an emtb, is as follows:

1) the norm is unclear. Theoretically it could be interpreted as a way to limit the 200 km limit to "muscle" bikes. That is correct. But it would have been more clear to create a separate article and exclude ebikes from being eligible for credentials. Exactly like for sailboat (and is wind not giving you a lot of help?).

2) from a content point of view, it is someway understandable that e-bikes are not limited at 200 km like the muscle ones, given the help the motor gives. But my experience is that the battery is rarely able to give substantial help over long distances, especially with luggage, and including the power supply. In addition, "pedelecs," as those adhering to EU regulations that do not require insurance are called, are highly sustainable, and their use should be IMHO encouraged as much as possible today. An opportunity was missed to favor them...

In my humble opinion, it would have been enough to impose a higher limit on the minimum distance to be traveled in order to obtain credentials. In the end, pedelecs still require a lot of effort uphill, especially if you need to conserve energy for a long day.

 

[JoEllen]

When I read the sentence about the eBikes, I don't see where it says specifically that eBikes are excluded from receiving a Compostela. The sentence says "Bicycle pilgrimage: having traveled 200 km (excluding the electric bicycle)." Does that mean that eBike Pilgrims are excluded from having to ride 200 km? That is not clear to me that you will be denied a Compostela. I don't see on the photo that a different minimum has been imposed on eBikes, however.

 

[Jeff Crawley]

I don't know how much I care about getting the credentials. However, my humble opinion, as an ebike user who had previously planned to do a camino with an emtb, is as follows:

1) the norm is unclear. Theoretically it could be interpreted as a way to limit the 200 km limit to "muscle" bikes. That is correct. But it would have been more clear to create a separate article and exclude ebikes from being eligible for credentials. Exactly like for sailboat (and is wind not giving you a lot of help?).

2) from a content point of view, it is someway understandable that e-bikes are not limited at 200 km like the muscle ones, given the help the motor gives. But my experience is that the battery is rarely able to give substantial help over long distances, especially with luggage, and including the power supply. In addition, "pedelecs," as those adhering to EU regulations that do not require insurance are called, are highly sustainable, and their use should be IMHO encouraged as much as possible today. An opportunity was missed to favor them...

In my humble opinion, it would have been enough to impose a higher limit on the minimum distance to be traveled in order to obtain credentials. In the end, pedelecs still require a lot of effort uphill, especially if you need to conserve energy for a long day.

The Armada has arrived!

 

[lt56ny]

E bikes, Yikes. One of the many reasons you will only see me on caminos like the Aragones,, Madrid, Vasco, next year Mozarabe.

 

[t2andreo]

The Santiago cathedral has begun issuing a new version of its credencial. The new wording of the demand for two sellos per day every day has caused a lot of online debate. There has been less comment on another change which is far less ambiguous. The credencial now states that cyclists must cover a minimum of 200km (as before) but adds that electric bikes are excluded. The photo below was posted on Facebook by Johnnie Walker earlier today. My highlighting.

View attachment 175928

I am SOOOOO glad they clarified this issue!

In recent years, the issue was wether the particular bicycle had a motoring-only throttle, or required pedaling to move forward.

Without a bicycle mechanic out front to decide this fact, this is the only wise decision to take.

THANK YOU for simplifying matters.

Tom

 

[falcon269]

I love heated debates about arbitrary criteria on a completely artificial construct. It all began with a pilgrimage to the alleged tomb of an Apostle. Now you cannot touch the Tree of Jesse after 800 years of fingers and body oil (it won't survive another 800 years? Wouldn't an annual application of an acrylic prevent further deterioration and extend the touch life of the stone nearly to infinity while preserving an arbitrary tradition?).

I have a list of over twenty subjects that could raise the ire of someone on the Forum and heat up the debate...

First though, let's vent on e-bikes!

 

[Bradypus]

Does that mean that eBike Pilgrims are excluded from having to ride 200 km?

If you mean that eBike riders have special privilege and could receive a Compostela without riding at least 200km then I think that would be a very eccentric interpretation of the text.

 

[JoEllen]

If you mean that eBike riders have special privilege and could receive a Compostela without riding at least 200km then I think that would be a very eccentric interpretation of the text.

Perhaps - but it's still not clear.

 

[C clearly]

I don't see where it says specifically that eBikes are excluded from receiving a Compostela.

The third paragraph defines a pilgrim for the purpose of this document (my translation):

"A pilgrim is understood to be any person who does a pilgrimage on foot, horseback, sailboat or bicycle (excluding any motorized vehicle)."​

The intent seems quite clear, even if these Cathedral documents would benefit from some good editing.

 

[Tickbush]

Why would anyone care how another person gets to Santiago? Or what piece of paper they get? It’s their personal journey, not anyone else’s.

 

[Vacajoe]

Why would anyone care how another person gets to Santiago? Or what piece of paper they get? It’s their personal journey, not anyone else’s.

It is their personal journey and it can be done in any way they would like. Once they request an official Church document, however, one should not be surprised that they need to meet official Church requirements. No one is saying you can’t walk just 20km to Santiago or ride an e-bike across Spain, just that you can’t secure a specific document with specific requirements.

 

[Jeff Crawley]

Why would anyone care how another person gets to Santiago? Or what piece of paper they get? It’s their personal journey, not anyone else’s.

Because flying into SCQ and catching a taxi to the Pilgrim Office isn't in the spirit of things?

 

[davebugg]

My impression reading through this thread is that there is an abundance of overthinking, analyzing, and loophole nitpicking of the text. The bicycle criteria for a Compostela for religious and spiritual reasons has always been 200 km. The pedestrian Pilgrim, 100Km. If starting at a place BEFORE reaching those required minimum distances of travel to SdC, say from SJPdP, it did not matter HOW one got to the 200km or 100 km required starting point.

Ebikes are now specifically stated as not being considered a 'bicycle' for the purpose of riding that 200kms.

Two stamps a day while in Spain? It may be a minor hassle to some, but it is no big issue in the scheme of things as many collect more than that routinely as part of their souvenir Sello collection for their total journey.

What I found disappointing was the lack of clarifying language for self-powered walking pants and shorts.

 

[henrythedog]

My impression reading through this thread is that there is an abundance of overthinking, analyzing, and loophole nitpicking of the text. The bicycle criteria for a Compostela for religious and spiritual reasons has always been 200 km. The pedestrian Pilgrim, 100Km. If starting at a place BEFORE reaching those required minimum distances of travel to SdC, say from SJPdP, it did not matter HOW one got to the 200km or 100 km required starting point.

Ebikes are now specifically stated as not being considered a 'bicycle' for the purpose of riding that 200kms.

Two stamps a day while in Spain? It may be a minor hassle to some, but it is no big issue in the scheme of things as many collect more than that routinely as part of their souvenir Sello collection for their total journey.

What I found disappointing was the lack of clarifying language for self-powered walking pants and shorts.

Your penultimate paragraph does not seem to be what is required. Is it not 2/day within the 100/200km qualifying distance, regardless of where you started from? Exactly as it has been for many years; but possibly now enforced more rigorously.

 

[davebugg]

Your penultimate paragraph does not seem to be what is required. Is it not 2/day within the 100/200km qualifying distance, regardless of where you started from? Exactly as it has been for many years; but possibly now enforced more rigorously.

I must’ve confused my own writing so I thank you for clarifying

 

[witsendwv]

I am SOOOOO glad they clarified this issue!

In recent years, the issue was wether the particular bicycle had a motoring-only throttle, or required pedaling to move forward.

Without a bicycle mechanic out front to decide this fact, this is the only wise decision to take.

THANK YOU for simplifying matters.

Tom

I don't see the difference between ebikes and horseback, neither requires pedaling!!

 

[trecile]

I don't see the difference between ebikes and horseback, neither requires pedaling!!

Horseback seems much more difficult to me because you have to take care of the horse!

 

[witsendwv]

Horseback seems much more difficult to me because you have to take care of the horse!

True, but the energy expended is by the horse or e-bike primarily. I don't think that taking care of the horse was factored into the distance requirement any more than care of a bicycle for 200km. If a disabled person (or any other) can ride a horse why not an e-bike? The bike does need some care e-bike or not!!

 

[Blister Bill]

Horseback seems much more difficult to me because you have to take care of the horse!

And seriously if you are looking after the animal you don't ride it the whole time either. A good change.

 

[witsendwv]

And seriously if you are looking after the animal you don't ride it the whole time either. A good change.

And you don't ride a bike- e-bike or not the whole time either. As some one who owns and rides horses, it it far easier to ride 200 km than walk 100 km. Horses do not need that much attention- water and/or some pasture or hay. They only need supplemental feed if you are going far and fast!!

 

[Blister Bill]

And you don't ride a bike- e-bike or not the whole time either. As some one who owns and rides horses, it it far easier to ride 200 km than walk 100 km.

Personally I'd much rather walk after spending a great evening with a well known character who rode the vdp and wrote the book for others to get round the logistical issues he faced. But I do agree re the exertion. I've always felt the horse should get the Compostela !

 

[trecile]

And you don't ride a bike- e-bike or not the whole time either. As some one who owns and rides horses, it it far easier to ride 200 km than walk 100 km.

The required distance is the same whether on foot or horseback - 100 km.

 

[witsendwv]

The required distance is the same whether on foot or horseback - 100 km.

Sorry, I thought horseback and bicycle were 200km. Mea culpa. It is still easier to ride 100km vs. walk.

 

[trecile]

Sorry, I thought horseback and bicycle were 200km. Mea culpa. It is still easier to ride 100km vs. walk.

Except the responsibility of taking care of the horse!

 

[witsendwv]

Except the responsibility of taking care of the horse!

I think that was addressed in a post above. The pilgrims' office does take "the responsibility of taking care of the horse!" into account when they issue a compostela. How would they differentiate between someone who took good care of their horse vs someone who does not. It does not apply here. Sitting on a horse for 100 km and letting the horse power your way is no different from sitting on an e-bike. Except maybe that if you haven't been on a horse much and not learned how to tuck your butt muscles to prevent blisters you could end up in a worse way than someone walking with bad fitting shoes.

 

[VNwalking]

The new wording of the demand for two sellos per day every day has caused a lot of online debate.

Yes, no doubt. I've walked plenty of days on less travelled caminos where there was nothing in between places where I stayed. It's possible (I guess) to get a sello in the morning, but that requires you leave late enough to find someone to give it to you. Grrrrrr.

 

[Camo]

The Santiago cathedral has begun issuing a new version of its credencial. The new wording of the demand for two sellos per day every day has caused a lot of online debate. There has been less comment on another change which is far less ambiguous. The credencial now states that cyclists must cover a minimum of 200km (as before) but adds that electric bikes are excluded. The photo below was posted on Facebook by Johnnie Walker earlier today. My highlighting.

View attachment 175928

In Cairns where I live ebikes have already been replaced by e-scooters and I use one as a mobility scooter. If I was to take up "walking" trails again it would be on my e-scooter, but I would probably opt for the South Downs Way which is "Mobility Scooter Friendly".

But I see nothing no mention here as to e-scooters. Any ideas?

 

[JabbaPapa]

Perhaps - but it's still not clear.

It's clear in the Spanish. Spanish participles do not translate exactly 1:1 into English ones, which have more restrictive meanings.

 

[C clearly]

It's clear in the Spanish. Spanish participles do not translate exactly 1:1 into English ones, which have more restrictive meanings.

One thing that is not clear is: "haber realizado 100 km." It gives no indication that it must be the last 100 km.

What are the confusing participles you are referring to?

 

[JabbaPapa]

One thing that is not clear is: "haber realizado 100 km." It gives no indication that it must be the last 100 km.

What are the confusing participles you are referring to?

I am not confused.

The phrase Al finalizar la peregrinación higher up in the document clarifies that other matter.

 

[C clearly]

I am not confused.

I am curious more than confused. I read the document posted above and was interested in how the use of participles might be different in the English and Spanish text. I am genuinely curious about this difference, which I hadn't considered before.

The phrase Al finalizar la peregrinación higher up in the document clarifies that other matter.

If you mean it clarifies that the last 100 km are the ones that count, I don't see that clarity.

 

[henrythedog]

They really could have omitted that second paragraph about how the credencial is distributed if they realised that anyone reading it was probably already in possession of one.

I agree that whilst the qualifying distance is clear, the destination is not stated. I wouldn’t like to argue that point at the pilgrim office though.,

 

[Blister Bill]

....just for the record in 2022

 

[JustOneGuy]

Sitting on a horse for 100 km and letting the horse power your way is no different from sitting on an e-bike.

It's not the same, actually.

Just to clarify for those who have never owned an ebike, those of the "pedelec" type (equated with bicycles according to EU regulations) provide only a percentage of the energy required, the rest must be supplied by the cyclist at any time (the US regulation is very different and allow the use of a "throttle", but this would be equated to a motorbike in EU). And on a climb, or on a steep descent off road the effort required can be significant. In some cases you have to get off and push.

I feel that those who made these regulations do not really know what an ebike is.

I have never owned a horse but I imagine the situation is different and the effort is much less. Correct me please if I am wrong, but I imagine that those who do it on horseback also walk stretches if they want to, or need to stretch their legs, and still they can leave their backpack on the horse. Or can't they? Even from a "maintenance" perspective, changing a tire on a bike, or an ebike, can take a good portion of an hour. But I don't know how long it takes to change a ... horseshoe .

And if something breaks, all that's left is to push.

Said that, equating 200 km of bicycles with 100 of people on foot also seems deeply unfair to the walker to me. With a minimum of preparation a person on an "muscular" bicycle can tackle routes of 50 or even 100 km DAILY with the same effort with which a person on foot does 25 with a backpack. Even less. And less potential injuries.

I have only one question: once clarified that the "compostela" is an internal matter for believers, or for those who make it an essential issue (which I totally understand and respect), the issue may be the access to hostels: is it possible while doing the Camino with an ebike?

If not, I think this is unfair, since the Camino-related network has often benefited from Government or European assigned funds (FEDER), paid for by all citizens, and so I think that rules would be discriminatory.

But this is not clear from what I read in the document posted at the beginning.

 

[JabbaPapa]

I am curious more than confused. I read the document posted above and was interested in how the use of participles might be different in the English and Spanish text. I am genuinely curious about this difference, which I hadn't considered before.


If you mean it clarifies that the last 100 km are the ones that count, I don't see that clarity.

If I weren't on the Camino I would PM you, as it would seriously derail the thread.

But briefly, for one thing Romance languages in their written form always use the semantic content of previous sentences, phrases and paragraphs in a text as context to qualify meanings of later elements in the same text.

This is in frequent contrast to English which uses precision in vocabulary to foster precision in meaning.

 

[t2andreo]

In Cairns where I live ebikes have already been replaced by e-scooters and I use one as a mobility scooter. If I was to take up "walking" trails again it would be on my e-scooter, but I would probably opt for the South Downs Way which is "Mobility Scooter Friendly".

But I see nothing no mention here as to e-scooters. Any ideas?

According to the new credencial language, and as I read it, if the device is motorized, it does not qualify you for a Compostela. The EXACT language states "(excluding any motorized vehicle).

By definition, an e-scooter is motorized. Hence, it is not allowed, at least if you plan to seek a Compostela.

The operative language is "excluding any motorized vehicle." Using that condition, we can eliminate motorized exoskeleton pants, robotic devices or any wheeled conveyance that is propelled by any motor.

Stating this limitation - it could be made clearer however - effectively eliminates all present or future motorized devices that assist a pilgrim. Personally, I would recommend change the final word from “vehicle” to “device.”

Alternatively, add "or device" to the end. So, as modified, it would read: "excluding any motorized vehicle or device." That would settle everyone's hash.

Hope this helps,

Tom

 

[Goyo]

The Armada has arrived!

View attachment 175935

And it only took 436 years and a major refloating of the ships

 

[Goyo]

Horseback seems much more difficult to me because you have to take care of the horse!

And what it leaves behind wherever you spend the night

I certainly don’t know the answer, but how common is it that a place of lodging has a stable, barn, etc?

 

[Bradypus]

I certainly don’t know the answer, but how common is it that a place of lodging has a stable, barn, etc?

That would probably take some advance planning. But within the last fortnight the Xunta has opened its first albergue with purpose built stables on the Sanabres. A route where there has been special attention to making it equestrian -friendly.

 

[Camino Chrissy]

Out of curiosity, this thread has me thinking of the beautiful movie "I'll Push You". The disabled friend was in a wheelchair totally "assisted" by his friend, who pushed him to Santiago. I don't recall exactly, but assume both men received a Compostela. I assume there are a few exceptions to the basic Pilgrim office rules or another category for being disabled. What about a newly disabled pilgrim who has bussed a section of the last 100km after being injured, even if only temporary?
I realize I am most likely "straining at gnats", but maybe there is an answer to be had.

 

[JCLima]

Out of curiosity, this thread has me thinking of the beautiful movie "I'll Push You". The disabled friend was in a wheelchair totally "assisted" by his friend, who pushed him to Santiago. I don't recall exactly, but assume both men received a Compostela. I assume there are a few exceptions to the basic Pilgrim office rules or another category for being disabled. What about a newly disabled pilgrim who has bussed a section of the last 100km after being injured, even if only temporary?
I realize I am most likely "straining at gnats", but maybe there is an answer to be had.

The credencial says:
"Peregrinacion en silla de ruedas: por tratarse de un caso excepcional, contactar con el Centro Internacional de Acogida al Peregrino"

Basically, because it's an "excepcional case" they need to contact the Pilgrim's Office.

 

[Jeff Crawley]

And what it leaves behind wherever you spend the night

I certainly don’t know the answer, but how common is it that a place of lodging has a stable, barn, etc?

Some refugios do/did have facilities. At O Cebriero I spent an uncomfortable night downstairs with an (occupied) horse box the other side of the wall. Melide had loose boxes and we had an English pilgrim with a Hinney stay at Rabanal - it can be done but such hard work.



Taken in Aquitaine a couple of years ago - they were heading down to Biarritz to join the Norte.

 

[Goyo]

Some refugios do/did have facilities. At O Cebriero I spent an uncomfortable night downstairs with an (occupied) horse box the other side of the wall. Melide had loose boxes and we had an English pilgrim with a Hinney stay at Rabanal - it can be done but such hard work.

View attachment 175988

Taken in Aquitaine a couple of years ago - they were heading down to Biarritz to join the Norte.

Wow! Interesting. A lotta work for sure. Robert Louis Stevenson knew. He wrote about such “work” in his Travels with a Donkey in the Cevennes,1879 His route didn’t quite follow the via Podiensis, but what the hay, close enuf

 

[Bradypus]

Wow! Interesting. A lotta work for sure.

I met a French man on the Via de la Plata who was walking with three donkeys, six goats and a dog. I don't think he was trying to find accommodation along the way. Eventually he was arrested much further north after a traffic accident involving one of his animals. No documentation for himself or any of his animals either.

 

[Goyo]

I met a French man on the Via de la Plata who was walking with three donkeys, six goats and a dog. I don't think he was trying to find accommodation along the way. Eventually he was arrested much further north after a traffic accident involving one of his animals. No documentation for himself or any of his animals either.

View attachment 175990

Now that woulda been quite the journey and story, as well. Nice looking animales, too. Depending on which animal was the victim of the accident, there might’ve been a lot of burritos or birria (goat stew) to go ‘round. If it was the dog, well, I dunno.

 

[Bradypus]

Depending on which animal was the victim of the accident, there might’ve been a lot of burritos or birria (goat stew) to go ‘round. If it was the dog, well, I dunno.

It was one of the goats. The news report mentioned the injuries of the motorcyclist but didn't say what happened to the goat.

Un peregrino francés con cinco burros, tres cabras y un perro provoca un accidente de tráfico en Asturias

Una cabra que invadió la calzada causó la caída de un hombre que circulaba en ciclomotor en Ribadesella | El acusado ha sido arrestado como supuesto autor de un delito de lesiones

www.elperiodicodearagon.com

 

[falcon269]

Wow! Interesting. A lotta work for sure. Robert Louis Stevenson knew. He wrote about such “work” in his Travels with a Donkey in the Cevennes,1879 His route didn’t quite follow the via Podiensis, but what the hay, close enuf

Amazon.com

 

[Kathor1]

It possibly also contradicts EU Law in its establishment of "the Camino" as being a "European Cultural Route", by making it excessively Spain-centric.

Non EU citizens will be forgiven for not knowing. EU citizens ought to know:

• The Camino Francés as the first European Cultural Route - and subsequent other European Cultural Routes - are a creation of the Council of Europe. The Council of Europe is an international organisation with 47 member states. Turkey is a member. Russia was a member until they got expelled in 2022. They can't make law. They are not linked to the EU and they are not part of the EU.

I think this is unfair, since the Camino-related network has often benefited from Government or European assigned funds (FEDER), paid for by all citizens, and so I think that rules would be discriminatory.

• EU money - which is taxpayer money - is used to finance Camino related infrastructure. However, this financial support is not granted so that pilgrims from around the world can find themselves or pursue their spiritual quests or obtain their Compostelas. The purpose is regional economic development, i.e. creating employment and improving infrastructure in order to strengthen economic, social and territorial cohesion in the European Union, as they phrase it. FEDER stands for Fonds européen de développement régional - in English it is European Regional Development Fund or ERDF.

EU law has nothing whatsoever to do with the Compostela that the Cathedral of Santiago awards to Camino pilgrim-walkers and cyclists and horse riders.

And as to how a vehicle or an e-bike is defined: If you don't know that yourself, you will have to ask the writer, or the superiors of the writer of the new text, what is meant. What the average person in Spain and in Europe understands by "e-bike" may help. The Spanish Traffic Law may help. But neither the Compostela nor the Credential are legal documents. What counts is what the Cathedral means whenever they rephrase one of their standard texts.

 

[Kathor1]

the norm is unclear.

The discussion about what is meant by bicicleta electrica has been going on on the forum for years. The main reason is that people think that they have to explain what "electric bike" could mean, based on their own country's usage of this term and their traffic laws and related law, and not what "bicicleta electrica" means in Spain. Wikipedia got it right, it is of course what is defined as follows:

Una bicicleta eléctrica es un tipo de vehículo eléctrico consistente en una bicicleta a la que se le acopla un motor eléctrico para ayudar en el avance de la misma. La energía es suministrada por una batería recargable. Su autonomía suele oscilar entre los 30 y los 60 km.​

​

En la Unión Europea, legalmente tienen la consideración de bicicletas a efectos de circulación, siempre que:​

• Solo proporcionen asistencia mientras se pedalea. Pueden tener acelerador siempre y cuando este solo sea efectivo cuando se pedalee.
• El motor deja de asistir a partir de 25 km/h.
• Su potencia nominal no sea superior a 250 vatios.
• El peso del conjunto no supere los 40 kilogramos.

Al resto de las bicicletas eléctricas se las considera ciclomotores eléctricos, y requieren licencia de conducción y seguro específico de accidentes.​

​

And it's been defined like this for I don't know how many umpteen years. Directiva 2002/24/CE del Parlamento Europeo y del Consejo, de 18 de marzo de 2002, relativa a la homologación de los vehículos de motor de dos o tres ruedas y por la que se deroga la Directiva 92/61/CEE del Consejo (Texto pertinente a efectos del EEE) and all that. That's what we mean by e-bike around here.

 

[Kathor1]

One more thing: A two-wheeler with a motor is a motorised vehicle. That is not so hard to understand. "Vehicle" is not only a term that is easily understood in common parlance but it is also defined in Spanish Traffic Law.

The confusion arises because the bicicleta electrica as commonly understood in Spain and as defined in the quote in the previous post, is by way of exception subject to the same traffic laws as the bicycle without motor - unlike all the other motorised two-wheelers which are defined as ciclomotores or motociclettas and what have you in Spanish Traffic Law.

Hence, because of the equivalence in Spain of motorised bicycle and non-motorised bicycle under Spanish Traffic law people may jump to the conclusion, well if I can ride by law everywhere and under the same legal regulations with my e-bike as I can with my non-motorised bike, then I can also get a Compostela for my e-bike Camino as I can get for my non-motorised bicycle Camino.

Jumping to such a conclusion is erroneous thinking. No, you cannot. Hence the clarification by the Cathedral: It is the Cathedral who ”own” the Compostela; who issue it; and who make the “law” for obtaining a Compostela; it is not the job of argumentative pilgrims nor of officials of the Spanish Transport Department DGT.

 

[Goyo]

It was one of the goats. The news report mentioned the injuries of the motorcyclist but didn't say what happened to the goat.

Un peregrino francés con cinco burros, tres cabras y un perro provoca un accidente de tráfico en Asturias

Una cabra que invadió la calzada causó la caída de un hombre que circulaba en ciclomotor en Ribadesella | El acusado ha sido arrestado como supuesto autor de un delito de lesiones

www.elperiodicodearagon.com

Thank you for article. What a mess.

 

[Vacajoe]

the issue may be the access to hostels: is it possible while doing the Camino with an ebike?

Every place can have their own rules, but generally bicycle pilgrims are allowed in public albergues after a specific time later in the day to allow for walking pilgrims to get first access to beds. The thinking being that it’s far easier for someone on a bicycle to travel to the next albergue when a place is full rather than someone who is walking.

Note, though, that this does not mean every albergue will welcome the bicycle itself as they may not have room for them. The need for charging an e-bike complicates the matter even further.

 

[Kathor1]

Thank you for article. What a mess.

For what it is worth: The story of the French peregrino with the 5 donkeys, 3 goats and 1 dog made the news at the time. He was spotted in various parts of Spain, and photos and videos clips were published in the news media and on social media. Did he ever go to Santiago let alone apply for a Compostela and get one? I don’t recall having read so. He did not follow standard Camino trails. He was seen in Pamplona or another town in Navarra iirc where he was even detained and made to spend the night in the town’s bullring (the issue was lack of obligatory veterinary documents), then near Madrid, and later in Extremadura, and when the accident in Asturias happened he was on his way back to France.

I somehow doubt that he even owned a credencial, no matter which version of the text was in it at the time.

 

[JustOneGuy]

Every place can have their own rules, but generally bicycle pilgrims are allowed in public albergues after a specific time later in the day to allow for walking pilgrims to get first access to beds. The thinking being that it’s far easier for someone on a bicycle to travel to the next albergue when a place is full rather than someone who is walking.

Note, though, that this does not mean every albergue will welcome the bicycle itself as they may not have room for them. The need for charging an e-bike complicates the matter even further.

Thanks, I totally agree with the rule giving precedence to walking pilgrims.

But, again, my question was if the system equate the bicycle and the ebike. In my opinion totally excluding all ebikes is questionable. We should encourage the use of sustainable transportation, plus all my other remarks. I think that there is a misunderstanding about what an ebike is and how it works in EU.

 

[Bradypus]

But, again, my question was if the system equate the bicycle and the ebike. In my opinion totally excluding all ebikes is questionable. We should encourage the use of sustainable transportation, plus all my other remarks.

Just over 30 years ago the cathedral made a decision to give the Compostela only to those who walked 100km or cycled 200km. At that time electric bikes were not a practical option and I imagine that they were not even considered in the discussions which led to the 100km/200km rule. Personally I did not and still do not approve of the rule and I would like to see the cathedral return to its earlier practice of granting a Compostela to all pilgrims who visit the shrine with spiritual intent who then ask for one - no matter how they got there. That is most unlikely to happen. But if there are to be specific conditions about route and distance then I feel they should at least be logical and applied consistently. E-bikes are a relative novelty and clearly undermine the principles underpinning the 100km/200km rule. A loophole long overdue for closure. I am a little surprised that it has taken this long for the cathedral to address this issue.

 

[Kathor1]

I think that there is a misunderstanding about what an ebike is and how it works in EU.

I understand from your previous posts that you want to say that there is a misunderstanding of what an e-bike is and how it works in EU on the side of the Cathedral of Santiago and their Pilgrim Office, right? If so, I personally don't think that there is a misunderstanding on their side.

Where there is a misunderstanding, and this has marred the discussion on the forum for years now, is what some forum members believe to be considered as an e-bike in Spain and in the other EU countries. Because there is legislation about this. I could quote it but it would be of little use. This visual overview might - might - help but I am not holding my breath. It's taken from the website of the European Cyclists' Federation ECF who 'gratefully acknowledges financial support from the European Commission' on their website. The first one is our e-bike. The term "type approved" refers to EU norms and standards, it's a technical thing. And the whole thing is actually nothing new. Note this line: "treated like bicycles across EU" - that means treated as bicycles under the law for selling and buying, and using as a participant in traffic in the public sphere. It does not mean: treated as a bicycle by the Cathedral of Santiago or any other non-governmental institution or person.

 

[Kathor1]

my question was if the system equate the bicycle and the ebike. In my opinion totally excluding all ebikes is questionable

You may see it like this, and it is reasonable to see it like this, but this is not the view taken by the Cathedral - to the extent that we even know what their view is. There are next to no official statements. Ever. All we know is pasted together from pieces of text on their websites, in their credencial, in the regional news media and published by Friends of the Camino associations, in particular the Spanish umbrella organisation, who refer to "sources" in the Cathedral or Pilgrim Office.

The Compostela is something that they award to pilgrims who make the pilgrimage in "the traditional way" where "traditional way" is not defined. One can guess that "in the traditional ways" means on foot and on horseback because that is clearly the mode of transport that the overwhelming majority of Saint James pilgrims used in the Middle Ages where the pilgrimage to Santiago originates. A few years ago, the Cathedral and their Pilgrim Office announced that they will include contemporary pilgrims on sailing boats and they, too, qualify for a Compostela. Because travelling on a ship to Santiago was also a major means of transport in the Middle Ages for Saint James pilgrims. Note that no physical effort is involved in sailing, you just have to be a passenger, apart from the physical effort of walking or riding on a horse for the short distance from the port of arrival in Galicia to the Cathedral in Santiago.

Why bicycle riding qualifies for a Compostela is anyone's guess. I have never seen an official explanation. My personal guess - nothing more than a guess - is that it is, or was at the time when the total of Santiago pilgrims was still a very small number, a nod to the passion for and popularity of bike riding in Spain.

The limits in kilometres that they set does not have much to do with physical efforts and their equivalence. My personal guess - again nothing more than a guess - is that their minimum requirement for distance covered in km is related to time, i.e. the time in days that it takes an average walker, cyclist and rider on horseback to reach Santiago from their individual starting point - this minimum appears to be around 4-5 days. An average walker or rider takes about 4-5 days to cover 100 km and a cyclist takes about 4-5 days to cover 200 km. Grosso modo. Pilgrimage is not meant to be a race ...

 

[Bradypus]

Why bicycle riding qualifies for a Compostela is anyone's guess. I have never seen an official explanation. My personal guess - nothing more than a guess - is that it is, or was at the time of small total numbers of pilgrims, a nod to the passion for bike riding in Spain.

At the time the 100km/200km rule was introduced the percentage of pilgrims who travelled by bike was far higher than it is today. The oldest figures on the pilgrim office website are from 2003 when cyclists made up 18% of those recorded compared with about 5% today. My own impression is that in 1990 the proportion may have been higher still. That would be a large group to cut off entirely.

 

[Kathor1]

One thing that is not clear is: "haber realizado 100 km." It gives no indication that it must be the last 100 km.

I am not confused. The phrase Al finalizar la peregrinación higher up in the document clarifies that other matter.

I agree with both views.

Whoever - whether an individual or a committee - agreed this new text in the credencial could have, or ought to have, spelled it out in writing that the pilgrim who aspires to obtain a Compostela must have walked (etc etc) the last 100 km (etc etc) until he or she had reached the tomb of the Apostle in the middle of the Cathedral of Santiago. The tomb is the destination of the pilgrimage to Saint James in Santiago. And walking 5 km from Monte do Gozo until arriving at the tomb is not enough for a Compostela.

I was a little amused as well as astonished when I followed a recent real time broadcast of a pilgrim mass in Santiago Cathedral where the Archbishop Emeritus Julian Barrio officiated and apparently felt the need to point out that the destination of the Santiago pilgrimage is not the Obradoiro square and not Finisterre but the tomb of the Apostle.

I wonder whether they sometimes despair a little these days. As the questions on the forum show these days (such as "Can I get a Compostela for walking from Burgos to Leon") it needs explaining to aspiring Camino peregrin@s what the aim of the Pilgrimage to Saint James once was: Arriving at the supposed Tomb of the Apostle James, also known as James, son of Zebedee; Saint James the Great; Saint James the Greater; Saint James the Elder; Saint Jacob; or Santiago.

PS: Before another flame war erupts: Yes, the Camino is open to all. You can walk from Burgos to Leon to your heart's content. You can define it as a spiritual pilgrimage or a cultural pilgrimage or a religious pilgrimage or anything else. You can hold a credencial and get it stamped once or twice or more often each day. You can stay in municipal and parochial albergues between Burgos and Leon. But you cannot get a Compostela from the Pilgrim Office in Santiago for Burgos to Leon. And this is not discrimination and it is not legally actionable. Not in Church Law and not in Spanish/EU law. The Compostela simply does not figure in either law system. And the same goes for the refusal to award Compostelas for e-bike Caminos.

 

[Kirkie]

I agree with both views.

Whoever - whether an individual or a committee - agreed this new text in the credencial could have, or ought to have, spelled it out in writing that the pilgrim who aspires to obtain a Compostela must have walked (etc etc) the last 100 km (etc etc) until he or she had reached the tomb of the Apostle in the middle of the Cathedral of Santiago. The tomb is the destination of the pilgrimage to Saint James in Santiago. And walking 5 km from Monte do Gozo until arriving at the tomb is not enough for a Compostela.

I was a little amused as well as astonished when I followed a recent real time broadcast of a pilgrim mass in Santiago Cathedral where the Archbishop Emeritus Julian Barrio officiated and apparently felt the need to point out that the destination of the Santiago pilgrimage is not the Obradoiro square and not Finisterre but the tomb of the Apostle.

I wonder whether they sometimes despair a little these days. As the questions on the forum show these days (such as "Can I get a Compostela for walking from Burgos to Leon") it needs explaining to aspiring Camino peregrin@s what the aim of the Pilgrimage to Saint James once was: Arriving at the supposed Tomb of the Apostle James, also known as James, son of Zebedee; Saint James the Great; Saint James the Greater; Saint James the Elder; Saint Jacob; or Santiago.

PS: Before another flame war erupts: Yes, the Camino is open to all. You can walk from Burgos to Leon to your heart's content. You can define it as a spiritual pilgrimage or a cultural pilgrimage or a religious pilgrimage or anything else. You can hold a credencial and get it stamped once or twice or more often each day. You can stay in municipal and parochial albergues between Burgos and Leon. But you cannot get a Compostela from the Pilgrim Office in Santiago for Burgos to Leon. And this is not discrimination and it is not legally actionable. Not in Church Law and not in Spanish/EU law. The Compostela simply does not figure in either law system. And the same goes for the refusal to award Compostelas for e-bike Caminos.

In spite of a very recent determination to mind my own business: you deserve the medal that was awarded to me but miraculously disappeared on another thread!. No, you do not deserve that medal - it was cynical. Mine for you is straightforwardly admiring. Your contributions are generally (well always, but I do not want to embarrass you too much!) so objective and correct and easy to follow.
Capitals and bold are not encouraged, so just let me say: thanks, merci, vielen dank, gracias, and the same in whichever is your native language.
I especially love your agility, agreeing with more than view at a time!

 

[JabbaPapa]

Whoever - whether an individual or a committee - agreed this new text in the credencial could have, or ought to have, spelled it out in writing that the pilgrim who aspires to obtain a Compostela must have walked (etc etc) the last 100 km (etc etc) until he or she had reached the tomb of the Apostle in the middle of the Cathedral of Santiago. The tomb is the destination of the pilgrimage to Saint James in Santiago.

I think it's space constraints - - detailing 100K / 200K / can't remember how many nautical miles, including by sea, river, canal according to this or that circumstance would have been a deal of somewhat ponderous verbiage.

And walking 5 km from Monte do Gozo until arriving at the tomb is not enough for a Compostela.

I thought some more about one of your recent posts, the one with a map of the old city limits, which were the historic Limina mentioned in the Compostela. Modernising that into modern terms, I realised that it means that the only people who cannot obtain a Compostela by walking from home are those that live within those Limina, as you cannot walk to where you already are. So legally, from modernising the terms and concepts, not from anywhere inside the Diocese, though the other Dioceses in the Archdiocese should be fine as starting points for those who live there.

So again, agreeing with you.

And this is not discrimination and it is not legally actionable. Not in Church Law and not in Spanish/EU law. The Compostela simply does not figure in either law system. And the same goes for the refusal to award Compostelas for e-bike Caminos.

Bingo, though because I am a pedant, the power to issue a Compostela is defined by Catholic doctrine and Canon Law.

Which is to disagree with your point not in the slightest, but to reinforce it. The fundamentals here are defined by Church Law, especially the local Diocesan decisions and norms, which in their own stead are separate from but nevertheless strongly related to Spanish National and Galician Regional Law. So there's a lot of spaghetti, but as to the delivering of a single Compostela to an individual pilgrim, it is entirely a privilege of the Cathedral Parish of the Santiago Diocese to do so according to its own sovereign decisions.

 

[Kathor1]

I especially love your agility, agreeing with more than view at a time!

And thank you, too.

 

[KFH]

It might be simpler to ban ebikes from the entire world.

Get the ball rolling, Galicia.

 

[dick bird]

To summarise: the authorities of Santiago cathedral decide who gets a compostela and who doesn´t (and what is an e-bike and what isn´t for that purpose). If only they could be a little clearer about it.

 

[Former member 118323]

The Santiago cathedral has begun issuing a new version of its credencial. The new wording of the demand for two sellos per day every day has caused a lot of online debate. There has been less comment on another change which is far less ambiguous. The credencial now states that cyclists must cover a minimum of 200km (as before) but adds that electric bikes are excluded. The photo below was posted on Facebook by Johnnie Walker earlier today. My highlighting.

View attachment 175928

Sad really for some. I halted my first cycling attempt 11 years ago on the French Camino when my spinal cord tumour, my other spinal issues were just grumbling along, said enough (I had completed 400km in 4 days on a steel beast without a motor). I had the tumour excised, that grossly limited my balance, leg strength and bodily functions (I am a British military veteran, medically discharged. I am recognised at 85% disabled both in the UK and France, I have the French disability card). Not completing the Camino des Compostela has always needled me, my balance and leg strength (they fail without warning) has pushed me across to an Azub Trike that has a Shimano motor. I would not consider using narrow trails that my presence (70cm wide) would inconvenience others; I am content to use side roads and wide tracks. My other mode of transport is a manual wheelchair (great for upper body strength). Sucks to be disabled (but I had 36 years being very active before tumour reared its ugly head), even more to be dismissed by the church. Shame on them … I’ll spend my money elsewhere.

 

[Former member 118323]

It might be simpler to ban ebikes from the entire world.

Get the ball rolling, Galicia.

TY, this disabled e-triker lauds your kind rhetoric.

 

[Flog]

Sucks to be disabled (but I had 36 years being very active before tumour reared its ugly head), even more to be dismissed by the church. Shame on them … I’ll spend my money elsewhere.

I'm sorry for your difficulties. In your circumstances and with a registered disability, they will certainly make an exception.

 

[JabbaPapa]

Sucks to be disabled (but I had 36 years being very active before tumour reared its ugly head), even more to be dismissed by the church. Shame on them … I’ll spend my money elsewhere.

That belongs to the exceptional circumstances mentioned in the document.

The disabled, and only the disabled, are eligible for a Compostela if they should need motorised assistance. e-bike, motorised wheelchair, etc. Plus some fringe situations like having to finish one's Camino by ambulance from an injury, as happened to one of my 2005 compañeras.

 

[Former member 118323]

That belongs to the exceptional circumstances mentioned in the document.

The disabled, and only the disabled, are eligible for a Compostela if they should need motorised assistance. e-bike, motorised wheelchair, etc. Plus some fringe situations like having to finish one's Camino by ambulance from an injury, as happened to one of my 2005 compañeras.

Looks like my e-Trike plus Cruz Trailer (for all my medication that includes catheters, that weight mounts up over a month at 7 a day, plus morphine, pregabalin etc etc, however not an issue since I have pulled my 37kg dog up Rocamadours a few times) is a player. I will only participate in challenges where I can be honest about my need for e-assistance. I’ll take a multi-socket so as not to inconvenience others, however I plan to try for a single room if at all possible …

 

[Marbe2]

Why would anyone care how another person gets to Santiago? Or what piece of paper they get? It’s their personal journey, not anyone else’s.

I agree. And, I do not begrudge a person with limited mobility from using an e-bike to make the pilgrimage. No, if it is necessary to complete the journey, so be it! However, I am always concerned with the danger that additional bikes with walkers, together, may present on a small path. I wish there was a safe separate route for both means of transportation.

 

[Former member 118323]

I agree. And, I do not begrudge a person with limited mobility from using an e-bike to make the pilgrimage. No, if it is necessary to complete the journey, so be it! However, I am always concerned with the danger that additional bikes with walkers, together, may present on a small path. I wish there was a safe separate route for both means of transportation.

I agree, but until there are separate routes, it should be the responsibility of the e-triker to avoid narrow trails that inconvenience others. Hopefully most of that will be sorted during my initial planning, once I dust off my 11 yr old GPX camino frances routing.

 

[Kathor1]

That pilgrims riding on e-bikes are excluded from obtaining a Compostela and that pilgrims with a disability riding on e-bikes may get a Compostela by way of exception is nothing new.

I remember that this topic was in the Galician news media years ago. The Pilgrim Office just did not put it in writing at the time but they have done so now. Pilgrims may not even have been aware of it, and it certainly did not help that some posters on social media wrongly claimed that the standard e-bike that we are talking about and that so many people use these days was somehow generally permitted for everybody because riding an e-bike requires some physical effort albeit less than a traditional bike.

Here is just one link to such an article from September 2019 - five years ago already:

La bici eléctrica se suma a los medios de transporte aptos para la compostela

Pese a ser un vehículo a motor, la Oficina del Peregrino hace una excepción con las personas que sufren una discapacidad

www.lavozdegalicia.es

First quote (machine translated) from 2019:

More and more pilgrims are doing the Camino on e-bikes. Tomás Sánchez, the manager of Bicigrino, a bike rental company on the Camino de Santiago, currently accompanies a group of pilgrims from Portugal to Santiago, and more than half do so on e-bikes. When they arrive at the Pilgrim Office, they will get a Compostela, because if asked how they did the Camino they will indicate that they did so by bicycle, and nobody will ask them what type of bicycle it was; only the required stamps in their credencials will be checked.​

​

The manager of the Bicigrino company is then quoted as saying that he does not think that the Pilgrim Office "looking the other way" is a solution for this issue. He advocates the recognition of e-bikes as an official means of transport for doing the Camino and obtaining the Compostela. It would open the doors to many people with mobility problems, he says [in 2019].

Second quote (machine translated) from 2019:

But the fact of the matter is this: Be it because in the last few days this topic had been raised or because the Cathedral Chapter had already taken the decision beforehand, yesterday (15 September 2019) the Pilgrim Office communicated that the e-bike is already among the means of transport that qualifies for a Compostela but only as an exception for people who have some type of disability.​

​

So now, in 2024, they simply put it in writing in their own credencial what had been their policy for many years. Camino pilgrims who have the newest Cathedral issued credencial are now better informed than before. Of course, the "some type of disability" is nowhere officially defined, and this leaves space for interpretation.

 

[Kathor1]

Here is the link to Bicigrino.com. I vaguely remember that the owner or manager had been interviewed numerous times and he had also lobbied at the Oficina del Peregrino for a recognition of e-bikes as a Compostela worthy means of transport but without success. As far as I can tell they are a major player on the Camino bicycle rental market. Their website about e-bike rental could not be clearer, and it is even in English:

– Remember that with this type of vehicles, the pilgrim’s office will not grant the Compostela, the diploma certifying the completion of Camino de Santiago.​

​

I checked the Wayback Machine: This text is nothing new. It has been on their website for several years already.

 

[Kathor1]

The same clear information on Vive Camino, and it is on the web since at least December 2022: Pilgrims who complete their journey to Compostela by e-bike will not be able to obtain the Compostela. There are exceptions, if the pilgrim who has used it suffers from a disability or similar. The Pilgrim's Reception Office does not consider this type of bicycle as qualifying for a Compostela, although some pilgrims think that it is unlikely that they will check each of the bicycles with which the route has been completed. Vive Camino is a major Spanish-language Camino blog, copyrighted by the La Voz de Galicia newspaper.

However, this quote is more important:

We must not lose sight of the fact that getting the Compostela is not the goal of the Camino. There are many reasons to do the Camino de Santiago: religion, sport, connection with nature or with yourself ... Although the Compostela certifies your experience, not having it does not subtract anything from your trip and all the unforgettable moments you have lived.​

​

Consider the proverbial old woman from a village in Galicia or elsewhere who makes the pilgrimage to Saint James in Santiago with members of her parish on a bus. She would not even be able to bike, whether on a traditional bike or an e-bike, and she would not be able to walk either. She is not going to get a Compostela. But then perhaps she does not care about Compostelas anyway.

 

[JabbaPapa]

Of course "some type of disability" is nowhere officially defined, and this leaves space for interpretation.

FWIW, many of the Xunta Albergues in Galicia have dorms set aside for the disabled, that I have sometimes made use of - - and whilst they usually take one look at my walking difficulties and take my word for it, I have occasionally needed to show them documentary proof of it.

I don't doubt that it is similar at the Pilgrim Office in cases of more obvious or less obvious disabilities, or on good versus bad days for an individual pilgrim's issues.

 

[Bradypus]

However, this quote is more important:

We must not lose sight of the fact that getting the Compostela is not the goal of the Camino.

I would like to think that is true. But the effort that so many people now make to travel to the 100km/200km point of a Camino route before beginning their walk/ride makes me question that. So much effort being put into walking or riding only the bare minimum distance which still qualifies for the piece of paper. If receiving the Compostela is not the main deciding factor why not just start from Melide or Padron or Betanzos or some other place more easily reached by bus and not visit the pilgrim office at all?

 

[Former member 118323]

That pilgrims riding on e-bikes are excluded from obtaining a Compostela and that pilgrims with a disability riding on e-bikes may get a Compostela by way of exception is nothing new.

I remember that this topic was in the Galician news media years ago. The Pilgrim Office just did not put it in writing at the time but they have done so now. Pilgrims may not even have been aware of it, and it certainly did not help that some posters on social media wrongly claimed that the standard e-bike that we are talking about and that so many people use these days was somehow generally permitted for everybody because riding an e-bike requires some physical effort albeit less than a traditional bike.

Here is just one link to such an article from September 2019 - five years ago already:

La bici eléctrica se suma a los medios de transporte aptos para la compostela

Pese a ser un vehículo a motor, la Oficina del Peregrino hace una excepción con las personas que sufren una discapacidad

www.lavozdegalicia.es

First quote (machine translated) from 2019:

More and more pilgrims are doing the Camino on e-bikes. Tomás Sánchez, the manager of Bicigrino, a bike rental company on the Camino de Santiago, currently accompanies a group of pilgrims from Portugal to Santiago, and more than half do so on e-bikes. When they arrive at the Pilgrim Office, they will get a Compostela, because if asked how they did the Camino they will indicate that they did so by bicycle, and nobody will ask them what type of bicycle it was; only the required stamps in their credencials will be checked.​

​

The manager of the Bicigrino company is then quoted as saying that he does not think that the Pilgrim Office "looking the other way" is a solution for this issue. He advocates the recognition of e-bikes as an official means of transport for doing the Camino and obtaining the Compostela. It would open the doors to many people with mobility problems, he says [in 2019].

Second quote (machine translated) from 2019:

But the fact of the matter is this: Be it because in the last few days this topic had been raised or because the Cathedral Chapter had already taken the decision beforehand, yesterday (15 September 2019) the Pilgrim Office communicated that the e-bike is already among the means of transport that qualifies for a Compostela but only as an exception for people who have some type of disability.​

​

So now, in 2024, they simply put it in writing in their own credencial what had been their policy for many years. Camino pilgrims who have the newest Cathedral issued credencial are now better informed than before. Of course, the "some type of disability" is nowhere officially defined, and this leaves space for interpretation.

I guess 80% counts

 

[Former member 118323]

I manage to push a mighty 40W (occasionally peaking to 100W for a millisecond or 3) that slowly reduces over 5 hrs (I use Garmin Pedals to check for any deterioration in my leg strength). I use ECO on the flat, Trail for hills … when towing my lardy 10 year old Pointer I stay on Trail. Due to my balance problems (interpretation: I fall over if I don’t use cane(s), walker or wheelchair depending on day) I used to topple over when using a bike (both the baker and bar owner used to bobble me to SWMBO … they would rush to help me but were clearly relieved when I changed to the recumbent trike).

 

[Kathor1]

I would like to think that is true. But the effort that so many people now make to travel to the 100km/200km point of a Camino route before beginning their walk/ride makes me question that. So much effort being put into walking or riding only the bare minimum distance which still qualifies for the piece of paper. If receiving the Compostela is not the main deciding factor why not just start from Melide or Padron or Betanzos or some other place more easily reached by bus and not visit the pilgrim office at all?

Getting the Compostela is not the goal of the Camino - that is the position of the Cathedral Chapter. Just as it is their position that the destination of the Camino is the Tomb of the Apostle and not the Obradoiro Square and not the Atlantic Ocean. Camino peregrin@s may well have a different focus and a different point of view.

 

[Marbe2]

The same clear information on Vive Camino, and it is on the web since at least December 2022: Pilgrims who complete their journey to Compostela by e-bike will not be able to obtain the Compostela. There are exceptions, if the pilgrim who has used it suffers from a disability or similar. The Pilgrim's Reception Office does not consider this type of bicycle as qualifying for a Compostela, although some pilgrims think that it is unlikely that they will check each of the bicycles with which the route has been completed. Vive Camino is a major Spanish-language Camino blog, copyrighted by the La Voz de Galicia newspaper.

However, this quote is more important:

We must not lose sight of the fact that getting the Compostela is not the goal of the Camino. There are many reasons to do the Camino de Santiago: religion, sport, connection with nature or with yourself ... Although the Compostela certifies your experience, not having it does not subtract anything from your trip and all the unforgettable moments you have lived.​

​

Consider the proverbial old woman from a village in Galicia or elsewhere who makes the pilgrimage to Saint James in Santiago with members of her parish on a bus. She would not even be able to bike, whether on a traditional bike or an e-bike, and she would not be able to walk either. She is not going to get a Compostela. But then perhaps she does not care about Compostelas anyway.

I would like to think that is true. But the effort that so many people now make to travel to the 100km/200km point of a Camino route before beginning their walk/ride makes me question that. So much effort being put into walking or riding only the bare minimum distance which still qualifies for the piece of paper. If receiving the Compostela is not the main deciding factor why not just start from Melide or Padron or Betanzos or some other place more easily reached by bus and not visit the pilgrim office at all?

Though I am sure there are many reasons, I do not think that getting a Compostela is the main goal of walking to SdC and why pilgrims walk to it. The Cathedral is reputedly where St. James is buried (?) and is part of a world heritage site. It is IMO Holy Soil, as is Lourdes, and it is the place of closure on the journey. I have heard other pilgrims relate that without getting to SdC their camino feels incomplete.

 

[chinacat]

Sitting on a horse for 100 km and letting the horse power your way is no different from sitting on an e-bike. Except maybe that if you haven't been on a horse much and not learned how to tuck your butt muscles to prevent blisters you could end up in a worse way than someone walking with bad fitting shoes.

Odd

In all my years riding horses I have never had a blister on my backside.

(I did find a brilliant seat-saver in more recent years, though … for my seat bones, not for the prevention of blisters.)

 

[Former member 118323]

The same clear information on Vive Camino, and it is on the web since at least December 2022: Pilgrims who complete their journey to Compostela by e-bike will not be able to obtain the Compostela. There are exceptions, if the pilgrim who has used it suffers from a disability or similar. The Pilgrim's Reception Office does not consider this type of bicycle as qualifying for a Compostela, although some pilgrims think that it is unlikely that they will check each of the bicycles with which the route has been completed. Vive Camino is a major Spanish-language Camino blog, copyrighted by the La Voz de Galicia newspaper.

However, this quote is more important:

We must not lose sight of the fact that getting the Compostela is not the goal of the Camino. There are many reasons to do the Camino de Santiago: religion, sport, connection with nature or with yourself ... Although the Compostela certifies your experience, not having it does not subtract anything from your trip and all the unforgettable moments you have lived.​

​

Consider the proverbial old woman from a village in Galicia or elsewhere who makes the pilgrimage to Saint James in Santiago with members of her parish on a bus. She would not even be able to bike, whether on a traditional bike or an e-bike, and she would not be able to walk either. She is not going to get a Compostela. But then perhaps she does not care about Compostelas anyway.

It is true, I have visited Santiago des Compostela twice. Once on a motorbike (2001), once with my wife in our Camping Car (March 2020, disabled post-Op, just before Covid 19 reared its ugly head in Europe). However, I suspect like many, having an abortive attempt in 2013 (courtesy of the spinal cord tumour that had sat between my shoulder blades); I would like to have a memory, other than a keyring , that can join my other memories from my lifetime, the good (hurricane relief), the bad (career) and the ugly (8 Ops/Wars). Something positive that my sons can reflect on from their often-absent father, that may galvanise them to do something similar (and not wait until they are 65 years old).

 

[Mick O'Grady]

The Santiago cathedral has begun issuing a new version of its credencial. The new wording of the demand for two sellos per day every day has caused a lot of online debate. There has been less comment on another change which is far less ambiguous. The credencial now states that cyclists must cover a minimum of 200km (as before) but adds that electric bikes are excluded. The photo below was posted on Facebook by Johnnie Walker earlier today. My highlighting.

View attachment 175928

Right on.

 

[peregrina2000]

I was notified by some members that we had multiple current threads on ebikes. Normally, the answer would be to merge them, but since the merge function puts all posts in chronological order, that would result in a very convoluted thread. So, I’ve decided to close the other thread and hope that any further helpful discussion will take place on this thread. I think things are pretty clear in terms of the policy, but I admit that I have not followed very carefully.

 

[Former member 118323]

It's not the same, actually.

Just to clarify for those who have never owned an ebike, those of the "pedelec" type (equated with bicycles according to EU regulations) provide only a percentage of the energy required, the rest must be supplied by the cyclist at any time (the US regulation is very different and allow the use of a "throttle", but this would be equated to a motorbike in EU). And on a climb, or on a steep descent off road the effort required can be significant. In some cases you have to get off and push.

I feel that those who made these regulations do not really know what an ebike is.

I have never owned a horse but I imagine the situation is different and the effort is much less. Correct me please if I am wrong, but I imagine that those who do it on horseback also walk stretches if they want to, or need to stretch their legs, and still they can leave their backpack on the horse. Or can't they? Even from a "maintenance" perspective, changing a tire on a bike, or an ebike, can take a good portion of an hour. But I don't know how long it takes to change a ... horseshoe .

And if something breaks, all that's left is to push.

Said that, equating 200 km of bicycles with 100 of people on foot also seems deeply unfair to the walker to me. With a minimum of preparation a person on an "muscular" bicycle can tackle routes of 50 or even 100 km DAILY with the same effort with which a person on foot does 25 with a backpack. Even less. And less potential injuries.

I have only one question: once clarified that the "compostela" is an internal matter for believers, or for those who make it an essential issue (which I totally understand and respect), the issue may be the access to hostels: is it possible while doing the Camino with an ebike?

If not, I think this is unfair, since the Camino-related network has often benefited from Government or European assigned funds (FEDER), paid for by all citizens, and so I think that rules would be discriminatory.

But this is not clear from what I read in the document posted at the beginning.

Your penultimate paragraph is supported by the creation, several years ago, of the EV3 cycle route that uses the same shared trail as the Camino Frances … perhaps a Brussels administrator wanted to find a way to keep the shared trail maintained with EU Grants to help all pilgrims, local cycle/walking clubs and the multitude of scalp hunters (the latter group, whether walkers or cyclists) now choke the trail.

 

[Kathor1]

Just to clarify for those who have never owned an ebike, those of the "pedelec" type (equated with bicycles according to EU regulations) provide only a percentage of the energy required, the rest must be supplied by the cyclist at any time (the US regulation is very different and allow the use of a "throttle", but this would be equated to a motorbike in EU)

I've posted way too much in this thread that has now been revived. However, @JustOneGuy makes an important point and the discussion about this topic on the forum has been distorted for several years now because posters don't know what bicicleta electrica means in Spain and in the language of the credencial and in information provided by the Cathedral's office in Santiago. Bicicleta electrica means this in Spain: a two-wheeler with an electric motor that assists the cyclist under these conditions:

• The motor provides assistance only while pedalling. No pedalling = no motor.
• The motor is switched off when the cyclist goes faster than 25 km/h. Assistance is progressive - the faster the speed of the pedalling cyclist, the less assistance.
• Motor power: 250 Watts.

Under Spanish traffic law, e-bikes are considered the same as traditional bikes: no driver licence, no insurance, no obligation to wear a helmet. E-bikes are allowed to go where traditional bikes are allowed to go. Because of this equivalence, people often wrongly assume that they qualify for a Compostela when using an e-bike on Camino. Hence the need to clarify that this is not the case.

As to Camino albergues, whether private or municipal: Camino albergues are not regulated by the Cathedral of Santiago. They are regulated by national and regional Spanish law and by any rules they wish and can set for themselves. According to this recent entry on a website that rents e-bikes for Caminos: We have no information of any albergue on the Camino Francés that they do not allow battery charging. We have only been notified by an albergue in Puente Duero that they do not allow this (posters had mentioned this albergue earlier in a thread on the website).

BTW, this rental company informs their customers who rent e-bikes from them that the use of e-bikes does not qualify for a Compostela.

 

[Kathor1]

a Brussels administrator wanted to find a way to keep the shared trail maintained with EU Grants to help all pilgrims, local cycle/walking clubs and the multitude of scalp hunters

Brussels administrators take very little interest in this, as far as I can tell. Camino pilgrims in particular are not high in their agenda if they are in it at all. In general EU taxpayer money goes to projects in regions that are economically disadvantaged compared to the EU average and their aim is to create or maintain jobs. They are also not involved in the actual planning as a rule. The money goes to national or regional administration in the various countries who then distribute it to various regional agents and their projects.

FWIW, the European Cultural Routes, of which the Camino Frances was the first such project, are an idea of the Council of Europe. Their headquarters are in Strasbourg and they are not linked to the EU; they are a totally separate entity.

 

[Kathor1]

I had a look on their website: The development and operation of the EuroVelo routes is carried out by national, regional and local governments, commercial service providers and NGOs. Some of these government units get money in the context of programs financed by the EU's ERDF (European Regional Development Fund). None of this means that Camino e-bikers should get a Compostela or must not get a Compostela.

There is no trademark on "the Camino". "The Camino" consists of public roads and paths, open to everybody. Nobody has to think of themselves as pilgrims or even have the Pilgrim Office in Santiago as their final destination in order to be allowed to walk or ride a bike on these roads and paths.

I don't know to what extent EuroVelo 3 coincides with the physical path of Camino de Santiago pilgrims. I remember a short section somewhere in Castile y Leon - it gained some awareness on the forum because of the markers (a triangle with two wheels) and the mysterious 3 on the poles, with Francia on one side and Portugal on the other side, if I remember correctly. The majority of Camino walkers did not know what to make of this.

 

[Former member 118323]

Brussels administrators take very little interest in this, as far as I can tell. Camino pilgrims in particular are not high in their agenda if they are in it at all. In general EU taxpayer money goes to projects in regions that are economically disadvantaged compared to the EU average and their aim is to create or maintain jobs. They are also not involved in the actual planning as a rule. The money goes to national or regional administration in the various countries who then distribute it to various regional agents and their projects.

FWIW, the European Cultural Routes, of which the Camino Frances was the first such project, are an idea of the Council of Europe. Their headquarters are in Strasbourg and they are not linked to the EU; they are a totally separate entity.

So the ECR does not derive any funding from the EU? Interesting.

Would you not consider that the EU funding does its job (so the ECR just happens to share a City with EU, as we both aware the EU decamps between Strasbourg and Brussels on a regular basis), to help poorer areas of the EU (farmers, local economy) … and in this case the Camino just happens to be the same shared trail.

 

[Former member 118323]

I had a look on their website: The development and operation of the EuroVelo routes is carried out by national, regional and local governments, commercial service providers and NGOs. Some of these government units get money in the context of programs financed by the EU's ERDF (European Regional Development Fund). None of this means that Camino e-bikers should get a Compostela or must not get a Compostela.

There is no trademark on "the Camino". "The Camino" consists of public roads and paths, open to everybody. Nobody has to think of themselves as pilgrims or even have the Pilgrim Office in Santiago as their final destination in order to be allowed to walk or ride a bike on these roads and paths.

I don't know to what extent EuroVelo 3 coincides with the physical path of Camino de Santiago pilgrims. I remember a short section somewhere in Castile y Leon - it gained some awareness on the forum because of the markers (a triangle with two wheels) and the mysterious 3 on the poles, with Francia on one side and Portugal on the other side, if I remember correctly. The majority of Camino walkers did not know what to make of this.

Haven’t mentioned the Compostela in my posts on regional funding … just letting those not familiar with EU processes (like limiting eBikes etc) that the shared trails are not solely for pilgrims, or locals and/or scalp hunters to use. As you have mentioned many times, you could meet a tractor (in France, often cars use the shared trail), a hunters ubiquitous van (complete with dogs), a scooter, a trail motorbike etc Nothing should surprise you … although I would raise my eyebrows coming across a schooner in full rig

 

[Kathor1]

Do we even know whether the EuroVelo3 trail, to the extent that it overlaps with the Camino de Santiago trails, got EFDR funding or similar EU funding? EuroVelo is a European cycle route network that has been initiated by the European Cyclists' Federation. Just because the EFDR logo is on the Federation's website doesn't mean that funds were made available to them in northern Spain. I checked and saw that they gave some money to the development of northern sections of EuroVelo 13 – Iron Curtain Trail - it goes through AT, CZ, DE, EE, FI, LT, LV, PL but not ES (Spain).

In forum threads, posters present all sorts of arguments or own ideas why one group or the other group should not walk or bike where another group is walking or biking for that matter. Comments find approval from other posters or are refuted.

There is no decision-making power here on the forum: Spanish traffic law and additional regional or local regulations decide who is allowed to use roads of any kind and other ways and paths of any kind in Spain and who is prohibited from use.

As far as I can tell, there is not even much lobbying with Spanish townhalls or provincial authorities emanating from our forum threads.

 

[JustOneGuy]

Do we even know whether the EuroVelo3 trail, to the extent that it overlaps with the Camino de Santiago trails, got EFDR funding or similar EU funding?

Yes definitively.

Finding out if something if funded by FEDER (Spanish name for EDFR) is easy: there must be a blue sign with the EU member state stars somewhere like this:


or something with explicitely written FEDER

And you are @Kathar1na correct when you write:

The money goes to national or regional administration in the various countries who then distribute it to various regional agents and their projects.

Is not an EU office that establishes what to fund with the available regional funding, but only what CAN BE funded with those money.

 

[Kathor1]

This logo is a private sector / non-profit sector logo.

Here is a photo from an earlier forum thread where a forum member walking on the Camino Francés took the photo and asked what the signs on the pole meant:

 

[JustOneGuy]

View attachment 177080
This logo is a private sector/non-profit sector logo.

Are you sure? I assumed it was equivalent to this and imply some sort of EU funding...


as the logo and colour are typical of the EU Commision funded items.... is not??