The New York Times continues its excellent reporting on distracted driving with an article today on the growing trend of car makers installing internet-connected computers in front of drivers: Despite Risks, Internet Creeps Onto Car Dashboards. The caption and photograph with the story tell you just how concerned automakers are with keeping drivers’ eyes on the road. The caption reads “Audi says it tested its system to reduce the amount of time that drivers spend looking at screens,” meanwhile the photograph shows an image of a dashboard-mounted touch screen displaying album cover art for Bruce Springsteen’s Born in the USA. As anyone with a newish I-pod knows, this is not the best strategy for reducing the amount of time spent looking at the screen. And a few extra seconds can make a big difference. In a 100-car, yearlong study by NHTSA and the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute (VTTI,) drivers took their eyes off the road within 3 seconds of 78 percent of all crashes and 65 percent of all near-crashes.
When the Audi system is turned on it provides this laughably unhelpful message: “Please only use the online services when traffic conditions allow you to do so safely.” The only traffic condition that would make it safe to look up a Wikipedia entry, which the internet-ready Audi system allows you to do, is when you’re parked — and they should say so.
The U.S. Department of Transportation has been doing its part to curb distracted driving. It recently launched www.Distraction.gov and a PSA on distracted driving.
Interested in learning more? Here is a list of distracted driving resources from an upcoming Advocacy Advance report by the League and the Alliance for Bicycling and Walking:
Flusche joined the League in April 2009 and has a B.A. in history from Syracuse University and a Masters of Public Administration with a concentration in public policy analysis from New York University.
The League of American Bicyclists would like take this opportunity to thank Secretary Ray LaHood for his vision for a national transportation system that includes biking and walking as a key ingredient of developing livable and sustainable communities. It is unfortunate that there are still many in Congress such as Mr. Coburn and Mr. McCain who do not grasp that more and more Americans want the option to be able to ride and walk safely within their communities.
According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the percentage of bicycle commuters has grown 43 percent since 2000, truly an indication that the number of Americans that have found bicycling to be a healthy and efficient way of getting to work is on the rise. The League of American Bicyclists also reports that in communities with greater bicycling infrastructure investments, bicycling commuting went up 69 percent.
Clearly, we have seen that increased bicycling helps communities thrive. Case in point, between 1991 and 2008, Portland, Ore. invested $57 million to create a 300- mile bikeway network – roughly the same cost of one mile of urban highway. In that period, bicycling increased significantly, at an annual rate of 10 percent. Since 2006, there has been a 38 percent increase in the value of bicycle-related industry sector, with total economic activity close to $90 million. In addition, Portlanders have saved $12 million in fuel and $10 million in healthcare costs by bicycling.
We also want to thank the Secretary and his Department for working hard to get the America Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funding out to states quickly. Under ARRA, states were required to spend 3 percent of their highway transportation funding on Transportation Enhancements (TE). Transportation Enhancements are federally funded, community-based projects that expand travel choices. Under ARRA, states were also required to obligate 50 percent of their highway transportation funding, including transportation enhancements, by June 30, 2009. Research conducted, by America Bikes, found that, by the June 30the deadline, States had awarded over 64 percent of the funding provided under ARRA. These projects provided much-needed jobs to local communities.
Funding bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure a waste? We think not, we must agree with Secretary LaHood, this is progress.
~Walter Finch Director of Advocacy, League of American Bicyclists
Finch joined the League in 2006 and has more than 20 years of experience in the transportation industry. He worked as a government relations associate with G.S. Proctor & Associates, served as the chief of staff for a member of Maryland’s House of Delegates, and worked at the U.S. Department of Transportation as the Special Assistant, Office of the Secretary, Office of Intermodalism.
USA Today’s Drive On Blog recently had a provocative piece asking whether motorists have let cyclists rights go too far – apparently missing the irony that it was cyclists in the 1880s that literally paved the way for motor vehicles, while simultaneously laboring under the misunderstanding that people’s right to use the public right of way is held at the whim of motorists.
While no doubt hoping to stir a lively debate, the author rehashed the tired – and false – notion that motorists and cyclists are at war and cannot coexist peacefully. The overwhelming majority of cyclists has absolutely no intention or desire to deliberately obstruct motorists. A tiny minority of riders may be oblivious and thoughtless about what’s going on behind them – and very, very occasionally a critical mass ride or equivalent will deliberately fill up a street or intersection for a few minutes, once a month, in a handful of cities across the country. Not exactly apocalyptic stuff.
To be honest, drivers are very much more effective at clogging up city streets, twice a day, every work day, 52 weeks of the year, all by themselves without any help from cyclists. Seriously, if a few more people walked, took transit or biked instead…?!
In one case highlighted in the article, a driver – apparently already notorious among the Los Angeles bicycling community for similar prior behavior – passed a group of cyclists heading down a canyon road and deliberately slammed on the brakes in front of them, with fairly obvious consequences. He was mad at having to wait behind them.
By chance, my son and I were in the LA area the week after this happened. As we drove down some of the amazing canyon roads, at the speed limit, we were illegally passed by impatient motorists who crossed the solid yellow center lines on blind corners and as we approached intersections – not just once or twice, but enough times that it became something of a standing joke between us. Except that it isn’t funny when people get hurt.
The other case involved a Maryland driver who hit and killed a cyclist in front of her that she “didn’t see”. The USA Today article, local mediaand evenearly statements from the Maryland Highway Patrol suggested that if the rider had been in the right portion of the lane instead of the middle, the crash might have been prevented – a little hard to fathom, given that the motorist didn’t see the cyclist when he was straight in front of her. Surely we should expect drivers to be aware of what is going on right in front of them – and surely the news media and police should bolster that expectation, not excuse careless, dangerous or inattentive driving.
The author contacted the League for a “little perspective”. He used a “little” of what Jeff Peel had to say in response. He actually managed to single out phrases that had both cyclists and motorists irritated with us at the same time, which is no small feat!
Our Smart Cycling program teach that there are times when cyclists do need to take the lane, even on streets with bike lanes: when the bike lane or right hand side of the travel lane is blocked, or has a dangerous drainage grate or pothole, or has broken glass, piles of snow or leaves – all things which can cause a cyclist to crash. It’s really no different for motorists encountering delivery trucks, wheel-swallowing potholes, broken down vehicles, illegally parked cars, etc. You don’t just drive over them if you can help it.
There may be times when the travel lane is simply too narrow to share side by side with a car, and rather than ride in the gutter or on the sidewalk (surprising to many, sidewalks are among THE most likely places for everyday cyclists to get in a crash with a car) it is safer for the bicyclist and the motorist for the cyclist to ride in the center of the lane. Not to get in the way; and not on the interstate. A cyclist is more visible, and frankly more predictable, where you can see them and see their intentions.
There are times when a cyclist may be going straight ahead and there’s a right turn only lane – to the motorist, it may appear that the cyclist is “in the middle of the road”; to the cyclist, they are just trying to get where they are going without having someone turn right in front of them. The same is true if a cyclist is making a left turn – they should usually be making it from the left side of the lane or left-turn lane.
Truthfully, this whole debate isn’t really just about bicyclists and bicycling versus motorists and cars – even though that makes for better copy and more strident discussion. It’s about civility and safety on our streets, for which we all share responsibility. There are rogue cyclists and rogue drivers; and failure to comply with traffic laws – be they stop signs for cyclists or speed limits for motorists – is sadly endemic in our culture, and we tolerate it at our individual and collective peril every time we hit the road.
Clarke was appointed to the position of Executive Director in April of 2004 after successfully leading efforts to create, interpret and implement the various transportation programs that are available to improve conditions for bicycling and walking as the League’s State and Local Advocacy Director.
Transportation Enhancements are the largest federal source of bicycle and pedestrian funding and they are under attack.
We need your help – TODAY!
Senator Coburn (R-OK) is offering two amendments to the FY10 Transportation, Housing and Urban Development (THUD) appropriations bill that will strike funding for transportation enhancements. The two amendments are S. Amendment 2370 and S. Amendment 2371. Find out what transportation enhancement projects are in your state here.
The Transportation Enhancement program has provided between one half and three-quarters of all Federal funding invested in bicycling and walking improvements in the last 20 years. More than $250 million is at stake in fiscal year 2010 – if Coburn’s amendment is successful it will affect hundreds of trail projects, sidewalks, bicyclist education programs, bike rack on bus programs, and roadway improvements for bicyclists.
S. Amendment 2370 prohibits funding for transportation enhancements if the Highway Trust Fund does not contain amounts sufficient to cover unfunded highway authorizations.
S. Amendment 2371 allows states to opt out of the 10 percent set aside rule that require states to spend at least 10 percent of their surface transportation funding on transportation enhancements.
We expect the amendments to be offered and voted on during Senate floor debate tomorrow, Wednesday, September 16.
Please call your Senator immediately and urge them to vote NO on S. Amendment 2370 and S. Amendment 2371 to the FY10 transportation appropriations bill.
Coming on the heels of the national Safe Routes to Schools Conference, the Safe Routes to Schools National Partnership is collecting letters to Congress from supporters expressing in personal terms why it is important for children to be able to walk and bicycle to school. They will bundle the letters and send them to Congress.
To show your support for Safe Routes to Schools, follow the instructions below and go to the National Partnership’s Dear Congress Campaign page for more information.
Google is asking for suggestions to improve their Maps feature. One of the things you can suggest with the click of a button is “bike trail information and biking directions.” It is very easy.
When you think of recess, you may think of kids playing on school playgrounds. But that’s because you’re not a Member of Congress – unless you are, in which case, welcome. For Members of Congress, recess is an opportunity to return to their home districts and hear from constituents on the issues that are important to them. It looks something like this:
Town Hall meetings are in the headlines now for their role in the healthcare debate, but it is important that Congress also hears from bicycling advocates on issues such as the next transportation bill and climate change legislation.
Both the house and senate are on recess until Tuesday, September 8. This is an opportunity to find out when your Member of Congress will meet with the public and to ask them to support the America Bikes platform. As our Advocacy Tips page says, this is particularly important if they sit on a key committee: Transportation & Infrastructure, Energy and Commerce, and Ways and Means in the house, or Environment and Public Works, Finance, and Commerce, Science and Transportation in the Senate. Before you go, refer to our advocacy tips on how to have an impact and see if your representative is on the Congressional Bike Caucus.
If you get the ear of an elected official, offer to take them for a bike ride in your district. There’s no better way to get them on board with our platform than to get them on a bike with us. Please let us know how your meetings go. Email us at Bikeleague@bikeleague.org.
After a long hiatus, the League of American Bicyclists’ blog is back. As before, the blog will feature contributions from the whole staff. Unlike before, the League now has two policy analysts to keep the blog up to date on the lasted national and notable regional bicycle news, policy and politics.
In fact, now is a good time to re-introduce the blog to the world since we’ve been busy responding to a report by Senators Tom Coburn and John McCain criticizing non-highway and -bridge projects in the transportation bill. First, we posted an update to the Trash Talking page of our website. Our position was then reported in an article in the subscription-only online publication, GreenWire:
Biking advocates say the senators’ accusations that bike and pedestrian projects have depleted the fund are baseless, considering how little the government has spent on them over the years.
Flusche said data from the same GAO study show that the government has spent less on bicycle and pedestrian projects over the past 18 years than the $7 billion Congress approved last week to patch up the highway fund.
“These modes of transportation are actually underfunded in proportion to how we use them,” Flusche said, suggesting that lawmakers look for better ways to finance the fund.
As the debate over the re-authorization of the transportation bill continues, we are likely to hear more spurious attacks on bicycle and pedestrian funding. We will cover them and the arguments in favor in this space, as well as many other topics.
The bicycle industry lost one of its true leaders with the passing earlier this week of Dick Burke, founder of Trek Bicycles, Inc. Burke’s and Trek’s story within the industry is well documented; in the space of 30 years, Trek has become a household name because of their bikes, their sponsorship of Lance and various outstanding teams and riders over the years. I remember Dick as an enthusiastic and engaged board member of the Rails to Trails Conservancy (RTC) when I was on staff there, and perhaps most significantly as the “eminence gris” behind getting bike industry advocacy efforts started that led to the creation of Bikes Belong. During the pivotal industry trade show where the League, RTC and Bicycle Federation of America (as it then was) were trying to raise an unheard of $360,000 for the Bikes Belong campaign, Dick quietly pointed us to the right people at the right companies to make it happen. Our thoughts and prayers are with Dick’s family and the extended Trek family as they celebrate the life of an industry champion.
On Tuesday came the moment we’ve all been waiting for. The report of the National Surface Transportation Policy and Revenue Study Commission…well, maybe not everyone was on tenterhooks but it’s actually a pretty significant document that outlines how $225 billion should be spent EVERY Year for the next 50 years on transportation and infrastructure in this country.
The size of the report itself is equally impressive at several hundred pages, 125 MBS complete with minority statements, addenda and the whole nine yards. The main recommendations appear in the 54-page Volume 1, and that’s where I’m going to direct my few cheap shots. The Commission took 20 months to listen to input (and yes, we did submit comments) and weigh options for creating a bold new transportation future – and in the 54 pages the word “highway” appears 128 times. Rail comes in second with 106 mentions, freight weighs in at 96, with transit a distant fourth on 57. The words bicycle, bicyclist, bike, pedal cycle, and pedal cyclist combined are mentioned just one time, on page 24, in the same sentence as the only mention of pedestrians, walking and other foot-based derivatives. Is it fair to judge a monumental report on such a trivial word search…maybe not, but it kinda tells you something nonetheless.
I looked up the various policy issues in play. “Climate change” warranted three mentions along with nine “greenhouse gas” references. “Environment” got 55 plays…although at least a dozen were in reference to the need to speed up project delivery by reducing environmental reviews. Congestion was a big issue (54) along with safety (47) energy (44) and the economy (13). Health issues, just 8 mentions. Obesity, not a peep. Mobility (transport as an end in itself) was addressed almost twice as often as Access (transport as a means to an end; the ability to actually get somewhere).
You can see where I’m going with this. The transportation future envisaged by this panel does not appear to include bicycling, nor is it yet ready to hold the transportation sector accountable to other national policy imperatives. States, and our beloved state DOT’s, were addressed ten times as often as “city” or “cities”.
The final superficial count I made: the pictures. What do the photos tell us about the direction of the report? Funny you should ask. There are 137 pictures in the 54-page report. Just 22 have any people visible in them, and of those eight are people sitting in cars and five show emergency services personnel at a crash scene, or researchers in lab coats. There is just one bona fide picture of people walking in the street; there’s one deer; one duck; and not a single person on a bicycle. Maybe you can’t read a lot into the photo count, but when bicyclists don’t even rise to the level of attention given to ducks and deer, it sure tells you something.
I really do love this time of year. Although often contrived I find it hard to not feel excitement and encouragement at the idea of a new beginning. This New Years I found a new type of encouragement in my home town. While visiting my family in New York City I went to check out the new seven block “Street of the Future” on 9th Avenue. This innovative design, where parked cars separate the bike lane from the road, is the first physically-separated bike path ever installed in the city’s urban nucleus.
I grew up in the heart of New York City where even going outside alone before the age of ten was pretty impossible. I can’t relate to the often-mentioned freedom that bicycles offer children or the youthful memories that cycling supposedly digs up. What I do remember is being very intrigued by the idea that kids in other parts of the country could bike to school. When I got my first bike in seventh grade I would often walk with it well out of the way to school so I could get to an avenue with low pedestrian traffic. I would cycle on the sidewalk for as long as I could, and then walk the remainder of the way. On the weekends when the loop road in the park was closed to vehicles I would trek there with my bike to get in a few miles of solid riding. It wasn’t until I moved to Maine for college that I could bike regularly, and I haven’t looked back since…nor have I moved back to New York.
This winter, however, I felt a new sort of connection with the city I sometimes forget is my real home. I hope this is the first of many new projects the New York’s transportation commissioner will explore to make the streets and the city a more livable place for cyclists and pedestrians in the future
I had a most frightening experience the other day. I almost hit a bicyclist. It was by sheer luck if not some greater power that I didn’t run over this guy.
It was about 30 or 45 minutes before total darkness, with the sun already below the horizon, and I just got off the freeway. (This is the freeway exit closest to my house and one I use all the time.) At this exit, there is a traffic signal if you want to turn left and if you want to turn right, you’re sent into a right turn lane that comes to a yield sign. Regular users of the right turn lane tend to first look left to see if there’s any oncoming traffic from the left, slow down or stop if there is, but keep going if there’s no one coming. That’s what I did, but just as I turned my head to the right before going out into the street, immediately in front of me was a guy on a bike.
I’m not sure about the guy on the bike who was stopped frozen in front of me, but I know I was scared out of my wits when I noticed him at the last split-second. He had a helmet on and was pretty much dressed to ride. What made things even more disturbing was that he had an adult riding partner and a couple kids in tow right behind him. There was a whole family of people going up the wrong side of the street on a sloping hill where cars are barreling down at 45 to 50 mph, if not faster.
This experience reminded me of when I was first learning to drive, and my father telling me to always look both ways before turning into a one-way street, because according to his explanation, there always the chance that some not-too-bright person was driving the wrong way down a one-way street and you would crash into him. While my dad’s lesson may not be quite the same situation as cyclists riding on the wrong side of the street, I’m going to have to pay attention to cyclists coming from unexpected directions not just for my own sake but the folks riding on the wrong side of the street.
And yes, for those of you who are curious, I did caution him in a friendly way that he should be riding on the other side of the street. He looked at me like I was crazy.
This is an update to a blog entry from October 16. You’ll recall that Mr. Thomas Lynch was alleged to have caused a 16-bike pileup which resulted in numerous injuries in Lake County, Illinois on September 22. The original blog entry can be found here.
On December 3, Mr. Lynch appeared in court, where the original traffic violations were dismissed. But, that is not bad news, because a couple weeks earlier on November 15, a warrant was issued for his arrest, on four felony charges: 2 counts of Aggravated Battery, 1 count Leaving the Scene of an Accident Involving Personal Injury, and 1 count Reckless Driving. He made a court appearance on November 26 and was subsequently released on a recognizance bond. His next court date related to the felony charges will be December 11 on procedural matters and the victims and witnesses are now being contacted by the State’s Attorney’s staff as they continue to develop their case.
When we first learned of this incident, the League’s executive director Andy Clarke wrote a letter to the Lake County State’s Attorney urging him to vigorously investigate and prosecute this case. Our collective voice has been heard. Thanks to all of you who also wrote Lake County State’s Attorney Michael J. Waller, who seems to agree that this was not simply a minor traffic violation but a very serious offense.
Updates on this case will be provided as we receive additional information.
As I was riding along Route 28 in Rockville several Sundays ago, I was hit in the back wheel by a driver. The driver obviously wasn’t paying attention and skidded and was about to come to a complete stop just before she hit me. I lunged forward when I got hit but didn’t get knocked off my bike, and amazingly there was no damage to the wheel. The driver was totally unapologetic and if anything was annoyed that I was there getting in her way. Since it was a busy intersection, I asked her to meet me past the intersection so we could exchange information. Well, guess what? She took off!
An unapologetic driver taking off on me was the right combination of factors to report the incident to the local police as a hit-and-run. Luckily the driver behind her saw the whole thing, wrote down the license plate number and gave it to me. I need to mention here that the driver had a temporary license plate on her car. I called the Montgomery County Police and reported the incident. The indignity of getting hit by an arrogant driver was about to be made worse. The officer told me that they can’t trace temporary license plates back to a specific driver. I asked if he was going to file a report, and he said that he “could” if I made the request for it but it probably wouldn’t lead to anything.
I didn’t get hurt. I didn’t even have any damage to my bike. But I consider hit-and-run to be a serious offense, and according to the law, it IS a serious offense. Now that I think about it, I probably should’ve filed the report just to press the issue with the police officer and so that I would have something on the record. If I had suffered serious physical injury as a result of the collision or had been killed, would the officer been a bit more determined to find the offender? This is just a wild guess but if a Montgomery County Police Officer had been injured or just struck by a hit-and-run driver, I get the feeling that somehow, they would track down the owner of the vehicle if all they had was the temporary tag number.
On September 22, Thomas Lynch, driving a pickup truck, is alleged to have caused a 16-bike crash in Lake County, Illinois causing injury to several of the riders and sending at least one rider to the local hospital for emergency treatment. Based on the information available through third-party eye witnesses, statements made by members of the cycling group and confirmed by the Lake County Sheriff’s office, the driver first drove alongside the riders, who were lawfully riding single-file, then drove in front of them and suddenly hit the brakes causing the pileup. He fled the scene, but then returned to the crash site where he was questioned by a county deputy sheriff.
In explaining how he caused the collision, he first said that he thought that that a bicyclist had punched his truck. He later explained that he braked suddenly in front of the bikers to avoid hitting a squirrel.
The driver of the truck has been charged with improper lane usage and failure to provide aid and information, both misdemeanors, and was initially ordered to appear in Lake County court on October 29. I’ve been in communication with one of the cyclists who was involved in the collision, and he tells me that Lynch’s court appearance date has been pushed back to December, but that the Lake County Sheriff has called back several of the people who were involved for more detailed statements. We are grateful for the work of the Lake County Sheriff’s Department for thoroughly investigating the facts of this incident, and particularly Deputy Sheriff Alan Burns, the deputy on the scene who took this matter very seriously and professionally as he investigated and recorded everyone’s statements.
This was not an “accident.” This was an act of violence by a driver forcing himself against law-abiding bicyclists with the weight of a pickup truck weighing thousands of pounds. He fled the scene. His account to the authorities of what happened is ridiculous and shows blatant disregard for the safety of others on the road.
The League of American Bicyclists is watching this case with great concern. League executive director Andy Clarke has written to Mr. Michael J. Waller, the Lake County State’s Attorney, urging him to vigorously investigate the case and where appropriate press charges to the fullest extent of the law. A copy of Andy Clarke’s letter to the State’s Attorney Michael Waller can be viewed here.
I encourage you to contact the Lake County State’s Attorney and let him know that cyclists locally, regionally, and nationwide are watching this case, and that a message needs to be sent to drivers like Thomas Lynch that they do not own the road and they are not at liberty to commit acts of physical violence to others on the road, motorized or not.
State’s Attorney Michael Waller’s contact information:
Michael J. Waller
State’s Attorney Office
18 North County St., 4th Floor
Waukegan, IL 60085
Phone: 847-377-3000
Fax: 847-360-1538
Email: StatesAttorney@co.lake.il.us
After all the words that have been written and conjecture and perspective that has been thrown around related to this year’s Tour, leave it to the Mayor of London, Ken Livingstone, to sum it all up perfectly. Here’s what the Mayor said in a story about his efforts to get the Tour back in London again soon. “It is a unique event, and I do not think a handful of riders breaking the rules diminishes the achievements of those who do not.”
That’s it. It really IS a totally unique event with its own lore and unwritten rules. Each day pits rider against rider at the limits of their endurance (drug-enhanced or not!) and their will to push on through the pain. It’s compelling TV and it’s a drag when the actors change, but the next episode is always worth watching. I can’t wait for le Tour 2008.
We all remember that feeling. It’s that sensation of speed, freedom, and mobility we got when we first started riding. It’s what we remember about riding a bike as a kid, and in many ways what continues to fuel our desire to ride as adults. As a father, one of the next best things to that childhood sensation is the thrill I see on my son’s face as we ride together in our neighborhood.
My son is eleven years old and like others his age he usually doesn’t go out biking any extended amount of time. Usually, he just rides around the neighborhood with his buds, or hops on his bike to go visit someone down the street. I used to ask him if he wanted to go riding with me, but about a year ago I stopped asking because usually he said no. But in the last couple weeks, he’s been asking if he can come along when I’m going out for my regular after-work ride. I figure that a ride with my son will always be more fulfilling for the both of us—and certainly for me—than a ride on my own even though I might sacrifice the workout I would get if I were on my own. (And actually, I’ve figured out how I can get the workout I want and still not leave him behind.)
From the moment he got on a bike at about five or six years old, I told him that someone had to be outside when he’s riding, and “don’t go out into the street!” While well intentioned, that regularly-blurted warning may have served us well back then but is now coming back to challenge us. Telling a child this over and over again, and cautioning them about the dangers of cars and the need to pay attention, is pretty much telling them, “ride on the sidewalk!” But as we ride now on our neighborhood streets, and as I have over the years become a more experienced rider of the road, it is becoming obvious—at least to me if not my son—that riding on the sidewalk is not a safe thing to be doing.
On our ride yesterday, I started cautioning him when a good examples arose that, for example, when that particular car backed out of the driveway, if he was about another thirty feet in front, the driver might not have been able to see him in time, or that he might not have been able to stop his bike. I’m not going to force him to do the entire ride with me on the street because I don’t want to scare him to death either, but he has started to ride certain parts with me on the road.
All the while, I’m thinking, I don’t want to kill the thrill for him. Of course, I want him to pick up good riding skills. But, I want him to stay in touch with that feeling that got so many of us to be life-long riders.
The terms “bike safety” and “bike etiquette” are most often used in reference to the many challenges of biking on roads alongside cars and other motor vehicles. It wasn’t until I began spending summer evenings biking on the Custis Trail, a popular bike path in Northern Virginia, that I started considering the complexities of biker to biker and biker to pedestrian interactions.
On a narrow and twisty trail like the Custis, passing is the foremost issue for all users. With an abundance of joggers, walkers, people with dogs and mothers pushing strollers, bikers are inevitably the biggest passers (one would hope). When passing other cyclists or any of the aforementioned slower moving users, bikers have three options: they can remain silent, call out a simple “on your left,” or ring a bell.
It seems that the best possible option is to cause as little disturbance as possible. If someone is using the trail properly on the right side and appears to be maintaining a direct line of movement, it makes little sense to announce your presence loudly and abruptly upon reaching them. Chances are they have heard your bike chains behind them, so only if completely necessary a very calm “on your left” should ensure that your path will not be obstructed.
Ringing a bell makes little sense for a number of reasons. First, just as getting honked at while driving can make a person unnecessarily flustered and anxious, a bell can be equally as shell-shocking to a trail user. Having someone ring their bell at me while I’m biking makes me immediately assume I am doing something wrong or am about to get rear-ended by the cyclists. Common sense will tell you that ringing a bell provides no direction or specific information. Do you want someone to get out of your way? Do they need to move more right? Or are you really just trying to say “I know you’re slowly jogging well to the right of the trail, but I just wanted to announce to everyone that I am flying by you.”
As bicycle advocates we should encourage all types of people to use urban trails and not make them feel that they are moving too slowly or are a hindrance to bicyclists.
Research summaries often state trends or “facts” in overly-simplified terms, using measures that are easy for us to grasp. About five years ago, I recall hearing in a public radio piece that more than half the households in the world do not have access to a telephone. Later, because this “fact” seemed hard to believe, I did some hunting on the internet and learned that this generalization was not based on any research, but the story wound up becoming something of an urban legend that started getting mentioned in numerous broadcasts and publications.
I read a similar generalization, and couldn’t help but wonder if it was true or was another urban legend getting tossed around by cycling enthusiasts. The generalization: there are more people in the world who commute to work by bicycle than by automobile. There were no ratios, no numbers, trends, nothing. And, if it is true, is that ratio of bike commuters to car commuters increasing or decreasing?
Here’s one more “fact” that I heard last week. In a report about a joint World Bank/Chinese government research project on health and pollution in China, it was said that each day a thousand new cars are introduced into the streets of Beijing. In the aggregate, I suspect that a certain number of cars are being taken out of circulation each day because they’re no longer operable or people are moving out of the city, etc. But, it is a significant number of cars for each day in the year. For a city known in the past for its “river of bicycles” I can’t help but think that if bicycle commuters outnumber car commuters now, it won’t be for long.
You won’t often see me write these words, even though I’m a [new] Virginian. We don’t have the most progressive state legislature or DOT or transportation commission in the country (and that massive understatement confirms my English upbringing), but for once the state is making me proud.
You may have read this week that penalties for serious traffic violations have gone up significantly – particularly in the form of administrative fees and penalties attached to various driving offences such as speeding and drinking and driving. So now a speeding ticket in Virginia might cost you $3,000 if you were way above the speed limit and driving erratically or too close etc.
Personally, I love it. For the first time in the 15 years I’ve lived in Virginia people are actually talking about having to behave behind the wheel of their car! I think that’s good news for cyclists in the state.
The only down side I can see is that the fees were levied to raise funds for a transportation funding package that will “improve” roads all over the state. Based on VDOT’s track record, and that of most local agencies in the state, that isn’t going to be so good for bicyclists. But, we can do something about…we can “stick it to the man” by not speeding or running red lights or driving too close or driving under the influence.
This morning’s Washington Post Business Section almost made me choke on my cereal.
The lead story documents the billions and billions of dollars with which we subsidize the blending of ethanol into our gasoline supply. It’s currently around $5 billion annually and will rise to more than $18 billion 15 years from now. And that’s just from the 51-cent tax credit the oil industry gets for every gallon of ethanol they add to the mix. That doesn’t include the agricultural subsidies lavished on farmers to grow the corn for the ethanol.
At the same time, the same Congress can’t find it within itself to spend the $6 million already authorized to fund a few programs to test what would encourage more people to ride or walk instead of driving, or the less than $10 million annual cost of a tax-break for bicycle commuters.
According to the most recent National Household Travel Survey, bicyclists rode about 6.5 billion miles in 2001, a number that has surely increased given rising gas prices and the obesity crisis headlines of recent years. Conservatively, that saved around 300 million gallons of gas from being burned. And remember that’s with bicycling making up a paltry 1 percent of trips in this country. We could double or triple the levels of bicycling in US cities with just a fraction of the money being spent to sustain our driving habit.
Biofuels certainly have their place in the mix of solutions to combat climate change – but I hope at least some of that corn is still left to make my morning cereal.
What on earth would possess someone to promote and sell promotional materials that makes light of – even legitimizes – hitting and verbally abusing cyclists? Ask the folks at CafePress, because I’m not sure I can answer that for them. They are an on-line store that has loads of other products that are clever, humorous, ironic, pointed, self-deprecating, off-the-wall.
And then they have artwork that shows a cyclist getting hit by a motorist, with an accompanying explicit epithet that anyone that’s ridden a bike in the last 24 hours will likely have heard, along the lines of “excuse me, but I think you are in my way.” They have it for bumper stickers, mugs, T-shirts.
I wonder if they also have klever klan merchandise encouraging folks to break race laws. Perhaps snappy graphics showing people being persecuted for their sexual orientation or religious beliefs of other lifestyle choices. Is there a line in humorous “I support torture” stickers that flout international law as well as domestic laws and good taste?
So why would they think it is OK to glorify violence against cyclists? Free speech – to promote behavior that kills and injures people every single day of the year already? We’ll be waiting to hear from them.
And thanks to Dean Schott at the League of Illinois Bicyclists for calling out this awful example of anti-cyclist nonsense. State and local advocacy groups are the eyes and ears of the cycling movement – yesterday it was a radio station in Baltimore, tomorrow it could be someone in your neck of the woods going off on cyclists. Make sure you are a member of your state and local advocacy groups as well as the League. We need to stand up to this crap.
Yesterday morning, WBAL (Baltimore) Talk Show host Chip Franklin did what all “shock jocks” eventually get around to doing (I’ve always likened it to chimps at a keyboard…) and picked on cyclists as a bunch of arrogant, lycra-wearing, law-breakers who don’t pay their way, etc.
As usual nowadays, while the premise of his rant was small-minded, factually dubious, and certainly obnoxious, he made a point of not advocating harm; equally predictable was the chilling attitude of the callers to show who really do appear to want to hurt cyclists.
We learned from folks who listened to the start of the broadcast that what set Franklin off was an altercation with a cyclist on his way into work that morning. Interestingly, two years ago, an Iowa legislator – chairman of the transportation committee, no less – got into a verbal fight with cyclists and introduced legislation to ban cyclists from certain roads in the state. Bicyclist access to one of the Atlanta area’s premier cycling loops was jeopardized earlier this year after harsh words between riders and a powerful resident of the street in question.
Now, I have no doubt that the cyclist that “got in the way” of Chip Franklin was probably just where he should have been in the road and that the Iowa legislator and Atlanta big-wig were at least partly to blame – and goodness knows I have had my share of close calls and heated “discussions” with taxi drivers, diplomats, double-parkers, and drivers who just don’t want me on the street.
But the WBAL story reminds me that you just never know to whom you might be giving the finger, and what impact that person might have once they get out of their car! Be careful out there!
Congratulations, and thank you to drivers of America! Thank you for driving just a little bit less this year than you did last year. After decades of seemingly inexorable increases, the number of vehicle miles traveled has actually leveled off in the past year, according to figures from the Federal Highway Administration.
Whether the reason for this is increasing gas prices, frustration with traffic congestion, or the efforts of communities across the country to promote bicycling, walking and transit use, this is actually good news for America and good news for the planet. The transportation sector, primarily cars, contributes between a quarter and third of all greenhouse gas emissions and to our dependence on foreign oil – we might finally be turning the corner and reducing our over-dependence on cars for most of our trips.
Let me be clear, we are NOT anti-car. There are a lot of trips and a lot of tasks for which a car is ideally suited and often the only option. We aren’t asking or expecting people to throw away their cars keys. What we are saying is that more than 40 percent of all trips in the country are two miles or less; one quarter are just one mile or less – and two-thirds of even these shortest of trips are being made by car. These short trips – which are by far the most polluting – are ideal distances to do on a bike.
As folks contemplate the highest average gas prices ever in this country, we encourage every American to consider making one or two trips a week by bike or foot that they would normally make by car. What better ways to save money, get some exercise, reduce pollution, and have some fun into the bargain.
The impacts are not trivial. Cyclists who rode to work on Bike to Work Day alone will
• save more than 56 tanker trucks full of gasoline from being burned
• save $5.7 million in driving costs
• prevent 4,580 tons of carbon dioxide and 230 tons of carbon monoxide from entering the atmosphere
• burn 410 million calories
If you multiply these numbers to cover a year’s worth of commuting, the benefits start to add up fast for individuals, communities, and the nation as a whole.
You never know what a visit to Capitol Hill is going to bring. I was up on the Hill yesterday to deliver our testimony on the role bicycling can play in combating climate change – read all about it here – with Walter Finch, the League’s advocacy director.
I got up to the Hill first (cos I was riding….!) and found myself standing in the security line next to the guy from the Discovery Communications empire that does Lance Armstrong’s website. Evidently it was Livestrong Day on Capitol Hill and Lance was in town with other cancer survivors to raise awareness for their issues.
The hearing itself was a long-drawn out affair – not because of the witnesses or even the statements from Members of Congress, but because of frequent lengthy interruptions for a series of quorum votes on the House floor. My five minutes of fame took about four and half hours to complete – like the last few minutes of a basketball game, I guess – but I did get a couple of questions from Members who were in attendance.
The nicest surprise was that Congressman Dan Lipinski (D-IL) from Chicago introduced himself as a League member, and then asked a couple of good questions about the Federal government’s potential role as a model employer for bicyclists.
And then before we’d even gotten back to the office we were contacted by the Association for Commuter Transportation – the ridesharing, vanpooling, commuter services people – to follow up our testimony and see if there are ways we can work together.
Floyd Landis’ doping case has been getting a lot of ink lately as it winds towards some sort of conclusion (hopefully) in May. He’s on the cover of your latest issue of Bicycling; his story even made it two days running into the Washington Post this week – a rarity for any cyclist outside of the three weeks in July that the sport is actually noticed!
Now, I’m not an expert on any aspect of the case. Not a doctor, nor a racer; and the League doesn’t really cover the competitive side of the sport at all. But our mission is to protect the rights of cyclists, and it seems to me that Floyd Landis is getting a pretty raw deal from “the authorities” right now.
Why do I say that? If you’d asked me at the start of the 2006 Tour de France which rider I thought was least likely to engage in doping, out of 200 or so riders Floyd Landis would have been at or near the top of the list. No question.
Last November, I listened to Dr. Arnie Baker present his defense of Landis at El Tour de Tucson (which, incidentally, is hosting our very own national rally this November). Again, I’m no expert, but the overwhelming impression Dr. Baker convincingly left with me is that the various testing labs and anti-doping agencies are almost comically inept in their handling of this and other cases – except it really isn’t so funny when they are affecting lives so fundamentally. The way the French labs are reported to have handled the latest round of tests and results simply confirms that impression.
This March, Floyd came to the League’s National Bike Summit in Washington DC and stood in front of 400 bicycle industry leaders and advocates and took questions. Without any preconditions. He talked of his love of cycling and the impact it had on his life growing up, and then it was open microphone time. I’m not sure that someone with something to hide would do that.
Full disclosure: I got a chance to hang out with Floyd a little. Just an hour or two – we’re hardly IM’ing each other or sharing pictures of the kids just yet! And believe me, I’m no Allison DuBois from the TV show Medium, who can see into people’s souls simply by shaking their hand. But once again, the overwhelming impression I got is that this is a man with nothing to hide and everything to lose by so publicly and visibly challenging the injustice that is being done to him. He is prepared to put himself and his career on the line in the full glare of the media just as he did in the Alps on his heroic ride last July.
I want him to win again. I want him to get his day in court just as I do every cyclist who is treated poorly by the police, the courts, or the judicial system. I want to enjoy watching the Tour again, and I want Floyd Landis to be able to enjoy the ride.
This will be the spot where the League sounds off about bicycling, advocacy, education and so much more. Please comment, share your thoughts, vent, and let’s work together to build a bicycle friendly America.
Blog
This winter, however, I felt a new sort of connection with the city I sometimes forget is my real home. I hope this is the first of many new projects the New York’s transportation commissioner will explore to make the streets and the city a more livable place for cyclists and pedestrians in the future
Subscribe
