Call to action: Can we educate ourselves?
Posted by Elly Blue on October 29th, 2007 at 2:10 pm
[This article has been written by BikePortland.org columnist Elly Blue]
(Photos © Jonathan Maus)
Responses to the tragic deaths of cyclists this year have been by and large constructive. A law aimed at protecting vulnerable roadway users was passed and, more recently, thanks to the leadership of Commissioner Adams, a dialogue about improving intersection design appears to be really going places.
“Until cyclists are seen as equal users of the road, not as scofflaws, miscreants, and frivolous leisure riders, bicyclists will continue to be an easy target, a symbol and scapegoat for the confusion and fear people feel on the roads.”
–Elly Blue
If there is a silver lining to these dark events, it’s that new communication channels are being forged and ideas for positive change are being seriously discussed.
But there have also been less positive responses, ranging from pathologically vicious to simply uninformed. Rumblings of the latter quality are starting to be heard more and more often about bicycle licensing. I’d like to nip these in the bud. Right now.
Yes, we should all be concerned about the lack of skill and knowledge that’s painfully visible among the increasing flow of cyclists out there. And yes, even the most experienced among us have something more to learn about the complex task of navigating our roadways.
But the idea of licensing bike riders carries a petty, punitive undercurrent. Like a recently proposed change to bike lane laws, licensing is a proposal aimed at keeping bicyclists in the margins of the road and the law rather than continuing to integrate us.
The only effect of licensing bicycles would be its intended one — criminalizing bicycling and crushing the rise of a healthy, sustainable, safe mode of travel that more and more people are choosing.
Most cyclists already have been through driver training and licensing. And it does us just about as much good as it seems to do most people driving cars out there. Until the DMV is more effective at teaching road skills to drivers, we should be reluctant to broaden their scope to bikes. We can do it better, and cheaper, ourselves.
And until cyclists are seen as equal users of the road, not as scofflaws, miscreants, and frivolous leisure riders, bicyclists will continue to be an easy target, a symbol and scapegoat for the confusion and fear people feel on the roads.
As Jeff Mapes pointed out in an excellent editorial in last Sunday’s Oregonian, the number of people who die in traffic crashes each year in the US would fill two jumbo jetliners a week — and where is public outrage? It’s focused on bicyclists, not on people driving cars, who are equally undereducated and prone to human error, and to much more horrific effect.
Motorist education and licensing as they exist are not serving to keep our roads adequately safe and orderly. The bicycle community owes it to ourselves, and to all the new cyclists who we’ve helped inspire — and to all users of the road, whether pedestrians, drivers, or other cyclists — to do what we can to educate each other to keep ourselves as much as possible out of harm’s way.
Skillful, safe cycling is not a perfect correlation with legal cycling. And bicycle skills are not just about avoiding the physical dangers posed by sharing the road with cars and other cyclists — we should also know how to ride in a way that minimizes road rage, frustration, and just plain inconsiderateness.
Efforts are already being made, and some great resources are available. A group on the Shift email list have done some research and compiled all the bicycle education resources we could find available in Portland, and some resources for drivers as well.
Our list of resources so far shows many opportunities, and some glaring needs, for action and involvement.
How do we get more certified bicycling instructors out there, and how do we attract people to classes and workshops?
Are we doing enough to teach people who show up to group rides how to share the road with cyclists, pedestrians, and drivers?
How do we disseminate the already existing printed materials? Are they at all bike shops, schools, and other places where bicyclists go?
How do we get the community talking about bicycle safety and skills beyond just legal issues and how do we reach out to bring more cyclists into the dialogue?
Do we need more printed materials? Would a bicycling skills page here on bikeportland.org be useful?
Are there other resources out there that we’ve missed?
I consider myself an experienced cyclist, but I plan to spend some time today re-reading some of these resources. I’m thinking about taking a class to keep my skills sharp. It’s a complicated art, being out there on the road, and the stakes are too high not to be the best drivers and cyclists we can be.
Email This Post
Possibly related posts
October 29th, 2007 14:22
I say it again now that I get to be the first poster; one night only defensive cycling crash course. Everyone comes. Let us fill up a gym or rec center and end this nonsense from our side of the equation. If there's one thing to be gleaned from the varieties of religious expression, it's the power of shared experiences to effect lasting changes in attitude.
October 29th, 2007 14:37
I think group rides are a great place to learn. Almost every time I ride with other people I learn something, and teach something. It's usually just tips though. Cycling in Portland is growing so fast that most of the people to learn from only have a few years of experience themselves.
October 29th, 2007 14:41
As in any group, it is the minority of bad actors who are remembered. Whether they be miscreant pedestrians, bikers or drivers, those are the experiences the speaker (whether he or she be biker or driver) remembers. Few recall the days, weeks or months at a time that go by with little or no negative interactions between street users. Considering the levels of all three types of traffic in the city core, I think this is something worth keeping in mind.
But I certainly do no intend to minimize the negative experioences, because those are the events that lead to the injuries and deaths. Just making an observation.
I've been hit by a car as a pedestrian, brushed by bikes while on foot and on bike, etc, etc.... And those are certainly the most memorable events to me!
I think a bike skills page, and maybe a separate one aimed at kids would be great. And bike safety taught via bike shops would be wonderful. My kids look up to the folks at our bike shop - and would be more inclined to listen to them than perhaps, to me in my role as a nagging parent!
October 29th, 2007 14:59
Thanks for the excellent post!
"How do we get the community talking about bicycle safety and skills beyond just legal issues and how do we reach out to bring more cyclists into the dialogue?"
Perhaps hosting several times over the course of a few weeks or months that brings together both motorists and cyclists to talk about misunderstandings would be good?
CNRG hosts a great Non-Profit networking night every month, perhaps the Bike community could start a bicycle safety networking/working group every month or bi-monthly and invite different public administrators?
Also, it could be effective to host forums or "working receptions" (fun social events) for different groups of bikers - commuters, competitors, recreational. We're all cyclists in the end, but perhaps some people feel more comfortable talking in groups with like-minded and like-purpose cyclists?
October 29th, 2007 15:06
I ran across a very interesting and timely book this weekend at Classic Cycle (www.classiccycleus.com) while touring around Bainbridge Island ... Bicycling and the Law by Bob Mionske (JD). Check it out for many interesting points on the discussion topics now circulating in our community about bicycling and traffic safety (rights and responsibilities on the road).
http://www.powells.com/biblio/1-9781931382991-0
Mr. Mionske writes…that typically adults are not issued bicyclist operator's permits for historical reasons, common law and constitutional reasons ('the Right to Ride': the state has no legal right to keep you from choosing the bicycle, like it can for car driving and the Bicycle Civil Liberties Union successfully fought to keep bicycling open to those who had lost their driving privileges...so they could still have private mobility).
The objective of certifying the competency of bicycle operators can be met through enhanced education materials and testing (as an adult) at the time of being DMV certified to operate a motorized vehicle on public streets – if the bicyclist chooses to seek a motor vehicle license (most do). This would accomplish the same objective while spreading awareness broadly through the non bicycling community vs. instituting a bicycle operator's permit for only bicycling adults.
This is where the motoring public and the bicycling public should have a common ground – improved education and regular testing at the time of issuing motor vehicle operator’s permits.
Many US communities have (and had) what is called a bicycle license...but this is only a registration of a vehicle (its ownership and road worthiness) and not the operator’s competence.
Requiring bicycling children in the US to have a permit would limit access to bicycling by the very young if strictly enforced – much as some helmet laws have done in some communities. This in turn may cause more childhood obesity through inactivity over the long term.
[Though some non-US communities have instituted a bicycle exam of sorts as a way of general safety education or access to parking on school grounds vs. banning children without permits from bicycling on public streets – though different countries have different guaranteed rights to public space and precedence in case law.]
October 29th, 2007 15:08
As a former motorcyclist I live by the motto "Assume you are not seen 100% of the time." Without thinking much about it I ride my bike in traffic much like I did my moto, scanning for escape routes and making sure I never put myself in a place where I can't bail if someone does something unexpected.
I read this article on Vehicular Cycling after Tracy's death and thought it was well thought out:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicular_cycling
Check it out.
As far as I can tell, the rules regarding lane position give us lots of leeway to take the lane as we see fit. If you aren't comfortable having a car pass you on a particular part of the road, take up enough of the lane so that they won't. If they still try to you'll have lots of room to scoot over.
Without going on too long, another trick I learned from motorcycling is to make eye contact with drivers that are in a position to cut you off. Something about initiating eye contact really grabs people's attention. Try it--they will see you--if they don't return your eye contact then they haven't seen you and you should make some bailout plans.
Ride smartly and confidently. Don't get bossed around. Let drivers know that you know what you are doing. Be careful out there.
October 29th, 2007 15:46
I agree with Tony (#6) on making eye contact with drivers. I always do so especially with drivers coming out of side streets or about to make a right turn. If I'm stopped at a light I'll even turn around and make eye contact before the light changes to make sure they don't cut me off. This is really important when they don't have their blinker on and still make a right turn. If the vehicle is large enough, I usually sit behind them parallel to the second vehicle if there is a bike lane; if not, I will sit directly behind them.
October 29th, 2007 15:54
I think the eye contact technique is indispensable, and i always use it. However, I have heard from more than one cyclist that they made eye contact with a driver, and the driver still behaved as if he/she didn't see the cyclist.
So make eye contact, but don't assume that the driver has seen you once you've made eye contact.
On a parenthetical note, I was in a crosswalk once, made eye contact with a driver who was turning so that I knew she saw me , and she nevertheless drove her car straight at me, rapidly, and intentionally.
October 29th, 2007 16:00
Yes, you are correct; making eye contact does not assure safe crossing. I forgot to mention that after making eye contact, I do hesitate if the driver looks aloof, on a cell phone or does not show any recognition.
October 29th, 2007 16:02
Reading this article made me recall taking the state boating exam. I am a kayaker and it is not required for me to take the test, but I did so anyway. What I found was that most of it was general boating and trailering questions, but about a quarter of the questions were on jet ski safety and operation. Why can't this technique be adopted on (land-based) motor vehicle licensing? Clearly a specific audience was targeted for boating why not driving? A supplemental 20 bike-related questions (out of a pool of 100 or so) should be able to get the point across, and this carries the added bonus of making sure people know the laws before getting their license.
I also like the idea of having posters, fliers, and pamphlets at bike shops; inform new riders at the source and get the laws instilled in younger riders before they can take their driving test. A printed list of resources can be placed on the counter as well.
Thanks for the articles and keep up the good work!
October 29th, 2007 16:09
#8 rixtir,
My same experience, you can't assume they have seen you. I almost wonder if the driver is thinking "Good, they (cyclist/pedestrian) can see me and will be able to move out of my way as I proceed forward." Doesn't happen often but enough that there is a constant tension between riding assertively and being just a bit hesitant due to our vulnerability.
October 29th, 2007 16:20
the discussion of the lack of education relating to cycling is timely and needed. While many more motorists die daily from crashes, with little fanfare, each death or injury is more deeply felt in the cycling community for one reason: its a cycling COMMUNITY. Locked in their cars for hours on end, cyclists have daily opportunities to interact with the larger community and as a result, are more connected to other cyclists and as a result, more empowered.
That connection and power make it possible for ever increasing benefits to be bestowed on the cyclists.
Which leads to the education piece..
I would never plan on State government to act, and City government probably would study it to death before anything happened. Which leads it to the cyclists to make that education piece happen.
Winter is coming.. perfect time to band together and develop a curriculem. Enlist qualified instructors. Raise any money to make it happen..(the deadline for small community grants is Nov 1. Probably too late for this year, but next year, a great source of $$ ( City grant program from ONI, focus in developing under-represented communities..cyclist safety classes as a community building exercise? )
We are all talking safety and the need for education..both for ourselves and for motorists..
are we willing to act?
October 29th, 2007 16:32
Education. Yeah, now we're talkin'!
Before asking for more paint, I highly recommend that cyclists educate themselves on vehicular cycling techniques.
A cyclist should never accept a bike lane that puts him/her in an unsafe position on the roadway. If you are riding down a hill at or near the speed of traffic, you should be in the middle of the traffic lane, never on the far right of the roadway. High speed requires room to react, a full view of the road and visibility to other traffic (behind and crossing).
We must also never accept a bike lane that positions us to the right of a lane with a right arrow (even if the lane is for straight and right-turning traffic). In this case, I leave the bike lane and merge into the traffic lane before the intersection - even if it means I'm sitting at the traffic light behind a few cars. It is so much safer than rolling up the right side of cars that might turn right. The ability to roll to the front of the line is not worth your life.
We should reject bike lanes that keep us to the right of traffic in a high-conflict area. We must reject bike lanes that run through door zones.
In a slow-speed, high-conflict urban environment, bike lanes are more dangerous than sharing a traffic lane. Yet, the laws (requiring us to use them and requiring motorists to yield to us in them) create a false sense of security that lures novices onto the street with no understanding of traffic dynamics... then introduces them to a counter-intuitive handling of intersections and foolish high-speed passing on the right. Sometimes using a gauntlet bike lane is the most expedient thing to do, but no one should ever do it without understanding all the potential hazards.
Elly is right, we have to educate ourselves and our fellow cyclists.
Vehicular cycling is the safest and easiest way to function in traffic. Not only that, it actually can lead to increased roadway civility. I'm always impressed by the kindness and generosity of motorists when I communicate and ride legally and predictably. Of course, there are plenty of idiot drivers out there, but we need to clean our own house.
We should look to mutual cooperation, integration, sharing and respect as indicators of bike-friendliness. Not an abundance of lanes and trails.
Here are some resources I recommend:
Bike Lanes VS Wide Outside Lanes
http://www.bicyclinglife.com/EffectiveAdvocacy/blvswol.htm
Engineering and Planning: Bike Lanes
http://www.bicycledriving.com/bikelanes.htm
The Roads We Have
http://www.bicyclinglife.com/EffectiveAdvocacy/TheRoadsWeHave.htm
Intro to Vehicular Cycling
http://www.bicyclinglife.com/PracticalCycling/VCIntro.htm
October 29th, 2007 16:34
We've got more than a few LAB certified LCI instructors in the Portland Metro area, aren't any classes already being offered?
October 29th, 2007 16:40
As my own grass roots attempt at making cycling safer through education; I often tell other cylcists that they don't have their lights on and are not very visible, or let someone know it is really dangerous to ride the bike lane in the wrong direction, or let parents know where they can get a bike helmet for their kids. I'm always surprised at how often I get a really negative response. I even make a point to make sure my message is simply notifying and not using the word "should" as though passing judgement, but I still get shoved off. Even in the shadow of the recent tragedies I still see so many cyclist riding without lights and putting themselves in risky situations. I know it would be easier to keep my big fat mouth shut and let these cyclists take the risk, but it makes me feel guilty. I can't stand the thought of riding near someone making these choices and seeing them get hit. I would always wonder if they just didn't know and I would know there was always something I could have done. I could have spoken up.
I think a good question is how do we get the people who really need to attend a bike class to show up? How do we get the people who don't want to listen or learn to pick up a pamphlet and read something they think they already know enough about?
October 29th, 2007 16:47
Thanks for all these meaty comments. In case any of you missed it in the body of the text, here is a list of cycling education resources (plus a few for how to drive cars around bikes) already available in the Portland area:
http://www.shift2bikes.org/wiki/education
It's a wiki, so you can add new info yourself, or post here and I'll try to keep up with adding new stuff.
I love the ideas of a monthly social night to meet other cyclists and talk about bike skills. Shift has a social night on the third wednesday of every month that might be a good chance for this. Check out the calendar at www.shift2bikes.org for info on the next one (no location's been set yet).
There are also Dan's bike lunches -- still happening every Wednesday downtown? See the Shift calendar.
Another great idea is the one-hour intensive. You can't learn everything in an hour, but you can learn a lot more than you knew before. Jonathon S, want to work on putting something like that together?
Burr -- Only 2 LAB-certified instructors made themselves known when we compiled this. Here is info about how to get certified:
http://www.bikeleague.org/programs/education/seminars.php
It looks a little tricky, but I bet we could get them to offer a certification class here, if there's enough interest. Anyone?
October 29th, 2007 16:50
Re/Vehicular Cycling -- I think it offers a great set of skills, and it really does lead to behavior easily predictable by motorists.
But in part I suspect this is just because it IS a system. It's not a bad system. But a similar system, tweaked to allow for bicycles' size, speed, flexibility, and non-dangerousness, would probably be even better if it caught on and everyone knew basically what to expect from it.
October 29th, 2007 16:54
Ask and you shall recieve. coming right up:
Adult Bicycle Safety Education (Road 1)
Date: Saturday Nov. 10, 2007 9A-5P
Instructor: Hal Ballard
Location: 5550 SW Hall Blvd, Beaverton, OR 97005
Fee: $50
Description: Gives cyclists the confidence they need to ride safely and legally in traffic or on the trail. The course covers bicycle safety checks, fixing a flat, on-bike skills and crash avoidance techniques and includes a student manual. Recommended for adults and children above age fourteen, this fast-paced, 8-hour course prepares cyclists for a full understanding of vehicular cycling.
To register for this course, contact:
Hal Ballard LCI 815
Phone: 503.516.6733
Contact Email: lci815@washcobtc.org
Website: http://washcobtc.org
Signup required in advance? Yes
Special signup instructions: Contact Hal by phone or email for registration details and other information
Equipment required: Bicycle in good working order, ANSI or Snell approved helmet. Water recommended.
October 29th, 2007 17:00
Okay, I put those Vehicular Cycling resources on the wiki. But clicking on those links reminded me how much that stuff bugs me. It's almost super smart, but there's this smarmy undertone that cyclists shouldn't be on the road unless we're brilliant accomplished expert riders, and that if anything happens to us it's our own damn fault for trying to run with the big guys. Very car-centric. Buyer beware.
The Art of Urban Cycling by Robert Hurst is a much more fair and realistic guide.
October 29th, 2007 17:01
Elly, bicycles are not "non-dangerous" under the right circumstances.
Remarkably, a system of the predictability you call for is already in place...
October 29th, 2007 17:03
The Art of Urban Cycling by Robert Hurst is a much more fair and realistic guide.
Absolutely. It's a great book for those who want to think about riding safely.
October 29th, 2007 17:06
Elly, I'd be interested in the LAB effective cycling course, at least an abbreviated version thereof. Because, as Rummy should have said, it's those damned unknown unknowns that lead to your undoing.
October 29th, 2007 17:10
>> The Art of Urban Cycling by Robert
>> Hurst is a much more fair and
>> realistic guide.
I couldn't agree more. I read this book a year ago and it changed my entire perception and approach to safe urban cycling.
October 29th, 2007 17:10
Actually, the new edition of Hurst's book is called "The Art of Cycling."
http://www.powells.com/biblio/1-9780762743162-0
October 29th, 2007 17:11
Hi Rixtir,
The system that's in place was instituted without regard for bicycles. We've sort of wedged ourselves in, but it rubs in a lot of places, cf nearly every article on this blog this week, and nearly every bicyclist I see on any major route.
October 29th, 2007 17:14
Elly, you are 100% wrong about the system that's in place. It was devised specifically to address bicycles when they entered the transportation mix in the 19th century, and was tacked on to the system that was already in place for equine traffic. When cars came along, the principles that were adopted to address the bicycle were adapted to bring the automobile into the system.
October 29th, 2007 17:17
Addendum: Of course, the requirement that slower-moving vehicles keep to the right IS a sop to the automobile...
October 29th, 2007 17:21
re. #19:
Elly, I think we need to separate the concepts involved in Vehicular Cycling, which are generally quite excellent, with the personality and personal agenda of the man originally behind the concept, John Forester, who can be quite abrasive and condescending.
Interestingly enough, John himself has gone over to the dark side, shilling for the American Dream Coalition - a pro-automobile pro-sprawl organization.
http://www.americandreamcoalition.org/forester.html
October 29th, 2007 17:23
Wow, that's fascinating -- what's your source for that? So it's cars that are the redheaded bastard of our transportation system. Too bad they ended up becoming the favored sons.
But we digress from the topic at hand. Rixtir, you're an opinionated guy, how would you like to spread bike skills around more widely?
October 29th, 2007 17:31
Elly, it would be fun to sit down for an evening and talk about all this stuff, including what's needed in our community now. You can definitely learn much from Rixtir.
October 29th, 2007 17:36
Elly,
"redheaded bastard" Have you been reading Dave Moulton?
October 29th, 2007 17:39
well put turn of phrase on that transition, Elly.
Lots of research dug the history up.
I think "The Art of Cycling" is a great way for anybody to learn how to safely, sensibly, and-- dare I say it?-- courteously get around the city.
I think if there were a "safe cycling" program for cyclists, it would include theoretical knowledge, for example, the pragmatic concepts Hurst writes about. it would also include practical bike handling workshops, to teach safety and evasive maneuvers. It might include a basic "introduction to your bike" component so that people can know when their bike needs attention from a mechanic, to keep it safely operating. And it would also include a legal component, to help cyclists understand their rights and responsibilities-- what the law is, why it's that way, and how they can protect themselves before they have a problem, and what to do after they have a problem. A "safe cycling" program would be run by cyclists and cycling advocates, for cyclists. I envision the program lasting for more than one class session. If we could make it fun, it could take place over a month or more, with a different component covered in each session.
For motorists, the obvious answer is to include knowledge of the laws relating to cyclist's rights to the road as a requirement for acquiring or renewing a driver's license. And if I were the Beloved Leader, I would require one year of bicycling on the road, as an introduction to the rules of the road, before an applicant is eligible to operate a motor vehicle.
October 29th, 2007 17:54
Gaahhh, there's so much I forgot. An equipment component-- without getting preachy, straight-up talk about what a helmet can and can't do for you; lighting and other visibility equipment-- what's legal, what's safe, and why (the why always helps everything make sense for me); theft prevention-- what works, what doesn't.
Etc.
October 29th, 2007 19:38
Elly,
Please email me if you would like to discuss putting together what I have in mind. I really haven't the foggiest idea how to plan a large event, so anyone who does should chime in now as well. All this talk about books to read, tacking discussions on to social rides, and $50/8hr classes is well and good, but it is talk by serious cyclists for serious cyclists, and I am concerned that those who stand to benefit the most from this information will not show up for these events. I think the only way to reach the lay Portlander who rides in the city often, even daily, but is neither a serious cyclist nor a bikey person in general, is to neither ask for too much of their valuable time nor require that they read anything. So I'm thinking lowest common denominator here; free course with value-added entertainment, whatever that means, free schwag if we can swing it, (lights, bells, helmets...) promote the beejeezus out of it, and make it not too lengthy--two hours max. Obviously this will not be able to cover nearly as much territory as, say, an eight hour or multi-day course would, but it will reach a demographic that that approach never will.
October 29th, 2007 20:45
Nice article.
October 29th, 2007 21:00
I think the bike shops could play a much, much larger role than they currently do to encourage safe riding.
Why? Bike shops are pretty much THE only place that all bicyclists will pass through at one time or another. Some bicyclists read BikePortland. Some bicyclists are on the Shift list. Some bicyclists belong to the BTA.
But most don't. Most just ride, and don't have access to all these things, the articles, the information, the education....
I think every time you go into a bike shop, you should be offered a free bike map from the City, and then SHOWN how to actually use it by a member of staff.
Every single purchase should come with a copy of the DMV bicyclists manual stashed in the bag, a bike map, a stolen bikes listings card, and a cheat sheet on how to share the road and ride safely.
Portland can supply the materials. The bike shops just have to supply the willingness.
October 29th, 2007 21:01
To whomever is interested:
This was recently forwarded to me by David Lewis of the OR Bike/Ped Advisory Committee.
Subject: FW: League of American Bicyclists Certification Seminar Happening in Eugene Oregon
Spread the word.
Thanks!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Paul Adkins [mailto:adkins.p@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Paul Adkins
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007 9:51 PM
Subject: League of American Bicyclists Certification Seminar Happening in Eugene Oregon
Dear LAB Certified Instructors or Interested Groups,
This is to alert you that there is an LCI Seminar
scheduled for February 8-10, 2008 or
February 15-17, 2008 in Eugene, likely at
Bike Friday (to be finalized soon).
This 3-day Seminar, costing $200, will teach and test candidates
to become certified instructors -- enabling them to teach safety
and effective cycling courses to adults and children.
Here is the link to see what the seminar is all about:
http://www.bikeleague.org/programs/education/seminars.php
then here are some commonly asked questions:
http://www.bikeleague.org/programs/education/instructors.php
October 29th, 2007 21:16
btw, it's not just bicyclists. pedestrians face the same issues. cars are required by law to stop at marked crosswalks, and while many do, there are those who do not. i was honked at today when crossing at a crosswalk. i'm always on my toes.
stupid, rude pedestrians are just as bad as stupid, rude bicyclists. this is not to excuse anyone, but until we end the cultural bias of the car's superiority, those of us on foot and bike are going to feel under threat, and sometimes not willing to be nice. frankly, when a car zooms past me or honks because i'm doing something as awful as crossing the street at the corner, i think they deserve my middle finger. childish, yes, but if i can raise it, they haven't finished me off.
October 29th, 2007 22:15
Barnhart, I can't believe you, someone known as a fairly intelligent contributer over at blueoregon.org, would do something like that or relate it to other people in a way that might encourage them to do similarly. I really think that flipping people off for dumb stuff they do just lets the worst of them feel justified for doing it in the first place.
A lot of bad motorist and cyclist behavior and actions probably occur as a result of each being less prepared than they need to be in order to responsibly and competently operate their vehicles, or as you suggest, simply cross a street on their own two feet. Irritability and fatigue, in addition to insufficient awareness and understanding of traffic management devices and vulnerability of other road users all contribute to the creation of hazardous conditions on streets we all are obliged to use.
This is one of the major problems to be overcome if we intend to arrive at a safer environment on streets and roads for people admirably dedicated to negotiating them on foot, bike or skateboard and so on, without the wasteful encapsulating steel armor represented by the average motor vehicle.
October 29th, 2007 22:29
I agree with the sentiment, generally, but think bicycle education is a complete waste of time and energy.
You really can't teach someone to have common sense. Riding a bike on a street ain't that hard. Seriously. It ain't brain surgery. You shouldn't have to take a class to figure it out. I mean, tonight I was coming down SW 4th downtown. I'm behind some girl riding her fixie with no lights (it's 7pm), wearing all black, no helmet, in traffic, and she's got headphones on. I see idiots like that all of the time. You think she's gonna take a class and all of a sudden realize -- "Hey, I should put lights on my bike!! I should wear a helmet! Why didn't I ever think of that before?!?!" C'mon.
People on bikes will continue to excercise poor judgment. Same with people in cars. Hell, same for people on foot. You can't teach someone to not be an idiot.
October 29th, 2007 22:30
I wasn't aware Forester had gone to the "dark side." If true, that is very surprising. In any case, though, his voluminous tome, "Effective Cycling" the book, is a truly impressive work of scholarship, the most comprehensive work on cycling in all its aspects -- mechanics of the bicycle, safe riding skills, physiology of riding, and on and on -- that I've ever come across.
October 29th, 2007 22:36
Jim F:
You couldn't be more mistaken. People CAN learn not to be what you perceive to be idiots, amazingly enough. I've seen it happen. People are extremely responsive to peer pressure and to doing what they think is "fashionable" and "cool." The problem right now is precisely that people are unaware -- yourself included apparently -- that there is in fact anything substantive and not immediately obvious to learn about this subject -- let alone inclined to think there would be anything "cool" or hip about knowing such things.
Pick up some books on cycling like the one I just mentioned, and you might be very surprised indeed about how much there really is to know.
October 29th, 2007 22:45
Bicycle riding training would be a godsend... I'd definitely take it. I've been riding in Portland for 4 years now, but I'm sure I'm doing a lot of things wrong, and would stand to learn a lot.
Reminds me of one time I was riding my scooter on Market St downtown from I-405 towards the river. At night - there was a cyclists w/out lights or a helmet, wearing all black, weaving all the way across the street from one side to the other!
I beeped at him then passed - and he almost ran into me crossing 3 lanes. At the stop light (which he actually stopped at!) he yelled at me for being an asshole. I told him he was lucky he wasn't dead...
...yup, education would definitely help, methinks.
$.02
October 29th, 2007 23:17
On eye contact:
It is not so much about eye to eye contact,(though that is of course good) so much as it can give you the ability to see where they are looking.
I like looking where people are looking from behind through their rear view mirror.
It is so sneaky it is almost dirty.....
October 30th, 2007 00:15
"I'm behind some girl riding her fixie with no lights (it's 7pm), wearing all black, no helmet, in traffic, and she's got headphones on." Jim F
I can appreciate what Jim F has to say about that kind of rider, but hey...no offense, but that's probably a kid. She'll either get wise soon under pressure from smarter fellow riders and drivers, or be dead. Road weary drivers like Jim F hopefully are likely to be smart enough to be extra wary for for bicycle idiots like that poor naive kid.
I suppose a lot of us that aren't generally so, can be idiots from time to time. Years back when I was particularly compulsive about riding regularly, I set out 45 min before dawn on a rainy Oregon winter day for a ride on a work day. For a light, I had this flashing thing called a belt beacon. Nothing like today's halogen lights. Mostly ride was on quiet residential streets, but there was one quarter mile section on a particularly busy section.
Some poor motorist caught me on the uphill when I was going slow and pleadingly explained to me that my little light, it was very difficult to see me. Tired from the climb in the rain and cold, I wasn't as friendly in responding to him as I wished I would have been, but did thank him for telling me.
The battery was kind of low in my light, and I more or less knew that it wasn't as visible as it needed to be, but I had never had anybody tell me bluntly that it wasn't doing the job. Sometimes it's easy to be stupid. The value of education in countering that kind of common stupidity shouldn't be easily dismissed.
October 30th, 2007 00:39
Jim F:
Education DOES work.
If it didn't, why would we have all of those things across the country called schools? Are kids supposed to learn their arithmetic using nothing but common sense these days? ;-)
Bicyclist education taught me a hell of a lot. I am hopeful it will teach others a hell of a lot too.
October 30th, 2007 00:52
barnhart:
cars (and bikes) are required to yield at both marked and UN-marked crosswalks (i.e., any intersection) (ORS 801.385).
October 30th, 2007 01:07
I find it heartening to see that people are interested in cycling education. I think this can be a key to both improving rider safety AND confidence on the road, which are closely tied together. This in turn will boost the perception of cycling safety in the minds of the public. Which will in turn boost participation. A virtuous circle, as it were ;-)
Perhaps a fund could be established that would be administered by BTA, for example, to jumpstart such an educational outreach program, for doing things like getting educational materials into all the bike shops, which sounds like a great idea. I think many of us might be happy to contribute to such an educational fund.
About your perception of a certain "elitism" in the area of cycling education, Elly, which could be offputting to people, I would like to point out that there is a flipside for some of us nerdy types: We develop a certain fascination for the intricacies of bicycles and bicycling that we hadn't even been aware of before.
Also, there is a certain mystique surrounding the automobile with its intricate mechanical workings that contributes to its allure and "sex appeal" with many people, particularly young men. I would venture that it could do us much more good than harm if some portion of that sex appeal could be transferred over to the simple, but elegant, and much more ecologically friendly bicycle.
October 30th, 2007 07:26
"The problem right now is precisely that people are unaware -- yourself included apparently -- that there is in fact anything substantive and not immediately obvious to learn about this subject -- let alone inclined to think there would be anything "cool" or hip about knowing such things"
Antonio, I appreciate the stubbornness of your optimism that we can make bike safety cool, but I'd settle for making it viscerally UN-cool to be the non-illuminated, helmetless, black hoodie wearing, thousand yard staring, brakeless fixie riding ("inexperienced-" being my escape prefix for those who will doubtlessly take umbrage at this), bird-flipping after getting horn after running stop sign Portland cyclist. So, from now on, I am going to dress darkly and leave my blinkies at home, crank up Death Cab for Cutie and troll listlessly around town. I expect that within a few weeks I will be the only person doing this.
October 30th, 2007 08:26
"...learning is the human activity which least needs manipulation by others. Most learning is not the result of instruction. It is rather the result of unhampered participation in a meaningful setting."
Deschooling Society 1970
October 30th, 2007 08:52
A few weeks ago I sent a letter to some folks at teh BTA about expanding the Safe Routes to School Program to include workshops for parents. At the same time I asked about ride leader training and found BTA has no such program. I think it would be great.
One issue that is often overlooked in all these discussions is the fact that people ride differently. I can not travel as fast as the bike messenger on his way to work. I'm hauling a kid or two on my tandem most everywhere I go. A parent towing a trailer or a trail a bike or both might not want or be able to travel at the rate of traffic but we still need to cross bridges and ride with heavier traffic on occasion. Different riding styles and needs should be addressed more in all these safety discussions. That shouldn't meen telling family commuters and slow commuters to stay on the MUP and get off the roads... which some avid bike commuters have told me.
I have done my best to share knowldege with other parents but as I try to get other families to join in my cross town commute it would be nice to have a bit of training beyond my own experiences and gleaned knowledge.
October 30th, 2007 08:55
The implementation of a DUI diversion style program for motorist / cyclist / pedestrian violations would dramatically increase the awareness of cyclist and pedestrians for motorists. The program could be funded by the violators (increase the fine 3X from current levels for failure to yield). Take 1/3 of that to fund additional enforcement of the rules (cyclist / ped stings, fund police overtime, etc) and 1/3 to fund part of a education / training program. The training / education sessions should tack on a $50.00/session fee for 4-5 sessions. The 1-2 hours educational sessions would include a mix of classroom, hands on and homework. Classroom material could cover the rules of the road (pedestrian, cyclist and motorist refresher), defensive driving / cycling / walking, etc. Hands on could include cycling skills, smiliar to what Team Oregon does for motocyclist. A program like this would work on several levels. It raises awareness, provides economic incentive and educates.
October 30th, 2007 09:15
wow..nice to chime into bikeportland.org after awhile and see that all the bickering and infighting haven't changed whatsoever..
I wish people would just realize you do not need a class or a book to teach you all how to ride safely...you ride on the roads of Oregon, you follow Oregon road laws...PERIOD. stop at stop signs. "drive" defensively. anything else puts you in heightended danger irregardless of the other guy. we have a right to be on the road, we dont' have a right to overtake it. the blatant displays of ignorance and arrogance on the roads of PDX by a LOT of cyclists informs me the majority of people are too stuck on the act of cycling to realize where they fit in to the larger transportation picture.
October 30th, 2007 09:36
My 2 cents:
I'm thinking that we ought not be using the deaths of Brett and Tracey to launch a major Educate Motorists and Bicyclists program unless the goal is to educate bicyclists of boneheaded decision making while riding.
We need to quietly MOVE ON from these two incidents and focus on things that benefits most of us (and the reason we're not dead) DEFENSIVE THINKING cyclists.
October 30th, 2007 09:43
So here's what I'm hearing:
- At least one person (Jonathon S.) is interested in putting on a major gala bike instruction fiesta night in a big community center somewhere, with tons of freebies and incentives to show up.
- Jay S. would like bike instruction specific to family riding (this seems to be a quickly emerging need -- how do we support people who ride with kids?)
- There is some interest in LAB-certified classes, and also seems to be interest among more folks in becoming certified instructors.
- Rixtir and A.O. could be interested in drafting up a Portland-specific curriculum that covers the basics in less time than the LAB class.
- Several people have suggested that they would prefer to be engaged by less formal instruction, eg, learning by example and discussion at group rides and events.
The question is, how do we act to fill these needs? And what existing resources and partnerships can we use?
I really love the idea of this big bike skills night hullaballoo -- seems like it would only work though with input and resources from the WHOLE community -- pdot, bta, shift, bike shops, schools, hospitals, neighbors...a big task that I'm reluctant to throw at one person alone. Is anyone else interested in working on this?
It seems like there are a few classes for straight-up instruction, but we may need more of them, a more unified curriculum and a concerted effort to get the word out and serve new populations, like families. PDOT says in their excellent new document about improving bicycling in Portland that they're committed to beefing up education efforts; they & BTA already have curricula that could be used or tweaked; there are a bunch of bike shops out there looking to do more community outreach -- seems like there's a lot of opportunity to make something happen. Who would be interested in working on this?
Thanks for keeping these comments positive and constructive all the way through #52!
October 30th, 2007 09:43
Since you guys are so into using roadway design, why don't you simply lose the bike lanes, and paint bike symbols in the middle of the right, outside thru lanes?
Bicyclists need to lose some of the inferiority complex too, get in FRONT of cagers, and make 'em SEE you.
DON'T be caught where cagers can't see you, right, passenger side.
October 30th, 2007 10:14
BURR and Elly make an important point about vehicular cycling. There is an arrogance and intolerance among many of the die-hard proponents - they need to recognize that untempered disdain doesn't help anyone. I also found it very off-putting at first (I decided to ignore the abrasive elements and consider the truth behind them). That said, it is not hard to understand the frustration and cynicism when, for instance, a "bicycle advocacy" organization happily accepts the "gift" of a bike lane that lures unsuspecting and uneducated novice cyclists into a dangerous situation.
I've too often seen planners and developers patting themselves on the back for being so bike-friendly and green after installing substandard and dangerous door zone bike lanes on residential streets where they are completely unnecessary.
Yes, there is a continuum of speed within the cycling community. Vehicular techniques do not necessarily exclude the slowest. To build a bike lane, you must have a wide roadway. It is lane width that offers the slower cyclist safety.
In many cases, the line creates a visual separation that is not of benefit to us. It actually allows motorists to pass closer and faster. When cyclists and motorists share the lane, motorists change their lateral position and slow a little to be sure there is separation. Basically, what a motorist is concerned about is not hitting you, not how comfortable a space he gives you. When you take away the uncertainty, you take away the incentive for added caution.
Here's another interesting concept along these lines:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shared_space
Lower traffic speeds in urban and residential areas also accommodate the slower rider. We should push for more equitable speed limits and enforcement of speed limits. There is also a need for a paradigm shift in the general community. You can travel to other cities in the world where road users of all sizes and speeds share traffic lanes. It's worth examining some of the factors that foster that environment. Such civility and sharing are community assets that reach beyond the roadway.
I, and many others who practice VC, recognize a usefulness for bike lanes (or wide, well-maintained shoulder) on arterial roads with higher speed limits, traffic congestion and minimal intersection conflicts. The painted line and its effect of visual separation is of benefit to us here - especially at night.
The bottom line is, no facility can supplant education and public awareness. I'm very happy to see this discussion and the interest in educating ourselves and each other.
Here's another article you might find interesting. It's long, but worth reading.
Listening to Bike Lanes
http://www.wright.edu/~jeffrey.hiles/essays/listening/contents.html
I'll end with this. We cyclists are community assets. We are the miners' canaries, in a sense. We know the contours of our place. We feel the moods of our community much more acutely than those who are encapsulated in large, safe, quiet vehicles. We have something to offer that is far beyond using ecological transportation. Think about it. How do we communicate that? How do we use that to make our cities more livable, engaged and civil places?
October 30th, 2007 10:26
Elly, it seems to me that a cycling education program could and should be directed at as many cyclists as it can reach. A cycling education program should, therefore, be addressed to the different types and different needs of riders, with different types of events. For some riders, that will mean showing up to a one-night gala, picking up some saferty ideas and some free gear, in a setting they will enjoy. For other riders, that will mean a more comprehensive curriculum. For others, it may mean taking the LAB courtses.
There's no reason that, with the energy and creativity we have in this town, we can't put together a program that meets the needs of anybody who might be interested in learning.
October 30th, 2007 11:04
Elly,
We are on the same page with the program I have in mind. It should be a production by all and for all, and I see its usefulness as threefold: the first of which is to provide a demonstration based core lesson of defensive cycling techniques for those who will never explore this topic in any greater depth. I think if a few natural showpeople were to act out the situations at www.bicyclesafe.com in a sufficiently reverent vaudeville setting that these lessons could really be burned into some minds. In particular, I'm imagining Brian Campbell's bike winnebago dressed up as the evil Hummer gonna sqaush you and concluding that there is no way that people will not remember this for the rest of their lives.
The second purpose would of course be to advertise these discussed services both extant and under planning for the benefit of those who do wish to delve deeper and take their health security intentionally.
And finally, I see a large event like this as sending a clear public message that cyclists are unified about taking roadway safety seriously, which could encourage motorists reading about it in the newspaper to do the same.
October 30th, 2007 11:07
I aggree with rixtr(#58). I applaud all education efforts. The more diverse the efforts are the more I applaud them. I would hope that we will be smart enough to avoid a "unified curriculum". Dogma should constantly be under siege by thoughtful cyclists evolving in the use of public space.
October 30th, 2007 11:32
Nothing beats great word of mouth buzz in terms of getting people to pick up new ideas and consciousness. Some people will go to classes and so forth, but the greater majority of people will learn better biking and driving habits if the casual information environment is richer. The comments of Jonathan Severdia and Ivan Illich, #'s 49 and 50 respectively, are relevant to this point.
October 30th, 2007 11:36
Man, now this is a blog post I can really sink my teeth into.
Education, whether formal or informal, is always a good thing. The more, the better. There's that whole, "the more you know" thing going on, I love it.
I would love to go to both the gala-style event as well as the more comprehensive day-long class. I've been riding for about 3 or so years now, and I know I'm doing some things wrong... if I can just pinpoint hose things! :)
As for educating others: Just this morning I heard, on K103, a PSA about crosswalks marked or unmarked and the law about stopping for pedestrians. Why can't the BTA or some other group get some PSAs out there aimed at educating folks about cyclists? Kill two birds with one stone, you know?
Licensing bikes: wouldn't work. I already have a driver's license, I see no need to have a cycling license.
October 30th, 2007 12:24
I agree that education is a very important part in all of this...it is part of my job after all. And from that view I think it is great - the more classes the better. But sometimes we find that people say they want classes but then attendance can be very low. People get busy or decide that they know enough or whatever...I would love to hear thoughts on how to get people to come to classes.
But count me in for helping out with education for cyclists, pedestrians and drivers.
Cheers,
October 30th, 2007 12:54
Relating to # 36, I would love to find out if there currently exists an -
* easy to digest
* relevant
* bright
* modern
* eyecatching flier
- detailing some of the key rules/issues relating to bike safety that all cyclists need to be aware of.
I agree wholeheartedly that the one place you are more likely than anywhere else to reach a bicyclist at some point or other, is in a bicycle shop.
I would love to work with a group of people to take a shot at putting such a flier/poster together, then getting it photocopied, and distributing it to Portland bike shops, who would then include the flier in the bag of every purchase made by somebody who is obviously a newer/inexperienced cyclist.
Perhaps it seems a little ambitious, but I can't help thinking this could be a great and relatively inexpensive way to begin getting the bike safety message out there to the ever-growing plethora of new, seemingly inexperienced cyclists joining us on the roadways every year (as well as the existing cyclists who also don't know how to ride safely!)
Feel free to get in touch if you have ideas, or would like to be involved -
kirstys.junk.email.account {at} gmail {dot} com
October 30th, 2007 13:05
Kirsty, could PDOT's Guide to Your Ride be a good option for that? They cover all the bases really well.
http://www.portlandonline.com/transportation/index.cfm?c=34811&a=58157
Or are you thinking of something a little more concise?
October 30th, 2007 13:43
How Not to Get Hit By Cars at www.bicyclesafe.com is an excellent, excellent basic guide for cyclists. Thanks, Jonathan for mentioning it.
October 30th, 2007 18:11
Elly Blue says, "Like a recently proposed change to bike lane laws, licensing is a proposal aimed at keeping bicyclists in the margins of the road and the law rather than continuing to integrate us."
I agree that licensing is a poor idea, and as an outsider to the Portland experience, I will defer to the suggestion that this fellow Kruger may not be a friend to transportational cycling, but --
part of the problem you do have here is the solid white line all the way to the corner, in combination with the requirement that a cyclist stay in the striped bike lane and the motorist stay out until the corner and then make a right hook. This is a bad design, and if what Kruger is proposing is a dashed line for the last fifty or so feet, allowing (or should I say, encouraging) the motorist to merge right -- yielding to any bicyclist in the lane -- and allowing the cyclist to move left to get around right turning traffic, then frankly what he is proposing is a good idea.
From some of the links you have provided, it would appear that there is plenty of vehicular cycling education available, through BTA and other sources.
But you cannot reach everyone, and even if you improve the bike lane striping in the manner proposed (there are reasons why the "bike box" does not work, but this is perhaps not the venue for that discussion), you still will have cyclists trapping themselves at the right edge of the roadway and motorists right hooking them, etc., but maybe less . . .
October 31st, 2007 08:48
I believe we (fill in the blank, be it cyclist, society, etc.) can do more to advance education, awareness, training, and civility on the roads by both cyclists and motorists...many great ideas and programs are mentioned above. i am working with members of OBRA on ideas we can implement that will , in honor of Brett, advance education/training/civility. All the great comments above will be read and considered carefully.
That said, for our (cyclist's) part, the first and foremost thing we can do is start riding in accordance with the laws. Last evening, I followed a cyclist across the Hawthorne Bridge heading west. At the base of the ramp, she ran the red light. As the bridge had been up, a long line of frustrated motorists were positioned to see this flagrantly stupid and illegal act. I chased her down and shouted at her, demanding that she follow the law...failure to do so only worsens the already negative mood on the roads, and increases the animosity of motorists.
We all know basic laws and need to begin following them.
Since Brett's death, I have been hit by a car, shouted at, honked at...and I have been followed at great distance, passed with extreme caution, and even been engaged by a truck driver in a conversation about the situation. Tensions are high, people are aware of the situation...and any time one of us does something illegal, or just plain stupid, we only hurt ourselves...or possibly enrage a motorist who will hurt someone else.
Rick
October 31st, 2007 10:22
crash courses in defensive cycling are available for free every sunday in alberta park and for the the cost of max fare ever night in the west hills.
as elly says, 'doing it ourselves better and cheaper'
October 31st, 2007 11:08
#68
I always take the time to carefully evaluate demands which are shouted at me. That's what I call effective education. Nice work Rick!
October 31st, 2007 12:46
"I'm thinking that we ought not be using the deaths of Brett and Tracey to launch a major Educate Motorists and Bicyclists program unless the goal is to educate bicyclists of boneheaded decision making while riding."
Mr. Ross,
Have you even been reading the reports on these accidents? Have you even ridden where these accidents occured?
Brett and Tracy were in the position, in the bike lane, right where they were supposed to be!
Is it a boneheaded decision to place yourself in the bike lane right where common sense, and the law, places you?
You sir, in posting the comment you did, have reached the upper echelon of your self proclaimed "boneheadedness".
You should get right up from your desk (or is it the cab of your 18 wheeler, Dr?) (I do recall you in the past stating that you drive a big truck for a living) march yourself to their grave sites, and spout out a lengthy apology.
Then go find their mothers, spout the same apology, lower your head, and walk away.
Blasphemy does not help, it hurts...
October 31st, 2007 14:12
Here's a question. In light of the recent deaths and the general heightened awareness of defensive cycling, is it OK for me while I'm bike commuting, to give fellow cyclists tips or advice?
I ride into town every day with other cyclists, many of whom are not wearing helmets and have no lights, and I-pods plugged in. Am I out of line to be pointing out to them how much safer they'd be if they wore helmets, or un plugged their I-pods? I did this to one young women a few days ago and she seemed completely suprised that I'd even mention this to her.
October 31st, 2007 16:00
It sure would be interesting to see how the unsafe cyclists respond to "being advised" by those who practice safer biking.
This being Portland, I suspect you'll be told to "*** off" or "mind your own ***** business". There are some people who simply will not follow the rules that are there for their own safety because they are selfish. It's as simple as that - they feel they are above such things.
Sadly, that kind of arrogance frequently leads to accidents. It also makes the rest of the cycling community look hypocritical. And the one kind of person that is never taken seriously is a hypocrite.
October 31st, 2007 18:06
actually, I think 'mind your own business' is pretty good advice. confrontations on the street, whether between motorists and cyclists or cyclists and cyclists, and not good educational tools.
October 31st, 2007 18:43
I agree that it is out of line to do so, unless the cyclists in question has put you in danger, or you have seen them put another cyclist in danger.
There is nothing that irks me more than having someone (a cyclist or a driver) with the "Holier than though attitude" bitch me out for something, something that is a personal choice, like helmet, or choice of clothing color.
I will stop, or turn around and follow them, and give them back a piece of my mind on the subject.
Mind your own business is very good advice...
October 31st, 2007 19:21
k, rather preaching at you, here is thought experiment:
Ask the next person you see smoking if they know the health benefits of not smoking.
Tell them you used to smoke.
Did that help?
Repeat above experiment with your favorite addiction.
Now pretend you actually engaged that person in a conversation. A conversation like they were a real human being. Repat scenario. Was that better?
October 31st, 2007 21:09
Ironic. If mind your own business is such good advice, this board would be silent.
Allowing people to do stupid things only affirms that behavior.
If you saw a car blow through a stop sign, would you say anything to the driver or would you mind your own business?
November 1st, 2007 08:43
Someone mentioned public service anouncements. This a pretty strong one:
http://www.youtube.com/PEDSdotORG
I am not sure anyone would have the courage to run it.
November 1st, 2007 09:40
You can buy em books and send em to school but you can't make them learn if they don't want to.
I think the best thing we as bicyclists can do to change behavior is teach by example. I ride this city every day and I don't see many examples out there.
Be responsible, have respect (for yourself, others, and the rules/law) and we'll all learn something.
November 1st, 2007 10:07
Not from Portland but I've been learning as I read through the articles and comments. I agree with Small Cogs that cycling well is advocating for cycling. For those that are interested, Bruce Mol (CANBIKE in Vancouver, B.C.) describes 4 types of cyclists in his essay "The Social and Emotional Aspects of Transportation Cycling".
http://www.gonecycling.com/commuter/index.html
The "boneheaded" cyclist (as described in another comment above) would definitely be a challenge to "educate" but maybe can we provide a process for "Vigilant" cyclists (as described in the essay) to become "Veloquent" cyclists.
November 1st, 2007 10:12
Should have mentioned above not just that I have been learning from reading these articles but you are also teaching me -- i.e. I have been learning FROM YOU. Thanks.
November 1st, 2007 13:10
"Ironic. If mind your own business is such good advice, this board would be silent"
Interesting point.
Except that this is a place where people come to read the articles, and the personal views of others about said articles. With comments open, it is an invitation to speak your mind.
While someone complaining to me about a lack of say a helmet, while I am out on a ride, is another thing.
I do not recall inviting that person on my ride.
January 20th, 2008 10:59
Apart from the general agreement that training is needed in many cases and that something generally along the lines of Forrester's VC or Hurst's book is the best way to go, there doesn't seem to be any mention of school cycling and training.
In the UK, the new national standard Bikeability courses are s-l-o-w-l-y being rolled out.
They call for, among other things, on-road training for children in year 6 and in the mid-teens. Apart from what I've read about things called "bike rodeos" and the Texas Bicycle Coalition's programme, I've not read anything much on this subject, nor any serious call for such training.
Is there much cycling to school in your area? If not, why not and what, if anything, is being done to encourage it?
I assume that the situation is much the same as in the UK, with parents scared of the traffic (i.e. other parents) and a lack of safe bike storage, together with a lack of real commitment from city councils to promote safe routes to school.
Likewise, there will be a lack of political commitment to such things as rigorously enforced 20mph zones (or any speed limit?), introducing real traffic calming (Woonerfs would be valuable, of course) and so on.