CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Debate!

Vehicular Cycling is Bad?

(18 posts)
  • Started 13 years ago by Wilmington's Cow
  • Latest reply from wee folding bike

No tags yet.


  1. From Copenhagenize

    http://www.copenhagenize.com/2010/07/vehicular-cyclists-secret-sect.html

    I've got a lot of time for Mikael, met him once and he's probably the single 'effortlessly cool' person I've ever had the pleasure of sharing a pint with. That's not to say I agree with everything he says though, however a lot of what he says does get you thinking and wondering.

    Am I a vehicular cyclist? Do I rail against the 'ghettoisation' of cyclists into segregated paths? Probably.

    But then I've also cycled in Copenhagen where those very same segregated paths exist and I don't think I've ever cycled anywhere better or more relaxed.

    Hmmmm.

    Posted 13 years ago #
  2. chdot
    Admin

    It's an entertaining article, I like -

    "It is a small, yet vocal, group that is male-dominated, testosterone-driven and that lacks basic understanding of human nature. They expect that everyone should be just like them - classic sub-cultural point of view - and that everyone should embrace cycling in traffic and pretending they are cars. They are apparently uninterested in seeing grandmothers, mothers or fathers with children or anyone who doesn't resemble then contributing to re-creating the foundations of liveable cities by reestablishing the bicycle as transport."

    There are undoubtedly people against any sort of segregation - 'bicycles are traffic'. There are people against on-road (painted) cycle lanes - though in Edinburgh the real issue is more about maintaining the ones you've got!

    In the past when separate cycle lanes were created alongside main roads there was a genuine concern that cyclists would be made to use them. In general this never happened (unless you want to get the Forth Road Bridge...)

    Likewise there have been people against the idea of Sustrans off-road paths - somehow these don't encourage 'proper' cyclists.

    Mikael's general thesis seems to be that such people are a minority but unduly influential.

    He may be right.

    As he concludes -

    "
    Let's not wait another 35 years and see yet another generation become obese and suffer a long line of lifestyle illnesses. Now, more than ever, it's time to get people onto bicycles. With theories that have been proven. With best practice that has been established.

    Let's get to work.
    "

    Posted 13 years ago #
  3. spytfyre
    Member

    I like the way it ends with "Lets get to work"
    I already am at work...

    Posted 13 years ago #
  4. Min
    Member

    "In the past when separate cycle lanes were created alongside main roads there was a genuine concern that cyclists would be made to use them. "

    In this country, where we have to make do with the infrastructure we are given, the attitude of some drivers is that cyclists SHOULD be forced to use them and that is enough since such people can and do use their vehicles as weapons to correct any cyclist they judge to be riding on a banned road. Not to mention ever more depressing crayoned letters to local rags on the subject. Ferry Road is a good example but there are plenty of others. This is why some people are totally against any sort of separate infrastructure for cyclists as it gives licence for this sort of behaviour/hysterical ranting in the press. So it is an understandable attitude IMO.

    However there is no doubt that traffic free routes get more people cycling.

    "Am I a vehicular cyclist? Do I rail against the 'ghettoisation' of cyclists into segregated paths? Probably."

    Well no because otherwise you wouldn't use one every day!

    There is something about the tone of the Copenhaganise articles that always gets my back up. Trying to load guilt on to anyone who rides as best they can in the conditions and attitudes we face in the UK is what does it I think.

    Posted 13 years ago #
  5. chdot
    Admin

    "the attitude of some drivers is that cyclists SHOULD be forced to use them"

    Yes, that is undoubtedly a problem, but is about the consequences of a (VERY POOR) 'motoring culture' and not the existence of segregated paths (or not).

    IF the 'authorities' really wanted people to use such paths they should make them better - e.g. the path by the busway/tram where people on bikes are supposed to dismount and become pedestrians at the junctions!!!

    (and all the other parallel paths that stop at every road and farm track.)

    "Trying to load guilt on to anyone who rides as best they can"

    Well yes, though I don't quite read Mikael's writings in that way - I think he is primarily aiming at 'planners' rather than 'users'.

    Posted 13 years ago #
  6. LaidBack
    Member

    Let's not wait another 35 years and see yet another generation become obese and suffer a long line of lifestyle illnesses. Now, more than ever, it's time to get people onto bicycles.

    That's one reason why I do my LB tour thing (the other being I need the money!). It might be a PITA or a laugh to 'proper' cyclists but if it gets people active then it's not all bad.
    Last Saturday I took a young Czech couple out on hired bikes and trikes to Queensferry on a mixture of roads and paths. We used path to Cramond Brig, then the Kirkliston Road. Back in through the Dalmeny estate. I'd hate to be forced to use 'infrastructure' but sometimes it works ok and gives people a chance to do things without feeling the need to 'drive before cycling'.

    I often wonder where we think the next 'wave' of 'proper' road cyclists will come from. In Carlisle on Monday I saw as many people cycling on pavements as on the busy roads. Some of these are marked for use so not all illegal. Ideally it would be nice to think that this current crop of pavement riders will graduate to roads.
    On current social trends I suspect I might be disappointed.

    Posted 13 years ago #
  7. LaidBack
    Member

    The link to Crap cycling in Waltham states...

    The Cyclists’ Touring Club and the London Cycling Campaign are failed organisations, in denial about their failure to bring about mass cycling over the past thirty years. The basic reality is that cycling in this country is unsafe (and widely perceived to be unsafe by the majority of the population who won’t and don’t cycle).

    Just reminded me that a friend in Carlisle told me how some people 'stupidly' took horses along Brampton Road to get to the lovely Rickerby Park by the River Eden.
    'Yes... they have a right but horses (like bikes) hold up traffic. It's the 21st century and everyone's in hurry to join the queue at Eden Bridge etc."

    Posted 13 years ago #
  8. SRD
    Moderator

    I rarely use the off-road network, but found myself agreeing with much of the original post.

    Posted 13 years ago #
  9. chdot
    Admin

    "The Cyclists’ Touring Club and the London Cycling Campaign are failed organisations, in denial about their failure to bring about mass cycling over the past thirty years."

    Well it's a point of view.

    Kinda depends whether you believe they had any power to actually do more than they did/do and/or have nothing to do within the increase in cycling in the last 30 years (their figure) - especially in London.

    I have NO DOUBTS that the increase in cycling in Edinburgh in recent years wouldn't have been as great without 33 years of Spokes. That is not to say that Spokes couldn't have done more (that is not a criticism OR a suggestion that it is a 'faiure'!)

    More importantly there could have been even more people cycling, without any cycle campaign groups, IF Edinburgh's councils had been more like Copenhagen's - over the past 30 years...

    Posted 13 years ago #
  10. recombodna
    Member

    I think separate cycle paths through town like they have in the Netherlands would definitely get more people cycling in Edinburgh. If there is a cycle path along side a busy road ( A8 at gogar for example) I would always use it. Personaly I don't mind city centre traffic but I know it's a reason people don't cycle in town.

    Posted 13 years ago #
  11. Min
    Member

    "Well yes, though I don't quite read Mikael's writings in that way - I think he is primarily aiming at 'planners' rather than 'users'. "

    That is not how it looks to me and quite a lot of the comments underneath seem to feel the same way. Riding in the middle of the lane rather than hiding in the gutter does NOT mean we hit children thanks very much. We don't have a choice-not if we want to live.

    Anyway, exactly how much influence do this supposed sect have anyway? I've never even heard of them before now and they certainly don't seem to have any influence on preventing councils putting in crap and/or dangerous "infrastructure".

    Posted 13 years ago #
  12. Kim
    Member

    The real problem is the lack of political will to provide a proper choice of transport options. To get the sort of "infrastructure" which Mikael like to talk about cost about £20-25 per head/year. Instead we get the sort of "infrastructure" you can expect for the £1-1.50 per head/year, then there attempts to make us use it with the inevitable result.

    Posted 13 years ago #
  13. wee folding bike
    Member

    More cycle lanes will not change attitudes of people in cars.

    If I can't have a door to door lane for every journey I make then I am going to end up on the same road as motorised traffic at some point.

    Posted 13 years ago #
  14. Aphid
    Member

    In the UK cycling is only given the spaces which cannot be used effectively by motorised vehicles. Canal paths, railways and gutters are peripheral wasteground. Token cycle paths string these spaces together (if at all) in order to minimise the impact of bikes on motorised vehicles. They are mainly designed without the cyclist in mind.

    Defensive cycling hasn't failed in 30 years. It is the only sensible approach to surviving in a hostile environment.

    Posted 13 years ago #
  15. LaidBack
    Member

    Aphid Defensive cycling hasn't failed in 30 years. It is the only sensible approach to surviving in a hostile environment.

    That would get the vote from everyone on this forum I suspect. A good overview of the role of cycling facilities too.

    The other (flawed) defensive technique is to ride on the pavement. Used by people with a BSO to nip down to the shops beside busy roads (in places like Carlisle!). If they didn't take their bike they'd drive. In an odd way they are actually more 'continental' as they see cycling as a means to an end.

    The 'pootling on the pavement' trend is not confined to big kids either... but it can maybe be linked to adults brought up on BMX bikes and stunt bikes which are not really designed for road use.

    I reckon few of the proponents would volunteer for bike training but will continue to do their version of cycling whatever.

    Posted 13 years ago #
  16. chdot
    Admin

    "That would get the vote from everyone on this forum I suspect."

    Perhaps, but it doesn't deal with the issue of how to get people cycling who would be too nervous to try "Defensive cycling" so don't cycle on roads.

    Posted 13 years ago #
  17. Aphid
    Member

    I am not sure if there is anything that can be done that will change the mode of transport people choose, without some sort of negative force on the alternatives. There are so many problems, so many distorted attitudes, so many long term planning choices to overcome. That doesn't even cover the innate laziness of everyone...

    The huge decline in road cycling events over the past 50 years and the massive growth in MTB and the recovery of cyclocross indicates people have taken bikes off the roads. "Cycle traffic declined from 23 to 5 billion passenger kilometres between 1952 and 2006", and blips like 2001 onwards are only significant when you ignore the massive falls of the past 50 years. Even the success of sportives is partly due to road closures/policing (and their costs are going up as they attempt to keep motor vehicles and bikes apart), and although clubs like ERB are huge, I just sense that road biking is continuing to decline.

    The whole dutch, basket upright, cute girls with swishing dresses, is a great goal (and I for one, want!), and I would welcome the death of the roadwarriorz crap that I have encountered (and been guilty of) if it helped. I tend to think, however, that we evolved down a different line, and "we found ouselves in dark woods; and the right road was wholly gone and lost" and getting back is not an option until we survive through this phase into something else. Perhaps that is all we can do; mitigate the worst through campaigns, and try and be decent, considerate cyclists, and crucially, stay alive out there.

    I am depressing myself. "Never surrender, never give up", and I completely support Spokes/CTC, and I have been a member of the BCF for years, but cycle paths are in the gutter for a reason. They are telling us something.

    Bitter? You bet.

    Posted 13 years ago #
  18. wee folding bike
    Member

    "Never surrender, never give up",

    It's the other way round.

    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0177789/quotes

    Jason Nesmith: Never give up. Never surrender.

    Posted 13 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.


Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin