Running the gauntlet

Time to get serious about bikes 15

I participated in another Critical Mass bike ride last Friday and thought I'd share some observations. This was the first time I have seen a patrol car at a gathering, although they didn't seem to know what exactly was going on. They cited one guy for drinking in public. The goofball had an open bottle of red wine. I had to smile as they dragged him off because half of the crowd watching was standing there with beers hidden in riding gloves or drink bottles.

The ride got off to a rocky start. Normally, a few of the several hundred riders will start circling the crowd to warn everyone that take off is imminent. But this time the dummies just took off while everyone else was still waiting for a signal. This spread the ride out. So, I decided to hang out at the tail end to see what that was like.

I found a woman and a mom and her young son trying to stay up with the other riders. When the crowd swept onto the highway things got dicey. I stayed with them to help run block on cars and tried to hurry them along. Now I know what a wildebeest cow and her calf must feel like when a pack of hyenas have weeded them from the herd. Another woman dropped back to help me protect them from the cars. We became surrounded by pissed off SUV drivers. The coup de grace was when a guy in a Porche deliberately slammed on his brakes. The young woman who had dropped back to help me ran right into his bumper and fell off her bike. He screeched his tires and left her lying there. She was pretty unhinged. I stuck with them until they got to an exit ramp where I told them that they really should not be participating in this ride. They simply were not strong enough riders. The exit ramp happened to be a few blocks from my house so I bailed out of the ride early hoping everyone got home safely.

I rode in yet another bicycle protest just two nights ago. Some local power brokers have convinced the Seattle authorities not to connect our main bike trail to a brand new bike lane on a major bike commute arterial. Bikes leaving the trail have to run a dangerous six-block gauntlet to get to this bike lane. Instead, they got the painted symbol pictured above, which is very similar to the bike lane symbol next to it. Nobody I talked to knows for sure what that symbol is supposed to mean, drivers in particular. Not that it matters. It won't protect bicyclists.

Personally, I think those behind this are going to be responsible for a lot of bike injuries and possibly some deaths. Riding a bike in Seattle's horrific traffic has become serious business. It is time our local politicians started taking it seriously. Sure, buses running on food crop and rainforest devouring biofuels are higher profile, but there are tens of thousands of carbon-neutral commuters out there and they are in serious need of some protection from the 200 horsepower wheelchairs they share the roads with.

My real name is Russ Finley. I live in Seattle, married with children. Suffice it to say that although I am trained and educated as an engineer, my passion is nature. I very much want my grandchildren to live on a planet where lions, tigers, and bears have not joined the long and growing list of creatures that used to be. In an attempt to minimize the workload on Grist editors responsible for turning my submissions into intelligible articles, I will also be posting on a seperate blog called Biodiversivist, which will contain articles in addition to those submitted to Grist.

Related Stories

Advertisement
Advertisement

  1. Christine Gardner Posted 6:00 am
    03 Aug 2007

    Glad you made it home OKI hope these rides, dangerous though they are, help get you some of the protection you need. I've been riding for just a few months, and not in a major city, but I've already learned what kind of jackasses are out there.
    Minivan. SUV. Minivan. SUV. SUV. Don't mind me guys. I know it's a four-way stop, but you go on ahead. Jerks...

    Permalink

  2. cmurthi Posted 6:37 am
    03 Aug 2007

    Cycling is for EverbodyFirstly, the symbol is meant to indicate that the lane is "shared" (with vehicles). Aa with many bureaucratic things, this should be obvious...bicycles have the same right to roadway that vehicles have (at least in most states,) symbol or otherwise. It's meant as a "reminder" to those SUV drivers.
    Secondly, I think you do a disservice to state that the woman  "was not a strong enough cyclist" to participate in Critical Mass. That's exactly the type of elitist attitude that makes cycling such a fringe activity. If the average middle-class shmo jumped on a cycle to do a few errands or commute (as in many European cities,) many more would participate. As it is, many think it's a weird sport confined to spandex-clad daredevils. And telling people they're not welcome only makes it worse.

    Permalink

  3. odograph Posted 6:47 am
    03 Aug 2007

    parallelcmurthi, would you say that since running is a healthy sport, the average middle-class shmo jump and run with the bulls at Pamplona?
    It sounds like that is the parallel BioD found at his Critical Mass.

    Permalink

  4. gregobad Posted 6:49 am
    03 Aug 2007

    What that symbol meansWe have those painted symbols here in san francisco on a number of roads. It means, at least in principle, that bikes are allowed the full use of the lane. cars are supposed to pass using the other lane. Of course, that's probably a local regulation and it might mean something else in seattle; and even here, there aren't many cars that seem to understand what it's supposed to mean.

    Permalink

  5. Delay And Deny's avatar

    Delay And Deny Posted 7:03 am
    03 Aug 2007

    I Don't Like To Share

    I am coming to the conclusion that roads cannot be "shared".   The mass differential between bike and car can't be ignored.  Putting both on the same roadway is always dangerous.
    The push should be for:
    More independent bikeways

    Bike lanes with dividers -- preventing cars from entering at any time.



    John Bailo


    Supratext:

    Permalink

  6. Ron Steenblik Posted 7:08 am
    03 Aug 2007

    Exactly jabailo,That's how bike lanes are made in the Netherlands.

    Permalink

  7. gmunger Posted 7:33 am
    03 Aug 2007

    differentiate or integrate?The mass differential between bike and car can't be ignored.  Putting both on the same roadway is always dangerous.
    The mass differential is much less critical if the velocity differential is minimized. This prompted a few thoughts....
    Seems to me that speed limits, in general, need to be lowered and ENFORCED. This has benefits for almost everyone. In most instances of non-highway driving, I find that the impatient motorist rarely makes any significant headway relative to cyclists and slower autos. They usually just get to the next traffic light sooner. They DO, however, create a safety problem.
    Reduced auto speeds, and also reduced rates of acceleration/deceleration also mean improved fuel efficiency, as well as safer driving.
    Also, I think BioD is correct, and not elitist, in saying that inexperienced, unskilled, and slow cyclists do not belong in traffic. Especially heavier, faster traffic. In a 30 mph speed zone, a cyclist traveling 15-20 mph integrates with auto traffic vastly better than the same cyclist traveling 5 mph. And if you can't ride a relatively straight line, you're simply asking for trouble. That's not elitist, it's just reality.
    That said, independent bikeways, where practical, are a good thing. They can provide a safe alternative for the "inexperienced" cyclist who wants to commute via bike and it also gives them a safe place to hone their skills and improve their fitness level.
    Independent bikeways also make sense where slowing auto speeds to cycle-sharing-safe levels is either impractical or not politically feasible. And cyclists should also show some prudence in their choice of routes. Why ride on the busiest thouroughfare, when a parallel but quieter route is just as practical?

    Permalink

  8. Jon Rynn's avatar

    Jon Rynn Posted 7:39 am
    03 Aug 2007

    Right on, jabailo,here in evanston there is a bike path near the lake, and there is no comparison between biking where you can get killed or maimed -- there is a fellow around here who will give his whole story of being hit by a truck while riding a bike, he can barely walk and talk now -- and biking where you don't have to worry about it.  I totally respect people who try to ride with carheads, but it's really dangerous.  At the very least, put a continuous metal divider between bikes and cars.

    Permalink

  9. cmurthi Posted 8:23 am
    03 Aug 2007

    Speeding is for the TrackWell, to each their own. As a regular cyclist, on city streets in Brooklyn, I can say I never reach anywhere close to 15mph. That would be suicidal. I use my bike to go to the store, to take my son to school etc.
    Critical Mass should not be about excluding anyone or speeding around. If you think cycling is about speeding around, you're more the problem than the solution...i.e., a solution to short trips around which can replace the use of a car. If you want to speed on a cycle, get on a Park track (and try not to, as in Prospect Park near me, terrorize the kids who want to have fun cycling.)
    To gmunger: suggest you check out the traffic in many countries where cycling is the norm for those who don't have cars. They do, indeed, go at about 5 mph.
    odograph, that's a somewhat stretched analogy and can safely be ignored.

    Permalink

  10. cmurthi Posted 8:28 am
    03 Aug 2007

    Correction to aboveI should've said "Critical Mass was not about excluding anyone" (at least in SF where I used to live and now in NYC). Perhaps Seattle is different.

    Permalink

  11. PermieWriter's avatar

    PermieWriter Posted 9:41 am
    03 Aug 2007

    Sharing doesn't workIn my experience sharing doesn't work. It's a laudable goal, to be sure, but the physics don't work. Cars need much bigger, more solid roads. Cars leave horrible oil slicks that bikes can skid on. shows you a nifty scar on her knee

    Drivers just don't pay attention. shows you bent handlebars

    And some drivers are psycho and will run you down. shows you police report

    Seperate bike paths are the way to go. I'll ride in traffic when I have to, but it makes me nervous as hell.
    Now if we can do something about the joggers with strollers that run two or three abreast on the multi-use paths...

    Eat what you grow, grow what you eat

    Permalink

  12. Biodiversivist's avatar

    Biodiversivist Posted 10:29 am
    03 Aug 2007

    cmurthiCritical mass is leaderless. No plan has been made for a contingent of riders to bring up the rear for (protect) those who can't keep up with a generally slow moving crowd. Think of a bell curve. In a crowd that big there is often a small tail of riders who fall over on steep hills when they try to downshift, can't get up the hill period, or get left behind when the pace picks up to clear the highway. Nothing elitist about my comment although I can see how it could have been interpreted that way.

    In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world

    Permalink

  13. odograph Posted 10:31 am
    03 Aug 2007

    safeFWIW, my call after reading all these numbers is that bicycling is a relatively safe activity.
    But.  Those numbers include a lot of judgment calls by a lot of local people.  If your local roads look safe, they might be.  Conversely, if your local roads (and the drivers you share them with) don't look safe, they might not be.
    I ride my bike lots of miles on and off road (tend to hurt myself off road), but I'm very conscious about choosing my risks as I do so.
    (In my town sharing works because we think of ourselves (beach town) as bike riders.)

    Permalink

  14. cmurthi Posted 9:13 am
    04 Aug 2007

    Sharing the RoadWell, all the comments about sharing fly in the face of recent theories about traffic (Gehl for instance) where European cities are going exactly in the direction of "forcing" all manner of traffic -cars/cycles/peds to share space.
    Separation of uses leads to false sense of secutity and less space for all. This is not my theory, it's becoming the accepted wisdom. See http://www.streetsblog.com or http://www.sharetheroadsafely.org/ or http://www.gehlarchitects.dk/ or google "shared road use".
    And, on a purely anecdotal but valid note, I can, having grown up in India, attest to the inherent ability of roads to allow vehicles, cycles, people and even animals to share. Not that I'd want to foist Indian anarchic conditions on anyone, but they do serve a purpose.
    If the commments here are from Seattle, it must not be a bike-friendly place.

    Permalink

  15. Jon Rynn's avatar

    Jon Rynn Posted 10:58 am
    04 Aug 2007

    How do they do it?.....although I remember reading that India has 200,000 automobile related deaths a year, but do they and the Europeans not allow cars to drive over a certain speed?Give bikes more space?  Having traveled to old European cities, I know velos and the like scoot in and out of everywhere; the streets are usually quite small, although I don't remember seeing bikes on the big streets.

    Permalink

Add a Comment

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have an account, log in. If you don't have an account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.

Hello, Visitor!    Why not register?

Viewed
More
Commented
More
Advertisement