PDA

View Full Version : 70% of surveyed Canadians would bike to work, if bike lane were available


Pages : [1] 2


spandexwarrior
12-07-05, 12:47 AM
If Canadians Within 30 Minutes Regularly Cycled or Walked to School, Work
by: Staff

Nation-wide survey shows 70% of those within half-hour cycle to work would if safe, dedicated traffic lane available


A major opportunity exists to improve health across Canada while reducing greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution by capitalizing on the strong interest of Canadians to lead more active lives, according to the most comprehensive national public survey ever conducted on walking and cycling.

Among conclusions from the Environics International Ltd. survey:




70% of Canadians say if they had access to a dedicated bike lane that would take them to work in less than 30 minutes at a comfortable pace, they would definitely use it;

A large majority in Canada (82%) supports government spending to create dedicated bicycle lanes and paths that would encourage safe cycling and a healthy lifestyle,

Most adults (85%) walk for exercise or leisure but only about half of Canadians who could walk to work in 30 minutes or less do so as a rule;

While 68% of children have a walk to school of 30 minutes or less, just 36% walk as a rule;

Walking and cycling for transportation offers the key to better health in two ways: reducing pollution and increasing individual physical activity. Environics International has found that the public ranks environmental pollution and exercise/diet highest by far among all factors determining individual health;

Some 74% of Canadians could cycle and 62% could walk to one or more routine destinations (work, shopping/errand, visiting friends/family, pursue leisure activities) in 30 minutes or less (up to 5 km cycling, 3 km walking). As a rule, 14% do cycle and 43% do walk.

If those who could cycle to work in 30 minutes or less did so most of the time (three days a week or more, 26 weeks per year), it would save an estimated 13.1 million vehicle km each year, reducing smog and making a significant contribution towards Canada's international pledge to cut emissions of greenhouse gases.


Conducted for Go for Green, a national non-profit organization, the survey provides insights into why some Canadians are physically active while others aren't, probes attitudes towards walking and cycling, and helps identify the conditions that foster an active lifestyle -- important issues in light of estimates that 66% of adult Canadians are not active enough to maintain good health. Even young people need to get moving more often: the Heart and Stroke Foundation estimates that 2 out of 3 Canadian children and youths are at risk of premature death and disability because of inactivity.

Results from the survey, which involved telephone interviews with 1,501 adults, are considered accurate to within plus or minus 2.5%, 19 times out of 20.

Bicycling

The survey found 57% of Canadians (54% of women and 61% of men) own a bicycle; 47% cycle for leisure or recreation.

Only 38% of those with bikes use them for transportation to a routine destination and just 6% cycle to work "at least sometimes"

Of bike owners who live within 5 km of work -- a 30-minute ride or less -- 85% rarely or never cycle. Respondents within a 30 minute ride of other regular destinations also rarely cycle as a means of transportation. The highest positive response comes in connection with leisure: 6% say they cycle nearly all the time to leisure time destinations; another 12% say they cycle more than half the time. Almost two-thirds, however -- 63% -- rarely or never cycle to pursue leisure activities.

Two-thirds of respondents (including 60% of those considered "inactive") would like to cycle more often. However, more than half (53%) of Canadians believe cycling on the streets in their community is dangerous because of vehicle traffic. Women are significantly more inclined to that opinion than men (59% vs. 47%). Worries about the weather and about the safety of cycling in traffic are strongest in communities larger than 1 million (Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver).

The survey shows 82% of Canadians support greater government spending on dedicated bike lanes and paths. Overall, 70% of those within 5 km of work would cycle if safe, dedicated traffic lanes were available. Even 67% of Canadians who neither walk nor cycle once a week to a destination agree with the statement: "If there were a dedicated bike lane which would take me to my workplace in less than 30 minutes at a comfortable pace, I would definitely use it."

Other survey findings about bicycling:



Roughly 3 in 10 Canadians live within 5 km of work but just 1 in 10 cycles "at least sometimes"

Women are far less likely to cycle to work (92% said rarely or never, compared with 79% of men);

Half of those who cycle to work "at least sometimes" live within 5 km. The average distance is 7.4 km;

The top five reasons for bicycling: exercise and health (55%), pleasure (23%) practicality and convenience (13%), environmental concern (3%), saving money (3%);

Public attitudes towards bicycle commuting are positive. Asked for views on the statement "I think people who cycle to work are a little odd," only 7% agree; 92% disagree. Asked if "most Canadians view people who cycle to work as a little odd," 24% agree and 74% disagree;

Just 26% Canadians agree and 72% disagree with the statement "Cyclists in my community are reckless and a major menace to pedestrians and cars";

There is widespread sympathy for cyclists in traffic: 9 in 10 Canadians feel drivers should be much more considerate of bicyclists than they are now.


Walking to work, shop, visits and pleasure destinations

About 1 in 5 respondents live within 3 km of their workplace (representing a walk of about 30 minutes or less) but just 1 in 10 report walking "most of the time" (3 days a week or more). One-third of those with a walk to work of 3 km or less "never or rarely walk"; 53% walk less than half the time.

The average distance covered by those who walk to work "at least sometimes" is 3.6 km each way.

While relatively few people walk to work, a large majority of Canadians (89% of women and 80% of men) say they walk for leisure or recreation.

Some 62% of Canadian adults live within 30 minutes by foot of at least one regular destination (work , shopping , visiting family/friends , pursue leisure activities ). Among those who live within a reasonable walk of a routine destination, the survey found people most likely to walk to leisure activities: 19% walk most of the time to leisure destinations, another 31% walk at least sometimes.

Some 82% of Canadians say they'd like to walk as a mode of transportation more than they do. Just one-third of all respondents agrees with the statement "I never have time to walk," and only 15% agree "there are no pleasant places to walk near my home."

Asked then what prevents them from walking more often, 47% of Canadians say distance, 19% say lack of time, 18% say weather conditions, 11% say poor health/disabled, 11% cite laziness or inconvenience, 6% say they have too much to carry. The lack of a pleasant route was cited by 2% of respondents and 1% cited traffic concerns and bad roads.

The survey divided respondents into two groups: inactive and active (those who walk or cycle at least sometimes -- one day a week -- to a destination). Both groups showed virtually the same desire to walk more often (81% of the inactive group, 83% of the active group) but the inactive respondents were more inclined (40% vs. 24%) to the view that they never have time.

The survey canvassed Canadians' favorite reasons for walking as a mode of transportation. A majority (62%) does it for exercise and health, while 30% does it simply for pleasure. Another 24% say that for them walking is practical and convenient, 10% cite environmental reasons, 9% cite the money savings and 2% say they have no choice.

Statistics on children walking to school …

On a typical day, about 40% of Canadian school children take a school bus , 29% walk, 13% ride in a family vehicle, 5% use public transit; and 2% cycle.

Asked to rate the safety of their child's walk to school, 25% of Canadians with girl children and 19% with boys say it is fairly or very unsafe. Safety concerns are significantly higher in smaller communities -- 29% of those in centers with less than 10,000 people say walking to school is unsafe.

Top parental concerns about walking to school: busy traffic/bad drivers (cited by 55%); no sidewalks/poor roads (19%); too far (16%); bad area/drugs etc. (12%); gangs/other kids (3%). If walking to school was very safe, 20% of those who don't now feel that way say their child would walk much more often.

... and bicycling to school

Among children 13 to 18 years old, 82% have a bike yet just 4% cycle to school. Almost all respondents (96%) with 5 to 13 year olds said their children have bikes but just 2% of children in that age group cycle to school.

Distance and safety are the two reasons cited most often when asked why their children don't cycle more often. Asked to assess how safe it is for children to bicycle to school in their community, 42% of those with girl children and 33% of those with boys say it is fairly or very unsafe. Among people who consider cycling to school unsafe, 88% cite busy traffic and bad drivers; 14% cite poor roads or a lack of routes and 12% say it is unsafe because of the distance involved.

If bicycling to school was very safe, almost half (49%) of those who don't now feel that way say their child would cycle more often, with 17% saying "much more often."

Summary

"This survey shows that most Canadians want to be more active and are frustrated they are not active more often," said Mr. Grundy. "Through education and the improvement of infrastructure, including more paths for walking and cycling, better lighting, dedicated bicycle lanes on streets, and bicycle parking facilties, society can create safer and inviting conditions for active transportation. We need to help Canadians move from good intentions to action by creating a community environment that supports an active lifestyle."

Ted Scrutton of Halifax, National Chair of Go for Green, said the issue of active transportation embraces key areas of public concern: health, safety, transportation and the environment.

" The benefits of shifting to an active lifestyle include not only better health and lower health care costs but important environmental benefits as well," he added.

"Every year, each of Canada's 14 million cars travels an average of 16,000 km and pumps out more than four tonnes of greenhouse gases and other air pollutants. The average car makes 2,000 trips per year of 3 km or less and many of these trips could easily be done on foot or bicycle," said Mr. Scrutton. "The fact is, when we make a short trip, we cause a great deal of pollution because a cold engine generates much more emissions than a warm one. Promoting active transportation and eliminating needless short car trips is an excellent way to help Canada reduce smog and meet our international commitments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions."

Mr. Grundy said the survey provides an important baseline for future research into attitudes towards walking and cycling as transportation options.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Walk a Child to School Day", Wednesday, Sept 23

Canada's first-ever nationwide "Walk a Child to School Day", Wednesday, Sept 23, calls on Canadians wherever possible to promote active transportation to school. Go for Green will use the occasion to launch its Active and Safe Routes to School program, designed to explain and promote such innovative ideas as "walking" or "cycling" school buses, mapping safe routes to school, and establishing "no idling" zones in front of schools. For information, please call 613-562-5309.

Go for Green

Go for Green helps individual Canadians participate in outdoor physical activities, at the same time encouraging them to become good environmental citizens -- to protect, enhance and restore the environment in which they live, work and play.

Go for Green supports local community action to improve opportunities for citizens to become more active in outdoor environments that are clean, safe and accessible -- helping people understand better the relationship between their health and the environment. Among its priorities, Go for Green encourages active transportation to replace short car trips, promotes positive changes in community infrastructure, such as trails and bike lanes, and discourages excessive use of pesticides in parks and home gardens.

Go for Green works in partnership with Health Canada, Environment Canada, every provincial and territorial government, national voluntary organizations, community groups, and the private sector.

http://erg.environics.net/news/default.asp?aID=361

Wow, gotta love those Canadians! I think if Americans were polled with the same questions, I think 70% would say, "I think people who cycle to work are a little odd," and some 10% would say, "Cyclists deserve to be run into a ditch."

Bekologist
12-07-05, 05:12 AM
THAT's populist agreement on bike lanes for the cycling public!

Wow. true that, Canadians seem more socially sensible that their neighbors to the south.

Jalopy
12-07-05, 05:52 AM
THAT's populist agreement on bike lanes for the cycling public!

Wow. true that, Canadians seem more socially sensible that their neighbors to the south.

Actually I think it simply shows that Canadians are politically correct hypocrites (and I'm one of them).

Everybody knows that the question "Would you take a bicycle instead of a car if you could?" is loaded with environmental innuendo. Nobody wants to appear to be insensitive to the environment so the obvious answer is "Yes, of course I would. But I can't because...." If you built bike lanes to these people's front doors all the way to their cubicle at work (my guess is) very few of them would become consistent bike commuters.

What makes me so cynical? well, statements like this from the article :

"The average car makes 2,000 trips per year of 3 km or less and many of these trips could easily be done on foot or bicycle"

"This survey shows that most Canadians want to be more active and are frustrated they are not active more often"

How sad. We want to be more active but just can't be. Surely it's not because we are lazy but rather because the government hasn't made it easy enough for us.

Jalopy

Bekologist
12-07-05, 06:00 AM
thats interesting.....I bet the poll got your 'sample demographic' represented in there, Jalopy...

Is that the 'angry, lazy' canadian constituent you represent, or is just the 'hypocrite' demographic?

Jalopy
12-07-05, 06:16 AM
thats interesting.....I bet the poll got your 'sample demographic' represented in there, Jalopy...

Is that the 'angry, lazy' canadian constituent you represent, or is just the 'hypocrite' demographic?
I'm not sure what you are asking. Perhaps you missed it the first time but if you re-read the first sentence of my post, I happily included myself with those that I was criticizing.

Jalopy

Bekologist
12-07-05, 06:27 AM
I agree, I'm just pointing out your demogographic was probably sampled by the surveyors, so your POV is represented in the poll.

No biggie.

Canooks seem more with it than your average american suburbanite, but I'm sure there's suburbs like the "whole nine yards" and I know Vancouver's meth addicts could skew any poll a little bit as well...

AndrewP
12-07-05, 07:09 AM
Its a question of convenience. The distance across the Walmart parking lot is more than most people are prepared to walk. They need to eliminate on street parking to make room for cycling (WOLs or bike lane) and tax commercial parking spaces to pay for public transit.

slvoid
12-07-05, 07:16 AM
70% of americans would drive in the bike lane if it were available.

lyledriver
12-07-05, 08:43 AM
"telephone interviews with 1,501 adults"

I wonder what city those 1501 people surveyed were in, and how they figure that represents the rest of Canada.

Here's a good article on how survey results are presented in the news, using 'black friday' as an example:
http://www.boingboing.net/fakenews.html

I also agree with Jalopy, that 1051 out of 1501 Canadians knows the "RIGHT" answer in a survey that asks a loaded question such as this.

That being said, my commute is 13km of bike paths. I saw ONE other cyclist this morning. If there are approximately 560,000 people in Vancouver, I should have seen at least a few thousand =D

patc
12-07-05, 09:21 AM
"This survey shows that most Canadians want to be more active and are frustrated they are not active more often"

How sad. We want to be more active but just can't be. Surely it's not because we are lazy but rather because the government hasn't made it easy enough for us.

Jalopy

Sadly I think you're right. I do believe that a great many more Canadians would cycle for transportation if they had an incentive to... but I also know that much of that 70% would find another excuse not to.

I'm hoping the Greens get a seat or two in the Commons after the election. We need a few rabid environmentalists to put in place programs that will encourage cycling etc. Cancelling the old PaticipAction program was a bad move.

patc
12-07-05, 09:23 AM
"telephone interviews with 1,501 adults"

I wonder what city those 1501 people surveyed were in, and how they figure that represents the rest of Canada.

1500 is commonly used to represent all Canadians, including in the endless pre-election polls now being quoted. I don't know much about stats gathering, but according to a friend who does this should result in a good estimate provided the questions and survey demographics are well chosen.

Keith99
12-07-05, 09:55 AM
From the original article:

Most adults (85%) walk for exercise or leisure but only about half of Canadians who could walk to work in 30 minutes or less do so as a rule;

Yet 70% say they would bike if it was 30 minutes. When it comes to biking there are lots of things that are extra problems. Where do you put the bike, maintaining the bike, is the bike lane 'safe'. I'd say the real number is far lower (but still much higher than in the U.S.)

On the other side the distance used for a 30 minute ride when computing the reduced car miles etc. was only 5 kms. More like a 10-15 minute ride (or 30 minutes at a pace with no sweat worries).

All in all rather interesting. The one big question is what would those saying they would bike with a safe bike lane consider a safe bike lane? If it is a bike lane outside the door zone with good thought put into intersections then this is a meaningful result. If it is a totally seperate 'lane' (more a bike path) that does not cross any streets then this is meaningless.

GGDub
12-07-05, 06:19 PM
Yeah, I have to agree with Jalopy. The proof is in the pudding for me so to speak. I can take a bike path to work in 30 min from my house, I'm only in heavy but slow traffic for 3 city blocks. I can definetly say that 99.5% +/- .5% of people don't ride their bikes to work from my neighbourhood or others along my route. Its one of those things that's easy to say you'll do (like many of my coworkers) but will never do (like using a gym membership). However, it'll be interesting to see what happens when gas is consistently above a $1/litre. I definetly, saw an increase of cyclists during the last price spike.

genec
12-07-05, 06:33 PM
70% of americans would drive in the bike lane if it were available.


And another 28% would just park in them...

budster
12-07-05, 06:56 PM
All in all rather interesting. The one big question is what would those saying they would bike with a safe bike lane consider a safe bike lane? If it is a bike lane outside the door zone with good thought put into intersections then this is a meaningful result. If it is a totally seperate 'lane' (more a bike path) that does not cross any streets then this is meaningless.
Good question. I'd guess the respondents wouldn't know the difference.

While I prefer wide lanes with no bike stripes to wide lanes with bike stripes -- if painting a line on the road gets more people biking, I'm all for it.

carless
12-07-05, 08:04 PM
"Just 26% Canadians agree and 72% disagree with the statement "Cyclists in my community are reckless and a major menace to pedestrians and cars";

There is widespread sympathy for cyclists in traffic: 9 in 10 Canadians feel drivers should be much more considerate of bicyclists than they are now."

I am doing this right: 16% feel others should be considerate to the reckless menances?

chipcom
12-07-05, 08:12 PM
And another 28% would just park in them...

and 50% of them already do...

GGDub
12-07-05, 08:29 PM
"Just 26% Canadians agree and 72% disagree with the statement "Cyclists in my community are reckless and a major menace to pedestrians and cars";

There is widespread sympathy for cyclists in traffic: 9 in 10 Canadians feel drivers should be much more considerate of bicyclists than they are now."

I am doing this right: 16% feel others should be considerate to the reckless menances?


whoa, I so have to go get my stats textbook to figure this all out.

sbhikes
12-07-05, 08:34 PM
I ride to work. My boyfriend drives. We work in the same office.

In Santa Barbara, most respondents to some survey they did about Measure D funds (which is a bunch of tax money dedicated to transportation projects) said that the first priority was bike facilities (lanes and paths).

A co-worker of mine says he'd ride to work from Ventura to Summerland, where we work--a considerable distance that currently involves riding on the freeway (highway 101) for a couple miles, if there was a bike path the entire way. He refuses to ride a bike where there is car traffic. He's a big guy, smart (engineer/programmer), a lifeguard, but just doesn't want to mix it up with cars.

I live in a place with lots of bike lanes, and actually there can be bike congestion in them sometimes. I don't care what you all think about bike lanes, but they do seem to get people out there riding bikes.

Jalopy
12-08-05, 06:03 AM
I live in a place with lots of bike lanes, and actually there can be bike congestion in them sometimes. I don't care what you all think about bike lanes, but they do seem to get people out there riding bikes.
Just to clarify, my negative comments about this poll were not were not meant as a criticism of bike lanes. I was simply stating that, when asked a politically charged question, what people say and what people do are often very different.

Jalopy

Keith99
12-08-05, 09:07 AM
I ride to work. My boyfriend drives. We work in the same office.

In Santa Barbara, most respondents to some survey they did about Measure D funds (which is a bunch of tax money dedicated to transportation projects) said that the first priority was bike facilities (lanes and paths).

A co-worker of mine says he'd ride to work from Ventura to Summerland, where we work--a considerable distance that currently involves riding on the freeway (highway 101) for a couple miles, if there was a bike path the entire way. He refuses to ride a bike where there is car traffic. He's a big guy, smart (engineer/programmer), a lifeguard, but just doesn't want to mix it up with cars.

I live in a place with lots of bike lanes, and actually there can be bike congestion in them sometimes. I don't care what you all think about bike lanes, but they do seem to get people out there riding bikes.

It has been a while, but I've ridden there on weekends and the freeway section is the one part I would not have worries about. Most of the rest I would wonder if traffic might be more difficult during a commute. But the freeway section is plenty wide and would give me no problems as long as the sun was up.

Ritehsedad
12-08-05, 09:54 AM
70% of americans would drive in the bike lane if it were available.
...and 50% would drive on the sidewalk if the curb was lower... :(

skookum
12-12-05, 12:44 PM
70% huh?

I'll bet it is more like 70% of Canadians would ride their bike to work if there were bike lanes, and if there were no hills and if the weather was good and if they were in shape and if they had a proper bike and if there was no easy alternative.

chemcycle
12-12-05, 11:23 PM
70% of americans would drive in the bike lane if it were available.

You mean it's not? Gives me some extra swerve room.........

silk
12-13-05, 12:03 AM
70% of americans would drive in the bike lane if it were available.


I would say 90%

I have never feared for my life on a bike in the thousands of Km I put on every year until I decided to
try the new bike lanes downtown Vancouver. In the course of 10 minutes I almost got smoked 6 times.

I Vowed never to ride in bike lanes again.

Citadel Rider
12-13-05, 08:06 AM
If we Canadians would truly match our actions with our words, we would have a healthier society, far less polution, and an easier commute to work on bicycles and transit systems -- not cars.

I'm all for bicycles in the summer and transist systms in the "other" three seasons. Our present road systems could easily handle twice as many bicycles as cars. I personally think that on four lane city streets one complete car lane (both directions -- 2 lanes for cars, 2 lanes for bicycles) should be converted to a bicycle lane -- with bicycles having the right-of-way -- this would certainly get everyone's attention and really make people think about serious cycling -- both commuter and recreational. But the lying/cheating politicials don't have the guts to make that kind of truly responsible decision.

Until we are FORCED to do "the responsible things" our society will stumble along with other "1st world countries" ...all making the same mistakes. And you think people will really like being "forced" to do the responsible things -- drinking and driving and seat belts are still big issues -- and they shouldn't be -- yet, people refuse to do the right thing, no matter how beneficial..... its just pure laziness and indifference due to too much "rights and freedoms."

The unfortunate problem is... many 3rd world countries want to follow our stumbling-bumbling-stupid ways.

lyledriver
12-13-05, 08:43 AM
I would say 90%

I have never feared for my life on a bike in the thousands of Km I put on every year until I decided to
try the new bike lanes downtown Vancouver. In the course of 10 minutes I almost got smoked 6 times.

I Vowed never to ride in bike lanes again.


Just out of curiousity, which 'new' bike lanes are you talking about?
I ride on the designated bike routes, and don't have too many problems.

PM me if you think this is too off topic.

patc
12-13-05, 09:33 AM
If we Canadians would truly match our actions with our words, we would have a healthier society, far less polution, and an easier commute to work on bicycles and transit systems -- not cars.

I'm all for bicycles in the summer and transist systms in the "other" three seasons. Our present road systems could easily handle twice as many bicycles as cars.

I am seriously considering voting Green in the next election. I know there's no chance of them forming a government, but a few Greens in the Commons could be a voice for environmental responsibility. Further a lot of the real work of Parliament gets done in committee, and a single voice there can count for a lot.

I was also impressed with our local Green candidate, he was willing to discuss issues at length with me via e-mail. The big party guys just send you a boilerplate reply.

Crazy Cyclist
12-13-05, 09:55 AM
From April until October or November, I am on my bike 6 - 7 days per week, sometimes I ride 4 -5 hours per day. I ride everywhere. I ride on the streets and whatever bike lanes are available.

In the winter, like it is now, I try and walk as much as I can, but - 25 almost everyday is not the best weather to walk in. I can't wait until April to roll around. I hate winter.

powers2b
12-13-05, 10:18 AM
Nation-wide survey shows 70% of those within half-hour cycle to work would if safe, dedicated traffic lane available

70% of Canadians say if they had access to a dedicated bike lane that would take them to work in less than 30 minutes at a comfortable pace, they would definitely use it;

100% of those surveyed that actually ride to work say that Bike Lanes = Bike Ghettos.

Enjoy

GGDub
12-13-05, 10:51 AM
I am seriously considering voting Green in the next election. I know there's no chance of them forming a government, but a few Greens in the Commons could be a voice for environmental responsibility. Further a lot of the real work of Parliament gets done in committee, and a single voice there can count for a lot.

I was also impressed with our local Green candidate, he was willing to discuss issues at length with me via e-mail. The big party guys just send you a boilerplate reply.


I too was impressed by the Greens, but I moved ridings and my new candidate is a little "green" so to speak. She's still working on a Uni degree. Not that I think she'd be incompetent, but I think she's lacking some serious experience. I think thats the Green Party's biggest problem, their leader is great and have some sharp candidates in other ridings, but then they fill in the other ridings with students in environmental programs who are idealistic but have no practical experience.

patc
12-13-05, 11:24 AM
I too was impressed by the Greens, but I moved ridings and my new candidate is a little "green" so to speak. She's still working on a Uni degree. Not that I think she'd be incompetent, but I think she's lacking some serious experience. I think thats the Green Party's biggest problem, their leader is great and have some sharp candidates in other ridings, but then they fill in the other ridings with students in environmental programs who are idealistic but have no practical experience.

I agree. It can be a tough choice... do you vote for a party likely to have enough power to do something, a candidate you agree with and who responds to you, or an individual with enough experience to get something done regardless of party affiliations?

cooker
12-13-05, 11:50 AM
This isn't the politics forum but since a couple of people have discussed voting Green in the current Canadian election I'll comment.

There are several reasons for voting Green. Even if your Green Party candidate is not likely to win, you are sending a message to the other parties that they'd better "green" their own platforms if they want to stay relevant.

The Green Party has a complete election platform and combines ecological and pacifist leanings with elements of fiscal conservatism. A major plank is the "green tax shift" which would see income taxes and other ecologically neutral or negative taxes gradually lessened in favour of taxes on resource depletion and pollution, fostering a slow transition to a more sustainable economy.

Under new election rules, parties get federal funding subsidies based on votes cast, so each person who votes Green sends $1.75 to the Green Party to use in subsequent election campaigns.

Of course, the Green Party may have some naive or novice candidates (the others have some too) and of course many of them don't expect to win, but this way every Canadian will have a chance to vote Green if they wish to.

RGC

silk
12-13-05, 01:12 PM
Just out of curiousity, which 'new' bike lanes are you talking about?
I ride on the designated bike routes, and don't have too many problems.

PM me if you think this is too off topic.


The worst is the one on Hornby St, all the way from Pacific to waterfront is hell

FlowerBlossom
12-13-05, 01:53 PM
Actually I think it simply shows that Canadians are politically correct hypocrites (and I'm one of them).

Everybody knows that the question "Would you take a bicycle instead of a car if you could?" is loaded with environmental innuendo. Nobody wants to appear to be insensitive to the environment so the obvious answer is "Yes, of course I would. But I can't because...." If you built bike lanes to these people's front doors all the way to their cubicle at work (my guess is) very few of them would become consistent bike commuters.

What makes me so cynical? well, statements like this from the article :

"The average car makes 2,000 trips per year of 3 km or less and many of these trips could easily be done on foot or bicycle"

"This survey shows that most Canadians want to be more active and are frustrated they are not active more often"

How sad. We want to be more active but just can't be. Surely it's not because we are lazy but rather because the government hasn't made it easy enough for us.

Jalopy

Fact is, govt pays for the road system, in Canada and the US, therefore, the answer "if the govt provides bike lanes" is a very good answer, and very, very sensible.

Seems like it's more of a matter of safety; who in the heck is going to, in essence, "volunteerily" (sp?) get runover by a SUV on a busy, fast, 4 lane city street and/or highway? I consider myself a dedicated commuter, and I wouldn't. Give me a bike lane, and, if there's only 80% of the people in the US who will run me over, down from 100%, then, that makes me much happier.

Secondly, as a statistician, if guaranteed that the answers won't be tied to their identity, most people will answer honestly. Granted, there are people who like to give non-honest opinions, just to try to "throw" the poll, for fun, for ego, for perceived "power", or for whatever other reason they have that day. However, we statisticians have ways of weeding them out. The "I know, I'm one of them" is a sample-size-of-one situation. I'm not worried.

Wulfheir
12-13-05, 02:51 PM
I agree with Jalopy. What a load of crap canadians are giving on that survey. Just try to pry the pick-up truck keys away from albertans, good luck. An Albertan who does not drive the most inefficient gas-guzzler on the market, is simply not a proud Albertan. Alberta produces all of the gasoline for the rest of canada, and most of the states. He better be mattin' the cummins while slammin' back a AAA grade alberta bred steak to work and back, regardless of distance. This is how everyone around me thinks.

jyossarian
12-13-05, 03:09 PM
70% huh?

I'll bet it is more like 70% of Canadians would ride their bike to work if there were bike lanes, and if there were no hills and if the weather was good and if they were in shape and if they had a proper bike and if there was no easy alternative.
What if the question was changed to, "If the gov't zambonied the ice on the streets everyday, would you ice skate to work while wearing your team's jersey?" I believe the positive response would be in the 90%+ range and 50% would be wearing no. 99.

cooker
12-13-05, 03:23 PM
Fact is, govt pays for the road system, in Canada and the US, therefore, the answer "if the govt provides bike lanes" is a very good answer, and very, very sensible.

Governments don't suddenly and altruistically do what's best, they do what their stakeholders want. Ideally those stakeholders are the voters, but the lobbyists and cronies have a major influence too, and that includes oil and automobile interests. And the voters aren't consistent or unified. Those Canadians who say they would bike to work, are also many of the same ones who want more and wider roads for their driving.


Secondly, as a statistician, if guaranteed that the answers won't be tied to their identity, most people will answer honestly. Hmmmm... I think they might answer sincerely, but not necessarily accurately. It's a bit like New Year's resolutions...everyone wants to improve themselves, but they don't actually follow through.

skookum
12-14-05, 10:09 AM
What if the question was changed to, "If the gov't zambonied the ice on the streets everyday, would you ice skate to work while wearing your team's jersey?" I believe the positive response would be in the 90%+ range and 50% would be wearing no. 99.

LOL! Good one.

I'd wear number nine.

Look at places where lots of people bike to work.
I'm thinking Holland. Dedicated separate bike paths or lanes everywhere.
Secure bicycle parking lots.
Automobile parking is expensive. Roads are crowded.
The land is flat.
Everybody else bikes, and they do it wearing their work clothes.

I think the three main factors are 1)people feel safe on their bikes
2)everybody else does it, and 3)driving and parking is expensive.

I don't think we will ever see those three factors in North America. The only
place it might work is in densely populated cities where most trips would be quite short.
But those places tend to have awful traffic, which intimidates people and the cost of dedicated bike facilities (paths, lanes, parking) is expensive.

I see a lot more people commuting than 20 years ago, but it is still a tiny minority. I can't see it ever being like Europe.

GGDub
12-14-05, 12:15 PM
Since 30% of the population of canada lives in Ontario and a lot of those people live in the 905 area and work in Toronto, I can't see how any of them could find the time to commute in by bike, regardless of bike lanes or bike paths. Riding 60-70k, one-way, in a timely manner is pretty much out of the question for 99% of the population.

Wulfheir
12-14-05, 01:33 PM
http://geodepot.statcan.ca/Diss/Maps/ThematicMaps/population/National/pop_dens_colour_e.pdf

Population density of canada in pdf format. Just found it interesting, and it sort of relates to this thread. Kinda.

jyossarian
12-14-05, 02:03 PM
Since 30% of the population of canada lives in Ontario and a lot of those people live in the 905 area and work in Toronto, I can't see how any of them could find the time to commute in by bike, regardless of bike lanes or bike paths. Riding 60-70k, one-way, in a timely manner is pretty much out of the question for 99% of the population.
Not completely OT, but somewhat related; isn't the most obese province Ontario and the most obese city the GTA? I'm talking Canada only, not in comparison to the US. If so, is it the easy access to donut shops, foul weather and urban sprawl that make people more sedentary and prone to driving? I measured the distance between downtown Toronto and my in-laws in Scarborough and it was something like 10-12 miles w/ some killer hills (for me, and I cyclo commute most days) thrown in for good measure.

Jalopy
12-14-05, 03:10 PM
Seems like it's more of a matter of safety; who in the heck is going to, in essence, "volunteerily" (sp?) get runover by a SUV on a busy, fast, 4 lane city street and/or highway? I consider myself a dedicated commuter, and I wouldn't.
Hi FlowerBlossom,

I certainly hope you don't equate riding a bicycle on a street without bike lanes with a desire to be run over by an SUV. I also hope you don't assume bike lanes make you safer. Regardless, my original post wasn't meant as a critique of the effectiveness of bike lanes.


Secondly, as a statistician, if guaranteed that the answers won't be tied to their identity, most people will answer honestly. Granted, there are people who like to give non-honest opinions, just to try to "throw" the poll, for fun, for ego, for perceived "power", or for whatever other reason they have that day. However, we statisticians have ways of weeding them out.
I like Cooker's answer to this. People have a way of deceiving even themselves.

Ignoring that for a moment, I'm curious if you really believe what this poll is saying or if you just didn't like my slightly over-the-top response?

Jalopy

webist
12-14-05, 04:37 PM
"telephone interviews with 1,501 adults"



Sounds more like a random intercept poll taken inside bike stores. :D

cooker
12-14-05, 04:42 PM
Since 30% of the population of canada lives in Ontario and a lot of those people live in the 905 area and work in Toronto, I can't see how any of them could find the time to commute in by bike, regardless of bike lanes or bike paths. Riding 60-70k, one-way, in a timely manner is pretty much out of the question for 99% of the population.The original survey said 70% of Canadians say if they had access to a dedicated bike lane that would take them to work in less than 30 minutes at a comfortable pace, they would definitely use it
All Canadian cities have urban sprawl and have people who live too far from work to start bike commuting - the survey referred to what people say they would do if they lived close enough to work and had what they (perhaps naively) assume to be a safe bicycle route. Even so, I doubt that anywhere near that many would follow through if those conditions were met.{Edited}

Daily Commute
12-14-05, 04:42 PM
70% of Canadians say if they had access to a dedicated bike lane that would take them to work in less than 30 minutes at a comfortable pace, they would definitely use it;
If you think that 70% of any group would start cycling if only they had bike lanes, think about all the unused gym equipment people buy when they are certain that they are 100% committed to exercising daily.

GGDub
12-14-05, 04:55 PM
The original survey said
All Canadian cities have urban sprawl and have people who live too far from work to start bike commuting - the survey referred to what people say they would do if they lived close enough to work and had what they (perhaps naively) assume to be a safe bicycle route. Even so, I doubt that anywhere near that many would follow through if those conditions were met.
I hope this isn't degenerating into a Toronto-bashing thread.


No not all. I happen to like Toronto, but I grew up in Burlington and know how many people waste 3-4 hours a day commuting in on the QEW and 401/403 (and now 407). My point was, when you have such a large portion of the Canadian population who lives really far from where they work, 70% of people saying they'd ride to work if they have a bike lane is pretty hard to believe. As far as the urban sprawl goes, Calgary is definetly suffering from it, but its still orders of magnitude lower than golden horseshoe. Even if you live in some of the farther neighbourhoods, its still possible to get to work by bike in about an hour.

skookum
12-15-05, 11:35 AM
Okay on our floor of approximate 50 people there are six who commute at least occasionally in the summer and maybe three of us who commute whenever the weather allows, whatever the season.

So thats a maximum of about 10% when conditions are perfect.

We have showers here at work and there is secure bike parking in the building -however it is full and half the people who have alotted spaces, seldom use them.

I can't see more than about 15% of people riding in, in optimum conditions, so thats the max.

I think bike lanes or paths would encourage more novice cyclists who don't feel safe in traffic, but I don't think the numbers would be very large. Another issue is secure parking and access to showers. Because people think of cycling as exercise rather than transportation they feel they need a shower every time they cycle.

The 70% number is pure fantasy.

Wulfheir
12-15-05, 11:40 AM
Not completely OT, but somewhat related; isn't the most obese province Ontario and the most obese city the GTA? I'm talking Canada only, not in comparison to the US. If so, is it the easy access to donut shops, foul weather and urban sprawl that make people more sedentary and prone to driving? I measured the distance between downtown Toronto and my in-laws in Scarborough and it was something like 10-12 miles w/ some killer hills (for me, and I cyclo commute most days) thrown in for good measure.

From statscan (http://www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/050706/d050706a.htm):
With a few notable exceptions, adult obesity rates did not vary greatly by province. In 2004, the rate for men was significantly above the national level in Newfoundland and Labrador and Manitoba. The rate for women surpassed the national figure in Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia and Saskatchewan.

cooker
12-15-05, 03:43 PM
No not all. I happen to like Toronto I had edited that comment about Toronto bashing out of my post, I guess while you were replying, since I decided it added nothing to the thread.
Regards