Advocacy & Safety - The Spokesman, Part Deux!

A new season, a new column.

To update; last year, after submitting yet another letter to the editor to straighten out a demeaning or derogatory article or letter appearing in the paper regarding cycling or cyclists, the editor called me at home to ask if I would write a column about cycling to appear on a regular basis throughout the summer months.

How could I say no? After a planned 6 columns turned into a dozen, I retired the column for the winter. A couple of weeks ago, I was contacted for a request to write a second season of columns.

My first piece informs everyone about the upcoming Bike to Work Week. The subsequent columns will cover points I never managed to address last season.

here's (http://www2.canada.com/richmondnews/news/community/story.html?id=6e7e7d65-8b0e-4520-af95-4a9a6f009915) the link for the first column of the season.

as long as you don't fall into your spurious anti-helmet fixation ,good on ya! congrats on another season of columns.

well, you just know I'm going to write one of those, but to balance things out for you, I wrote a column on riding on a separated path this past winter and another column on riding in bike lanes.

Great stuff, CB !
What a fabulous soapbox for one to enjoy ! :thumb:

I read somewhere(?) that a study was dont that shows correlation
between drop in crime that coincides with rise in bike commuting.
Regardless of whatever that long-lost study said, I would subliminally
push that everybody in a community benefits from increased bike riding,
not just bike riders :)

Great stuff, CB !
What a fabulous soapbox for one to enjoy ! :thumb:

Yeah, I was surprised at the call, and appreciate the opportunity.


... Regardless of whatever that long-lost study said, I would subliminally
push that everybody in a community benefits from increased bike riding,
not just bike riders :)

That's always a theme I try to convey, sometimes none too subtly.

Most of the public have no idea how good they have it when someone takes a trip on a bike that they would have otherwise taken in a car. I aim to show them.

well, you just know I'm going to write one of those, but to balance things out for you, I wrote a column on riding on a separated path this past winter and another column on riding in bike lanes.Bek is just worried he may not sell as many helmets when well written articles come out.:innocent:

Bek is just worried he may not sell as many helmets when well written articles come out.:innocent:

Just wait until I get a ticket for riding my bike without my helmet and I end up making a federal case of it! :lol:

and hey Bek... just so you know, I was inspired at that Bob Mionske on Road Rage (http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=465894&highlight=bob+road+rage) thread both you and I took part in, so I wrote a column on that too! :D

There was a letter printed in the paper this week responding to my column last week.

Apparently the heading "Bikes have rights to the road too" made the writer "bristle".

Put brake on bad cyclists

Published: Wednesday, May 13, 2009

The Editor,

Re: "Bikes have rights to the road too," News, May 6.

I must take exception to some of the statements Brad Kilburn made in his column. The heading "Bikes have rights to the road too" made me bristle. As both a cyclist and a motorist, I believe I can see the issue from both sides.

If cyclists want to have equal rights with motorists, they must then abide by the same rules of the road. For those cyclists who are obviously uninformed, this includes STOPPING at stop signs and red traffic lights, and indicating when intending to turn. This is for their own safety as much as anyone else's, so why they persist in not doing it is beyond me.

Amazingly, it is the professional-looking cyclists from the bike clubs or groups who are the worst offenders. They descend en masse on Steveston and **** Road every weekend and make driving a nightmare for anyone brave enough to venture out.

To make their lack of observance of road etiquette even worse, they insist on riding two or three abreast, forcing cars to slow to a crawl and follow them until they deign to move over. If you should be bold enough to say anything to them, you get the one-fingered salute or verbal abuse -- as if YOU are the one at fault!

Please, all you cyclists out there, stop embarrassing us law-abiding bike-riders. Have some respect and consideration for other road users, and maybe you will be afforded the same.

Remember -- it IS a two-way street, in more ways than one!

Carlie Holland

Richmond

I can see his point, to a point.
First off, if he is not one of the "obviously uninformed" he
would know there is a whole school of thought that bicycles
should brake and roll or leave lights early, etc now that
bicycling is getting a little bigger in the US and ideologies are changing.
That being said, I live in a spot where there are lots of group rides,
and big ones. When you get to Jupiter Island or anywhere in the
vicinity, its not uncommon for 30 bikes to bust a stop sign if
they get a break and are able to. If a car pulls out the car has a
huge percentage of being hit, slapped and yelled at, like its a
given to these people you are 'sposed to stop and wait for them even
if its your turn to go at the sign. To me, a lowly solitary commuter,
this stuff is making it impossible for us to achieve any sort of respect
from our adversary's. I even got yelled at once cuz a roadie had to
unclip at HIS stop sign. WTF ?!?!?! I could go on and on on what I
see right outside my front door, but Ill mercifully end it here :)

THERE'S an attitude you could do to reform, Brad-

unbridled criticisms for bicyclings perceived or actual transgressions against modern traffic law.

motorists that don't respect bicycling present primary troublesome and insidious threats to bicyclists.

trying to educate that large portion of the public (and a likely demographic of the richmond reader!) about bicyclists being worthy of motorist respect and community support would trump any other topics for your columns.

I'm trying but sometimes you have to wonder how much of the attitude you can reform when I write,

"cyclists are entitled to use the road with the same rights and responsibilities as motorists."

and the response comes back with,

"If cyclists want to have equal rights with motorists, they must then abide by the same rules of the road."

I consistantly hit on the resposibilities cyclists must adhere to in my columns but I guess some people just don't see it, just as they refuse to see the trangressions they commit.

I wonder what it was that the writer was bold enough to say to the cyclists to elicit a one fingered salute? Something that s/he was at fault for?

...

Re: "Bikes have rights to the road too," News, May 6.

I must take exception to some of the statements Brad Kilburn made in his column. The heading "Bikes have rights to the road too" made me bristle. As both a cyclist and a motorist, I believe I can see the issue from both sides.

If cyclists want to have equal rights with motorists, they must then abide by the same rules of the road. For those cyclists who are obviously uninformed, this includes STOPPING at stop signs and red traffic lights, and indicating when intending to turn. This is for their own safety as much as anyone else's, so why they persist in not doing it is beyond me.

Amazingly, it is the professional-looking cyclists from the bike clubs or groups who are the worst offenders. They descend en masse on Steveston and **** Road every weekend and make driving a nightmare for anyone brave enough to venture out.

To make their lack of observance of road etiquette even worse, they insist on riding two or three abreast, forcing cars to slow to a crawl and follow them until they deign to move over. If you should be bold enough to say anything to them, you get the one-fingered salute or verbal abuse -- as if YOU are the one at fault!

Please, all you cyclists out there, stop embarrassing us law-abiding bike-riders. Have some respect and consideration for other road users, and maybe you will be afforded the same.

Remember -- it IS a two-way street, in more ways than one!

Carlie Holland

RichmondTo his credit, he signed his response. But that's all I can give him credit for. I'd bet he considers himself a cyclist--and therefore entitled to his self-proclaimed expertise--just 'cause he has a bike hanging in the garage that he rode once last summer when it was nice out and he had nothing better to do.

Of course, by his reasoning, motorists should have no right to the road because I consistently see motorists roll through stop-signs, and even red lights! And very few use their turn signals! And I am constantly slowed down by motorists driving slower than me! And run off the road by those idiots who whizz by at twice the speed of sound!

As for the group of riders, I bet he'd complain more forcefully if they all road single-file and their line was a 1/4-mile long, forcing him to wait forever to make that turn or pass them when it was safe!


..."cyclists are entitled to use the road with the same rights and responsibilities as motorists."

and the response comes back with,

"If cyclists want to have equal rights with motorists, they must then abide by the same rules of the road."
...Excellent way of phrasing it.

I find it amusing that the transgressions of motorists never seem to be mentioned by those pointing the boney finger at cyclists.

If we are all to be responsible road users, perhaps motorists should try driving at or below the actual speed LIMIT, and should themselves be aware of their own tendencies to fail to signal, and to commit rolling stops.

Of course, by his reasoning, motorists should have no right to the road because I consistently see motorists roll through stop-signs, and even red lights! And very few use their turn signals! And I am constantly slowed down by motorists driving slower than me! And run off the road by those idiots who whizz by at twice the speed of sound!


Which only goes to show that it is just a red herring. It's an opinion in seek of a legal justification to make it not seem like an opinion.

If every person who sat on a bicycle operated within the legal confines of their respective laws, the argument would simply be replaced with another argument that no doubt comes from a "rational and objective" place ;). Nope not an opinion. Critics of cyclists are rationally coming to their conclusions through reason. Not because they don't like cyclists riding on their road. Can't be that simple.

I'm trying but sometimes you have to wonder how much of the attitude you can reform when I write,

"cyclists are entitled to use the road with the same rights and responsibilities as motorists."

and the response comes back with,

"If cyclists want to have equal rights with motorists, they must then abide by the same rules of the road."


It seems to me that you and the letter writer agree perfectly. What's the problem?

not any real problem, just unnecessary reiteration, or maybe Carlie just missed the part s/he was concerned about. After all, why is it s/he writes my call for equal rights makes her/him "bristle" unless s/he missed that I called for the same responsibility s/he wan't cyclists to follow and I wrote they need to follow?

It does give me an opportunity to address the fact that cyclists do, on occasion break the law and that riding 2 abreast is illegal in BC but not in other areas.

I thought of an opening for this on my ride in today- OK, I'll admit it, people on bikes break the law - or something like that.

That'll catch their attention and then I can then explain that people in cars break the law too.

One of the most frequent things I get asked is,

"is my bike in good enough condition to ride after sitting dormant over the winter. Does it need a tune up?"

The next most frequent question is,

"I'm thinking of buying a new bike. What should I buy and where should I buy it?"

I've always kind of resisted "nuts and bolts" pieces and favored more advocacy based information that might somehow improve an attitude towards cycling in the community but there really as been demand for this advice at this time of year so I wrote one column on doing a pre-ride check and my next one will be on buying a bike (leaning heavily on buying it at a bike shop of course)

Here's (http://www2.canada.com/richmondnews/news/community/story.html?id=75a7d7d9-78fc-4a5f-9ed5-ba2b728a6ee0) the link for the latest.

The next most frequent question is,

"I'm thinking of buying a new bike. What should I buy and where should I buy it?"---✄✄✄
✄--my next one will be on buying a bike (leaning heavily on buying it at a bike shop of course)



I might take some issue on this even though I wholeheartedly approve of what you are doing :thumb:

I think the next reason other than fear, getting people on the roads is the belief that commuting
has to be complicated and expensive. Based on my experience IRL, and looking at commuter
forums, people always ask what they need to start commuting and the responses are "A
Surly Crosscheck" etc, etc , etc, insert the name of any bike co's proprietary commuter bike.
These bikes run $500-1000+. My best commuter bikes have cost around 300.00 with great
lights and all. I might suggest Craigslist for the bike but suggest a LBS go over it. In short,
I think showing people you dont have to look like a PowerRanger and you dont have to spend
any money at all, relatively speaking, is what might attract more people. I think people
are unnecessarily complicating the issue by suggesting 700.00 bikes and lists of stuff people
need. To me, its too simple....80's-90's Japanese steel 125.00, lights, fresh tuffy tubes
and tires.....ride ! :) Very simple :)

The next column will say I follow a philosophy of simplicity, fit is the most important consideration and one need not buy lots of accessories.

Lights are needed for riding after sunset and a bag is needed for carrying things, but that's about all you need.

The next column will say I follow a philosophy of simplicity, fit is the most important consideration and one need not buy lots of accessories.

Lights are needed for riding after sunset and a bag is needed for carrying things, but that's about all you need.

Other essentials: Fenders. Bell/horn. Tire patch kit and a few simple tools. Helmet. Mirrors. Glasses or similar eye protection. Reflectors. Bright clothing. All should be considered standard equipment. I'm sure I'm forgetting some...

one of the biggest surprise I had when I was in rainy, London (England) was the lack of fenders on bikes. Sure they're great, and help keep you dry (and lengthen the life of components) but are they needed? Some would say yes, but others do just fine with out them.

I find my mouth is a perfectly fine sounding device, I've never used a mirror and while a helmet does have some use, it'd be of little surprise to many who frequent these pages to find that I don't consider a helmet a necessary item as I don't consider goggles a necessary item.

A repair kit is handy too, and cost effective, but one step at a time. If you're at the point where you know how to use the repair kit, you may be past the point of someone giving you advice on what you should buy

YMMV.

I was 36 before I got my first fenders. One not-so-obvious use for them was when I sprayed my bike and clothes with fresh tar that had been put on the road. Destroyed a brand-new shirt. :/

I find it amusing that the transgressions of motorists never seem to be mentioned by those pointing the boney finger at cyclists.

If we are all to be responsible road users, perhaps motorists should try driving at or below the actual speed LIMIT, and should themselves be aware of their own tendencies to fail to signal, and to commit rolling stops.

Honestly, I doubt they point boney fingers at cyclist, given the condition of many of those glued to their car seat, I imagine fat fingers are more likely. :D

I'm on my last day of my week-end and I used it to reply to the letter. It'll run after my next column.

I can't wait for the response.

The next column will say I follow a philosophy of simplicity, fit is the most important consideration and one need not buy lots of accessories.

Lights are needed for riding after sunset and a bag is needed for carrying things, but that's about all you need.

my buying a bike column was printed.

I push the idea of buying from a shop

http://www2.canada.com/richmondnews/news/community/story.html?id=ae4346d3-342a-4456-9731-ec085d367ed8

Other essentials: Fenders. Bell/horn. Tire patch kit and a few simple tools. Helmet. Mirrors. Glasses or similar eye protection. Reflectors. Bright clothing. All should be considered standard equipment. I'm sure I'm forgetting some...

To each his/her own. I'm a carfree cyclist riding 5000 miles a year for the last seven years. Other than "a few tools", I don't have any of the items that you say are "essentials." The point is, most new riders probably don't need 20 pounds of expensive stuff. They probably need only a cheap bike and a will to ride.

This is a point that I would like to see in one of closetbiker's articles.

...most new riders probably don't need 20 pounds of expensive stuff. They probably need only a cheap bike and a will to ride.

This is a point that I would like to see in one of closetbiker's articles.

Oddly enough, my rough draft included the phrase, "one only needs cheap bike and a will to ride."

The final draft said, "I know many people feel that riding a bicycle requires all kinds of special equipment and clothing, but I find that many of these things are not essential."

Oddly enough, my rough draft included the phrase, "one only needs cheap bike and a will to ride."

The final draft said, "I know many people feel that riding a bicycle requires all kinds of special equipment and clothing, but I find that many of these things are not essential."

:D great minds run in the same course.

I feel similarly about safety instructions. Beginners just don't need to know all the subtleties such as how many inches from the right tire track they should be. I cringe when a newbie writes here with a simple question, and gets a 5 page debate on angels and pinheads.

The message should be geared to the audience whenever possible. Tell them to ride in the same direction as traffic, watch carefully, and use directional lanes and signals/signage like cars do. That's enough to keep them alive in the first 1000 miles or so. Let them figure out the rest later.

With a letter to the editor appearing in the Richmond News after my initial column, and the recent "crackdown" on cyclists breaking the law on my mind, I penned this

http://www2.canada.com/richmondnews/news/community/story.html?id=9ed57af8-250a-4f15-ae16-08fa0e3a1251

A number of people have told me about how they would like to ride in an environment free of cars. I've always preferred the street, but thought I'd try what's right next to my door.

http://www2.canada.com/richmondnews/news/story.html?id=4a39fcc1-e80c-430b-9696-aff295668055

vc dreck. blech. that column was lame-o - complaining about pedestrians on a MUP and the human nature of your fellow bicyclists, then admitting riding a car free environment is pleasant- as if you had never tried riding a trail ever.

you think your fellow riders can't handle the chicanes and egresses of a trail? :eek: quite pompous of you eh

I believe I wrote leaving traffic behind was nice for a change (and it was a good thing I didn't mention the bozos on bikes on the trail. They were as bad as the peds).

I planned on riding the trail all winter but I couldn't take it. Too many close calls, but like I wrote, I gave it 3 months. I gave it a try and prefer taking my chances on the road.

If you liked this one Bek, you'll probably like my next one. It's going to be about the bike lanes I ride every day.

vc dreck. blech. ..

how is relating the behavior of unaware peds vc?

You're not claiming that peds don't do what I described are you?

I had a comment emailed to me that it was a good thing what i wrote because peds and dog walkers read my column and were made aware of an issue they may not have been aware of before.

A number of people have told me about how they would like to ride in an environment free of cars. I've always preferred the street, but thought I'd try what's right next to my door.

http://www2.canada.com/richmondnews/news/story.html?id=4a39fcc1-e80c-430b-9696-aff295668055

It took you three months? I would have seen all the things mentioned in a couple days. Plus add in teenage boys playing swords with sticks.

hope you're getting paid for this....

:)

I'm getting paid with heavy dollops of love from the cycling advocacy community.

:D

how is relating the behavior of unaware peds vc?


dude, your smug vcist "I prefer the roads, the motorists are orderly and they carry insurance so i much prefer the roadway but some bicyclists fear serious injury" is quite odious in tone to a bicycling populist like myself.

how do you convince a majority of mothers to feel safe bicycling on a 100km/h roadway with their kids in a trailer?

heck, i rode the last two days on roads without a lot of vehicles and even roads, much less trails, without cars are nicer than roads with a lot of traffic!

what the heck, Bek?

I guess I asked you a question. My bad.

I guess I'm critical of your opinions.

i also should have been more concise in my response. you really don't see it? here's a more concrete intro.... "it's not your comments about the pedestrians that is vc, it's your smug....." maybe you really don't see the high horse you ride on.

Maybe you weren't so much complaining about the peds as much you were lauding the orderly nature of the motorists -heck they carry insurance! coupled to a thinly veiled chiding of your fellow bicyclists.


how do you get a majority of moms to feel comfortable riding 100 km/h roadways with kids in tow?

My bad i guess.

one of the biggest surprise I had when I was in rainy, London (England) was the lack of fenders on bikes. Sure they're great, and help keep you dry (and lengthen the life of components) but are they needed? Some would say yes, but others do just fine with out them.

I find my mouth is a perfectly fine sounding device, I've never used a mirror and while a helmet does have some use, it'd be of little surprise to many who frequent these pages to find that I don't consider a helmet a necessary item as I don't consider goggles a necessary item.

A repair kit is handy too, and cost effective, but one step at a time. If you're at the point where you know how to use the repair kit, you may be past the point of someone giving you advice on what you should buy

However, you definitely-but-definitely need a pump - for top ups, even if you won't repair your own punctures. (The Truflo Evolution is an amazingly good pump, btw - a minipump that's also a floorstand pump and FAST.)

One thing that I'd suggest a column on would be tyres. Even most sports cyclists don't understand a bloody thing about them - the dangers of riding knobblies on the road, that wide tyres can be fast and offer more grip than narrow ones as well as providing suspension, the importance of buying good quality ones, the effect of rain, choosing a frame with decent tyre clearance, latex inner tubes to reduce rolling resistance for those who care, etc. Brake blocks could go in the same article. A pair of Conti Sports instead of knobblies and a set of Kool Stop pinks could save someone's life.

You could also mention how cheap it is to put a Fenix or other standard LED light on a bike and use it as a strobe instead of using the hugely expensive bike specific stuff.

And an article on getting the bloody saddle high enough would be a service to mankind...

I guess I'm critical of your opinions.

Gee! You think?


i also should have been more concise in my response. you really don't see it? here's a more concrete intro.... "it's not your comments about the pedestrians that is vc, it's your smug....." maybe you really don't see the high horse you ride on.

Maybe you weren't so much complaining about the peds as much you were lauding the orderly nature of the motorists -heck they carry insurance! coupled to a thinly veiled chiding of your fellow bicyclists.


how do you get a majority of moms to feel comfortable riding 100 km/h roadways with kids in tow?

My bad i guess.

different points of view I guess.

I see it as although I prefer the road, I'll check out what others have been asking for and give them my impressions and opinion, because that's what I do. Give my opinion.

it's not like i haven't mentioned a very good reason why people like these or if by riding a certain speed (that isn't going to be a problem for moms riding with kids in tow) the larger problem couldn't be handled easily.

it's not hard to see that there's a people problem in both situations. if people aren't co-operative in any situation, there's going to be a problem. If they are, it's smooth sailing.

...One thing that I'd suggest a column on would be tyres... Brake blocks could go in the same article...You could also mention how cheap it is to put a Fenix or other standard LED light on a bike and use it as a strobe instead of using the hugely expensive bike specific stuff.

And an article on getting the bloody saddle high enough would be a service to mankind...

Thanks. I always appreciate suggestions.

Here's one for Bek.

Bike Lanes by Brad

http://www2.canada.com/richmondnews/news/community/story.html?id=6f8ec9eb-2504-4f13-8b31-29317bbbbb9b

After a competing paper ran an editorial that said cyclists should pay to use the roads, I bashed out a column in response and asked if it could be printed asap.

They got it in but the space was limited and as a result, points were taken out so the column could fit in the paper.

I'm a little disappointed because I don't think people think of all of the positive points bikes have over cars so losing a few means they're not going to know.

They cut out my comments on the space devoted to automotive parking, damage motorists create in collisions, and the BYU study that said, "communities that had larger reductions in air pollution, on average, had larger increases in life expectancies"

http://www2.canada.com/richmondnews/news/community/story.html?id=6d19e603-2161-4093-9b11-993727a254c1

After a competing paper ran an editorial that said cyclists should pay to use the roads, I bashed out a column in response and asked if it could be printed asap.

They got it in but the space was limited and as a result, points were taken out so the column could fit in the paper.

I'm a little disappointed because I don't think people think of all of the positive points bikes have over cars so losing a few means they're not going to know.

They cut out my comments on the space devoted to automotive parking, damage motorists create in collisions, and the BYU study that said, "communities that had larger reductions in air pollution, on average, had larger increases in life expectancies"

http://www2.canada.com/richmondnews/news/community/story.html?id=6d19e603-2161-4093-9b11-993727a254c1

Nice article.

Of course, we already pay for use of the roads... through income and property taxes.

actually, after reading the paper, instead of skimming it, I caught that it does say cycling reduces the need for space set aside for parking, and riding a bike reduces pollution and helps extend the lives of everyone.

Both points were edited for brevity

I missed that I originally wrote the health gains from cycling saves huge heath care costs and was dropped (hopefully that's an obvious point to the reader), but was right that the costs of automotive collisions was dropped.

*just noticed something else. There's a feature on the front page that leads a reader to the column saying a cyclist saves the community money and that people who say we should pay for the use of the roads are just airing a bunch of sour grapes. That's a nice attention getter*

Today the paper ran my take on Critical Mass and it's spawn, Critical Manners

http://www2.canada.com/richmondnews/news/community/story.html?id=75d8a233-31bb-436b-8a70-de470cbafa23

i'd say that's a fairly accurate take on CM, Brad.... but really, a bicyclist your age, living in Vancouver, and you HAVEN'T participated in a critical mass ride?

Your connection with Vancouver's abundant bicycling culture has just been scaled back a notch.

Today the paper ran my take on Critical Mass and it's spawn, Critical Manners

http://www2.canada.com/richmondnews/news/community/story.html?id=75d8a233-31bb-436b-8a70-de470cbafa23

As always, great stuff, Brad :thumb:

I just sort of disagree with calling attention to the perception of the 'wrong' part of CM....
Drastic problems call for drastic measures...
I don't/wouldn't ride in a provocative manner, but for the sake of empathy, it could be
pointed out that that behavior is what we suffer from car drivers, regularly.
If you dont like it once a month...Try suffering it every day.
In articles about semi-truck accidents and instances, 50 people write to the paper about
how aggressive and dangerous semi's are. Car drivers dont understand the unwritten
laws of tonnage based dominion over the vulnerable they partake of with us. Its
no different than the deadly semi stuff they complain about when prompted.

Anyway, great stuff....thanks for sharing :)

Thanks. One of the things I'm learning about writing is the editing process.

There are a few layers to go through and each editor want clarifications that sometimes muddy an original point. Throw in availability for space and a dead line and sometimes things don't come out as intended.

I appreciate those that take part in CM. They make my job easier. I think C Manners will make no difference for cycling advocacy, but that's just my humble opinion.