View Single Post
Old 10-28-14, 02:06 PM
  #2  
welshTerrier2
Full Member
 
welshTerrier2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 247
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 67 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by genec
Bicycle traffic deaths soar; California leads nation - LA Times

The report goes on to note that there appears to be more cyclists commuting today than in the last several years, and that the exposure of more cyclists to motor vehicles is perhaps why there is an increase in cyclist fatalities.
Here is a link to the actual report from the Governors Highway Safety Association entitled "Spotlight on Highway Safety - Bicyclist Safety".

The most disturbing piece of information in the report was this statement: "Adequate exposure data are not available to accurately monitor changes in bicycle travel ..."

How can we evaluate what is safe and what is not if we lack adequate usage statistics? Evaluations of various infrastructure designs need to be based on a bicycle-miles-traveled to number of accidents ratio. Raw data that show only the number of accidents can be very misleading.

Originally Posted by genec
Good quality separate paths are only "rarely feasible" when they are not planned for and when funds are not allocated...
Then let's get them planned for and funded. If we make non-fossil-fuel transportation and recreation a priority, the sickness of an automobile-centric society can be healed. Ultimately, there's probably no alternative we can live with. The current model is not sustainable. Those who plan most effectively for the demise of the automobile culture will fare the best.

Originally Posted by genec
Of course, the above are basically bandaids in a world that has been ripped up and re-designed for motor vehicles, while leaving out the possibility of walking, cycling and public transit.
Well said!
welshTerrier2 is offline