Originally Posted by timmhaan
i think there is one flawed assumption here. and that is that there will be swarms of unskilled riders clogging the roads who will be a danger to themselves and everyone else. we all were unskilled riders at some point, but quickly got the gist of it. in new york, which is crowded with everyone doing everything, even relatively new riders manage quite well - despite heavy traffic. it takes only a couple of days to acclimate to it. people are fairly adaptable and like mentioned above they can learn how to ride in large groups quickly.
There is a noticeable increase in cyclists here, but no increase in their quality. I'm not a snob. By "quality" I mean the roadworthiness of the bikes and their riders. Most of these new cyclists have no idea how to ride on streets, and they don't seem to be picking up skills very fast.
And why would they? Nobody is given a car and turned loose on the streets. You are required to take some lessons and pass some tests before driving. This is not true of cycling. When people say no changes in infrastructure are needed, they are correct if they are referring to the physical infrastructure. But infrastructure also includes (or should) training, education and competence. We have a huge educational and bureaucratic infrastructure devoted to motor vehicles. Something similar will be called for if cyclists increase dramatically in number.
And that would be a mixed blessing, as far as I'm concerned. On the one hand, as others have posted, it would be great to have more biking company and fellowship. However, I don't relish giving up my freedom and independence. I dread the day when I'm required to pass a road test and get a card from Big Brother before I ride. I don't want to pay insurance and pay to register and license my bike. But if a lot of incompetent riders start jamming the streets and getting themselves and others killed, that is all too likely to happen.