Whatever may be the result of twisting a few words here and there, to suggest that a 'shoulder' is not part of the roadway is ridiculous. It is paved, it is plowed, it is salted, it is swept clean of sand and debris as often as can be afforded ( ), buses use the shoulders for about 30% of their total mileage!

All that language means is that the shoulder is not part of the 'normal path for traffic.' And indeed, that is exactly how I look at it as a cyclist. The shoulder is THE BIKE lane. Cars may enter this lane on occasion given a subset of traffic conditions (some specified and itemized in the law), but they are intermittent users and should return to the lane of traffic as soon as possible.

Similarly, as a cyclist I may on occasion enter the lane of traffic if conditions require or suggest it...a disables vehicle, debris, a bus (pathetically often) etc...but it is my obligation to return to the bicycle lane as soon as it is possible and prudent to do so.

Such peaceful coexistence, melded with a solid amount of courtesy, enabled cyclists to thrive on the roadways for decades before the critical mazzholes and take-the-laners began to sieze their moral high ground.

When I am talking with highway engineers, cops, public hearings, whatever, I often say: dollar for dollar, the best investment in highway safety and bicycle safety is to widen shoulders, or add shoulders to roads that do not have them. In fact sometimes shoulders are ridiculously WIDE...i have been on many country roads where the shoulder is the widest lane on the whole surface...which borders on the ridiculous.

roughstuff