Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Advocacy & Safety
Reload this Page >

AAA against bicyclists rights under the law in CA

Advocacy & Safety Cyclists should expect and demand safe accommodation on every public road, just as do all other users. Discuss your bicycle advocacy and safety concerns here.

AAA against bicyclists rights under the law in CA

Old 04-06-19, 09:03 PM
  #1  
Rick
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 161
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 63 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
AAA against bicyclists rights under the law in CA

I am 61 years old and the biggest thorn in my side when bicycling has been the intentional misinterpretation and the straight out lying about the stay to the right law by both motorists and especially LEOs. The AAA is the biggest anti bicycling lobbyist organization in the US. Here is an article on one of there more recent antics. https://cal.streetsblog.org/2019/04/...l-lane-pulled/
Rick is offline  
Old 04-07-19, 01:07 AM
  #2  
CB HI
Cycle Year Round
 
CB HI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Honolulu, HI
Posts: 13,563
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1246 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Adding the Idaho stop to the law would be one of the biggest improvements. Specifying 14 feet in the too narrow to share would be good.

What was the proposed text?
__________________
Land of the Free, Because of the Brave.
CB HI is offline  
Old 04-07-19, 06:19 AM
  #3  
mr_bill
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 3,344
Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1359 Post(s)
Liked 6 Times in 5 Posts
Bill text

A more honest title would be must use bikelane bill. Third time Ting has introduced a version of this bill in the Assembly, third time it has failed? And it’s supposedly AAA’s fault?

In MA, a bill to encourgage flourescent safety vests just also happens to be an all ages helmet law.

-mr. bill

Last edited by mr_bill; 04-07-19 at 07:39 PM.
mr_bill is offline  
Old 04-07-19, 06:48 AM
  #4  
Hoopdriver
On Holiday
 
Hoopdriver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,063

Bikes: A bunch of old steel bikes

Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 389 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
??????????
An act to amend Section 21202 of the Vehicle Code, relating to bicycles. An act to amend Section 69432.7 of the Education Code, relating to student financial aid.

AB 697, as amended, Ting. Bicycles. Student financial aid: Cal Grant Program: qualifying institutions.
Existing law, the Cal Grant Program, establishes the Cal Grant A and B Entitlement Awards, the California Community College Transfer Entitlement Awards, the Competitive Cal Grant A and B Awards, the Cal Grant C Awards, and the Cal Grant T Awards under the administration of the Student Aid Commission, and establishes eligibility requirements for awards under these programs for participating students attending qualifying postsecondary educational institutions. Existing law requires each participating postsecondary educational institution to annually report specified information regarding its undergraduate programs in order to be a qualifying institution.This bill would prohibit each participating postsecondary educational institution from giving preferential treatment in admission to an applicant with a relationship to a donor or alumni of the institution in order to be a qualifying institution for purposes of the Cal Grant Program.
Hoopdriver is offline  
Old 04-07-19, 06:50 AM
  #5  
mr_bill
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 3,344
Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1359 Post(s)
Liked 6 Times in 5 Posts
Originally Posted by Hoopdriver View Post
??????????
An act to amend Section 21202 of the Vehicle Code, relating to bicycles. An act to amend Section 69432.7 of the Education Code, relating to student financial aid.

AB 697, as amended, Ting. Bicycles. Student financial aid: Cal Grant Program: qualifying institutions.
Existing law, the Cal Grant Program, establishes the Cal Grant A and B Entitlement Awards, the California Community College Transfer Entitlement Awards, the Competitive Cal Grant A and B Awards, the Cal Grant C Awards, and the Cal Grant T Awards under the administration of the Student Aid Commission, and establishes eligibility requirements for awards under these programs for participating students attending qualifying postsecondary educational institutions. Existing law requires each participating postsecondary educational institution to annually report specified information regarding its undergraduate programs in order to be a qualifying institution.This bill would prohibit each participating postsecondary educational institution from giving preferential treatment in admission to an applicant with a relationship to a donor or alumni of the institution in order to be a qualifying institution for purposes of the Cal Grant Program.
Make sure you look at “as introduced.”

-mr. bill
mr_bill is offline  
Old 04-07-19, 08:54 AM
  #6  
Maelochs
Senior Member
 
Maelochs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 11,261

Bikes: 2015 Workswell 066, 2014 Dawes Sheila, 1983 Cannondale 500, 1984 Raleigh Olympian, 2007 Cannondale Rize 4, 2017 Fuji Sportif 1 LE

Mentioned: 131 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5307 Post(s)
Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
A 14-foot lane is not too narrow to share .... if a car is six feet wide, a bike three feet wide, and the car passes three feet from the bike, both have a foot on either outside edge. I am pretty wide, but under three feet ... more like 2.5 feet, and under three feet wide even with packed panniers. A 7-foot--wide truck or SUV could give three feet and still leave six inches between the vehicle an the yellow line, and the bike and the fog line. Theoretically, two SUVs traveling in opposite directions could simultaneously pass cyclists safely and legally.

Not that's I'd generally let that happen if i didn't think the road was safe ...

Here's another thing. Why don't those Pro-cycling advocacy groups raise funds to appeal decisions where cyclists were incorrectly ticketed? it would only take one case where a judge was over-ruled for not knowing the law and it wouldn't happen again.
Maelochs is offline  
Old 04-07-19, 06:51 PM
  #7  
CB HI
Cycle Year Round
 
CB HI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Honolulu, HI
Posts: 13,563
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1246 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by Maelochs View Post
A 14-foot lane is not too narrow to share .... if a car is six feet wide, a bike three feet wide, and the car passes three feet from the bike, both have a foot on either outside edge. I am pretty wide, but under three feet ... more like 2.5 feet, and under three feet wide even with packed panniers. A 7-foot--wide truck or SUV could give three feet and still leave six inches between the vehicle an the yellow line, and the bike and the fog line. Theoretically, two SUVs traveling in opposite directions could simultaneously pass cyclists safely and legally.

Not that's I'd generally let that happen if i didn't think the road was safe ...
Most of my road riding includes 8' 6" wide tourist buses, plus another 18"s of mirrors at head height on each side. How does your math work for that?

How do you manage which motor vehicle comes around the bend behind you?

The law needs to apply for the widest motor vehicle not listed as a wide load.

Originally Posted by Maelochs View Post
Here's another thing. Why don't those Pro-cycling advocacy groups raise funds to appeal decisions where cyclists were incorrectly ticketed? it would only take one case where a judge was over-ruled for not knowing the law and it wouldn't happen again.
Funding to overturn bad judgments against cyclist has occurred. Have YOU ever contributed to one.
__________________
Land of the Free, Because of the Brave.
CB HI is offline  
Old 04-07-19, 06:58 PM
  #8  
CB HI
Cycle Year Round
 
CB HI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Honolulu, HI
Posts: 13,563
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1246 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by Rick View Post
I am 61 years old and the biggest thorn in my side when bicycling has been the intentional misinterpretation and the straight out lying about the stay to the right law by both motorists and especially LEOs. The AAA is the biggest anti bicycling lobbyist organization in the US. Here is an article on one of there more recent antics. https://cal.streetsblog.org/2019/04/...l-lane-pulled/
bill is right that it is a mandatory bike lane law.
This bill would recast those provisions to instead require a person operating a bicycle to ride in the right-hand lane or bicycle lane, if one is present, and
You should be thanking AAA and kick your buddy legislature in the butt.

Seems the California Bicycle Coalition is not a real friend to cyclist.
__________________
Land of the Free, Because of the Brave.

Last edited by CB HI; 04-07-19 at 07:04 PM.
CB HI is offline  
Old 04-07-19, 08:59 PM
  #9  
Rick
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 161
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 63 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
I only read the streetblog article not the bill. There is no mandatory bike lane law in CA. The impudence of street cops pulling someone over for not riding in a door zone bike lane and not lane surfing in and out of the spaces between parked cars and other annoying practices is what I object to. Only giving credence to the stay as far right as practical/stay the hell out of my road portion of the law is what allows murderers to walk. By not applying the whole law they are condoning bad driving practices. When I hear someone tell me they will only ride there bicycle if there is a bike lane. I have a good laugh. I am not talking about separated bike lanes around canals or rivers etc. I am talking about the ones in the soup, you know the right edge of the road were all the trash and car parts accumulate. Were there are many ways of painting the lines and different things done at intersections. Many motorists don't even understand or care to know how to negotiate them.
Rick is offline  
Old 04-07-19, 11:07 PM
  #10  
CB HI
Cycle Year Round
 
CB HI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Honolulu, HI
Posts: 13,563
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1246 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by Rick View Post
I only read the streetblog article not the bill. There is no mandatory bike lane law in CA.
No mandatory bike lane law in CA YET.
California Bicycle Coalition submitting and supporting a law putting mandatory bike lane use in force, three years in a row is disgusting. In this case, AAA is more of a cyclist friend than the California Bicycle Coalition.
__________________
Land of the Free, Because of the Brave.

Last edited by CB HI; 04-08-19 at 01:32 PM.
CB HI is offline  
Old 04-08-19, 07:25 AM
  #11  
Maelochs
Senior Member
 
Maelochs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 11,261

Bikes: 2015 Workswell 066, 2014 Dawes Sheila, 1983 Cannondale 500, 1984 Raleigh Olympian, 2007 Cannondale Rize 4, 2017 Fuji Sportif 1 LE

Mentioned: 131 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5307 Post(s)
Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
I don't foten agree with @CB HI but in this case ... mandatory bike lanes mean if you move onto the regular road surface to avoid an obstacle you lose legal protection and then, if someone hits you, they can ssay, "The cyclist should have been in the marked lane." Worse still, if there is a "cycling path" provision like new mexico added .... that law forces cyclists to use MUPs if they run parallel to roads. Sounds exciting, doesn't it?
Maelochs is offline  
Old 04-08-19, 07:37 AM
  #12  
DrIsotope 
Non omnino gravis
 
DrIsotope's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: SoCal, USA!
Posts: 6,368

Bikes: Nekobasu, Pandicorn

Mentioned: 88 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3394 Post(s)
Liked 31 Times in 27 Posts
Are we operating from the mistaken point of view that traffic laws change driver's behaviors? Cyclists are still regularly shouted at to "Get on the sidewalk!" by drivers on their cellphones, ignoring all manner of traffic laws. I stay as far to the right as is practicable, and I live by the Idaho Stop. If we as cyclists are waiting on legislature to save us, we're already doomed. Locally, we don't get bike lanes put in until someone dies.
__________________
DrIsotope is offline  
Old 04-08-19, 11:41 AM
  #13  
rydabent
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Lincoln Ne
Posts: 7,486

Bikes: RANS Stratus TerraTrike Tour II

Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1301 Post(s)
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
And yet many from Calif want everyone think it is the leading green state. How green is it to take 4000 pounds of car a mile to the grocery store to get a couple of items.
rydabent is offline  
Old 04-09-19, 08:06 AM
  #14  
DrIsotope 
Non omnino gravis
 
DrIsotope's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: SoCal, USA!
Posts: 6,368

Bikes: Nekobasu, Pandicorn

Mentioned: 88 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3394 Post(s)
Liked 31 Times in 27 Posts
There's nothing environmentally conscious about California government. Let's put it this way: we have to pay a "lumber fee" every time we buy wood products. Not a tax mind you, they didn't let us vote for it, but instead railroaded us by calling it a fee and just passing it through the assembly. This fee generates about $30M a year. You might think, oh, for conservation purposes, right? Hah. The money goes to fund the agency that regulates the sale of lumber. A fee was created to pay for an agency created to spend the income from the fee. Same story for smog checks, the state doesn't actually care about emissions (the car idles for a few minutes with a bluetooth box plugged into the OBD2 port, as long as there are no engine trouble codes, you pass.) They just want to collect the +$50M in "smog certificates" every year. The DMV could have been replaced by a website 10 years ago, but it has to be there to collect the money to keep itself going.
__________________
DrIsotope is offline  
Old 04-11-19, 01:48 AM
  #15  
Chris0516
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Washington Grove, Maryland
Posts: 1,418

Bikes: 2003 (24)20-Speed Specialized Allez'

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 376 Post(s)
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by Rick View Post
I am 61 years old and the biggest thorn in my side when bicycling has been the intentional misinterpretation and the straight out lying about the stay to the right law by both motorists and especially LEOs. The AAA is the biggest anti bicycling lobbyist organization in the US. Here is an article on one of there more recent antics. https://cal.streetsblog.org/2019/04/...l-lane-pulled/
This ticks me off. There are 'Share The Road' signs', all over my county. That doesn't say that a cyclist should let a vehicle be right next to them IN THE SAME LANE. Yet that seems to be the IMPLIED purpose of these signs'.

Here in Maryland, the language in the state traffic code is "as close as practicable". Which means, it is a judgment call on the part of the cyclist, not the motorist. But the majority, think it is the other way around.
Chris0516 is offline  
Old 04-11-19, 07:15 AM
  #16  
Flip Flop Rider
Senior Member
 
Flip Flop Rider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: South Carolina Upstate
Posts: 1,031

Bikes: 2010 Fuji Absolute 3.0 1994 Trek 850

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 378 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times in 4 Posts
Originally Posted by Chris0516 View Post
This ticks me off. There are 'Share The Road' signs', all over my county. That doesn't say that a cyclist should let a vehicle be right next to them IN THE SAME LANE. Yet that seems to be the IMPLIED purpose of these signs'.

Here in Maryland, the language in the state traffic code is "as close as practicable". Which means, it is a judgment call on the part of the cyclist, not the motorist. But the majority, think it is the other way around.
agree with this. "Share the road" not direct enough and drivers (and some riders) don't know what it means
Flip Flop Rider is offline  
Old 04-11-19, 09:15 AM
  #17  
jimincalif
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Lake Forest, CA
Posts: 1,952

Bikes: '96 Trek 850, '08 Specialized Roubaix Comp, '18 Niner RLT RDO

Mentioned: 49 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 465 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 10 Times in 4 Posts
Agreed, to drivers STR means bikes shouldn’t be in the lane cause that’s not sharing. Much prefer Bicycles May Use Full Lane signs or sharrows. But even these are problematic. They imply that bikes may not use the full lane anywhere except where they are displayed.
jimincalif is offline  
Old 04-11-19, 09:25 AM
  #18  
Maelochs
Senior Member
 
Maelochs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 11,261

Bikes: 2015 Workswell 066, 2014 Dawes Sheila, 1983 Cannondale 500, 1984 Raleigh Olympian, 2007 Cannondale Rize 4, 2017 Fuji Sportif 1 LE

Mentioned: 131 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5307 Post(s)
Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
As some wise soul ... well,no, me actually ... has said a few times, the only thing that is going to have a significant impact on cycling safety is a widespread, long-term public relations program. "Share the road" is a good slogan but if it isn't backed up by TV commercials, internet adds, twitter twattles, and such, it becomes just another sign no one reads, like "Children--go slow."

I am nto a fan of government spending, but there is no cycling safety lobbying group like Mothers Against Drunk Driving which had sufficient membership and sufficient lobbying ability that lawmakers couldn't ignore them

No congressperson wants to tell a weeping mother who lost a child to a drunk driver, "Sorry, but we cannot help."

On another hand, no congressperson wants to meet with a cyclist at all, and no one is going to get mad at a congressperson if s/he doesn't spend money on the spandex-clad freaks, the crazy kids cutting through traffic, and the low-income people with bags hanging from the handlebars.
Maelochs is offline  
Old 04-11-19, 10:13 AM
  #19  
mr_bill
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 3,344
Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1359 Post(s)
Liked 6 Times in 5 Posts
Originally Posted by Maelochs View Post
No congressperson wants to tell a weeping mother who lost a child to a drunk driver, "Sorry, but we cannot help."
Federal DUI laws cover driving while on government property and over commercial operators. MADD was a state by state by state battle. (The Federal Government helped, only indirectly, through the National Minimum Drinking Age Act in 1984, and the NHTSA push for 0.08%.)

Originally Posted by Maelochs View Post
On another hand, no congressperson wants to meet with a cyclist at all, and no one is going to get mad at a congressperson if s/he doesn't spend money on the spandex-clad freaks, the crazy kids cutting through traffic, and the low-income people with bags hanging from the handlebars.
Again, if a cyclist wants to talk about changing requirements for the manufacture or sale of bicycles, they'll want to talk to their members of the US Congress. Otherwise, it's a state by state by state battle.

My State Rep rides a bike.

-mr. bill

Last edited by mr_bill; 04-11-19 at 10:45 AM.
mr_bill is offline  
Old 04-11-19, 11:50 AM
  #20  
Maelochs
Senior Member
 
Maelochs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 11,261

Bikes: 2015 Workswell 066, 2014 Dawes Sheila, 1983 Cannondale 500, 1984 Raleigh Olympian, 2007 Cannondale Rize 4, 2017 Fuji Sportif 1 LE

Mentioned: 131 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5307 Post(s)
Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
State congresspeople and State senators operate on the same principle as Feds. MADD had to work hard and for a long time. Having worked as a grassroots lobbyist, i can attest that that is the norm---what is not the norm is success. MADD had a great campaign---crying mothers is tough to beat as a visual.

Fat old men in spandex ---our campaign could be--"Tired of seeing my giant butt? pass some safe-cycling laws!"
Maelochs is offline  
Old 04-11-19, 12:22 PM
  #21  
mr_bill
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 3,344
Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1359 Post(s)
Liked 6 Times in 5 Posts
Originally Posted by Maelochs View Post
....crying mothers is tough to beat as a visual.

Fat old men in spandex ---our campaign could be--"Tired of seeing my giant butt? pass some safe-cycling laws!"
Only one "fat old man in spandex" in this set. Everyone in Pittsburgh knows him. (And many are upset that he got traded to Oakland.) He not only rides a bike, he dances too.

-mr. bill

Last edited by mr_bill; 04-11-19 at 12:30 PM.
mr_bill is offline  
Old 04-11-19, 12:43 PM
  #22  
Maelochs
Senior Member
 
Maelochs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 11,261

Bikes: 2015 Workswell 066, 2014 Dawes Sheila, 1983 Cannondale 500, 1984 Raleigh Olympian, 2007 Cannondale Rize 4, 2017 Fuji Sportif 1 LE

Mentioned: 131 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5307 Post(s)
Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Excellent. That's a good thing IMO.
Maelochs is offline  
Old 04-11-19, 02:28 PM
  #23  
venturi95
Woof!
 
venturi95's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: NorCal
Posts: 372

Bikes: Breezer Venturi, Lemond Ti, Santa Cruz Blur, Soma Saga, Miyata Colorado

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 38 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by rydabent View Post
And yet many from Calif want everyone think it is the leading green state. How green is it to take 4000 pounds of car a mile to the grocery store to get a couple of items.
Maybe not the greenest state in the Union, but there are some forward thinking laws now and in the past. Like automotive emissions laws from decades ago, and CA SB 350, requiring half of all energy production from renewable sources by 2030.
venturi95 is offline  
Old 04-12-19, 11:53 AM
  #24  
genec
genec
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Posts: 26,258

Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2

Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6087 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 13 Times in 11 Posts
Originally Posted by rydabent View Post
And yet many from Calif want everyone think it is the leading green state. How green is it to take 4000 pounds of car a mile to the grocery store to get a couple of items.
Well, a watermelon, a case of beer, and a sack of ice are "a couple items..."
genec is offline  
Old 04-12-19, 08:40 PM
  #25  
CB HI
Cycle Year Round
 
CB HI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Honolulu, HI
Posts: 13,563
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1246 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by venturi95 View Post
Maybe not the greenest state in the Union, but there are some forward thinking laws now and in the past. Like automotive emissions laws from decades ago, and CA SB 350, requiring half of all energy production from renewable sources by 2030.
My favorite, is the law requiring gasoline producers to make the gasoline to burn more completely. CA regulators were fine with the manufacturers using Methyl tert-butyl ether (CH3)3COCH3 MTBE as the additive which accomplishes that quite well. They did not consider MTBEs affinity for water and that it is a likely carcinogen. So when some fuel tanks at gas stations leaked, CA gave you cleaner air and polluted water supplies with a carcinogenic .
__________________
Land of the Free, Because of the Brave.
CB HI is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.