bicycling is not transportation
#26
Son of the Dark One
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hell (DC)
Posts: 844
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
In some parts of the world camels serve as transportation, in other parts they serve as far more:
https://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/...=mostpop_story
https://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/...=mostpop_story
#27
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 5,866
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
2 Posts
This is an exact quote of what the Secretary of Transportation said:
Well, there's about probably some 10 percent to 20 percent of the current spending that is going to projects that really are not transportation, directly transportation-related. Some of that money is being spent on things, as I said earlier, like bike paths or trails.
Here is the complete transcript of the interview: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/trans...ure_08-15.html
Well, there's about probably some 10 percent to 20 percent of the current spending that is going to projects that really are not transportation, directly transportation-related. Some of that money is being spent on things, as I said earlier, like bike paths or trails.
Here is the complete transcript of the interview: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/trans...ure_08-15.html
Well, there's about probably some 10 percent to 20 percent of the current spending that is going to projects that really are not transportation, directly transportation-related. Some of that money is being spent on things, as I said earlier, like bike paths or trails. Some is being spent on museums, on restoring lighthouses, as I indicated.
And the context has been totally ignored so far. The interview was about the bridge collapse and this comment was in responce to a followup question on pork projects where the interviewer said much of the pork was still transportation and the interviewee came up with examples where transportation infrstructure was not the object of spending. Now I would have prefered a responce that put more stress on that still being pork.
#28
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 5,866
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
2 Posts
Should transportation infrastructure money be spent on bike paths and trails? I would say that depends. There are some win/win paths. Weekend recreation weekdays commuter. The river path in Sydney comes to mind. I know I've heard about similar paths in the Eastern parts of the U.S.
#29
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Sacramento, California, USA
Posts: 40,865
Bikes: Specialized Tarmac, Canyon Exceed, Specialized Transition, Ellsworth Roots, Ridley Excalibur
Mentioned: 68 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2952 Post(s)
Liked 3,106 Times
in
1,417 Posts
Personally, I don't need any money spent on bike paths. Just keep the streets paved and enforce the existing traffic laws.
#30
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Maryland
Posts: 5,155
Bikes: rockhopper, delta V, cannondale H300, Marin Mill Valley
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times
in
5 Posts
Furthermore, DOT does not consider bicycle messengers members of the public. Entry to their headquarters in DC is categorically denied to bicycle messengers while all others are permitted if a DOT employee OKs the visit.
#31
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 1,068
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Well, I would have to agree that I think using federal funding for bike trails and paths is a waste of money. Most bike trails and paths in my area are for recreation; you know, families going for a weekend ride, people power walking their dogs. I'd rather the money be spent on creating and maintaining safe bike lanes on main roads and better public transit systems.
An article in today's San Jose Mercury News was about how a higher percentage of people in the San Jose area, despite the year-round great weather, despite access to public transit, still use their cars to get to work compared to hilly San Francisco, rainy Portland, and freakin' hot Phoenix.
I think the reason is that there are few main roads in San Jose that have good, safe bike lanes. F%&*K bike PATHS, we need bike LANES!
An article in today's San Jose Mercury News was about how a higher percentage of people in the San Jose area, despite the year-round great weather, despite access to public transit, still use their cars to get to work compared to hilly San Francisco, rainy Portland, and freakin' hot Phoenix.
I think the reason is that there are few main roads in San Jose that have good, safe bike lanes. F%&*K bike PATHS, we need bike LANES!
Where I live, public money IS NOT spent on bike trails - i.e: those specifically for mountain bike use. I did just read an article in the local newspaper where the county administration has given permission for a local mountain bike association to construct and maintain bike trails in a county park.
However, I think it would be perfectly proper to design bike LANES into roads as these roads are updated or re-paved/re-designed/
#32
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Mountain View, CA
Posts: 925
Bikes: 1999 Seven Sola, 2004 Bianchi Axis, 2005 Trek Madone 5.2 SL, 2006 Merlin Works CR 3/2.5, 2009 Kona Ute, Spot Acme, 2017 Raleigh Roker Comp, 2016 Specialized Camber Expert 29
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
An article in today's San Jose Mercury News was about how a higher percentage of people in the San Jose area, despite the year-round great weather, despite access to public transit, still use their cars to get to work compared to hilly San Francisco, rainy Portland, and freakin' hot Phoenix.
#33
Violin guitar mandolin
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Friendsville, TN, USA
Posts: 1,171
Bikes: Wilier Thor, Fuji Professional, LeMond Wayzata
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I didn't read the comment as addressing bicycles, just bicycle paths. From a federal perspective, bicycle paths are local rather than interstate transportation corridors. I can't see why they should get federal funds myself.
Bicycles themselves are vehicles and already have an extensive transportation network available nationwide. Roads.
Bicycles themselves are vehicles and already have an extensive transportation network available nationwide. Roads.
#34
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6,900
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Cheap political shots will not change the fact that Minn. spent 37% of their $1.6 billion highway money on repair of highways. The other billion went to "other" uses. (WSJ Saturday) This is the point that she was trying to make while offending the bicycle commuting community.
#35
Peloton Shelter Dog
Cheap political shots will not change the fact that Minn. spent 37% of their $1.6 billion highway money on repair of highways. The other billion went to "other" uses. (WSJ Saturday) This is the point that she was trying to make while offending the bicycle commuting community.
To become a Zen Master of Cheap Political Shots, one need only watch Fox News 1-2 hours each day.
#36
my nice bike is at home
Not surprising coming from this administration. Ignorant: Check. Anti-environment : Check. Put the blame on someone else: Check. Yeah, Blame Bicyclists for the bridge collapse. (Not so far from the R/Right blaming *****exuality for the world trade center disatster) Now if we hadn't wasted SO MUCH money on bike paths that bridge would still be standing. And maybe New Orleans would't have flooded. RIGHT!
Weird logic for sure.. Sad actually. Okay, I am exagerating a bit, but really. This is not the kind of person I want representing my transportation needs. Besides why shouldn't some bike paths be federaly funded? You CAN ride from state to state on a bike path..
Weird logic for sure.. Sad actually. Okay, I am exagerating a bit, but really. This is not the kind of person I want representing my transportation needs. Besides why shouldn't some bike paths be federaly funded? You CAN ride from state to state on a bike path..
Last edited by kraftwerk; 08-21-07 at 10:05 AM.
#37
my nice bike is at home
Check this thread also: Adminstration fails to see value of cycling/trials
R900
R900
#38
Road, MTB and SS Rider
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 524
Bikes: Trek 5200, Yeti Kokopelli, Clockwork
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Just curious as to how a Lighthouse wouldn't be considered part of the DOT. Is a lighthouse not what controls coastal boating? Are tankers and container ships not under DOT governing? Does a lighthouse not keep a tanker/container ship from running aground, crashing into something, etc? How is that any different than a traffic light in an intersection?
As for bicycles not falling under DOT jurisdiction for MUPs or any other type of path or not being considered transportation... it all falls under DOT jurisdiction. NY State received quite a bit of Federal DOT funding recently to begin, finish or help design new MUPs and bicycle lanes, put up Share the Road signs and mark out hundreds of miles of bicycle paths and lanes all across the state. I guess this was a different DOT that approved all of this...
As for bicycles not falling under DOT jurisdiction for MUPs or any other type of path or not being considered transportation... it all falls under DOT jurisdiction. NY State received quite a bit of Federal DOT funding recently to begin, finish or help design new MUPs and bicycle lanes, put up Share the Road signs and mark out hundreds of miles of bicycle paths and lanes all across the state. I guess this was a different DOT that approved all of this...
#39
Training Wheels Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Lancaster, PA
Posts: 261
Bikes: 2006 Cannondale R800
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
With obesity becoming a health crisis it's in the country's best interest to promote transportation via some means that includes exercise. If you figure what the long term costs are for treating heart disease and type 2 diabetes the bike paths are a good return on investment. Should the funds come from the department of health instead of the department of transportation? That could be argued either way. But it still comes down to the fact that it's addressing several issues that are plaguing the country.
Repairing a road only promotes the issues of congestion and poor health while further exasperating the problems. In other words, it's a poor return on investment and a waste of tax dollars in comparison to bikes.
Repairing a road only promotes the issues of congestion and poor health while further exasperating the problems. In other words, it's a poor return on investment and a waste of tax dollars in comparison to bikes.
#40
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Northern California
Posts: 10,879
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 104 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times
in
5 Posts
The League of American Bicyclists responds
The League of American Bicyclists (the premier bicycling advocacy organization in the USA) has responded to the Secretary of Transportation's comments. There is a link in the top article on their web site: https://www.bikeleague.org/