SHARE THE ROAD, NOT THE LANE, WITH CYCLISTS
How to Drive a Motor Vehicle
By Bill Schneider, 5-15-08
 |
|
 | |
|
A couple of weeks ago, I was riding my bike up MacDonald Pass, on four-lane U.S Highway 12, on the shoulder. It was a mid-day, low-traffic time, and even though the left lane was available, a driver purposely hazed me by speeding by with his right wheel on the fog line going at least 80 mph. His mirror missed my helmet by about six inches. One minor correction to miss a rough spot on the road, and I wouldn’t be writing this.
Besides wondering if this reckless driver realizes how close he came to killing somebody, the incident reminded me of one of the first commentaries I wrote for NewWest.Net when I started the Wild Bill column three years ago called I Can Feel the Scorn. I’m sorry to say that I can still feel it.
The column focused on the conflict and real-life danger road cyclists face every day out on our highways. A few months later, I followed with another column on the same subject. Many other writers have written similar commentaries, with a dozen or more articles on NewWest.Net alone.
These articles and thousands of other educational efforts have, it seems, had an impact on motorists who care, the courteous, careful majority who might not have ever been told how to share roads with cyclists, but I’m embarrassed to say, all this communication has been woefully ineffective on a small percentage of reckless, belligerent motorists who still need a major attitude adjustment.
The vast majority of motorists accept cyclists as legitimate users of public roadways, but a tiny minority not only refuses to share the roads with cyclists but tries to scare them off the road by hazing them at high speed, blasting horns, shouting insults and threats, freely giving out the universal salute and throwing lethal missiles otherwise known as beer cans. Instead, of course, they should be respecting and thanking cyclists for stepping up to the plate to do their part to conserve energy and stay healthy. After all, this works toward lower energy and health care costs for everybody.
In a time when we need as many people as possible riding bicycles for all the much overstated reasons such as energy conservation and independence and health and obesity issues, I can’t exaggerate how unacceptable such behavior is.
Some motorists blame cyclists for the conflicts, and some cyclists should more carefully follow traffic rules, just as some motorists should. Sometimes on my bike, sometimes in my pickup truck, I have rolled through a few right hand turns at stop signs, caught a few yellow lights, and even occasionally exceeded the speed limit. Am I the only one? I doubt it.
The point is, almost every driver, however inadvertently, commits minor traffic violations, as do most cyclists.
The fact is, almost all cyclists dedicated enough to go out for multi-hour rides on public highways ride carefully and courteously. They’re on constant Red Alert, and safety is the prime objective. You could call it “survival instinct.” Nonetheless, I guarantee you they still get hazed and intimidated by a vengeful minority needing an anger management class. It happens to me once per week at least--insulted and threatened while riding in a safe, legal manner. So, let’s not go there. Cyclists aren’t causing this problem.
Will this (or any other) plea for acceptance and respect matter? I’m not sure any amount of driver’s education could change some motorists, but undaunted, once more, here is a quick course on how to drive a motor vehicle when approaching a cyclist from behind on a high-speed highway.
- Slow down.
- On four-lane roads, move completely into the left lane when it clears and safely pass.
- On two-lane roads, never try to pass the cyclist at high speed in the same lane. Instead, wait for oncoming traffic to clear before crossing the centerline and moving completely into the left lane for a safe pass. No different than what people do when approaching other slow-moving vehicles like a farm tractor or road grader from behind. If you need help with your attitude, pretend bicycles are strollers.
The above tutorial might be lost in the wind to the road-rage susceptible who refuse to acknowledge cyclists as rightful users of public highways. But I present it regardless with the hope a few might see it and reconsider their hazardous, irresponsible behavior. If even one reads it and changes, it was worth writing.
Just in case you’re thinking it, I agree. I could just sell my bikes, stay home and ride my exercise cycle. But does that seem fair? Asking people to give up a favorite pastime and method of fighting old age because a few irresponsibles despise cyclists?
I know people who have had conflicts and near misses and given up road cycling. I could do this, too, but it would give a victory to the last people on earth who deserve it, so I’m not giving up. I’m back on the road at every opportunity because I know that the more cyclists we have on the roads the safer they are and the better chance we cyclists have of changing unacceptable driving behavior.
(For a companion article on one positive step Montana has taken to ease the conflict between cyclists and motorists, click hete.)
Like this story? Get more! Sign up for our free newsletters.
Like to receive our print magazine, The New West? Click here for free subscription information.
Comments
Even in your own experience you assumed quite bit and found no fault in your actions, assuming low traffic time and left lane availability, those are fatal assumptions by an aggressive bicyclists, lucky it wasn't your last.
Yes, the conflict is a real concern, however Iaho has provided bicyclists with wide open intreprtation of the law on the road.
When life requires using the auto, encounters with bicyclists in urban and suburban areas have constantly become extremely aggressive towards drivers, riding multiple cyclists across lanes in traffic, always failing to ride within the bike lanes provided and seeming to enjoy forcing autos into lanes of oncoming traffic. Yes, both auto and bikes need to accept each other, but to place blame on the auto only is an attempt to vilify drivers and praise bikers.
Bicycles are obviously a great mode transportation and fun, I ride every day in Boise, in the city and mountain biking. Unfortunately your angry thoughts of frustration from your personal mistakes are divisive and don't do any good in resolving serious issues about bicycle awareness and responsibilities of cyclists.
Good Luck on the road and never assume the road is empty.
Based on my 22+ years, 120,000+ miles of year 'round transportation cycling in and around Boise, I've got your back, for the most part. Agree with what you're saying. (I also read your previous linked columns, which demonstrate clearly that you understand the points of conflict, and how to avoid them, at least among civilized motorists and cyclists.) The one possible difference in our experiences (besides geographic location)... my experiences with the "problem drivers" are far more infrequent than once a week. I'd say once a month or less.
Usually the problems are with:
- punk teenage boys who are probably reacting to the testosterone thing and haven't yet figured out to handle it, or are showing off to their buddies
- rednecks in pickup trucks (as you mentioned. Sorry - I can't make up any excuse for them, other than sheer ignorance, or perhaps "alpha male mentality" - the guy in the biggest vehicle is the Leader of the Pack.)
Very occasionally a woman will deliberately try to intimidate me; almost always it's the male of the species.
You point out correctly that the vast majority of motorists have a clue. I salute them, and thank them for their cooperation.
(I agree with "J" that groups of cyclists are PART OF THE PROBLEM when they won't temporarily surrender their 2- or 3-up riding to let motorists get by. Motorists resent them, and so do I.)
Ride safe! Pity the poor motorist!
(-;
http://bikenazi.blogspot.com
Comments on J's comment: "extremely aggressive towards drivers, riding multiple cyclists across lanes in traffic, always failing to ride within the bike lanes provided and seeming to enjoy forcing autos into lanes of oncoming traffic."
a) riding more than one across a lane is permitted as far as I know, see: all motorcycle riders in groups (why wouldn't this also apply to bikes--it makes sense)
b) bikers (at least in OR) don't have to choose the bike lane if they feel the actual lane is more safe----bikers don't usually choose to ride in a busy lane of 2000+ pound cars if they have a safe alternative
c) I think it would be difficult for someone on a bike to force a car into an oncoming lane of traffic... if this happens to you you're probably not using your brakes, your mirrors, and your gas pedal. have some patience and then go around the bike when it's safe, then you wouldn't have to be in oncoming traffic.
Wow, that was an ignorant diatribe by a supposed ID cyclist. I would be my year's salary that you don't "ride every day"! I bet that you may not even ride 1/2 dozen times a year, if even that. You write (aside from poorly) as if you are experienced as a cyclist. It is blatantly obvious that you have not spent time on the road, trying to share what is equally yours with others that assume that because they have the bigger mode of transportation, that they can do what they want. I have been glazed by one to many side view mirrors to take lightly to your ignorance. Aggressive bicyclists? It's tough to be aggressive when you may weigh 160 lbs and are armored only with lycra. Who's gonna win that battle? As a cyclist, you must ride defensively as there is no choice, no option.
You show me a bike lane, and I will gladly keep within it's boundaries. I will also show respect to auto's and others sharing the road, especially when all parties involved understand that the road is to be shared.
I admire you crazy road cyclists. You have endurance and drive and for some reason, no matter what the situation, will fight the great fight to do something that frankly looks more like torture than fun exercise...but it is not my life to live.
Here is what I do not admire. I live in Idaho and quite regularly go over a two lane pass called Galena Pass - which on the down slope heading north lets you into the awesome Sawtooth Valley. Without fail, every year cyclists and autos come so close to disaster I wonder how the gods allow all involved to live.
Many cyclists on this stretch ride anywhere from 2-4 wide - considering there is about a 12 inch shoulder, this means at least 1-3 riders are IN the road. So now the cyclist say, slow down and wait to pass me until the other lane is clear. I don't think they understand when you come around a bend at the speed limit and come upon riders, it is not a slow down situation, it is a slam on the breaks and pray for greatness type of moment.
What about those towing trailer of any kind? I have seen those autos slowing down for cyclist(s) the best they can, but on a downgrade don't have immediate response and their load starts to sway dangerously into the oncoming lane as well as back towards the cyclist(s). And somehow it is the driver who is the jerk?
My last trip over Galena there was little to no traffic as it is still the quiet time. I was coming back south and around a bend encountered a lone cyclist - Smack dab in the MIDDLE of the road. Granted, it looked like fun coming around sweet bends in the road going pretty fast - but when a vehicle comes up behind you at the speed limit (which he was not even remotely traveling at) you should do the right thing and move over to the shoulder.
He did no such thing. He stayed right in the middle of the road for about 2 miles. I could not pass on these blind corners without taking my and his safety for granted. So I waited...when I did pass you bet your ass I had some choice words for this guy. When did the cyclist become so arrogant? This was not my first middle of the road encounter either.
So Bill, for you to assume all cyclists "get it" just doesn't jive with me. Yes, this land and these roads are for us to share, but roads were really built for automobiles to travel on. They were not built for and are not currently maintained to accommodate another lane for cyclists.
I want you guys to have a good time and end up home safe at the end of the day, I really do. But, when your fun comes at the expense of many others safety, I don't know if it is justified.
I know when I want a good ride on a bike I grab a mountain bike and hit some great trails...or a cruiser on the bike path for a mellow ride. But then, I would rather hike well away from all of the people (and especially the traffic) to get my natural high. By the way, how does that exhaust treat you?
I know I have always wanted to propose a "closed" time for cyclists on Galena during the very busy summer months (approximately June 15th - September 15th). There is ample time available for rides around those dates. But just like where you live, that is a battle between the interests that has yet to be settled.
Just another side of the coin....happy trails (instead of roads) I hope!
By the way, bikeboy - I am a woman (not a redneck and not a punk teenager) and I don't want to intimidate you, I want you to move on over to the shoulder and respect four wheels and the lives that ride on them as much as you do two wheels and your life!
Here's some good stuff from one of Schneider's earlier columns (linked in this one); I believe it's a great explanation of at least PART of what you might be observing:
"Cyclists need the entire lane for a fast descent, and even at 40+ mph, they can still back up traffic. When overtaking a descending cyclist, be even more patient in waiting for a good passing lane. You can give a little, friendly beep of the horn like they do in Europe, which tells the cyclist that you're back there courteously waiting to pass. Pretend you’re backed up behind an eighteen-wheeler using low gears to slow the descent. The trucker will probably be going slower than the cyclist, but in either case, please be patient and wait until you can move into the other lane for a safe pass.
"For cyclists, please understand that inconveniencing motorists does not further the goal of developing a sharing attitude on our roadways. It only buys more scorn, so avoid it whenever possible."
You won't get an argument from me that there are some irresponsible and inconsiderate cyclists on our roads. And I bet I resent 'em even more than you, because of the hostility they foster. (And I'm VERY judicious about riding on popular weekend thoroughfares - I wouldn't DREAM of riding up Highway 55 towards McCall on a Friday afternoon! Just too much opportunity for conflict and/or disaster, for my taste.)
In the words of that famous 20th-century statesman and philosopher, Rodney King, "Can't we all just get along??"
(-;
Good luck... thanks for being patient.
No excuse for going down the middle of a steep road no matter what, the vehicle behind you being forced to ride his brakes may overheat them and loose control resulting in disaster for everyone.
I have to admit some drivers like to 'push-the-limit' when they see bike riders, I'm not one of those, BUT, I'll be danged if I'm going to wreck my self because of some arrogant bike rider that won't stay out of the mainstream of traffic.
Some highways should be completely OFF limits to bicycle riders. Narrow, winding, two lane highways, are an example.
Yes - every user of the road and all other mention areas has a RESPONSIBLITY to behave in an appropriate manner for the safety of ALL USERS!! IF NOT - Laws will be written and enforced to control behavior.
I'm sooo sorry if someone elses use is a problem for YOU - maybe another part of the the planet would suit you and your ilk better!!
Rhiana ; maybe you and Marion could/should start Education classes for cyclists and motorists; be part of the solution!
I've seen several near misses. One in particular sticks in my mind; I was heading into town on Springhill Road, and true to form met an oncoming semi right at the corner by Toohey's. Problem was, he apparently didn't see the bikers in his lane until the last moment, & his last-second swerve could have been disastrous for everyone.
Just yesterday I was heading in, driving the heirloom '52 F5. Sure enough, in the little knolls on Summer Cutoff road I came up on a Spandexie. He didn't even attempt to move over. There are no shoulders, and I'd say he was about a foot right of center in "our" lane. We were ascending one of the little hills, and pulling into the oncoming lane would have been lunacy on my part, so I got to grind down through the gears until I could see to safely pass. Yes, he got a dirty look.
But that's a recurrent theme I've noticed on the Spandex side also. They NEVER smile! WTF??
I use a bike when I'm shuttling equipment around, and one of these times a Brigade will be going by when I'm pedaling out of the driveway in my dirty Carhartt's and boots, and I'll get to yell "Hey! Wait for me!!".
At least I'll get a laugh out of it.
Thanks for the laugh at the mental picture, you made my morning!
Knowlege:
http://www.vtpi.org/whoserd.pdf
Concerning cyclists taking the entire lane on a long descent, this is necessary for safety reasons. Speeds usually exceed 30 mph and commonly exceed 40 mph. Cyclists can not ride on the shoulder at these speeds because one little pile of sand or small rock can cause a serious crash. As I've noted in past columns, I advocate cyclists, even at 40 mph, pulling off into turnoffs to let traffic by if it stacks up behind on the descent.
Concerning riding left of the fog line instead of on the shoulder, experienced cyclists realize that on narrow roads, this is the safest place to ride because if discourages motorists from trying to squeeze through on the same lane instead of waiting for oncoming traffic to clear so they can cross the centerline for a safe pass. Also, many shoulders are rough and full of obstacles that are dangerous and sometimes cause cyclists to swerve to miss them. It's safer to ride 12-18 inches left of the fog line and ride in a straight line without any erratic moves.
Concerning two or three cyclist riding side-by-side and blocking the entire road, this is unacceptable behavior. I ride with groups a lot, and we always discourage such riding, which is also illegal, incidentally.
Concerning taxes, all or almost all cyclists also own cars and pay the same taxes non-cyclists do. In my case, I might add, way too many of them.
Concerning banning cyclists from certain highways, please keep in mind that cycling is a legal, rightful use of our public roadways, just like driving a farm tractor or running a flock of sheep up to pasture. Hence the need for my much-requested sharing attitude. This works in most parts of the world that have even more narrow, congested roadways, and the share-the-road philosophy would work here, too, if motorists would accept it.
Bill
Seems the bike riders need to figure out what is more important, Their (and others) lives or a ride down a busy two lane Highway. I think I would pick the lives, and be able to ride another day on a safer road(bike)way.
I do have to agree with an earlier post, Bicycle riders NEVER smile.
For the most part bicycle riders are NOT using that bike to get to or from work, they are on a pleasure ride or some stupid endurance race. That is NOT something that needs to be on the roadways. Especially Roadways that have speed limits above 45 MPH
Your last comment is a perfect illustration of the problem I'm trying to communicate. You shouldn't even think about trying to pass cyclists at 60 mph in the same lane, nor more than you should "play chicken with a semi." Instead, you should wait for a safe passing opportunity. Instead of considering cyclists "hazards," please consider them legitimate users of our roadways, which they are legally and every other way. They are on the highway because they have just as much of a right to be there as a motorist. Can we agree that this is the law of the land, like it or not? Cyclists are taking their 15 inches; you can have the rest. Please use it safely and courteously. The rest of the world does.
Bill
P.S. I never thought about cyclists not smiling, but that might be true. I suspect they're either breathing too hard to smile or scared to death.
What happens if an emergency vehicle is coming along, do they have to slow down for a few miles until there is a place that the biker considers safe to pull off, especially if that emergency vehicle happens on the end of a couple dozen cars creeping along behind an uphill biker or group of bikers?
I agree with you 100% for once. But please take up mountain biking, it's much safer. The only hazards out there in the hills are MWA members with cameras. Plus you can be so much more in tune with nature. Someday soon enough bikers will inherit the roads anyhow.
Ann,
There is a huge problem with road bikers riding across the lane, I see it often around the yuppy towns like Sun Valley and Bozeman. But I think Bill is right about how to pass bikers and what safety steps both bikers and motorists should take. It's just that there is entitlement attitudes in both camps that cause these problems. I doubt any of us can reach these headstrong a- holes with a dose of logic.
As to smiling, I smile every time I don't pay for a parking meter or parking ticket, I smile for every week that passes by that my car sits in the driveway undriven, I smile when I'm out riding on the open road and its a beautiful day, but I DON'T smile when I'm being passed by a car or dealing with heavy traffic, because at those times I am focused on what is in front of me, what I can hear behind me, and what I can see in the mirror. I am focused on making the decision of whether it is safe for me, the motorist behind me, and oncoming traffic for me to pull over to the shoulder to let the car behind me pass. When it is safe, I'll do it. When it is not safe, you will find me well out in the lane, making sure that I communicate the CLEAR message that it is not safe to pass me at that moment. I may be able to hear oncoming traffic up ahead that is not audible inside your car or I may not feel like we'll all have space for you to complete your pass. So I'm not smiling, I'm concentrating.
Agreed, mountain biking would be safer, but I have a problem. I like road biking. If I'm on a trail, I would rather hike.
Marion,
Road bikers pull over for emergency vehicles and stop for school buses just like motorists do. In my case, I try to pull over whenever I believe I am unduly inconveniencing any motorists, and I know many road cyclists who do likewise, but obviously, not all roadies do this.
Bill
If there is an emergency vehicle coming, I come to a complete stop and pull all the way off the traveled road, as fast as I safely can, just like I do in my car.
I beg to differ with " Road bikers pull over for emergency vehicles and stop for school buses just like motorists do." I've never seen bike riders do that, they just keep pedaling right on past the school buses, as well as NOT pull over for anything let alone an emergency vehicle.
I don't know where you guys ride, but obviously we've never 'crossed' paths, I've not seen any bike rider show the consideration that you people are talking about.
Maybe you do have the legal right to be there, just as somebody on horse back would. But that doesn't mean they should be there.
I like Marion's idea about building your bike paths. etc. would save a lot of injuries and road rage.
Personally I think that if a Bike rider REALLY did think of safety first and consideration, they wouldn't be on a two-lane windy narrow road in the first place. But we all know everyone for themselves.
I agree some cyclists ride discourteously and dangerously, and I dislike this as much as you do, probably more. Obviously, there are some in your area who need an serious education. In Helena and in the Flathead area, where I do most of my riding, I don't see much of this, and knowing we have this conflict, most guys I ride with are fairly good at "policing the ranks."
Marion,
Concerning bikeways, I agree this works well in some urban situations, but they don't work for serious cyclists, mainly the subject of this column. In fact, many cyclists, including myself, won't ride on bikeways because there is too risk of accidents with pediestrian, dogs, kids who don't know how to ride (and show be on bikeways) and pedestrians. Also, many bikeways are covered with rubble and glass, which makes them unridable with road bikes. I've been road biking for 35 years, and the only serious accident I've had is hitting a dog.
Bill
"What is SAFE to do so for the Bike rider, may NOT be safe for the motorist on the highway with a one ton piece of metal to try and control because of inconsiderate bike riders."
Sorry, wrong.
If you are approaching a bike from behind or from the other lane, if you are descending a windy mountain pass in such a way that you cannot stop for a slow-moving or stopped vehicle around the next bend in time, then you are overdriving the limits of your vision and you FAIL. This is no different than driving too fast for conditions, overdriving your headlights, or whatever. If you continue to drive faster than will allow you to stop for a hazard beyond the reach of your vision and the capability of your brakes, then you are driving unsafely, period.
What's around that next corner? Might be a cyclist descending at 35mph, but it could just as equally be a tractor trailer loaded with logs using his jake brake. Either way, if you are overdriving your vision and the capability of your brakes, you have put yourself and others at an unacceptable risk due to your decision to drive faster than is safe. It might just be a fender bender and a sore neck for you, but it might be death for a rightful user of the road, and heartbreak for his or her family and friends.
Watching all that goes on around you is NOT going to allow you to see around a bend, and alert you that there are bike riders on the shoulder in the driving lane etc. on a narrow two-lane highway that is a truck route as well as a tourist route in the summer months. There are Highways that are more conducive to bicycle riders than highway 191. Bike riders need to remember that they are the smallest on the roads and should ride accordingly, Most of the riders I've come across on the road act like they are the ONLY ones on the road, and that everyone else needs to look out for them. Well Sorry But I'm not going to head on with another motor vehicle because a bike rider was too concerned about whether or not it's 'safe' for them to pull off the highway. There isn't much to it. It's not like a bicycle is traveling faster than 45 MPH and much easier for that rider to get out of the line of danger.
I'm not saying all roadways are not for bike riders just the ones I mentioned before. I try to expect the unexpected, and maybe that is why I've been so 'lucky'.
riding side by side two and three deep maybe against the law but it sure doesn't stop them from doing it.
Bill I could only hope more bikeriders were as conscientious as you are. Trouble is they are few and FAR between.
I'm talking about driving roads that follow a river and are narrow. If you think some one should drive SLOW because they can't see around the bend then how do you get anywhere? You sound like those drivers that are doing 35 in a 60 and braking for every bend in the road, and a bunch of cars backed up behind them. Heaven forbid they use the Turnouts, Those type of drivers have NO business on the highways. Bike riders don't on 191 very often. I know I've been behind them and they just pedal on past the turnouts, and flip you off if you do toot at them.
again I'll say there are SOME highways that ARE conducive to bike riders, and there are many that are NOT. Bike riders should take that into consideration before they get on that particular highway. But most of the times the Rider couldn't care less about anyone else except that THEY have a RIGHT to ride their bike there, and Katy bar the door, safety or not they are going to do it.
A sense of entitlement is dangerous as someone said earlier on this thread, especially that is so when both sides are hard and fast in their sense of entitlement, the road is narrow and twisty & both are going to prove their entitlement matters most. As Ann said, some roads just are not designed by cycling and should be off limits for safety sake..
What's with these people and their arrogant entitlement position? Yeah, you're on a bike and I'm in a car so how about whenever a car approaches you on the bike, you dismount the bike and move off the road until the car has safely passed. You can then resume your pleasure stroll when the cars are gone. Also, whenever a line of cars is at a light, do not go to the front of the line and then ride alongside the cars - keep your planet saving happy ass where you are. Ever see these bikers ride outside the bike lane just into the lane far enough so a car cannot pass in the same lane? Stop doing that too, we know it's on purpose you assholes.
And finally, in closing, let me just say, I am a pendejo, and you bikers are on lesser vehicles which are treated legally as cars, so if you don't do what you're supposed to and follow the rules, I will run into you. And you will lose. Is it worth it?
I quit road biking after I got klanged by a hunk of bark on Underpass Hill a long, long time ago. I wasn't hurt, but nonetheless decided I didn't like hazards coming from behind.
The fact remains that bicyclists are a road hazard anywhere they travel slower than the flow of traffic. I always try to give them a wide berth.
I want to ask, Bill, why the heck should I "wait for oncoming traffic to clear before crossing the centerline and moving completely into the left lane for a safe pass." Why should I wear down my brake pads and slaughter yet more dinosaurs, that I'm buying with my money?
Never mind the gas tax issue.
Couple years ago I was heading up WF Stage near the pit, and here are two spandexers grinding the hill, about six inches into the lane, no shoulder. Turns out there was ANOTHER spandexer grinding the other way just around the half-blind curve, that was in turn being negotiated by a big ol' KW.
Let's just say things got REAL danged exciting there for a minute, it was offensive driving at its finest by both me and the trucker. The velos certainly were offended, but they lived to be such.
Never mind this protocol you want on four lanes. Bicyclists are hard to spot in an objective sense, under all circumstances. Now, I'm on a four lane road, in traffic, and you expect me to disrupt flow or execute a lane change when Blind Joe is screaming along in the FAST lane, and Blind Joe can barely register ME much less the bicyclist cloaked by my vehicle? Are you nuts?
Bicycles make sense in San Francisco. They even make sense on roadways with shoulders, roadways with light traffic and a low speed limit. But on arterial highways, or second-rate Montana roads with no escape?
There's a reason Glacier Park restricts bicycles on the Sun Road. Sure, it would be el-primo to ride but let's be real. The level of competence of many bicyclists is about the same as it is for drivers. Some are champs, and I respect them, some are plain dangerous no matter the mode. And there are enough in all the vehicle classes that the velo-dogs need to understand who and what the HIGHWAY and ROAD infrastructure is designed for. If bicyclists want to tax themselves ala Pittman Robertson for decent bike infrastructure, then maybe I'll be interested. Other than that, here's some cheese.
To keep fromm killing somebody--the cyclist, yourself or an oncoming driverr--seems like a fairly obvious answer to your question.
Bill
I'm sorry, but I stand by the assertion that if you are driving fast enough that you cannot stop to avoid an obstacle far enough away (or around a bend) that you can't see it, you are driving too fast for the conditions, period. You are risking the well being of whomever might be around that bend.
Dave skinner- maybe you missed the link above on how roads are paid for here it is again:
http://www.vtpi.org/whoserd.pdf
Take a look at Figure 1 on page 8 for the pie chart, then tell me I'm not already "taxing myself"
Let's cite from the Vic paper..."rights and DUTIES." That includes a DUTY to NOT CREATE A HAZARD, eh?
When a pedestrian crosses the highway, he or she has a RIGHT to cross the dang road, but a DUTY to cross it in a way that does not create a hazard. One does NOT walk out into the road three seconds before two loaded chippers running abreast. One has a DUTY to wait until the way is clear...or go to a crosswalk duly market and abide by the rules established at that crosswalk, eh?
And your pie chart? Don't forget that I pay exactly what you pay, eh? And then lic and gas tax on top of that, eh?
As for that line of sight argument made here. I agree somewhat. I like road motorcycles and really, really crooked roads. But the fact is, if you are someplace where the line-of-sight and speeds create a question of a hazard, then it is almost a DUTY to not linger in the danger zone. Or do I want to rant about the time some bicyclists were STANDING IN THE ROAD WATCHING THEIR BUDDY FIX A TIRE? They were all across the lane and another was in the OTHER lane. That was one of the greatest controlled stops I EVER made in my life...barely.
Look...I have been in two accidents where the driver (not me) was trying to avoid an animal. I did NOT enjoy being along for the ride. And I have since built up quite a record of pasting dogs, cats, pheasants, even a deer that was better than any I've shot. But when the choice is the body shop or the morgue...I'm gonna make the hit, not put myself into a Kenworth or in the borrow pit.
Just for your information - my post was neither arrogant nor obnoxious. I was stating my view of the issue and my negative encounters on a very busy two lane highway in the state in which I live. I was also bringing to light the idea that some stretches of road should be off limits during peak season. It is simply safer for all parties involved.
In regards to women drivers - I work in insurance and so you know, women drivers are rated a lower risk than a male of any age and therefore pay less premiums annually. These companies do their homework about accidents and risk assessment - I guarantee you it is true. So before you spout off about we girls again, know we are driving safe and responsible more consistently than men.
I have not done research for every state, but a while back, I checked on three or four states in this region. Here is the link to that article.
http://www.newwest.net/main/article/needed_more_bicycle_sense_in_drivers_manuals/
And in my companion article yesterday, yes, the re-write only applies to Montana. However, I think laws are similar in most states, chief among them is that cyclists are lawful users of public roadways.
Bill
If cyclists have the same rights to the highway as motorists, then it seems they should have to buy licenses to use the highways and their numbers could be taken down for infractions and they would be subject to the same traffic rules and potential fines as motorists. It certainly would not be right for them to have all of the privileges and none of the responsibilities. Any auto creating a traffic hazard by going too slow can be pulled over, and if bikes have license plates registered, they would be subject to the same rules.
I have requested that the last comments by Phil and Ann be removed from this thread. If you would like to re-make these points, please do it in an on-subject, non-personal manner.
Thank you,
Bill
I'm normally a very respectful person, until such tirades are thrown for no good reason.
As to the subject at hand, I kind of have to agree with Marion. Although I thought (at least in Montana) you were supposed to license your bike anyway. silly me.
As to the shoulders of the road being sandy, they have 'Adopt a highway' for litter, why not 'adopt a highway' for clearing off the shoulders?
One of the biggest things is pieces and parts of Tires that are left along the roadways that are a hazard to all.
This may be a real stretch, but maybe widening the shoulders along some of the highways would help.
Bigger shoulders can be a big improvement, if the highway department doesn't grind a rubble strip into it, the bane of all road cyclists, which, regrettably, they usually do. Also, the shoulders need to be moderately clean, and I almost think it is too much to ask the highway department to keep them clean. Drivers keep the driving lanes clean without sweeping.
As an aside, you might be surprised to learn that a good bicycle tire for a road bike costs $60, and it wears out twice a fast when ridden on sandy, rough roads or shoulders. so besides the safety issues, there is always economics.
Bill
I really don't think there would be any luck getting the highway departments to clean the shoulders. I can understand the rumble strips would be a real pain (pun intended)
$60 for a tire is expensive, but we fall back to safety first, don't we?
This has turned into a 'watch out for me' world, when it should be watching out for yourself.
I firmly believe, that bike riders, have it much easier for pulling off the road, etc. when cars come up behind them, than a car does for 'avoiding' the riders. Everything we do in life comes with hazards, slower traffic on main highways, is a major problem.
Here I go with a 'dumb' question maybe, but.... Are Bicycles allowed on the interstates?
Bicycles are allowed on Interstate highways in Montana, but I am not sure that is true in all states. And interstates are a safe place to ride, and I ride I-15 near Helena, but there is always a lot of garbage on the shoulders, and I tend to get a lot of flat tires.
Bill
If you are going to go out for your ride, and that ride is on a highway, then you need to adjust to what is on that highway. If that means having to move out of the lane of traffic, or pulling off the road, so-be-it. But to expect mainstream traffic to 'wait' until it's safe to pass is asking an awful lot of drivers. The vehicles should be able to pass a bike rider, without having to do it like they would if passing another vehicle.
A vehicle can 'crowd' the center line, the Bike rider can go to the edge of the shoulder, and there is plenty of room for both. A flat tire is a heck of a lot easier and cheaper than broken bones etc.
Like I said before, Bike riders can 'adopt a highway' for cleaning the sand off.
I agree that in a road situation where a cyclist backs up even one vehicle for more than a minute or two, he or she should pull over and let the motorists safely pass. I do this, but frankly, there are very few situations where a motorist can't safely pass in less than a minute. The key is still the same basic point of the column, slowing down to wait for a clear passing lane instead of trying to crowd through in the same lane at high speed.
On your second point, yes, a motorist could crowd the centerline and the cyclist could crowd the fog line, and the motorist could pass even with oncoming traffic, but only if the motorist slows to approximately the speed of the cyclist, usually 15-20 mph.
Funny how these things go. There are significant areas of agreement in this thread.
Bill
I do know of one cycling club that has an adopt-a-highway program, and I'm sure there are others. But I think this is for picking up litter, not cleaning the shoulders of sand and other rubble for riding, which wouldn't be realistic to do by hand.
Bill
I don't think a minute or so is what any of us are concerned about, it is the much longer waits. The one I mentioned in Colorado ran over 20 minutes before I could get around them. That is not fuel saving for anyone except the biker, but it certainly adds to pollution to back cars up like that.
I've seen more drivers who don't know what SLOW VEHICLE TURNOUT means than bicyclists causing delays. A LOT more.
Personally, I hate having people on my tail, whether I'm riding or driving. I know not everyone is as polite and thoughtful as I can sometimes be, but have some sense of proportion, would you?
Somewhere back in Driver's Ed, about 4 decades ago, I remember hearing that driving was a privilege. People seem to forget. Maybe if more police were patroling on bicycles assault with a deadly weapon would be prosecuted once in a while. (My personal experience was in 1994: http://fortboise.org/assault.html )
I've never heard of a situation like the one you describe in Colorado with a 20 minute delay. In my experience in group rides, 99 percent of the time motorists suffer very little delay, less than a minute. My concern is for those who won't even accept a five second delay.
Another point you made earlier that I forgot to respond to was bikeway accidents. You may be surprised to learn that there are many more bicycle/bicycle, bicycle/pedestrian, bicycle/dog accidents than bicycle/motor vehicle accidents, but usually not fatal, of course.
Bill
Also, found this little blog post on http://www.surlybikes.com:
Thursday, May 01, 2008
I play this little game while riding to and from work where I memorize the license plate of a passing car. When the next car drives by I memorize that one, and so on and so on. If there is an altercation, I've trained myself to look at the license plates first. So rather than use my middle finger to tell somebody how I feel, I can find out where they live based on that license plate and send them a letter of gratitude.
Flashback 10 weeks to Valentines Day in February. I'm riding within the law and hugging the curb as much as I safely can, doing about 20mph down the street, when a car lays on their horn for a good 10 seconds. They pass me, I memorize the license plate, approach them at the red light one block down, and stare into her window. No words said, no middle finger needed, I had her plates.
I "obtain" her name and home address (don't ask how) and write her the following letter:
"Dear Nancy,
Thanks for the extended horn honk this morning. It reminded me that today is Valentines Day and my wife just loves red tulips, the same red as your Cadillac. So thanks for the horn honk. Happy Valentines Day.
- Cyclist on 66th St."
I also enclose a fake traffic ticket and a copy of the Minnesota Department of Transportation rules of the road. No threats, other than she knows I know where she lives.
Fast forward to last Wednesday. I'm riding to work as usual, signaling my turns, flowing with traffic and abiding by the law when a car honks. I see the familiar license plate and verify the same red Cadillac with an older blonde woman driving. I wish you all could've seen her face when she pulled along side me at the red light and I said "Hi Nancy". All she could do was grip her steering wheel, look straight ahead, and figure out how she was going to get the poop off her panty hose once she got to work.
Score one for the cyclist.
I thought that was a great story to pass along to all the cyclists out there, enjoy and try it out.
The bike riders in the towns, ride right up along the right side of me, and right on up to the light. Over half the time the rider will just slow down, (IF they slow down at all) and then continue whether the light has changed or not. They certainly don't follow the laws by doing that. I see them weaving in and out of the traffic on Main street, with no concern for signaling or anything else. They act like you should already know where THEY are headed. How am I supposed to know which bike rider is respectful and which ones are on the road that don't care about others? I mean it's not like you have a sign or something to alert vehicle drivers that YOU respect the laws, and YOU are considerate on the highways.
When approaching guardrails, you would think the Bike rider would wait till the traffic passed, but NOT on 191. They know cars are coming but they won't pull over and wait until its safe for them to ride past guardrails. I'm talking about before the Bike rider gets to the guardrail, and cars are coming or already behind them. (If a bike rider sees oncoming traffic, and they are along side a guardrail, then they should stop and maybe get over the guardrail, would be safer)'You' expect vehicles to slow down and wait for safe passage, why not BIKE riders?
As to what Matt R said about getting personal information from a plate, that sounds a bit illegal. I didn't realize that just any 'joe-bloe' could acquire that information, And if they can, it should be made against the law with all the stalking etc. that goes on in this world today.
Yes, get the plate, but turn it over to the authorities. Had I gotten a letter like that I would have gone straight to the police. There are a lot of crazies out there, and our personal information such as address etc. should be kept private, or for people of authority to be able to access. Maybe, though, Matt is in one of those positions, and if so.........
I still feel that two lane narrow, windy roads, should be off limits to bike riders. Like I've said before there are safer places for bike riders to ride, than on a busy highway full of semi's and tourists. (Tourists, are the WORST, with stopping in the middle of the road to gander at the wildlife)
As to the Bike paths, they were made FOR bikes, and to not use them seems a waste of tax dollars. (a little odd that bike riders would be more worried about a dog than a semi, as was mentioned earlier why are you {third person} NOT paying attention to what else is on or may enter the Bike Path, it's no different than the highway, except there are no cars and trucks on the bike paths.)
I still can't believe that bike riders are more concerned with THEIR RIGHT to use the roadways, than the safety of everyone on those roadways.
Not to be a jerk, but as to 'adopting a highway' to clear shoulders for bikers, and you saying that it would be difficult to accomplish 'by-hand', That is more proof of the world we live in, and the 'hurry-up' disposable way we do things. Too busy to take a few added precautions? Easier to make the mainstream traffic watch out for 'you' instead of trying to make you a safer way to enjoy your ride? It seems a bit selfish to me to expect that EVERYONE should make it easier for the select few. No matter how you look at it Bike riders that are left of the fog line are a danger to everyone that encounters them.
In a perfect world vehicle drivers wouldn't have to dodge bumps or pot holes or Bicycles. But that is an impossibility, I don't feel that 'my driving experience' should be hampered by 'your' riding experience.
In order for me to get to Bozeman, I have no choice but to use 191 or 287 Bike riders out for a ride have all kinds of choices, I would hope they chose 287 or a wider highway than to insist on the narrow two lanes like 191.
Totally legal! Obtaining an ID for a plate is the same process as conducting a background check. For a nominal fee, a person can look up the owner of any license plate. I haven't done this yet as the motorists here are respectful (for the most part) of us bikers.
Slow down, share the road! If not, your plates tell all...
Bill, and all of the rest of the cyclists, I think enough replies have been written to this blog to show that the problem is not just the vehicles, at least some of the problem is with some cyclists, hard to believe that any of you who also drive have not crossed paths with any of them. Saying one group has all of the rights and the other has to accomodate them is not the way to bring folks together. Cyclists must share some of the responsibility, and they simply must be identifiable if they are on public roads. Privilege without responsibility is never a recipe for success.
Teh group in Colorado were evidently a part of a tour or race group, I don't remember, but they had flaggers along the route with signs telling folk not to pass that it was a group. On the top of the pass, they had a huge van with racks on it. I don't remember the name after all of this time.
She also tells us that she (doesn't) understand what a bicycle is doing on a MAIN highway anyway.
Without ever having ridden a bike (apparently), she knows that It's much easier for a bike rider to pull out of the (when actually they should be out of it to begin with) driving lane than for a vehicle to slam on the brakes, and do like Marion said.
But most of the times the Rider couldn't care less about anyone else except that THEY have a RIGHT to ride their bike there, and Katy bar the door, safety or not they are going to do it.
Helpfully, she suggests that If you can't keep up with the flow of traffic then stay off the roadway. And she still can't believe that bike riders are more concerned with THEIR RIGHT to use the roadways, than the safety of everyone on those roadways.
Whew.
First off, let me assure you Ann that you do not understand a blessed thing about the mind of a bicyclist. Given that, resist your impulse to infer crazy things, like what we are and are not concerned about.
Having been assaulted with a deadly weapon on more than one occasion, "no good reason" does not apply.
It's a fair amount of force times distance WORK to get somewhere on a bicycle, unlike the "work" you do operating the controls of a little car, big car, or even yes, a big truck. You have no idea, apparently.
Yes, I'd rather be on a quiet bike path away from traffic. No, that isn't always possible to get where I want to go. Some roads I really would like to avoid completely, but they're on my route.
Your mistaken and hostile attitude about what bicyclists SHOULD do and MAY do is why so many of us are so fearful of -- and yes, angry toward -- people who behave such as I would expect you to from your comments here.
Some twit backed out of a blind driveway (it had a loop, he could have gone forward) on me the other day, and I was about one-half second from being schmutz instead of getting away with a slow-mo endo. (I would have made it with a stylin' wheelstand, but my tennis bag flipped over my head and shifted my CofG.) It would've been better to be on the roadway at that moment... but then swerving left could've been death, too.
So here's the deal: while everyone on Cole Road likes to go 40 (illegally 5mph over the limit, btw), and keep the flow going, little old me on my bike has as much legal right to use it as Ann (say) in her 3 ton SUV.
That doesn't mean it's a good idea, I know.
But when for whatever combination of reasons I do decided to make a free and legal choice to use the infrastructure that I continue to help pay for, it behooves me to:
(a) expect that I will be invisible, even in broad daylight;
(b) act predictably;
(c) ACT VISIBLY.
(b) and (c) may not always be compatible.
It's an "attitude" of self-preservation, not a personal affront to you, Ann. Live and let live, will you? Delivering your load a little late should be preferable to putting someone else's life at risk, shouldn't it?
Not every cyclist is as skilled as I am, after 40-some years practice and riding across the country, and like every other human being, I make mistakes and sometimes need a little extra room, or luck, to survive. If I'm not riding a straight line 6" from the curb today (or even better, staying off the road so that I don't inconvenience you, eh), it might be for a good reason. I'm probably not as quick as I was reacting to trouble when I was 20-something, but maybe I'm a little more sensible too, who knows?
You mean to tell me that what I said is not TRUE? Bike riders are NOT the smallest thing on the roadway? No, I don't understand what a bike rider is doing on a MAIN highway because they are definitely taking their life in their hands with all the crazy drunk drivers etc, that are also on those highways, (not to mention people talking on cell phones and NOT paying attention) this is not saying those same idiot driver's are not on other roads as well. And it is a FACT that if you are slowing down the flow of traffic you are supposed to pull OFF the roadway. As to my riding a bike, Yes I used to but after the third back break I can't anymore, and when I did you were supposed to ride against the traffic. So that should give you an idea how long it's been.
Like I've said before over 90% of the bike riders I've had to encounter on the highway were on highway 191, If you don't know that highway then you have no idea what I'm talking about nor how hazardous it is. 99.9999% of the Bike riders I encounter with in a town do exactly what I said.
If you have ever driven a semi , with a FULL load, try to slow down to a crawl because of a bike rider that wouldn't pull over, after you (the driver) have just rounded an S curve and there is another one ahead, maybe you would understand what it's like.(55-60 MPH) Cars and Trucks (PU) are not as hard to slow down, but when there are Semi's coming up behind you , well, I hope you get the picture.
So Tom, You read my meanings in the OTHER tone. Remember it's not WHAT you say but HOW you say it. My tone was NOT in the vindictive, smug tone you thought it was.
And PLEASE explain to me how what I said is mistaken? And if you re-read my posts with OUT the 'hostile' tone you claim, maybe you could see what I was trying to relay. If you can't then I don't know how to explain myself with out using my voice any better.
If you read my posts, MY complaints are with Bike riders on highway 191 and my PERSONAL experiences with them there. As well as within the town of Bozeman, which is a University town, That in itself should explain the mentality of the Bike riders. Yes I am stereo-typing because they (in that town) have not proven me wrong.
I don't know highway 191, but looking at the Wikipedia entry, I see it runs from the Arizona/Mexico border up through Montana, where it fizzles short of Canada.
The worst 2-lane, busy highway I tried to ride on was the trans-Canadian highway in Ontario. It was a death-defying embrace of the fog line and the 2 to 6" of pavement to the right of it, but none of the big rig drivers seemed very inconvenienced by my presence; they just blasted right by me. I think it was the rain that got me to give it up and hitchhike part of it, until I could get to a more passable stretch.
If recreational cyclists choose to ride on this horrific stretch of US 191 in spite of what seems like common sense to you, maybe it's because it's uncommonly beautiful? (Or would be without all the traffic.) It's an old-fashioned notion that one should be able to see the USA from a highway, I know.
In reponse to your request for information, I believe you are mistaken in your estimate of your ability to infer the mental state of cyclists' relative concern for their safety and the safety of others, and their rights to use roadways. Sympathy is nice, but empathy is what changes behavior.
I have never driven a semi, so my own ability to empathize with your plight is limited. I do what I can to stay out of the way of vehicles big and small, and to avoid making them change speed on my account, just as I wish others would do for me.
It's proven in my best interests to understand people who have the means to gravely injure me, whether through carelessness or bad intent.
Your last little snipe about "a university town" (just being funny, right?) says more about your attitude problem. You seem like someone I really want to avoid meeting in any fashion.
University towns are usually full of college age kids, Most 'college age kids' are usually in a hurry. Most of the younger generation still think they are invincible, when most of the 'older' folks have either had or know someone who has had either a critical or fatal accident doing something that was thought to be just an 'enjoyable' past time.
So I don't see where you think I have an attitude 'problem'. Nothing that I have posted is untrue. And believe it or not I wouldn't want to see a 'road-kill' bike rider any more than you would. Again I will say I'm talking from my OWN experience on highway 191 through the Gallatin Canyon from Big Sky (49 mile marker to Bozeman (at least to the mouth of the canyon about the 70 Mile marker I think it is. It's the last time 191 crosses the Gallatin River.
I for one, would NOT ride to the left of the Fog line on that stretch for SURE. And especially not on the highway when the guard rail is almost the fog line.
Yes it is a BEAUTIFUL drive. Very narrow highway with mountains on one side, and river on the other.
"They think they are 'special', well guess what your NOT....
What makes bike riders (not all but most of the ones I have had to deal with) think they OWN the highways?"
I'm sure I could make a long list of other comments along the same line.
As a matter of fact, I do own the highway, along with the rest of the public.
No point in us flogging the discussion; you've dismissed the original article, as well as everything I have to say with your protestations of virtue and lack of self-awareness. Pretty much every online discussion I've seen in 20+ years has devolved to the same noise.
I've decided to chime in again.
I don't think the issue of cycling on public roadways can be discussed with U.S. Highway 191 as the basis. This is a dangerous road, no doubt, but if you are riding from Belgrade to West Yellowstone or points inbetween, this is your only option.
Ann, personally, I must say that I have never had a bad experience with a trucker. They are the most courteous, safety-concious drivers on the road, in my humble opinion. Most of my "negative interactions" are with guys in beat-up pickup trucks.
Not sure if that really says much, but must my experience.
The point is, look beyond U.S 191. There is also quite a few people, incidentally, that they 18-wheelers should not be allowed on this stretch of road because it is so dangerous (even without cyclsits) and it goes through Yellowstone National Park.
There is a lot of good information in this thread, for both sides of the issue. I hope we can use it to understand that since both cyclists and motorists will use the roads, we might as well share them peacefully, safely, and courteously. Oaky?
Bill
One more crack at the dead horse of road funding and the paying of fair shares.
The same debate seems to be floating around the opinion pages of the Missoulian today, and one of the letter writers cited a federal report, written by the The National Surface Transportation Policy and Revenue Study Commission, a body created by Congress in 2005.
Chapter 5, page 2 of that report has a table showing who pays for roads at the state, federal, and local level:
http://www.transportationfortomorrow.org/final_report/pdf/volume_2_chapter_5.pdf
You can argue that cyclists should pay more, but you cannot argue that they don't pay anything at all. (When are we going to get those pesky walkers to start paying for sidewalks, anyway?)
http://beta.velonews.com/article/73458
Compare: (A) cyclist yields lane and is squeezed to shoulder at 35 mph -- oh oh theres a two by four in the road --your dead; OR (B) cyclist brazenly (selfishly?) takes lane for 2 miles to stay safe costing Riana about 70 seconds of her travel time.
That's really the equation isn't it? Is saving a person from a life threatening situation worth 70 seconds of Riana's time? For most drivers its typically a loss of 5 or 6 seconds to slow down for oncoming traffic before passing. I've been driving in Montana for 35 years I have never lost as much as 2 minutes in any of those years taking time to share the road safely with cyclists. Try thinking about allocating 2 minutes a year to the cause of protecting a child or parent of a child, and your road anger may abate.
I’m just about ready to switch back to stilts.
No fuming going on in my first post, only a true account of what I consider to be one of the most dangerous practices by cyclists decending a mountain pass. You and others tell me this is the practice that must be utilized to safely corner at that speed and now I am telling you why it is scary and so unsafe for a driver to have to come upon.
My time was of no importance that day, so 70 seconds of my time has no relevance. Read the post again and you will know I did NOT try to pass until safe for both of us, unlike what you implied. Unless you were that cyclist, (I am starting to suspect you...) and you frequent this pass, you cannot know what it is to come upon this scene on a very tight corner. I try simply to imagine what the guy behind me with his RV in tow must do to negotiate 45 MPH to 20 MPH in literally 3 seconds to save the life of the cyclist and to keep his trailer from sway or even jackknife. Do you think about that?
I am suggesting that all modes of transport should be able to enjoy that stretch of highway - there is simply a time that should be closed to cyclists - it is for the safety of everyone...not just the pleasure of the few.
It seems as though each to their own with this issue, but I am suggesting a compromise unlike many here with their "live with bikers doing what they want" or shut up kind of attitude. And as far as my "road anger" Allan - I do not have what you have diagnosed. I am an extremely safe driver, a happy person and deeply care about life...what I don't care about is catering to the few where there is the safety of the many at hand.
And you cannot appeal to me with your "protecting or parenting a child" will help in my anger??? I don't really know what you are trying to imply, but I don't need to protect or parent other person's children as that is their responsibility and I will not have any of my own as I fear they will want to ride a bike up Galena once they grow up! LOL!