The Sawmill Branch Trail

The Sawmill Branch Trail in Summerville, South Carolina, is a bike and walking trail that follows along side the old Sawmill Branch Canal.

The final section is now finished and runs from East Richardson Avenue in the North, close to the center of Downtown Summerville. 

From that point there is now close to 7 miles of smooth paved bike path, about 12 or 15 feet wide that will take you to the South End of Old Trolley Road, near Dorchester Road.

Out and back on this trail will give you 14 miles of motor traffic free riding. Where the path crosses the busy Gahagan Rd, Old Trolley Rd, and Bacon’s Bridge Rd, in each case the path goes under a bridge, so there is no stopping or slowing. 

The photo above shows the approach towards the North End of Old Trolley Road.

Here you have the option of going right under the busy four lane Old Trolley and on towards Richardson Ave. Or you can go straight and turn right on Old Trolley; there is a busy intersection at Bacon’s Bridge Rd., but there is a traffic light at this point.

Once past Bacon’s Bridge, Old Trolley Rd., has a bike lane its entire length. You can ride to the South End and turn right on Cross Creek Drive, and join up with the bike trail again. This makes about an 8 or 9 mile loop. (See map below.)

There are 4 different parking areas. My favorite is Luden Street, a quiet residential neighborhood. The trail switches from one side of the canal to the other at this point; don’t go straight across from the car park as the paved trail on that side runs out in about 200 yards.

The trail switches sides at another point just after you go under Old Trolley Road; again this is on a quiet street with little traffic.

A word of warning as you go under the bridges; earlier this summer, some vandals piled large rocks from the canal bank, across the path, under the Old Trolley Rd. Bridge. When you come out of the bright sunlight it is quite dark and hard to see.

An older man, a regular user of the path, hit these rocks, fell heavily, and was hospitalized as a result of his injuries. There was just this one incident and I have since seen the police patrolling the path from time to time.

Unfortunately, the local kids also love to break glass bottles on the path too, usually thrown from the bridges above.

Apart from these unfortunate but somewhat isolated incidents, I can highly recommend this trail.

Much of the trail is shaded by trees, which is great on a hot day. You will see Blue Herons and Egrets in the water.

There are warning signs saying “Alligators may live here.” But I haven’t seen any yet.

Here are some more photos. 

  

(Above.) Egrets; one of the more common birds you will see on the trail

  

The Wild Mustang

In Montana near the Wyoming state line, lives one of the most genetically pure herds of Spanish colonial wild horses in the USA.

The Bureau of Land Management, which operates the 38,000 acre Pryor Mountain Wild Horse Range, decided in their wisdom to round up the entire 190 strong herd, corral them and then remove 70 horses.

Wild horse advocacy groups are opposed to the operation, saying it is unnecessary as the animals are well fed, healthy and are not in need of thinning out. In fact they have plenty of expert opinion to back their protest, saying the move will actually harm the herd.

All wildlife, left to its own natural way of things, will usually control its own population given a certain amount of habitat and food supply.

However, in this case we have a government agency, the Bureau of Land Management and by golly they are going to manage these horses, whether they need it or not.

This is the problem with government agencies; they have to constantly justify their own existence. If the wild horses are doing just fine on their own, someone might suggest we thin out the herd of unnecessary bureaucrats.

Actually, that wouldn’t be a bad idea; save the tax payer some money. These horses are to be rounded up with helicopters and on the ground horse wranglers. I wonder how many thousands of dollars this operation is going to cost.

The reason this story touched me is because when I lived in Southern California in 1990, there were wild mustangs living in the California desert.

Many of these horses were descendants of animals brought there during the migration of people in the 1800s and then abandoned when the automobile came along.

There was a similar move then to thin out the herd, only this time the horses were shot with high power rifles. The carcasses were lifted by helicopter, loaded onto trucks, and the meat and skins were sold down in Mexico.

I had a friend who owned a recording studio, and he was approached by someone who was making a documentary movie on the killing of these wild mustangs. He wanted a song written for the movie soundtrack.

My friend asked me to assist another songwriter to produce this song. I wrote the lyrics, and for whatever reason the movie never got made. However, a good song came out of it. Here it is, called simply

The Wild Mustang

Hoof beats sound like thunder,
Like the broad sky he’s under,
His beauty is a wonder of creation.
In the land of the free
He’s a page in history,
His forebears helped us build this great nation.

Heroes on his saddle,
Charged bravely into battle,
While Old Glory waved on high he was there.
The marshal or the outlaw
His master was whoever called,
Who needs him now, does anybody care.

He’s a Wild Mustang running free,
Hear his silent cry for help, just let him be
He should live and let my children see,
A Wild Mustang running free.

Westward with the wagon train
‘Cross mountains and the open plains
His strong back helped to make this country great.
When they were through, abandoned him,
Now kill him for his flesh and skin
One so brave, deserves a better fate.

Head held high, tall and proud
A shot rings out, clear and loud,
A bullet tears deep into his side.
There’s no one there to shed a tear,
Because there’s no one there to hear,
His cry for help as he lies down to die.

He’s a Wild Mustang running free,
Hear his silent cry for help, just let him be
He should live and let my children see,
A Wild Mustang running free.

The dangers of texting while driving

A shocking made for TV video from the UK and originally shown in Wales, is having some further impact world-wide by being shown on Youtube.

I saw a shortened version here in the US, on the evening TV news. However, the full length version showing the aftermath of the crash, I feel has a far greater affect.

I know some of you may have already seen this, and by showing it here I am only preaching to the choir. But hopefully from here the message will find its way to other sites viewed by those who need to see this. 

I wish this video could be shown in schools throughout the US. It is the young driver, their inexperience coupled with texting and cell phone use, who pose the biggest threat, both to themselves and other road users.

On the same subject here in the US, the State of Utah has brought in tough new laws to deal with the problem of people sending text messages while driving.

Under Utah’s law, someone caught texting and driving now faces up to three months in jail and up to a $750 fine, a misdemeanor. If they cause injury or death, the punishment can grow to a felony and up to a $10,000 fine and 15 years in prison.

The new law which took effect in May 2009, penalizes a driver causing a crash while texting, as harshly as a drunk driver. State senator Lyle Hillyard, and supporter of the bill stated:

"It is a willful act, if you choose to drink and drive or if you choose to text and drive, you are assuming the same risk."

Kudos to the senator, and the state of Utah; it is always a good thing when a state enacts tough new laws like this, because eventually other states will follow.

In Utah it was a 19 year old male text messaging his girl friend while driving, and the resulting crash killing two men, that brought about this legislation. Sadly, it will probably be similar tragic events that will force other states to act.

Only when public attitude changes and people realize that all this multi-tasking people do while driving is a choice, and a poor choice at that, will these widespread practices start to carry the stigma that drinking and driving carries

Do cyclists need friends like this?

Prof. John Pucher(Above.) is an urban planner at the Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy, in New Brunswick, New Jersey.

The professor puts out many articles, reports and studies on urban planning in the US, and how the lot in life for cyclists and pedestrians could be improved in American cities.

His plans call for cities with separate bike and pedestrian paths, and he uses as a model, cities in Germany and Holland. He points out that these two countries have far more cyclists and pedestrians, but fewer deaths and injury for the group.

It would appear that Prof. Pucher is the cyclist’s friend. However, the problem I have with the bold professor is that he uses scare tactics in order to push his own agenda. This is not the first time I have called him out for this, I did so in May last year.

He publishes articles and reports that exaggerate the dangers of cycling, and indeed walking in America, in order to push forward his plans to separate cyclists and pedestrians from motor vehicle traffic.

Because he is an “Expert” in his field, his reports get picked up by mainstream media, who then write articles implying that cycling is dangerous, and suggesting maybe cyclists shouldn’t be on the road.

Articles like this one in the New York Times, and this one from the Christian Science Monitor.

In Prof. Pucher’s report, at the bottom of Page 10, he states that per kilometer traveled, pedestrians in the American cities were 23 times more likely to be killed than in a car. Again based on kilometers traveled, cyclists in the US were 12 times more likely to die than a motorist.

As I pointed out in this previous article, you cannot compare injury and fatality rates based on distance traveled, be they kilometers or miles. Cars travel far greater distances than bicycles or pedestrians. The statistic is so flawed it should be ignored entirely.

The professor’s figures seem awfully high when compared to others I have seen, but whatever figures you use, those based on distance are false.

It is not unreasonable for someone to drive 30 miles to work, whereas a for bicycle commuter 6 miles would be reasonable, and a pedestrian 3 miles. This reduces the risk factor for a bicycle by 5 times, and the pedestrian rate by 10 times.

Also, you can’t compare cycling in Germany or Holland with cycling in American cities. These European countries have always had a cycling culture. People there have grown up riding bicycles, and are used to sharing the road with bicycles.

These countries are about the size of a single state in the US; they were built in the Middle Ages and designed around horse drawn transport. They have been forced to adopt a cycling culture because there is less space to drive, let alone park a car.

A few more bike paths and bike lanes would be nice in our cities, and I am all for Prof. Pucher pushing that aspect. But ultimately three things are going make cycling in the US safer; that is education, education, education.

Education for drivers, education for cyclists. TV ads, billboards, etc. would be money well spent. More cyclists on the road will make it safer, we become more visible, and of course more people on bikes, means less people in cars.

There are approximately 700 cyclists die in the US each year; and that’s 700 too many. However, let’s get that figure in perspective. With a population of over 300 million in the US, this number is quite small. It is less than 2 cyclists a day out of tens of thousands who take to the streets on their bike every day; quite a tiny risk I would say.

Cycling is not as dangerous as some would lead us to believe, especially when you consider the alternative of living a sedentary lifestyle and all the adverse health issues that entails.

I am all for separating bikes and cars on busy thoroughfares if at all possible, but at some point cars and bikes have to come together. Most people manage to make their daily commute in their car without running into other cars, how difficult is it NOT to run into someone on a bicycle?

And so Prof. Pucher, while I applaud your efforts to improve cycling in our cities; if you are a true friend of cycling, knock it off with the scare tactics.

You give fuel for the anti-cycling, “Get them off the road” faction, and you scare people away from riding a bike, at a time when we should be encouraging more bicycle riding.

What are your views? Am I being overly critical of Prof. Pucher? What do you think is needed to improve cycling and cycling safety?
 

Opinions

If there is one thing I learned building bicycle frames; it is that no two people are alike.

If you could assemble a hundred people, all the exact same height, and then further separate into groups all those with similar leg length.

You would find within those groups, the thigh, lower leg and foot measurements would all vary.

Even within the same race, people have different facial features, complexions, hair color, etc. When you consider all peoples, the variations are infinite. An idividual's finger prints are unique, and now we know that DNA is too.

Most decent people accept these differences and even those who don’t, would seldom question why. Therefore, it really should be no surprise that people’s opinions will vary even more infinitely than our physical differences.

What are opinions but a collection of thoughts, based on our individual beliefs and experiences? Sometimes called a “Point of View,” meaning literally, the world as one individual sees it from where he stands.

No two individuals can have the same view if they stand in different places.

In spite of this we sometimes argue and fight defending our point of view, or trying to impose our opinions on others.

My father was an opinionated man. The problem was he didn’t have the education to back up or debate his opinions.

He was his own worst enemy; he couldn’t keep a job longer than a few months and he would be fired for mouthing off to his employer, or fighting with a co-worker.

Because he didn’t have intellect to back up his convictions, if someone strongly disagreed with him, he would get physical and fists would start flying.

The problem was made worse by his heavy drinking. He never owned a car, and a bicycle was his only means of transport, outside of public transport.

He was constantly arrested for being drunk and disorderly, and banned from every pub within a ten mile radius of our home. He would have to ride his bicycle further and further afield to get his beer.

Sad really, my father (Pictured right as a young soldier in the British Army.) in later life had no friends; nobody liked him. All because he would insist on foisting his opinions on other people. Why do some have this trait?

We accept every other difference in the human species, why do we expect the thought pattern of others to be in line with ours? We are each a free thinking spirit, and I can’t think of anything more random that a person's thoughts.

I think it is because our opinions are the yardstick by which we view and evaluate the world. It is how we judge situations and other people. Our opinions have been formed largely by our life experiences, our parents, teachers and other pivotal people in our lives.

Our opinions change over time, and with changing circumstances; if we find a better one we change it. However, at any given time our opinion is the best it can be. We just can’t understand why anyone would have a different opinion, after all, ours is the best.

It is not the difference of opinion that is wrong, it is the failure to see that the other’s view point is from an entirely different place.

I have found that defending my point of view is just a huge waste of energy. It achieves little; rarely does either side move any closer to the other’s way of thinking.

It is the single most cause of conflict between individuals, co-workers, friends, and families. On a larger scale, it is the basic reason nations assemble armies and go to war with each other.

Speaking of which, my father was aged 19, in 1929 and in the British Army fighting rebels on the Northwest Frontier of India. Under British rule at the time, that same area is now the border between Pakistan and Afghanistan.

This happened long before my birth, and now we are fighting the descendents of the people my father once fought. Does anything change, and in eighty years has anyone changed the other’s point of view?

Just my opinion.