The Times they are a Changin’

In 1963 Bob Dylan wrote “The Times they are a Changin’.” I see the times a changin’ for cycling, I see it here in the US. Suddenly bicycles and cyclists are newsworthy.

Recently there have been a spate of cycling related articles in major newspapers. The LA Times did a story on July 21st, about cyclists and road rage.

The Wall Street Journal, no less, then ran with a story on the plight of the bicycle commuter in Los Angeles. Yet another article in The Economist, on cycling in the US, and then there was the piece in the New York Times that I mentioned in my last post.

Some of these stories dwell on negative aspects, increase in bicycle/car accidents, road rage, etc. But the media always dwells on the negative, it seems they can’t report a story any other way.

Placing this aspect aside, the main benefit I see in all this is that people are being made aware of bicycles and bike riders. Imagine the combined readership of these major publications, and how many people these stories reached.

People who otherwise may never have considered riding a bicycle to work, or for short errands; on seeing images of others doing just that, may think, “If they can do it, so can I.”

A recent story from Austin, Texas of cyclists being ticketed for running red lights, and for riding on the sidewalk, would appear at first glance to be anti-cyclist.

One of the main complaints used against cyclists, is that we don’t obey the rules of the road. It has become a cliché, one that will automatically be recited whenever someone mentions cyclists.

Enforcing the law for cyclists and being seen enforcing the law, will take away one very strong argument used against us by those who would rather we not be on the road. Enforcing the sidewalk law, takes away the argument that cyclist belong there.

I would much rather see bike riders voluntarily observe traffic lights, and not ride on the sidewalk. Let’s face it, if cyclists did just that, the action by police in Austin would be unnecessary.

In the accompanying video that runs with this story, is a shot of a bike commuter whining about motorists running red lights. Pointing the finger at other lawbreakers is always a feeble excuse for breaking the law.

Some may view the Austin story as another one of police anti-cyclist bias. Maybe so, maybe not; the question I ask myself is, in the long run will this be good for cycling. I believe the answer is yes, and it is already a good thing that stories like this get media attention.

The images on the video of what appears to be experienced cyclists, riding exactly as they should in traffic, I think leaves a good impression. Nowhere in the video do I see cars being inconvenienced by cyclists, and every bicycle on the road means one less car, actually easing congestion.

There are other signs of changing times. In Pittsburg, the City has announced plans to become bicycle friendly. They have started by appointing a cycling and pedestrian czar to oversee, and coordinate efforts to improve the lot of those who choose an alternative means of transport.

Could any of us imagined a few years ago that major US Cities would be even be thinking of accommodating bicycles, let alone making serious efforts, and spending money to do just that. We know that given time, other cities will follow.

Finally, I recently came across a blog by Tom Cassidy, who is a Chief of Police, in Lincoln, Nebraska.  He posted a piece on cyclists titled Share the Road, in which he wrote:

Sharing the road is not just polite, it's the law. Bicycles essentially enjoy the same rights and responsibilities as motor vehicles on the public streets. Motorists need to accord bicycles the same right of way, following distance, and passing protocol that they would another automobile.

Refreshing indeed coming from a police chief. Tom Cassidy was once a cyclist and triathlete. He also commuted to work by bike for a decade.

Be happy that bicycles have become newsworthy. Bicycle related stories are the hot ticket right now, it won't last and bicycles will soon be "old news."

However, the media shapes public opinion and it may become cool and trendy to ride a bicycle, and it could become un-cool to harass or behave in an impolite manner towards a cyclist.
 
In the last verse of his song, Dylan wrote:  
 
The line it is drawn
The curse it is cast
The slow one now
Will later be fast
As the present now
Will later be past
The order is
Rapidly fadin'.
And the first one now
Will later be last
For the times they are a-changin'.

What’s wrong with this picture?

The above picture is from an article in the New York Times titled “Moving Targets.”

The piece focuses on the turf war on our roads and city streets between cyclists and motorists. Negative stuff, which I hate; however, the negativity is not all biased towards one side or the other.

As they say in show business, any publicity is good publicity; at least the press is giving considerable space to the subject and possibly, if we get enough of it, people will begin to see how ludicrous the whole “Us vs. Them” situation is. We are all just people trying to get somewhere or other.

With high gas prices, we are seeing more bikes on the road, which is a good thing. Or it would be, except we now have a bunch of people in the mix who often don’t have a clue. Look at the guy in the above picture.

The traffic light in the background is about to turn red, which means this person on a bike was trying to get across the intersection while the light was against him. His near side pedal is at the bottom, not up where it should be, ready to push off when there is a gap in traffic.

And look what he has on his feet, flip-flops. In the midst of his scramble to get across the street, he is likely to stub his toe or lose his footwear altogether.

(On a totally irrelevant side note, I’m curious, don’t young guys get in fights anymore? You can’t kick someone’s ass wearing flip-flops. You can’t back up, and you can’t run away; you are screwed all around.)

Behind the cyclist, a lady in red is down on her haunches taking a picture, in the middle of the crosswalk just as the light is about to turn green and the yellow car waiting is about to run her over.

Of course she is a pedestrian and they don’t follow to many rules, but when people get on a bike and act with the mentality and lack of responsibly of a pedestrian, they are a menace to themselves and everyone else on the road.

This is what we are seeing, just pump the tires up and off you go.

“You can’t ride a bike in the city as an adult the way you did as a 10-year-old in a suburban cul-de-sac,” he said. “I see people riding like children on a sidewalk, or going the wrong way down a street.” (Cyclists should ride with traffic, not against it.) Bike Snob NYC

Or they ride their bike as they drive their car, in other words paying little attention to what is going on around them.

“They pull out without looking at traffic,” she said. “They don’t signal.”

Well of course they do, this is how they drive a car.

A pandemic of obliviousness, ear buds, texting, further ramps up the tension. Recently, Steve Diamond, ride coordinator for the Morris Area Freewheelers, a New Jersey cycling club, saw what he called a trisect of irresponsible cycling: “A guy riding his bike without a helmet, talking on his cell phone, with his kid in the bike attachment behind him.”

Is there anything those of us who a serious about our cycling do, amongst all this craziness?  We could lead by example, and start by watching our own behavior.

"The ability of drivers and cyclists to trash talk and then disappear into the anonymity of traffic further poisons the atmosphere."

“Share the road” means just that. We all learned about sharing as a kid, if we are not prepared to share, how can we expect others to share with us?

I was out riding alone last weekend on a busy two-lane highway, with a shoulder. I dislike habitually riding on the shoulder; too many drivers have their wheels over the edge, while driving too close the vehicle in front. I was out in the lane where drivers can see me, and where they have to make a conscious effort to go around me.

However, at one point I could see traffic coming toward me, and was aware of a vehicle slowing behind me. I moved over on to the shoulder to let him pass; he was towing a large boat, and gave a friendly little “Beep-beep” as a thank you.

He had recognized that I had made an effort to accommodate him, and just maybe here is one driver who will see cyclists in a different light in future.

We none of us have control over how others behave on the road, be they cyclist, or motorist. However, as individuals we all have control over our own behavior. I always find I can be assertive as I ride, but still show respect for other road users. By showing respect, I get respect.

I am appealing at least for this time, that any comments on this post be positive. There was enough negativity in the NYT article, and we all have stories of how some Bozo in an SUV tried to run us down. The bike blogosphere is full of such stories.

What have you seen, or done lately that sheds a more positive light on this whole crazy situation? What ideas do you have to improve things? I don’t know about you, but I am growing weary of reading stories of cyclists being run down, attacked, etc. etc, etc.   

Please don’t make the bicycle a political issue

When Dan Schleifer sent me a link to a site called Tree Hugger, running a story called “Why do Republicans Hate Bicycles,” my first reaction was, “I am not going to touch this with a ten foot pole.”

I am not a citizen of this country, therefore I cannot vote, and I usually stay as far away from politics as I can. My feeling is, I am a guest in the US, and as such it is not proper for me to voice an opinion on American politics.

However, I will say this much. I hate extreme politics on both sides, and here you have the two extremes. On the one side, a site called “Tree Hugger” with the subtitle, “Unchecked Environmentalism.” (The very epitome of Liberalism.)

On the other side, a video of a republican politician going off on an anti-bicycle rant, simply because the bicycle is seen as something “green” and left wing, and therefore is open to ridicule.

The two extremes cancel each other out; people on opposite ends of the political spectrum reading the article and viewing the video are not going to move an inch towards each other’s point of view. In fact, stuff like this drives the two sides further apart.

I hate that the bicycle is made out to be something political. I have stated here before, if automobiles ran on pixie dust and had zero carbon emissions, I would still ride a bicycle. I am a cyclist, and riding a bicycle is a love and a passion.

Forget the burning of fossil fuel for a moment, even if we overcome that issue; the bicycle is still a more civilized form of transport. It eases congestion; one person on a bike is taking far less space on the road than one person in a car who is taking up the space of four to six people.

It is less dangerous to other road users, and more bicycles on the road, with the resulting less cars would make it safer for everyone. It is a wonderful form of exercise, and it is fun. When is driving a car fun?

These are the real benefits of cycling. Riding a bicycle to ease the dependency on foreign oil is not what the majority of Americans want to hear. If we think, everyone in the US is going to dump their cars overnight and start riding a bike, either to save the planet or save America, think again. It is not going to happen.

Sell the idea that cycling is fun, and it is good for you, not keep cramming the green, environmentally friendly idea down people’s throats. All that does is it makes people feel guilty, and that makes them angry and sends them off on an anti-cycling rant like Representative Patrick McHenry.

I am sure all republicans don’t hate bicycles; even George Bush rides one. But if the Democrats make cycling a political issue, then naturally the Republicans are going to oppose and ridicule the idea, because that is what politicians do.

In the long run, is this going to help the cause of cycling?

Why do cyclists shave their legs? The only explanation you will ever need

It’s hotter’n hell, 90 degrees (32 C.) and we are going out for the evening. My wife is wearing long pants.

“Aren’t you going to be hot?” I ask. “Why don’t you wear a dress or shorts?”

“I can’t, I haven’t shaved my legs.”

End of questioning, no further explanation needed.

My lovely wife doesn’t want to be the only one in a roomful of ladies with silky smooth legs, while she is sporting stubble. Even though I would have to get down on my knees with a magnifying glass to find a tiny emerging follicle.

This is exactly the same reason why cyclists shave their legs, No one wants to go out on a group ride and be the only wooly mammoth in the pack.

Even if I am riding alone, I still shave my legs; I never know who I might meet on the road. Shaved legs simply look better on a cyclist. Some call it vanity, frankly I find that an affront to my pride.

I started racing in 1952 and that’s when I started shaving my legs. The European professional riders shaved their legs because they were riding the big stage races like the Tour de France and the Giro d’Italia.

Stages were long back then, sometimes in excess of 180 miles. (289.6 km.) They needed some serious massage therapy at the end of each day in order to have the leg muscles supple and relaxed ready to go again the next morning. It is neither comfortable for the cyclist or the masseuse to be massaging hairy legs.

The long, smooth legs in the picture at the top belonged to “Il Campionissimo” Fausto Coppi. I was no different from any other cyclist of the 1950s; we all wanted to emulate the great professional riders of that era. So we shaved our legs.

Shaved legs are faster; it is psychological. Like polishing the engine on a hot rod car; you can’t see inside the engine but you polish the outside. The cyclist is the “engine” of his bike; you can’t see the heart or the lungs inside, but by making the legs smooth and clean so you see every vein, sinew, and muscle, it is a definite psychological boost.

Professional cyclists today shave their legs for the same reason as their predecessors, and road cyclists of all levels, from amateur racers to weekend warriors follow suit. End of story, there should be no further explanation needed.

Fellow cyclists understand, but non-cyclists question this practice. We come up with all kinds of creative reasons for shaving our legs. We pretend that it is in case we fall and get road rash.

Sure with hair free legs it is easier to clean and dress wounds, but that is not why we shave our legs. A lady known only to me as “Jan” commented on a recent post. “If you fall and get road rash on your legs, wouldn’t you also scrape up your arms?” Good point, cyclists rarely shave their arms. (That would be weird.)

If someone asks me, “Why do you shave your legs?” I answer simply, “It’s traditional.” That is the only answer I need. No one questions it or doubts my word. After all, if something is traditional, who am I to break with tradition?

Professional racing cyclists have been shaving their legs for at least 100 years, that’s probably longer than ladies have been shaving their legs. So the practice definitely qualifies as a tradition.

Think of it like the running of the bulls in Pamplona, Spain; when someone asks, “Why would you run down the street in front of a herd of stampeding bulls?”

“It’s traditional.”

“Oh well, that explains it. No further explanation needed.”

Or, “Why are you taking that dead pine tree into your house at Christmas.”

“It’s traditional.”

You see how it works; it doesn’t matter how bizarre or irrational the act, just say, “It’s traditional,” and it is immediately accepted.

It is so easy. No more excuses, no more lies about road rash or guilt feelings over vanity. The answer is, “It’s traditional.”

No further explanation is needed.

Cyclists live longer

The chances of being killed on a bicycle are less than the odds of dying in an automobile.

Statistics actually confirm the statement is true; that is, with the exception of one. When comparing the fatality risk by miles traveled, every one million miles cycled, (1.6 Million Kilometers.) produces 0.039 cyclist fatalities, compared to 0.016 fatalities for motorists.

Both figures are very low but it would seem in this straight up, mile for mile comparison, that cyclists are more than twice as likely to die on a bicycle than in an automobile.

However, this statistic is flawed to the point that it can be ignored, for the simple reason it would take a cyclist riding slightly under 385 miles per week, 50 years to ride one million miles.

Most of us will never come close to that kind of cycling mileage; 500,000 miles in a lifetime would be very good. Compare this to driving, and we all know how relatively easy it is to put 100,000 miles on our car speedometer, two million miles in an automobile in a lifetime is not unreasonable.

When you consider the lower mileage covered in any given year, the chances of a bicycle fatality are greatly reduced. This is confirmed in another statistic that compares hours cycling with hours driving.

For every million hours spent cycling the fatality rate is 0.26, compared to 0.47 deaths per million driving hours. Therefore, driving a motor vehicle has nearly twice the risk of fatality as riding a bike for a given duration.

If you rode your bike non-stop for 114 years, which is one million hours, your chances of being killed on the road would be roughly 1 in 4. In that same period, your chances of dying of natural causes would be at least 99.999%.

Another statistic compares fatalities per million people. According to the US National Safety Council, for every million cyclists in the US, 16.5 die each year, whereas for every million motorists, 19.9 die each year.

How about the chances of dying as a result of injuries from a bicycle accident? One would suppose that crashing on a bicycle has a higher risk of death than crashing in a motor vehicle, but according to the NHTSA, bicycles compare rather well.

The odds of dying from a bicycle crash are 1 in 71. This compares to 1 in 75 for an SUV, truck or van, 1 in 108 for a car, 1 in 26 for a motorcycle, and 1 in 15 for a pedestrian.

In other words, the odds of dying in a bike crash are about the same as the odds of dying in an SUV crash. The false sense of security that comes from driving an SUV tends to produce far more dangerous driving behavior.

Many cyclists fear being hit from behind. This type of accident only accounts for slightly over 10% of all bicycle accidents, and half of these occur at night when the cyclist does not have lights.

In 90% of cases where a cyclist is hit from behind, injuries were minimal. In explaining the high death rate when pedestrians are hit. A pedestrian hit by a car doing 40 mph, the pedestrian is practically stationary, and the 40 mph impact is directly on the body.

Whereas, a cyclist traveling at 15 mph, hit by a car doing 40, the impact is 25 mph if hit from behind, and it is often not a direct hit on the body.

The most common accidents occur in front of you, and by defensive riding, many can be avoided. These are, vehicles coming towards you and turning in front of you. Vehicles pulling out from side roads and driveways in front of you. Drivers passing you then turning right in front of you (The right hook, or left hook in the UK.)

Statistics confirm that you can also reduce your risk of an accident if you don’t do the following: Don’t ride on the sidewalk and suddenly appear in front of motorists at intersections, especially if you are going the wrong way.

The same goes for riding the wrong way on a one-way street. Motorists are looking one way and not expecting traffic from the other direction. Don’t ride at night without lights or reflectors is another obvious one that will greatly reduce your risk of an accident.

I can’t vouch for the accuracy of some of these statistics, and individuals must draw their own conclusions. For example, in a risks per million hours of an activity comparison, scuba diving is 7 times more dangerous than cycling; however, a person is likely to spend far more hours cycling per year than scuba diving. How do you compare the two?

However, I think the figures are generally positive for cyclists. You can get out and ride your bike knowing the odds of survival are in your favor, and if you ride smart, your odds are even greater. Here is another one.

According to a study by the British Medical Association, the average gain in "life years" through improved fitness from cycling exceeds the average loss in “life years” through cycling fatalities by a factor of 20 to 1.

So you see, cyclists really do live longer.


Further Reading

Adult Bicyclists in the United States
Bicycle Almanac
Comparative Risk of Different Activities
Cycle Safely (RTH)
General Background on Bicycle Risks
Ken Kifer's Bike Pages: The Risk of Bicycle Use
Toronto Bicycle/Motor-Vehicle Collision Study (2003)