How to Talk to a Non-Cycling Liberal About Bicycling

Cycling itself is neither liberal nor conservative, and experienced cyclists find they mostly agree on how stuff works on and around bikes, and what to do in various traffic situations. However, non-cycling liberals seem to love to talk about bicycling, even though they (by definition) don’t actually ride bikes themselves.

However, as a matter of fact, cycling is a favored non-cycling liberal theme. Presumably, cycling will save the planet from global climate change. Most non-cycling liberals, however, are conflicted about cycling. Their ignorance leads them to get wrapped up in “us versus them” class warfare, espousing amusing views on transportation cycling, and indulging their overpowering urges towards more government control; the old notion of "better too much than too little." As a result, caution is in order so that you can talk to liberals (or non-liberals) about bicycling truthfully, without appearing on their “fascist enemies of the state” list. This caution should apply to you as a cyclist, whether you are liberal OR conservative.

 LIBERAL CYCLING CONFLICT
The fundamental difficulty non-cycling liberals have about bicycling is that while it is the mode of transportation that needs government intervention less than any other (besides walking), it also conflicts with the principle that government is a solution rather than merely a parasitic problem. As a result of the conflict, they fail to realize their well-intentioned efforts usually fail, while some of their crazy schemes go beyond failure and discourage cycling, or even maim and kill cyclists. One should be very careful about pointing this out, even to liberal cycling advocates (who are rarely ignorant of the problems). Instead, you can take advantage of this conflict to meaningfully communicate with non-cycling liberals about cycling without selling out. Just don’t get the notion that any of them will ever purchase carbon offsets from you when you ride your bike to work. I know this from first-hand experience. Non of my non-cycling liberal coworkers wanted to purchase carbon offsets from me, even to the extent that they all go to park one spot closer to the entry door since I didn't use up a parking spot and I arrived at work earlier than they did - resulting in less co-worker CO2 exhalation walking in from the car.

FEAR AND LOATHING
Liberals start out with a victim mentality. Rather than establishing facts, non-cycling liberals presume that cyclists are helpless to operate their bikes without special protection and intervention, and evil motorists (undoubtedly, fat cat bankers and the rich) are actually trying to kill cyclists. They forget our transportation system is dependent on trucks for delivery of goods (including goods for cyclists), and that private motor vehicles provide incomparable point-to-point transportation for moderate (between ten and two hundred miles) distances. Its why liberals like to drive their hybrid cars around, even while bemoaning the traffic. The cyclist as victim mentality leads them to meddle. Because few liberals really ride bikes themselves, they make things worse, arguing for things like door zone bike lanes, side paths that are crisscrossed by driveways, forgetting to get bike racks installed at destinations, and creating routes that randomly start and stop rather than integrating into any conceivably useful transportation element. Liberal politicians have it easier, since they simply pander to their constituents and bring the pork home. The liberal pols aren’t trying to actually HURT cyclists; they just mostly don’t know any better. The only politicians I have seen that looked comfortable on a bike on the road were Ron Paul (R), Betsy Price (R) and Wendy Davis (D). I'll note that Beto O'Rourke gets a pass here, as the only politician I know who had a parent killed while riding a bike, so he ought to know.

Liberal politicians compound things by making laws for cyclists to follow “for their protection.” Helmet laws, safe passing laws, and even mandatory side path laws (like Oregon) are all liberal artifacts that neglect a fundamental principle: “If you want to discourage an activity, regulate it more and claim it’s dangerous.” That summarizes the liberal approach to cycling. I'm not sure that's better than the "let's regulate people more" faction of the GOP that want to simply ban things they don't like, but it winds up having a similar effect of reducing cycling.

COMMON GROUND
Since you won’t get far by talking to non-cycling liberals about meat and potato things like educating cyclists or enforcing valid traffic laws, how DO you influence non-cycling liberals towards a more realistic view? LOOK FOR THE COMMON GROUND. While you won’t reform a non-cycling lefty by this tactic alone, you can plant some solid principles into their blathering nonsense about saving the planet with bikes.  The five principles below will get your pinko friends nodding in agreement, and maybe some will rub off on them. Small government cycling principles that even liberals can accept include:

• Worse than Benign Neglect – As a cyclist, you will no doubt know of many situations where government intervention has actively made things worse for cyclists. I am sad to report that even redneck poseurs have used the power of the state to make things worse for cyclists, but liberals are notorious for compounding rule upon rule until the poor cyclists have nothing left to do but throw their hands up. Helmet laws are one such example. I wore a helmet on my commute. If I lived in Seattle, I could not legally ride my bike without a helmet, though I could still ride as long as I wore a broken helmet backwards and unstrapped. Whether helmets are a good idea or not is not the issue here, but whether the case is clear and compelling enough (more important than things like health benefits of cycling to cite just one example) to use the power of the nanny state to mandate people wear one. If more ammo is needed, mention to your non-cycling liberal friend that helmet laws are mostly used by police to further stick it to people of color who happen to be riding a bike. If you really want to confuse things, suggest googling "Seattle Bike Helmet Law." This last item really merits another, futher post. Another example where liberal rules are worse than benign neglect are the periodic cases where you’ll get a liberal principal that bans bikes from his/her school “for the safety of the children.” When you cite these examples, MOST liberals will be nodding in agreement with you. If you need to, you can even cite cases of redneck crazies that want to use government to make cyclists stick to the sidewalk or simply restrict the right access to common public ways that has existed throughout the life of our republic. Such troglodytes are an embarrassment to the whole principle of a small, constitutional government. But that is yet another post entirely. Such scum should simply move somewhere like Russia, where they’ll be happy with authoritarian government.
• Spending on Needed Connections – Another area where you can get your non-cycling liberal friends nodding in agreement is pointing out simple and cheap bicycle and pedestrian connections that make it easier for people to get from place to place without motors. When we were growing up, good walk/bike connections were called “shortcuts.” Due to many years of misguided zoning laws and development that valued the appearance of pastoral purity more than the reality, there are now many places where it is difficult to get around OTHER than by car. While some bike projects are expensive (natural liberal darlings), these are vastly outnumbered by cases where a simple expedient of a bit of critical thought and consideration can improve life for us all. I’m sure you can come up with examples of your own. If you feel REAL DARING, you might mention, in passing, that hundreds of these connectivity improvements can be made for the price of a second-rate recreational multi-use path, or even a door zone bike lane. Shortcuts put real TEETH into the “one mile solution.” One thing you DON’T want to mention – putting AMTRAK out of its misery could fund all the quality bike projects (long and short ones alike) we might imagine and move many more people, while still saving money. Suggesting it’s time for AMTRAK to go will get you shunned - and not just by our current President. Unlike bikes, passenger rail has become entirely a creature of big government. It's sad because I really like trains, and they can make a great complement for a bike commute.
• Government Dictated Car Parking– A side effect of many years of liberal land use development rules and restrictions is the institutionalization of grossly inefficient land use (ironic, considering cities also invariably want higher density). Cities require lots of parking spaces nowadays, and only recently have these wise governmental bodies begun to consider bicycles. When your friend drives you to the mall in his/her Prius, you will have no trouble pointing out how simply and unobtrusively merchants COULD have accommodated bicycles instead of designing to discourage same to comply with government edicts. Your friend might not ever ride a bike, but will nod knowingly, and might begin to see parking in a less ignorant fashion from behind the windshield (trust me, even liberals don’t drive Yugos any more). In reality, bike parking is less a matter of government intervention than teaching people to see what is already available and how it can enhance their customer base. If you give businesses equal credit for bike spaces as for car spaces, you’ll see a lot more bike spaces.
• Discriminatory Laws and Police Teaching – Liberals will generally be receptive to the observation that there are many laws that actively discriminate against cyclists. I could do a whole post series on a small sampling of such. What’s more, while I hate to say it, most liberals will also be receptive to the concept that police are out to get cyclists. In reality, police (and even prosecutors) rarely actively persecute cyclists. Instead, bicycles are a minor element of law enforcement duties, most police drive lots of miles in cars, and cyclists are viewed as adults playing with toys; collectively, this leads to a general ignorance of bicycling law and safe cycling practice. NONE of the officers that testified against Reed Bates had any dedicated bicycle law training and none of them knew the principles of how to safely operate a bicycle in traffic.  You’ll get your liberal friend agreeing with you based on his/her prejudice against law enforcement, but you will not have to fudge the truth to obtain the agreement.
• Smart Cyclists SHOUT OUT – Most liberals will either give you a blank look or recoil in horror at the notion that cyclists should learn to operate bikes safely and within the law (the EDUCATION principle espoused by the Bike League). It simply won’t register that this might be more important than simply adding another door-zone bike lane. Liberals will, however, happily agree that cycling education should be more readily available to people, and that the government is not doing its part in this regard. It is simple truth that schools don’t teach kids safe cycling as a part of PE classes. What’s more, most any liberal will agree that educated cyclists will advocate better. The only thing you’ll need to be very careful of in this regard is in avoiding any suggestion that cyclists are generally anything other than innocent victims, that maybe many people on bikes need the education even more than the average motorist, or that butts on bikes might not be the best idea if those NEW butts are completely clueless. Most of all, you should avoid mentioning that smarter cyclists are much pickier about getting ONLY infrastructure that doesn’t put them in added danger. THAT, my friend, would be good for ALL cyclists.

IN CONCLUSION
It isn’t really hard to talk to a non-cycling liberal about bicycling. Most liberals tend to think of bicycling as a liberal activity, so that’ll work to your advantage, as long as you don’t try to claim cycling isn’t dangerous, or that you can go places even if nobody painted special segregated facilities on the road (sometimes it’s actually easier without that paint).

Learning from a Non-Teachable Moment

This morning, I learned some things when I rode to get coffee. I didn't learn anything in particular from the ride, but rather from the fairly short wait in line at the drive-thru.

It started like this - I left for coffee here in Ocean Shores about an hour later than normal - at 7AM rather than 6. As a result, early-rising tourists were starting to line up.

As a result, I wound up behind a silver Chevrolet Suburban. Like many in line, the driver didn't think to turn off his engine while stopped. Perhaps he was afraid his engine wouldn't restart if he shut it off or maybe he was still a bit sleepy. Who knows? Anyway, it got beyond typical when his cigarette smoke also wafted back. It got even further beyond typical and created the "learning from non-teachable" when he tossed his half-smoked cigarette onto the curb near me close to the wooden siding of the coffee establishment in order to pull forward and order his beverage.

Not considering things fully, I inquired if he realized his cigarette was still lighted and if he wanted it back. As you might expect, the answer came back in the negative. Then I forgot about non-teachable moments and suggested he pick up his (expletive deleted) item. Before you knew it, his passenger came out of the SUV and said "I'll take care of the cigarette but don't cuss at my husband."

At this point, I memorized the SUV license plate number - something I should have done routinely.  This was my first learning from the non-teachable moment. I'll not repeat than number here other than to note the license plate holder was from Tacoma, despite the "Ocean Shores Cares" decal affixed to his back window. It's good to learn from such episodes to do something like routinely mentally noting licenses - just in case.

In my second learning I also learned that some people just think that we on bikes simply ought NOT to be in drivethru lines to start with, even if the walk-up lobby is shut due to a pandemic. Or perhaps they just don't think things through at all.

In my own defense, at least I had the presence of mind to not going beyond calling out that the Suburban shouldn't have been in the drivethru line either, and I also considered what I'd do if the Suburban backed up after getting coffee. Upon reflection, the notion that bikes should not be in drivethrus seems even more common than the notion that they ought not be on any kind of road. My third learning was what if the guy had a gun and even more anger issues? In other words, avoid escalation when dealing with a questionable stranger.

One thing I learned only after the SUV drove off - my barista noted that the SUV had an ash tray and if the driver was going to smoke in it he ought to use that ash tray. Golly, I hadn't thought of that as the passenger yelled at me about how bikes should not be in a drivethru.

Hmm...

Rise and Decline of Bike Share

Five Years Ago, Bike Share and Scooter Rental were Neck and Neck. Now Scooters FAR Outpace Bike Share

This is a fable for our times. It was just a bit more than five years ago that bike share programs really go going. I will use history from the Seattle Bike Blog (SBB) as illustrative of bike share.

The first SBB post on the subject was made on May 5, 2014. By August 25, 2014, the headline: 

"It’s really happening. Today, you can buy a membership for a Seattle public bike share system."

 Somewhat grumpily, I forecast, on July 29, 2014:

"They’ll later use our tax dollars to subsidize the bike share system when it fails due to their policies. Perhaps they’ll emulate NYC in outlawing large soft drinks and in arresting cyclists for imagined offenses."

 At this point, the system was run by Pronto, a subsidiary of Alta Planning. It used fixed bike stations and tried to work around the Seattle helmet laws in order to draw in casual riders who didn't happen to bring their own helmets along on the chance they might want to rent a bike. Before too long, this became a drain, leading them to charge for helmet rentals. On May 11, 2015, SBB reported:

"If you buy a 24-hour or three-day pass to use Pronto Cycle Share, you will now have to pay an extra $2 to check out a helmet."

It also became clear that the service area with bike stations was pretty limited, and, as a result, on June 8, 2015, SBB reported:

"...the biggest problem with Pronto is that the service area is simply too small to meet most people’s needs. And under the current business model, the system would expand slowly over time as more private sponsorship investments or city budget line items lead the way. It’s a plan that creates solid benefits for relatively little public investment, but it’s not a plan that can truly revolutionize transportation and low-income access to bicycling in Seattle. 

"That’s why the city has put together a visionary plan for a massive, fast expansion of Pronto that would increase the service area from five square miles to 42 square miles..."

Bike share was growing by leaps and bounds! However, cracks were beginning to appear. While Seattle proposed a massive expenditure to dramatically increase the size of Pronto, and (move in to management of Pronto as well), the Feds said "nope." By October 27, 2015, SBB reported:

"...the city still intends to move forward with an expansion. Mayor Ed Murray’s proposed 2016 budget includes $5 million for expanding Pronto. If that funding is approved by the City Council, the path forward really hinges on whether the city focuses on expanding the station area or on electric bike technology."

Scooters - Cheaper Than Ebikes, Faster than Pedal Bikes

Electric bikes - well that IS a new development indeed. Things went down a bit further, when, on February 4, 2016, the SBB post headline read:

"Pronto needs city buyout before end of March, how did we get here?"

And things continued downhill for the Pronto, station-based bike share. By October 10, 2016, SBB reported:

"Though it’s not final, Seattle has indicated that it intends to select a young Quebec-based company to launch an all-new electric-assist bike share system. 

"That means both Motivate, the current Pronto Cycle Share operator, and the existing Pronto equipment are out if the deal goes through. The city is now negotiating directly with Quebec-based Bewegen to finalize a deal."

Now, bikes were only a part of the solution if they were electric assist, though bike stations were still the fundamental backbone of the system. By October 20, 2016, the SBB headline read:

"Council faces a choice: Kill Pronto now or make lemonade out of the existing stations?"

There it was, bike share, at least if it wasn't "electric" was going away - and fast. In January, on the 13th, SBB headlined the final resolution:

"Mayor Ed Murray has scrapped his bike share expansion plan, ending the city’s efforts to create a new public e-assist bike system to replace the doomed Pronto system set to shut down March 31. This officially ends a frustrating era..."

And so it was. Bike share was dead in Seattle. A victim of inflexible docking stations, mandatory helmet laws, and bureaucratic meddling, just to mention three factors. BUT WAIT, THERE'S MORE!

On July 19th, 2017, SBB reported on the beginning of dockless bike share. Spin and LimeBike started operation and exceeded the old Pronto system ridership in their first week. They would have done better, but old city rules were still in place that presumed an "ease into the water" approach. The report of the death of bike share was greatly exaggerated. By December 15, 2017, SBB headlined:

"Bike share pilot’s daily ridership blows past Pronto’s lifetime totals, rivals both streetcars combined."

and, in that article, stated:

"...bike share services are already rivaling two streetcar lines that cost about $190 million to build is pretty incredible. Free-floating bike share services have cost the City of Seattle almost nothing. In fact, these companies pay the city permit fees. And at $1/ride, bike share is the cheapest way to get around other than walking or owning your own (not-high-end) bicycle. That’s far, far cheaper than other private mobility services, like car share, taxis and app taxis."

However, this was about the peak for bike share. Instead, the future looked like e bikes and scooters. On August 19, 2018, SBB reviewed the timeline. Notably:

"2018: Lime introduces 15¢ per minute e-bikes, Spin leaves town as it transitions to scooters and ofo leaves town as their China-based business begins imploding. Bike ridership in Seattle increases significantly, smashing bike counter records all over town. Uber-owned Jump joins Lime at the end of the year as the $1 pedal bikes disappear."

Lime Rental Scooter

Scooters are Getting Fancier

Which brings me up to the present. Recently, in downtown Dallas, I noticed scooters ALL OVER THE PLACE. All of them were electrically powered. There was not a single "regular" bike to be had. Things didn't look a whole lot different in Seattle. The story continues to evolve. As with bikes, it appears that many of the people who rent these electric scooters do not understand that they are really renting a small motorcycle and zooming along sidewalks and against traffic is really NOT a good idea. Perhaps our driver licensing system should start by ensuring that  prospective motorists understand that the rules of the road apply to ALL that use wheeled things on public roadways (sidewalks are also part of those roadways) and require people to demonstrate they can do so with scooters and bikes before they move up to more powerful vehicles.

But I digress. Over on SBB, they are arguing that the best thing to do is bring back the dock system, but spend a LOT more money and make the bikes cheap to rent. Somehow, I think most people want a motorized item that they can simply pick up wherever they happen to be. It's been 30 years since the Soviet Union fell...

After Renting, Many People Scooter Along the Sidewalk

Bicycle Wisdom Rediscovered #1

Aftermath of High Winds in Ocean Shores

When high winds abound, do NOT trust a kickstand to keep your bicycle upright. Better lay it down gently yourself…

                        

Corollary – when high winds abound, and you foolishly trusted a kickstand, make sure the bike won’t hit a car when it DOES fall over.

                

Luckily, this time, when it fell over, it only bent a brake handle. Neighbor’s car was undamaged.

Kickstands Don't Restrain a Bike Well in Gusty Winds

Bike School Student Again

MSF Course includes Reference Text Like LAB, but Unlike CS. Material is Also Available on Line

The Bike League requests that its instructors periodically take educational material related to bikes in order to keep "fresh" in bike ed. The principle is exactly correct and ought to be followed by all; ESPECIALLY by instructors. Recently, I took advantage of an opportunity to become a bike school student all over again through a Motorcycle Safety Foundation (MSF) course offered near my home in North Texas. There is an obvious (to me) synergy between how to safely ride and control a bicycle with how to do the same thing on a heavier and more powerful two-wheel vehicle. Indeed, I found MANY things that cross over directly, and it was fascinating to see the similarities and differences between the Bike League (LAB) and Cycling Savvy (CS) bicycling programs.

MSF Instructor Has a Pole to Help Cone Placement, With Marks on the Lot, Unlike Either LAB or CS
ALL Riding was Done in this Parking Lot

General Observations
The MSF course takes two FULL days, and there is at least one added follow-on course. Thus it is longer than either of the cycling programs. In addition, in many states, taking and passing the test obviates the requirement to take the state skills riding test in order to win a motorcycle endorsement to one's driving license. On both days, the course started with some classroom work that consisted of going through the MSF handbook and watching relevant videos. Late each morning, we'd go over to the parking lot for various drills. Unlike EITHER the CS or LAB programs, there was no on-street riding and, as you can see below, the school-provided motorcycles do not have licenses or turn signals installed on them, making them not street-legal. My own class was probably unusual because one of the three students already had his motorcycle endorsement, was a deputy sheriff, and was taking the class in preparation to become an instructor. The second student was taking the course to get his motorcycle endorsement and did not have much more motorcycle experience than myself. The third student was me. While my bike handling skills were probably better than most, I last rode a motorcycle more than 30 years ago. Fortunately, the course does NOT assume you know how to do things such as starting the motorcycle nor shutting it down.

Our Class Had Only Three Students, Like Many LAB and CS Classes. Instructors Only Double-Up With Larger Courses

Motorcyles ARE Different (in some ways)
The first, and obvious difference is that motorcycles are big, heavy, and fast compared to bikes. Our training motorcycles were Suzuki 250 models which are tiny by current motorcycle standards but even they seemed heavy and clumsy to me. The second difference is that rider compliance is NOT considered "optional" by the larger society and the education programs are specifically backed by major manufacturers. A corollary is that instruction recognizes that motorcycles are vulnerable road users, but also starts with the presumption that crashes are usually multi-cause events in which the motorcyclist is actively seeking a balance between risk and safety. That is a refreshing change from bicycles, where advocates often seem obsessed with distinguishing between which crashes are the fault of the motorist and which are the fault of the cyclist. The MSF course knows that if you crash, it will HURT. This being said, there is a LOT of crossover in principles with bikes, even though the motorcycle people use different terms for many of their principles. ONE OTHER THING - Motorcyles ALL "backwards brake."

For the rest of this post, I'll cover topics I found interesting that either differ from bicycle teaching, match bicycle teaching, or fill in blanks for me.

Ear Protection
One thing I found fascinating was the subject of earplugs, due to my past bike school experience. Gail, here, started this and I have made other posts on the subject, here and here. In the case of the MSF, hearing protection is STRONGLY advocated even for those with quiet motorcycles and full-face helmets. One reason why, which tracks with my own bike experience, is that outside noise is a problem. The MSF cites wind noise in particular. In addition, traffic noise adds to the fatigue aspects. The MSF instructor discounted engine noise as a reason for the earplugs and was unaware that some jurisdictions outlaw their use. I also found that some motorcycle helmets have built-in provisions for listening to things like music while riding. Myself, I think this is a situation where "it depends" is a guiding factor. If you are riding slowly, in a quiet locale, ear protection is probably extraneous. That's a major reason I do not wear earphones in Ocean Shores. OTOH, if you are going to be listening to loud and engaging music, earphones are probably NOT a good idea since the music itself, in addition to being distracting, can add to hearing loss.

Visibility
In the past, I've been somewhat dubious about the incremental benefits of wearing "high vis" since much cycling (and motorcycling) clothing is basic black and because the first line of defense is to have good lights and to ride where people WILL see you before it is too late. However, I have to admit the MSF makes good points that being visible adds incremental safety. As they note about motorcycles (and could equally be noted about bikes), "...are smaller and not as prevalent as cars and trucks, so they are more difficult to pick out in traffic and their speed may be difficult for others to judge." We should keep in mind that many emergency vehicles are rear-ended on roads, despite being covered with high vis and despite "move over" legislation. 'Nuf sed.

Lane Positions
The MSF teaching on this is simple, and virtually identical to what is taught as "best practice" in cycling. The "line of sweetness" rules! In an interesting difference of terminology, the MSF describes the "line of sweetness" as the "presentation position."

The "Line of Sweetness!" Also Endorsed by the MSF

Dogs
I don't recall much material from bike school about dealing with dogs, and DEFINITELY not about how to deal with larger animals such as the deer that abound in Ocean Shores. The MSF recommendation follows: "Once an approaching dog is spotted, a good rider response is to slow, including a downshift, then accelerate past the point of interception. Don't kick at the dog, because it will make controlling the motorcycle difficult."

Crash Chain
Two things that are talked about in bike ed, are "the danger is ahead" and ACE (which stands for Ability, Conditions, and Equipment). This is complemented by the "ABC Quick Check" which is more equivalent to something the MSF refers to as TCLOCS. The Crash Chain is an excellent way to view all the elements of ACE. With apologies to Preston Tyree, he ought to consider adapting the graphic view of the Crash Chain as it wraps together all the elements of ACE, though it separates "conditions" into "road and environment," and "other traffic."

Crash Chain Graphic PERFECTLY Illustrates the LAB "ACE" Concept
REMOVE Crash Causes to BREAK the Chain Between You and Crashes

Tests
As noted  here and other places, I feel the CS program does too little testing (this is only bad because it means less feedback to students) while the LAB program spends too high a portion of its course time in testing (better student feedback, but too much time spent on tests relative to the length of the course). I do not know to what degree the MSF course approach to testing is dictated by state licensing requirements, but I found that its written test wasn't much less of a PIA than the LAB test, and its riding test was "pass/fail" since a "pass" is required to eliminate the state riding skills test. Overall, I wasn't impressed with the MSF testing, since feedback was only offered upon request. In this way it was effectively somewhere in between the two cycling programs.

Turning and Braking
I think I've blathered on for almost too much here, so I'll end with turning and braking. The principles of turning on a motorcycle are the same as on a bicycle. I found it interesting that the instructor never used the term "countersteer," though he taught us the principles. The MSF Handbook mentions it once in the context of "Press" where you press forward on the motorcycle grip in the direction of the turn. Still, this is an area in which my past bike experience with "instant turns" and such allowed me to control the motorcycle more accurately than the other students.

Another difference in emphasis is braking. In bike school, we try quick stops with the rear, with the front, and with both brakes to illustrate things. In motorcycle school, we are simply taught to apply both brakes smoothly and there is less emphasis on letting up on one or the other brake should skidding begin. Principles are the same, but perhaps the difference is because it would be difficult to spot for someone on a heavy motorcycle.

All in all, it was a good learning experience and I recommend it to anyone who is interested in improving his/her cycling abilities. Since I've done it, I also guess I ought to go ahead and get a motorcycle endorsement. After all, "you never know..."

Help Wanted

Since the middle of 2009, I made 723 posts on this blog, not including this one. I made a number more on "Cycle*Dallas" before that. The majority of these posts had significant cycling educational information. Heck, a couple were actually from material I collected for LCI Seminar teaching. It was not, however, done in accordance with a plan to accumulate a comprehensive story. Mostly, it tended to apply this writer's experiences in a way that others in the same situation could see an apply useful elements to themselves. As I've noted many times, I am NOT a cycling advocate. Mostly, it was cycling education from the perspective of a commute transportation cyclist. I freely confess that group riding is not something I'm particularly expert about. Well, that's actually putting a positive spin on my group riding skills. I ride well enough in a group that I haven't gotten hurt doing it.

Lately, however, and prompted partly by some developments within the Bike League, it seems to me that this information, along with complementary information on like-minded blogs could be organized and structured an "a la carte" approach to bike education. We just have to figure out how. It probably means we also have to import bits, such as some existing LAB course elements.

And those thoughts have not gone away.

Here are a few of the notions:

• First, it is a lot more than just a blog. That makes me glad I used to keep a couple of pretty good car club web sites and do JavaScript. But that also taught me that websites work better with collaborators.
• Second, this will need expert help. As in current and former LCI people to help keep the focus on sound bike education principles and not digress into campaigns for or against facilities or government programs. Political Bike Ed is corrupt Bike Ed.
• What's more, expert help should not be limited only to those, such as myself, that have spent more time learning to ride their bikes well than most motorists ever do in learning how to drive well. Help from those sensing learning needs are, perhaps, most valuable of all. On thing I have criticized in the LAB courses is that their tests are not the best use of student or instructor time. Certainly, none of the written tests I took ever helped me in any tangible way. However, some self test can be very valuable, particularly in an a la carte program such as described. And people with uneven knowledge can help make this work. Unfortunately, ignorant test subjects quickly lose their values as "people that don't know any better." I guess there are worse problems.
• Part of this should include information for the aspiring cyclist about equipment and maintenance. But this is not a "how to overhaul that bottom bracket and replace cartridge bearings" site. My study on Simple Green would be mentioned no more than in passing.

Simple Green Does NOT Eat Aluminum

I am thinking that this would not tell people where to go for charity rides or races, or about rides across the country. It might, on the other hand, flag upcoming educational opportunities. I don't know. I haven't thought it through that far.

First off, I need to dig up a descriptive URL and a few initial team consultants. If you have gone to one of those URL domain name search sites and come up with one. Leave a comment below, or if it is a REAL gem that should not be revealed to the world before I can get it registered, email it to me. Pretty soon, we'll have to figure out how to resolve the different directions people will want to go.

I think, however, I need help and advice. I'm reminded of innumerable movies in which the recruiter says "I need people to go on a tough mission with no glory and no pay." The ones I'm looking for are the ones that respond to that pitch with "Sounds good, count me in!"

For those that don't realize it, my email is connected to my profile and is

 steve dot a dot dfwptp at gmail dot com

 

When the new site gets up and running, we'll have emails connected to that. Yours, for example might be routefinder@ourcoolsitename.org

 

If you doubt the need for this, think about it the next time you see a wrong-way cyclist headed directly towards you while you are in a bike lane on a busy road. While you are at it, think about how will we reach such people?

 

Well, that's enough for the moment. I've got a swap meet to go to and you can expect updates of this post over the coming week. To add a little element of humor I like to put in my posts, much as are those Mormons lining up at Rantwick's door, we shall be on a mission. White shirt and tie are not required for this mission, however.

 

Oh, and by the way, it probably is a good idea for those (well, I'm pretty sure it'll be plural) that want to help, to let me know up front if you want your contributions to remain hidden from the world for some reason. After all, even I recognize that advocates can be cyclists as well and, in fact, I actually know some.

 

 

Lousy Kid Get OFF the Lawn!



"Linda A," On Another Day

Some say that the youngsters today simply don't "get it." About the most they can understand is "Lousy Kid, Get OFF the Lawn!" Well, I'm here to tell you it ain't so. At least ONE kid (and possibly a couple more) has learned how to drive safer around us pesky cyclists than many of my own generation. There IS hope for the human race, and I found out about it entirely by accident.

This morning, I was taking a fellow cyclist to the airport. We'll call her "Linda A" for the sake of convenience. Being of my generation, she was either too cheap or broke to take a decent flight, and so we were going along in the predawn darkness. Up ahead, I saw a person on a bike. He had lights, and was heading along the same four-lane road we were on, and the lanes were 11-12 feet wide. This person was riding at the far right of our lane. As you might know if you've read this blog much, I favor a more prominent lane position on such roads. Seeing the person, I was reminded of why. Simply put, it took me a couple of seconds to decide whether to make a full lane change to pass the person or not. I commented on this to "Linda A." I noted that the guy on the bike would have lowered my stress level by simply making it more obvious that a full lane change was THE action to take, and I wondered WHAT sort of message the "edge hugger" guy was sending to motorists who did not write about cycling on an ongoing basis. She agreed. But the guy on the bike is NOT the point of this post.

Stock Shot of Cyclist Riding in a Manner to Create Doubt in the Motoring Mind About How/Whether to Pass

After agreeing, she related a little story that reminded me there is hope for the future and that I'd never heard before. Linda mentioned that she'd ridden along with my wife and my youngest daughter. My wife was driving. They came upon a cyclist. My wife made a straddle pass of the cyclist. My youngest spoke up and said "you should have made a full lane change to pass that cyclist." My wife, chastened, agreed that would have been better. MY FAVORITE DAUGHTER!

It tells me those driving sessions where we hunted for cyclists she could practice passing were not wasted. Later, I mentioned this to her older sister who noted that she either made a full lane change or simply followed until it was safe to make that full lane change. Of course, SHE might have simply been "sucking up," knowing that we're now in the Christmas season, though I really don't think so. However, she didn't get an unsolicited testimonial. There's nothing like a neutral "Attagirl" to get points with "the Dad."

Daughter, During a "How to Pass Cyclists" Driver Training Lesson, Described HERE

The glow remains even now. It's good to know that sometimes our kids pay attention. Just sayin' that sometimes, it's good to hear these kids are sometimes smarter than they appear. Or maybe, I'm just being a proud papa. Either way, at least for today, YOU GO GIRL!

The Favored One, Modeling Raingear for This Blog

Cycling Savvy Preliminaries

Fellow Student, Chandra, Boards the TRE

First, I'll start with an update to that "Earphone Myth" post. When I mentioned it to someone before class started, the reaction was "eww, that is as controversial as a helmet post or gun control, only less well known!" And so it was.

Talk, Talk, Talk!
Friday was the lecture segment to Cycling Savvy. Cycling Savvy is an educational product of the Florida Bicycling Association that was principally developed by two cyclists in the Orlando area. Rather than belabor the details, go here to learn more about the developers and the organization. Our course was co-taught by Waco Moore and Keri Caffrey. Waco was one of my co-students when I took my second LCI Seminar and Keri came in from Orlando.

Chandra Unfolds the Folder

My own context for this post is from the context of one who has been trained to teach the Bike League curriculum; particularly Traffic 101. Most readers, if they know anything at all about bicycle education, know of that or its Canadian counterpart.

Cycling Savvy Myth
It is easier to first start with what Cycling Savvy is NOT. Despite what might be claimed, such as comments here, or even in Cycling Savvy literature, if the lecture I heard is believed, the underlying principles of how to operate a bicycle in traffic are identical as are taught in the LAB curriculum, and so Cycling Savvy is most emphatically not "new" in that regard. While Cycling Savvy claims to eschew "vehicular cycling," it does so only in avoiding the offensive language often associated with "vehicular cycling" advocates. Phrases such as "infeariority," "phobia" and similar hot button words. It presents simple information, simply and plainly. The closest it came to inflammatory rhetoric was when Waco contrasted bike ed videos from the 50's with the current "gotta wear a helmet" variety. Cycling Savvy, in short, does not pretend there is some magical new way to ride safely. It simply tells the student what to do.

Instructor Waco Moore Prepares for Cycling Savvy Lecture

A second thing that Cycling Savvy is NOT, is a general bicycling course, and this is really the major difference from the LAB Traffic 101 course. Simply said, Cycling Savvy will not teach you how to fix a flat tire, adjust brakes, or how to adjust a derailleur, while Traffic 101 does cover those topics. The difference is crucial to a student, however. It means that Cycling Savvy has much more class time to cover riding situations. It also means a prospective student needs to consider just what he/she really needs to learn and alternate ways to get that learning. On the other hand, if all things bikes (and not only  riding) are somewhat of a mystery to you and you don't even know where to start, Traffic 101 is a better bet.

Instructor and Course Co-Developer Keri Caffrey Takes a Brief, Well-earned Break

Steve Editorial Before We Get Too Far
My own strictly personal and unofficial opinion, neither endorsed nor prohibited by anyone, is that most people considering taking a cycling course are people scared because the BS they have been fed makes them nervous about simply enjoying the act of riding their bikes. Just like non-swimmers worry about all that water, prospective cyclists are concerned about those 18 wheelers. What's more people simply don't believe that I'm comfortable on the same road as 18 wheelers (GOD BLESS PROFESSIONAL DRIVERS!). The students I've seen are much less concerned that a flat tire or a loose quick release will hurt or strand them. They've got cell phones and bike shops identified. What is more, bike shops often offer means to learn basic mechanics. To draw an analogy, the LAB Traffic 101 course is like a computer course that teaches a bit about component installation and removal while Cycling Savvy focuses on how to boot things up and check your email. Most of the students I've seen, even in Traffic 101, are less concerned with what makes the computer tick than simply USING it. Of course, that might be just a North Texas situation. Which is why I'm not paid millions of bucks annually by either LAB or the Florida Bicycling Association. Go back to the disclaimer at the top of this paragraph.

Preston's Influence
Preston Tyree ruined me. It means I need to find something good and something that could have been better about Cycling Savvy. I'd like to list more of each (and I certainly have LOTS of candidate items), but I'll wait until after the on-bike sessions. For now, one of each.

Preston and Co-conspirators, Figuring Out What We Could Have Done Better

Something Good
The lecture material was strongly developed and presented. As I noted to an anonymous fellow student sitting to my right, (also a Bike League LCI) "you or I could work on PowerPoint for six months and we wouldn't be CLOSE to these charts." At the risk of getting to a second "good" thing, it looked to me that the pitch was standardized, with buttons being clicked to tailor for the locale. Simply put, the charts worked, made preparation simpler for the instructors, and engaged the students with modern multimedia.

Selected Cycling Savvy Chart. Note Familiar Material and Buttons to Customize for Presentation Locale

Something That Could Have Been Better
Well, to be perfectly honest, it seemed like there was an AWFUL LOT of stuff about how to ride around bike lanes. There are no longer any bike lanes within daily riding distance of my house. As in zippity do dah. The main problem that creates for me is I have to explain to non cyclists that no bike lanes really don't make it harder for me to ride to work safely. Even the unmourned loss of the North Tarrant Parkway bike lane was unlike the examples presented in class because there was no parking allowed along the bike lane and it was so wide that motorists used it as an auxiliary passing lane. Suburban North Texas is NOT Orlando, nor even Dallas, but it IS where a lot of students in North Texas will come from, and suburbs are around all the other cities where courses have or will probably be offered. In short, the class occasionally loses its focus on fundamental operation principles. That is hardly a fatal or uncorrectable flaw, though it is notable, considering I was thrashed before I took my first LCI by a correspondent that didn't like the LAB position on bike lanes. Come to think of it, bike lanes are a controversy up there with earphones and helmets and it was integrated so well that it really didn't use a lot of class time, so 'nuff sed!

Many Familar Faces Were at the Class, Including Eliot Landrum in the Photo, Richard Wharton, Chandra (of course)
And an Anonymous LCI that Sat to My Right. And I'm Sure I Forgot to Mention a Few. Chandra and I  Were Two of Three That Came by Bike
The Other was the Gentleman in the Back in the Hawaiian Shirt that Came up from Houston and Rode His Bike from the Hotel

Irony
One item brought up in the lectures were those count down lights I posted about, just last week, here. Another was how to trigger traffic lights. Posts here and here, and lots of other places. On the way to the train station to get home, I was mildly concerned about missing the TRE. There were three of those count down signals along the route. One one of the count down signals, I flashed through the intersection just as it hit zero. Hit it! It seemed a fitting end to the evening. And I may have to point Keri to some added secrets about the finer points of video signal camera detection zones. It's the engineer in me. Just as I'm sure John Brooking is capable of improving my ice biking technique.

This One's For YOU

Among other things, this blog has an educational purpose. It isn't to preach about how "you ought to do this or you ought to do that." Rather, it's is more of an "I've observed these things when I ride this way, such and such says it might be this way and that might be useful for you as well" approach.

It isn't real catchy marketing, and it depends on people trying stuff and seeing what works for them in their own situations. Often, it is hard to tell if things make any difference at all to anyone else. However, on rare occasions, feedback says that people are making connections for themselves that work. Most recently, this occurred on my "Four Hundred" post. Specifically, Big Oak wrote:

"You've helped me to become a more aware bike commuter through your posts, especially around construction areas. I also ride more "vehicularly" than I used to thanks to you."

and Rat Trap Press wrote:

"I'm much more assertive in my riding after reading your blog. Thanks."

Presumably, what all this means is these guys saw SOMETHING that made sense to them, each of them tried it, and found it made their cycling life better in some way. THAT means the world to me. Thanks. This post is for you and the others who have also seen something here that helped their riding be better for having read it. Of course, there's also a simpler explanation: what would one expect of a Tricross owner and a Fort Worth resident?

Sometimes God is My Copilot

Gerald Ball, God's Messenger to Cycling Instructors

Not always, but sometimes my copilot places earthly signs along my commute route to provide inspirational messages. These messages take many forms, but sometimes the signs are, literally, signs; such as this sign from one of His messengers to remind me how I should ride if I wish to best teach cycling technique. Might God ride a bicycle, or even instruct cycling? Whether yea or nay, it's a good message to contemplate over the weekend. It probably applies to other forms of teaching as well. You may see some signs yourself!

Frenchy Forgot to Mention Something

Mostly in this blog, I write about bike items. However, on occasion I mention Jaguars. I used to show them. Actually I also used to race them in Autocross. The Jaguar Club version of SCCA Solo 1 racing. In it, you run the car as fast as you can through a parking lot course marked by cones. It sharpens your driving skills and improves your understanding of what your vehicle will do at its limit. That understanding helps in normal driving as well. It's why my eldest daughter ran her first autocross while on her learner's permit. One basic technique is outlined in The Red Car:

"...Frenchy went into the corners...along an invisible line that slanted diagonally across the corner from outside edge to outside edge... The little car went so close to the inside...at the corner's point that...Hap could feel that a butterfly's weight of extra pressure...would break the car loose... But Fenchy never once gave it that extra butterfly's weight..."

Steve A, Cutting to the Inside of a Corner in Vancouver
Drive Smoother to Drive Faster

I don't drive my car that way on city streets, at least not obviously, but if you look at car wheel tracks on any road, you will observe that they move from side to side within a lane depending on curb and turn situations as well as the lane width. However, a bike is a lot narrower than a car, and I typically utilize more of the road when cornering than would be decent for my motoring companions. Coming to a right turn, I'll usually be riding roughly at the right side of the left wheel track in a position (the line of sweetness) where any following motorist will certainly not to have to watch extra carefully to notice my presence (SIN or no). As I near the corner, I will use the full lane available to me and move right within the lane as I approach the apex of the turn; finishing up in the new direction in about the same lane position on the new road. In effect, while I don't cut real close to the curb (after all, one doesn't want to ride through a debris field), I am doing exactly what Frenchy was doing on a closed course, albeit in a less dramatic fashion. Usually, this is perfectly safe and allows a fast turn while only yielding control of the lane at the sharpest point in the corner. A point at which I am invariably traveling faster than any following motorist.

Frenchy forgot one thing. He forgot to mention that cars and bikes have different turning characteristics because of the difference in width and wheelbase, and even cars turn differently when the road is slick than when it is dry. Usually, this doesn't matter, but we've accumulated a lot of loose road rubble due to the recent freezes and this has accumulated where motorist wheel tracks don't sweep it away the same way as usual. Like at the inside point of corners. This morning, making a turn I make every day at about 20mph, my apex was about a foot closer to the curb than normal (I've been leaving more room than usual in case I hit a patch of gravel) when my rear tire crossed gravel and swung out suddenly as if there was one too many butterflies applying pressure to the tire. No, I didn't fall, but I simply don't like my bike to do something unexpected while I'm on it on a public road. Maybe it's an "engineer thing." It was a reminder that the natural turning paths of bikes and cars are even more different than are the turning paths of skiers versus snowboarders. Frenchy was driving a sport car amongst other sport cars. His turn strategy would have been far different had he been driving an RV - or a bike. It was a good reminder. Bikes ARE different.

That Patch of Gravel Was Certainly Inconvenient for a Cyclist
Turning Smoother to Ride Faster

No Line, But a UNIVERSE of Sweetness

Seeing as how our local LCI class is coming up, and I've noticed some lane position comments that might be right or wrong depending on the situation, I decided to revisit "the line of sweetness." In reality, there is not a single line of sweetness. Rather, there's a universe of sweetness that varies from situation to situation. Often, I DO ride in the "left center" position, shown below.

Lately, however, even on the road indicated, I notice that I feel better riding on the right edge of the rough center, much as the Yeti, shown below.

Unlike him, when so riding, I would be VERY reluctant to jog to the right into the right wheel track - I'd hate to sucker a motorist into attempting a pass without a lane change when the lane is simply too narrow. The real danger of riding in the right wheel track is not that position, but that a small waver might sent the WRONG message to a following motorist, resulting in an awkward situation for both parties. Mostly, I think it better to clarify things in the minds of my following motorists so they change lanes early and keep moving along smartly.

However, sometimes, it'd seem churlish to ride in the main traffic lane at all, such as in the situation below. OTOH, the line indicating "my path" is, technically, illegal in most states even though it presents no risk to me and does not slow anybody down by even a millisecond. I've also never seen any motorist, even one wearing a badge, object to the indicated position and it IS recommended in both of the authoritative cycling books I know of. In such a situation, jogging right to avoid a hazard would not entice any following motorist to do something ill advised.

In SOME cases, however, as shown below, the only smart thing is to GET OUT OF THE WAY because some vehicles will run you down  to get ahead - and they'll even laugh about it. So much for the rules of the road. Sometimes, those rules get trumped by the cross. The cyclocross.

HH100 Report - MSU Squared

For some bloggers, MSU stands for "Missouri State University." So it is for some riders in the "Hotter 'N Hell 100." As one example, the rider below clearly suggests that his loyalties lie with the northern state of Missouri. This also proves that there is at least one MSU cyclist that rides far afield.

Now THIS Guy is a Long Way from Home!

But there is another MSU. This MSU has a strong cycling tradition. As a matter of fact, as noted here, Midwestern State athletes have won 21 national collegiate cycling championships on the road and track. While MSU would normally compete in NCAA Division 2, in cycling they compete in Division 1. The second MSU has a bit of an advantage, you see. It happens to be located in Wichita Falls. Conveniently Enough, Wichita Falls is the site of the largest organized century ride in the US; the "Hotter 'N Hell 100."

While in Wichita Falls, I highly recommend a tour of the MSU campus. The campus is very attractive and, not being a "megaschool," it won't take long. Besides, how many colleges do you know with a statue dedicated to the school cycling team?

MSU in Wichita Falls. Formerly it was Known as Hardin College

MSU Team Arrow Statue on MSU Campus