Posted by Here we go then, trying to sit on the fence as both a cyclist and driver and not get knocked off by either.
Cycle paths. Why the hell doesn’t every cyclist use them? As they say, it’s complicated.
From a motorists point of view, cyclists should make use of cycle paths no matter what bike they are on, and what the purpose of their trip. So if you’re training for time trials and road races, or out for a gentle potter into town with the kids on their new birthday presents, you should be on that little strip of, hopefully, tarmac.
So, let’s take these ideas one at a time.
Road race training types:
If you ride an expensive bike, and yes, some cost more than cars, then you most probably want to ride it fast on a decent surface, and cycle paths are, in general not that great.
There are several reasons for this, and here are just a few. The paths unlike roads, don’t get swept clear of tree debris, grit, broken glass etc. Most paths swap from side to side of the roads they follow, because they are generally also footpaths. For pedestrians this isn’t really an issue, but if you’re riding at 20-25mph on a flat road and upwards of 40mph downhill then stopping to keep crossing is not only a pain, but dangerous if you don’t know the path well enough to know where these crossings are.
Then there’s the issue that they are shared spaces with pedestrians, ironically, cyclists find this as annoying as car drivers find cyclists on the road. The surface of the paths is often very poor, again because once designated, the local councils don’t generally have any cash to maintain them. I’ve attached some photos of a few of these.
Commuters:
I have found that those that commute on bikes are often one and the same with club cyclists. They commute on their bikes to stay fit, and then ride with their clubs at the weekends. Some commuters however are more what I’d call leisure cyclists. They may ride more traditional styles of bike, or mountain bikes. These men and women tend to prefer the cycle paths because their bikes are made for them. They have fatter tyres, and are generally better equipped to cope with the uneven surfaces of the paths. They also are generally ridden at a more leisurely pace. Just to show that people do, in fact, use cycle paths, here is a photo of just that.
Family outings:
The final group I’m writing about are families, who tend to use the cycle paths whenever they can, because if you have youngsters on bikes, they generally won’t have such good control and are therefore much safer on a path where a wobble or tumble are not going to cause a crash. In my humble opinion, this group are who cycle paths were originally aimed at. Slow and steady riders who are often off their bikes as much as on them. I wouldn’t for one minute expect to come across them on an A road where there’s an option of being on a cycle path. One might reasonably expect to find all three groups on country lanes, in the same way you’d expect to find horses, tractors and pedestrians.
While I’m at it, which came first, the bicycle or the motor car? Bicycles 1817, cars 1885. So I would dare to reason that bicycles have more right than cars to the roads, in the same way that cycles should give way to horses and pedestrians who preceded them. I’m not suggesting that the M1 become a shared space for all to use, just that we are all reasonable when using the inevitably shared roads on our little island.
The exceptions to common sense:
So, now on to a rant about the idiots on bikes who are definitely out there, and who have a death wish.
Firstly, if you’re on a bike, for goodness sake, wear something in which you can be seen, from a distance. I all too frequently come across these insane idiots who dress all in black, it would seem especially in winter, in the dark. Why, just why?
Secondly, parents. What is so wrong in your little minds that you think it’s ok for little Jonny to ride all over the road in the dark with no lights on his bike? You can buy a pair, yes, front and back lights, for your kids bikes for less than you spend on a haircut. Aldi and Lidl often have them for £2 – £3, that’s the cost of two packets of crisps for your precious offspring’s life.
Helmets. I hate them, but I wear one because, quite simply, it might well save my life, and again, they don’t cost much so really, what sort of person will spend hundreds of pounds on a bike and then not spend £15 on a helmet. In my opinion they should be mandatory, but then again, if the police don’t ever seem to reprimand anyone without lights, why would they bother enforcing the wearing of helmets?
I remember being pulled over by a copper for not having a front light on my bike while riding home in a well lit village many years ago. It scared the pants off me, and the officer concerned made me walk home with my bike. Lesson learned.