View Single Post
  #8  
Old September 6th 05, 09:05 AM
Simon Brooke
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default A Sustrans dilemma

in message , tom
') wrote:

On Tue, 06 Sep 2005 00:06:23 +0100, Sandy Morton wrote:

In article
pan.2005.09.05.20.42.21.123202@firstnamelastname. com.invalid, Mike
Causer wrote:
So, by joining in the ride am I endorsing the stupidities, or is it
worth highlighting the really daft parts by not using them and
sticking to the road?


IMVHO Sustrans are a group of people without married parents.


Well it's great to see such massive support for a primarily cycling
oriented sustainable transport charity.


They aren't a cycling oriented sustainable transport charity. They may
have been that twenty years ago, but they aren't now. A lot of what
they're doing is very anti-cyclist and the majority of what they're
doing has nothing whatever to do with sustainability or transport. In my
part of the world, where Sustrans routes are on the roads they're mostly
OK, although not necessarily the road a cyclist would have chosen. But
where the route diverts off the road onto special cycle paths, they are
often actively dangerous, far more dangerous than the road. I hold up as
a special example of this the hill just west of Creetown, where the (two
way) cycle path is precipitous, very twisty through a wood with poor
sight-lines, and the tarmac is covered with moss, mud and slime. Someone
is going to get killed on there.

--
(Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; Friends don't send friends HTML formatted emails.
Ads
 

Home - Home - Home - Home - Home