RIP John Forester

On Sunday, April 26, 2020 at 4:10:39 PM UTC-7, sms wrote:
On 4/25/2020 3:48 PM, John B. wrote:
On Sat, 25 Apr 2020 07:13:03 -0700, sms
wrote:

On 4/24/2020 6:03 PM, John B. wrote:

snip

The argument that if we build bike paths more people will ride bikes
seems, well, similar to the theory that "if we build lower bridges
more people will bungee jump".

That's probably the worst analogy I've ever seen.

As an aside, building bike paths costs the taxpayer money while
enforcing existing laws should not add to the existing tax burden.

OMG, do you have any idea how much each additional police officer or
sheriff's deputy costs a city? Enforcing existing laws is incredibly
expensive, and it's a recurring cost. It's a tremendous tax burden.

Well, Good Lord!

VOTE for SMS and get rid of those expensive police and build bicycle
lanes to save money!

Thanks. We're not getting rid of any deputies but we are building
bicycle infrastructure.

Speaking of deputies and bicycle infrastructure, the new infrastructure is barricades. https://kval.com/news/local/columbia...itors-trespass Today, I talked a park ranger into letting me go down to Vista House to look for a little travel wallet that I thought might have fallen out when taking out my camera to take a picture a few weeks ago. She was really nice and let me do it. The climb back up was very peaceful. Zero cars. It's the King of Roads, and they shut it down. https://vimeo.com/106647620 I don't want to be on no queen roads.

In fact, I had to ride on some non-royalty roads and a super-crowded MUP, at least in places on the way home. It's a long rail-trail and a little out of the way but way better than riding through east county ****holia. So that piece of infrastructure gets the thumbs-up, except for the homeless and the murders, etc. Apart from that, though, its great.

-- Jay Beattie

On Sun, 26 Apr 2020 17:02:18 -0700 (PDT), Sir Ridesalot
wrote:

On Sunday, 26 April 2020 17:52:54 UTC-4, wrote:
On Sunday, April 26, 2020 at 11:19:39 PM UTC+2, wrote:
On Thursday, April 23, 2020 at 3:45:42 PM UTC-7, sms wrote:
On 4/23/2020 3:22 PM, James wrote:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/carlton.../#5bc19d171cc3

Yeah, just saw that report earlier today. I had no idea that he was
related to C.S. Forester.

I received a copy of his manuscript before Effective Cycling was
published, sometime in the early 1980's. Reading it was like Richard
Feynman when he was on the California textbook selection committee and
his wife would hear him scream whenever he encountered something really
stupid in a book (the story is in his book, "Surely You're Joking Mr.
Feynman").

He had his opinions, but very little was fact-based. Loved the line in
that Forbes story "Despite never having ridden on any cycleways in the
Netherlands, Forester was heavily critical of Dutch cycleways, stating
them to be dangerous for cyclists." That was the essence of his
personality, pontificate on things that you have absolutely no knowledge
about.

Fortunately few states or municipalities paid any attention to his
rantings, including in Palo Alto. Ellen Fletcher, for whom Palo Alto's
Bryant Street Bike Boulevard is named, was far more effective in
promoting widespread bicycling in Palo Alto
https://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2012/11/08/palo-altos-bicycle-pioneer-ellen-fletcher-dies.

"Despite the copious evidence that the separation of transport modes can
and does improve safety for cyclists, and encourages more people to
cycle, Forester remained adamant that providing cycleways was a
retrograde step for the health of cycling."

Tell us all how many cycleways you rode on in the Netherlands? What I saw was the same problems as here - drivers with the idea that since they had more power and paid more for their mode of transportation that they had right of way and drive with EXTREME danger around riders.

Huh?? Almost every car driver here also ride bicycles and have kids that ride bicycles. Why would they drive around around riders with extreme danger? This is extremely rare.

Lou

I take 99% of what Tom says with a grain of salt as he's so often proven to be in error.

My understanding is that in the Netherlands it's the driver who must prove the bicyclist was at fault if a car or other motor vehicle hits one.

Cheers

The thing that most don't seem to comprehend is the tremendous use of
bicycles in Holland compared to N. America. On a national basis some
27% of all trips in The Netherlands are made by bicycle. In the cities
it is even greater with Amsterdam being 38% and a smaller city -
Zwolle (pop. ~123,000) it is 46%.
--
cheers,

John B.

On Sun, 26 Apr 2020 17:26:54 -0700 (PDT),
jbeattie wrote:

Today, I talked a park ranger into letting me go down to Vista
House to look for a little travel wallet that I thought might
have fallen out when taking out my camera to take a picture a
few weeks ago. She was really nice and let me do it. The
climb back up was very peaceful. Zero cars. It's the King of
Roads, and they shut it down. https://vimeo.com/106647620 I
don't want to be on no queen roads.

Did you find the wallet?

--
Ted Heise West Lafayette, IN, USA

On 27/4/20 7:52 am, wrote:


Huh?? Almost every car driver here also ride bicycles and have kids
that ride bicycles. Why would they drive around around riders with
extreme danger? This is extremely rare.


I believe this is part of the "safety in numbers" effect, and in
Australia I believe we suffer a considerable lack of it.

Drivers here are often impatient and ignorant of the danger they pose to
vulnerable road users.

I ride defensively. I check and anticipate all vehicle movements in my
vicinity. It's requires concentration. It would be nice to be able to
ride without being on tenter hooks.

--
JS

On Sunday, April 26, 2020 at 5:51:53 PM UTC-7, Ted Heise wrote:
On Sun, 26 Apr 2020 17:26:54 -0700 (PDT),
jbeattie wrote:

Today, I talked a park ranger into letting me go down to Vista
House to look for a little travel wallet that I thought might
have fallen out when taking out my camera to take a picture a
few weeks ago. She was really nice and let me do it. The
climb back up was very peaceful. Zero cars. It's the King of
Roads, and they shut it down. https://vimeo.com/106647620 I
don't want to be on no queen roads.

Did you find the wallet?


Nope. I'd already cancelled the credit card. So someone got $20 and some I.D.

I'm thinking about getting a credit card case for the iPhone so I just carry one thing plus food in my jersey.


-- Jay Beattie.

On 4/27/2020 2:31 AM, James wrote:
On 27/4/20 7:52 am, wrote:


Huh?? Almost every car driver here also ride bicycles and have kids
that ride bicycles. Why would they drive around around riders with
extreme danger? This is extremely rare.


I believe this is part of the "safety in numbers" effect, and in
Australia I believe we suffer a considerable lack of it.

Drivers here are often impatient and ignorant of the danger they pose to
vulnerable road users.

I ride defensively.Â* I check and anticipate all vehicle movements in my
vicinity.Â* It's requires concentration.Â* It would be nice to be able to
ride without being on tenter hooks.

Regarding Forester and "safety in numbers" for bicycling: That's an
issue regarding which my attitude and arguments differed from
Forester's. And I took a bit of heat for it, but still don't agree with
Forester.

Peter Jacobsen wrote the article that first claimed that more cyclists
naturally generate safer cycling. He collected data in various ways, but
typically something like injuries per million cyclists vs. cyclists per
million population. Plotting those yielded curves with decreasing slopes
- IOW, more bike travel, less injury per mile.

Forester and others said the shape of the curves was an accidental
mathematical artifact - that having the cyclist count in the denominator
for the Y axis and in the numerator of the X axit, you guaranteed a
decreasing slope.

As I recall, it took a while for others on Forester's team to work out
correlation coefficients, etc. and show that Jacobsen's findings were
not just random or just mathematical artifacts. And as I recall,
Forester never admitted he might be wrong - which is typical of him.
(It's also typical of many people posting here.)

I didn't dive into the math as deeply as that. I merely said the
endpoint cases certainly justified what Jacobsen claimed. That is, if
you had just one car in a nation of millions of cyclists it would
present almost zero danger to the average cyclist, and if you had only
one cyclist in a nation with millions of cars, he'd be at unusual risk.
In general, other things being equal, I do think more bicyclists yield
better driver behavior, at least above a certain threshold.

A problem with the "safety in numbers" concept is that many bike
segregationists seized on it as justification for terrible designs. They
said it doesn't matter if a particular bike lane (say) sent bicyclists
into blind intersections in a way that surprised motorists, because
eventually there would be lots more bicyclists everywhere and motorists
would become more careful. I think that's nuts. The potential for a
small - or hypothetical - increase in the number of bicyclists does NOT
justify construction of badly designed facilities.



--
- Frank Krygowski

On 4/27/2020 6:31 AM, jbeattie wrote:

snip

Nope. I'd already cancelled the credit card. So someone got $20 and some I.D.

I'm thinking about getting a credit card case for the iPhone so I just carry one thing plus food in my jersey.

I just take my phone.

Can't remember the last time I used a physical credit card. With a
Samsung phone it's a lot easier to go card-free because you can pay even
at businesses that don't take Apple Pay or Google Pay, as long as the
store accepts credit cards.

Actually I do remember when I used a physical credit card--to buy
gasoline at Costco, the pumps don't take contactless payment yet, but I
would not need that on a bicycle.

On Mon, 27 Apr 2020 08:40:39 -0700,
sms wrote:
On 4/27/2020 6:31 AM, jbeattie wrote:

Nope. I'd already cancelled the credit card. So someone got
$20 and some I.D.

I'm thinking about getting a credit card case for the iPhone
so I just carry one thing plus food in my jersey.

I just take my phone.

I carry a small ziplock bag with printed out maps of the paved
roads in a 2-3 county circumference. Somtimes they come in handy.
I keep a seldom used credit card and some cash in there, just for
emergencies. It fits nicely in a jersey pocket.

--
Ted Heise West Lafayette, IN, USA

On 2020-04-26 17:45, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 26 Apr 2020 17:02:18 -0700 (PDT), Sir Ridesalot
wrote:

On Sunday, 26 April 2020 17:52:54 UTC-4,
wrote:
On Sunday, April 26, 2020 at 11:19:39 PM UTC+2,
wrote:
On Thursday, April 23, 2020 at 3:45:42 PM UTC-7, sms wrote:
On 4/23/2020 3:22 PM, James wrote:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/carlton.../#5bc19d171cc3



Yeah, just saw that report earlier today. I had no idea that he was
related to C.S. Forester.

I received a copy of his manuscript before Effective Cycling
was published, sometime in the early 1980's. Reading it was
like Richard Feynman when he was on the California textbook
selection committee and his wife would hear him scream
whenever he encountered something really stupid in a book
(the story is in his book, "Surely You're Joking Mr.
Feynman").

He had his opinions, but very little was fact-based. Loved
the line in that Forbes story "Despite never having ridden on
any cycleways in the Netherlands, Forester was heavily
critical of Dutch cycleways, stating them to be dangerous for
cyclists." That was the essence of his personality,
pontificate on things that you have absolutely no knowledge
about.

Fortunately few states or municipalities paid any attention
to his rantings, including in Palo Alto. Ellen Fletcher, for
whom Palo Alto's Bryant Street Bike Boulevard is named, was
far more effective in promoting widespread bicycling in Palo
Alto
https://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2012/11/08/palo-altos-bicycle-pioneer-ellen-fletcher-dies.



"Despite the copious evidence that the separation of transport modes can
and does improve safety for cyclists, and encourages more
people to cycle, Forester remained adamant that providing
cycleways was a retrograde step for the health of cycling."

Tell us all how many cycleways you rode on in the Netherlands?


I've at least racked up 5000 miles on them over the years. Surprisingly
I never got a speeding ticket on a road bike in the Netherlands but I
did in Germany and almost in the US.


What I saw was the same problems as here - drivers with the
idea that since they had more power and paid more for their
mode of transportation that they had right of way and drive
with EXTREME danger around riders.

Huh?? Almost every car driver here also ride bicycles and have
kids that ride bicycles. Why would they drive around around
riders with extreme danger? This is extremely rare.

Lou


That was also my experience when living there. Only very few rude
drivers, deliberate close passes, honking et cetera.


I take 99% of what Tom says with a grain of salt as he's so often
proven to be in error.

My understanding is that in the Netherlands it's the driver who
must prove the bicyclist was at fault if a car or other motor
vehicle hits one.


IIRC that was (still is?) France.


Cheers

The thing that most don't seem to comprehend is the tremendous use
of bicycles in Holland compared to N. America. On a national basis
some 27% of all trips in The Netherlands are made by bicycle. In the
cities it is even greater with Amsterdam being 38% and a smaller city
- Zwolle (pop. ~123,000) it is 46%. -- cheers,


I think it's gone down a lot in the last 30 years, unfortunately. People
becoming lazier? I don't know, moved to the US, maybe Lou can tell us why.

What made me really sad was seeing that a humongous bicycle parking lot
at a large Dutch company I worked at in the early 80's was ... gone.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/24/2020 9:12 PM, sms wrote:
On 4/24/2020 4:15 PM, Joerg wrote:

anip

No, what he didn't understand was that the vast majority of people is
not like you and I who clench their teeth and just ride. The vast
majority of potential candidates for cycle commutes will not ride on
busy narrow roads. Then they will use the car. Luckily the leaders in
Folsom, Rancho Cordova and finally even Sacramento understand this and
acted accordingly. The leaders in our town don't and, needless to say,
that clearly shows in the number of regular cyclists.

He understood it but he never was interested in increasing the number of
cyclists.

I think that's correct. And it directly rebuts the frequent criticisms
by people like Carlton Reid, John Pucher, Streetsblog and others of that
ilk. They frequently say Forester was a failure because he did not
increase the number of cyclists.

But that was not his objective. He showed those of us who choose to ride
a method that works in the real world, and allows us to ride wherever we
choose.

BTW, I think you can make a case that the Segregationists have failed by
their own standard. Yes, you can point to places like Portland that have
A) put in lots of segregated facilities and B) have increased bike mode
share.

But! There are places that experienced increased bike mode share
simultaneously with Portland, without installing segregated facilities.
San Francisco during the anti-bike-lane lawsuit is an excellent example.
It indicates a disconnect between facilities and ridership, and hints
that simple "fashion" may be as important in getting people to ride.

But more to the point, the Segregationalists cried, "Bicycling is
dangerous! We need special places to ride, for SAFETY!" They got a few
special places, on a really tiny proportion of America's 4 million road
miles. But they convinced millions of people that all the rest of those
roads were too dangerous.

There has been no big nationwide surge in bicycling in the last 15 years
that the "Paint and Path" contingent has yelled the loudest.

From https://bikeleague.org/content/new-data-bike-commuting
"The 2017 1-year data shows that overall, commuters are choosing to use
a bicycle as their primary mode of transportation to work slightly less
than in recent years. Year-over-year, the rate of people biking to work
has decreased 4.7%. Among the 70 largest cities (as of 2009 when the
League began tracking), a slight majority (37) cities had a
year-over-year decrease in bike mode share."

From
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...ms/2319972002/
"Fewer Americans bike to work despite new trails, lanes and bicycle
share programs."

So much public money was spent hoping to get people out of their cars
and riding in nice, "safe" bike lanes; but it may have scared more
people away from cycling. Overall, it is such a failure.

Oh, and "safe"? The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety found as many
as ten times the crash rate in some "protected" bike lanes.

Then there are the national fatality counts, which have turned upward in
recent years.

Reid, Pucher and others are failures. Their programs are failures. I
think they're attacking Forester out of frustration that he was right.


Much like politics folks that are dogmatic in the ideology rather than been
pragmatic, personally my commute has a mix of parks, semi segregated and
very old segregated cycleways the latter is a boon as it has very few give
ways.

Plus a small % of back streets and some busier stuff.

Equally also depends on your speed etc, on my commute bike which is a old
heavy beast fast roads can feel uncomfortable as it lacks the pace, but on
my Gravel bike it’s generally fine as it’s a much faster machine.

Roger Merriman