Cyclists !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Timmo1341 posted:

Don Atkinson posted:

Anyway, back to my OP.

We had a lovely walk today, not along the towpath, but through leafy green woodland and pasture. Not a car or cyclist in sight. Just the sound of birds and cattle. Three hours of pure delight.

I'm surprised it took so long to come up with the obvious solution - there are '000s of miles of unmetalled public footpaths, all but impassable to most two wheelers,  where walkers/ramblers/strollers (of whom I am one, as well as a keen recreational cyclist) can indulge their passion to their hearts content, undisturbed by the lycra clad hordes!!

Oh we usually walk along Watership Down or the hills west and north of Marlborough. No cyclists. Then further afield monthly hikes in the Breacons, Snowdon or the coastal paths in Cornwall. Again no cyclists. Again, when in Canada most of our hikes in the Monashees and the Rockies are beyond the reach of cyclists.

But now and again, the K&A canal beckons. And some of the cyclists are just unreal.

ChrisR_EPL posted:

Wow. Looks like Don has been studying James May's Man Maths ethos, where any number can be contrived to fit the required answer. Pardon the lecture, but there's so much wrong with his opinions that it needs correcting.

Cycling improves health, reduces obesity and improves cardio-vascular fitness. It significantly reduces the risk of later life diseases such as Parkinsons, Alzheimer's and other wasting diseases. It reduces pollution, reduces wear & tear on roads to almost zero, and promotes well-being. Cycling commuters take significantly less time off sick,  and are more productive. All of this is easily verified on the net, there are numerous studies and reports that confirm these facts.

So cycling is a good thing. It keeps us fit, reduces the load now and later on the NHS and other care services, and doesn't damage the roads. and if more kids cycled to school there'd be fewer cars on the school run so that blip of traffic around 8:30 would be significantly reduced; anyone who drives to work in school holidays will know this.

 

Cycling produces all of these massively positive benefits. The downside apparently is that sometimes cars are held up. Funny that; I'm driving a lot these days since my job changed, and although I see loads of cyclists it's rare to be held up by them. It's not cyclists who make up traffic jams, it's all the other selfish gits driving their cars that get in my way when I'm driving. Cyclists v occasionally delay my arrival at the back of another traffic queue.

Windy country roads eh? I do most of my cycling mileage on B & C roads, and they aren't very winding. It's true. Lanes evolved as means of linking hamlets & villages, and they tend not to meander back on themselves, they go roughly A to B. This is my experience in the south east, east mids, north east and across The Peak District. I'm not claiming they're arrow straight, just that winding country lanes isn't the norm. Where there are bends, best to assume that a girl on a horse is just around it, and drive accordingly (people like girls and like horses, so it's a useful aide memoire )

So, all good so far.

Taxes then... We all pay tax; this forum is probably self-selecting, in that people who are happy to spunk a few grand on a nice music system probably have a lot of disposable income, and therefore are quite well off. I'd be happy to suggest that people who're happy to spend a few grand on a decent bike with electric gears are in the same boat. We pay a lot of tax and we pay a lot of additional tax buying improvements for our bikes [like our hifis], and on clothing, and on the overpriced foodstuffs that we eat. Estimates a couple of years ago were that cycling contributes about £6bn pa to the UK economy in the form of taxes, employment and cash flow. You want to tax that out of existence with is £2000 occupancy tax that no-one would pay? Blimey.

Taxes all go into one big pot anyway, so [in my case] the 20% of everything from £11k to [what is it? £33k?], the 40% of everything above, duty on wine and fuel into the car, insurance tax, airport taxes, VAT on about everything blah blah blah, I reckon that all of that adds up to a lot. It might add up to a bit more or a bit less than some of you, but given that the principle is that we all pay a reasonable amount, I'm happy that I contribute, and contribute a few thousand a year. So answer this Don - if I pay a few grand a year over to HMRC, and you do too presumably, what relevance is the couple of hundred quid's worth of VED in that much bigger amount? I mean, if you want to start laying down a claim on the roads because you've paid a bit more, you might as well barge into A&E demanding to be seen first as you've paid more, or push in at the police station past all the petty criminals and document producers to report your theft from your shed, shouting "I pay more, deal with me first". Only life doesn't work that way; we all pay what we have to and very few offer to pay more taxes where they don't have to. We all contribute to shared national resources and don't quibble at those who've paid less having more than they've paid in. Unless you're called Don and don't like being held up on your roads.

Btw car tax is VED and is based on pollution, not some halfwit calculation based on 'occupancy'. You might fart a bit more or a bit less than me, but even so me + bike generates less pollution that you + car, ergo you need to pay more tax, and low polluting cars pay zero or v little tax. [As an aside, any massive and or smoking polluting car from before 1974 is also VED-free. Stick that in your pipe & smoke it Don] That tax represents both the pollution you cause, the damage you do to the roads with your car, and the ruination of the country where every single town & village is given over to the car, where vast car parks have to be built to leave them somewhere when we get to work, and where swathes of countryside have been buried under mile after mile of motorway & dual c/way. Cars kill hundreds of people a year; they bring danger where none existed. Cars aren't that great really.

@CDB - I too live in MK and the redway system there is noted in planning circles as an example of how not to do it. It's a dreadful way of getting to work, although if you have a wish to cycle much more slowly and to go further for no reason other than planning simplicity, and you have a fancy for getting tangled up in dog leads or coming across dumped furniture in the underpasses or enjoy second-guessing which way a bunch of schoolkids might suddenly go, fill yer boots - the MK redway is your lobster.

Nice rant. Hope you feel better ?

Cheers, Don.

Rant. Nice one. You not up to answering the points then? 

We get it. You hate cyclists and have conjured up a £2000 tax on something that is beneficial to health, society & the environment, when a bloke in a car can pay a couple of hundred quid?  

Nice one Don. You kicked off the ranting; I just supplied some points that entirely contradict your silly views. And all you could come back with was 'Nice rant'.

Priceless. 

Cage rattling can sometimes be an amusing pastime... 

ChrisR_EPL posted:

Rant. Nice one. You not up to answering the points then? 

We get it. You hate cyclists and have conjured up a £2000 tax on something that is beneficial to health, society & the environment, when a bloke in a car can pay a couple of hundred quid?  

Nice one Don. You kicked off the ranting; I just supplied some points that entirely contradict your silly views. And all you could come back with was 'Nice rant'.

Priceless. 

 

Your rant can be reduced to you simply not liking the thought of paying for something you use but currently don't pay to use. 

You simply list a few irrelevant points of view and think you have created a valid argument. You haven't.

i am suggesting a CHANGE that you don't like. I'm not surprised. Most people are selfish in that way. 

Perhaps, like winky, you could rescind your unjustified use of the word "hate". I do not dislike cyclists in general, only those that I described earlier and the word hate is inappropriate.

Surely cyclists pay for their use of local roads and cycleways through the Council tax, and for use of trunk roads - should they dare to use them - through income tax. I don't really understand the direction this thread has gone at all. Cycling is healthy, is environmentally friendly and the idea that cyclists should pay to use the roads and cycleways, over and above what they pay already, seems so preposterous that it's hard to imagine that anyone sensible could propose such a thing. It's just completely and utterly bonkers. 

Blimey. I read a non-photography thread in here for the first time in ages, and yep, populated by complete bell ends. 

Oh well, I'll just leave again for a while and listen to some music.

“It will be only a step from this for [motorists] to claim in a few years the moral ownership of the roads their contributions have created.”
Winston Churchill on his opposition to ‘road tax’, quoted in Plowden, William (1971). The Motor Car And Politics 1896–1970. London: The Bodley Head. ISBN 0370003934. More info at iPayRoadTax.com.

Road tax doesn’t exist. It’s car tax, a tax on cars and other vehicles, not a tax on roads or a fee to use them. Motorists do not pay directly for the roads. Roads are paid for via general and local taxation. In 1926, Winston Churchill started the process to abolish road tax. It was finally culled in 1937.
Car tax is based on amount of CO2 emitted so, if a fee had to be paid, cyclists – who are sometimes branded as ‘tax dodgers’ – would pay the same as ‘tax-dodgers’ such as disabled drivers, police cars, the Royal family, and band A motorists, ie £0. Most cyclists are also car-owners, too, so pay VED.

Crikey is this still going on?

Made it back from Center Parcs. Did the 93 miles at at average speed of 18.6 mph. Yeah I pushed myself nearly too hard but I feel I achieved something and had a bit of an adventure. 

I can recommend it to anyone, a bike is a good way of getting fit and keeping the weight off.

Just be careful not to get knocked off and avoid the Dons

ChrisR_EPL posted:

@CDB - I too live in MK and the redway system there is noted in planning circles as an example of how not to do it. It's a dreadful way of getting to work, although if you have a wish to cycle much more slowly and to go further for no reason other than planning simplicity, and you have a fancy for getting tangled up in dog leads or coming across dumped furniture in the underpasses or enjoy second-guessing which way a bunch of schoolkids might suddenly go, fill yer boots - the MK redway is your lobster.

Hi Chris
Yes, I have experienced all that on the redways at various times. I'm retired now but I found commuting in MK a bit of a dilemma as the choice between the redways and the roads was not much of a choice at all. I use the main roads but during the rush hour they are a nightmare.  Using the redways as an example was part of my attempt to introduce some rationality about cycling to the thread but I gave up on that finally earlier today. 
Clive

Cdb posted:

ChrisR_EPL posted:

@CDB - I too live in MK and the redway system there is noted in planning circles as an example of how not to do it. It's a dreadful way of getting to work, although if you have a wish to cycle much more slowly and to go further for no reason other than planning simplicity, and you have a fancy for getting tangled up in dog leads or coming across dumped furniture in the underpasses or enjoy second-guessing which way a bunch of schoolkids might suddenly go, fill yer boots - the MK redway is your lobster.

Hi Chris
Yes, I have experienced all that on the redways at various times. I'm retired now but I found commuting in MK a bit of a dilemma as the choice between the redways and the roads was not much of a choice at all. I use the main roads but during the rush hour they are a nightmare.  Using the redways as an example was part of my attempt to introduce some rationality about cycling to the thread but I gave up on that finally earlier today. 
Clive

Clive, Chris,

You both mentioned the Redways in MK. But none of your descriptions inspire any confidence that these are a solution to the commuting cyclist. Nor, BTW do you appear to consider using the MK road system to be a solution.

I'm not really too sure what aspect of commuter-cycling you are trying to extol with the MK system ?

For my part I do not use my bike(s) to commute. My current "commute" is a 60 mile round trip, either along the A34/A303 or along country lanes. The distance and roads are unsuited to cycling IMHO. However, I do pass cyclists, especially on the county lane route and horse riders too and I take great care to ensure they are all safe from my activity.

I used to visit London quite a lot on business, and would either take the train/tube/walk or car to (say) Hammersmith then again the tube/walk. I wouldn't dream of cycling in London - it would be a nightmare !

We only use our bikes for recreation. We drive to our chosen location, and use the bikes off-road. As I indicated in the opening post, we are very careful and courteous to pedestrians.

More often than not, we actually go hiking or back-packing, Mostly out of reach by cyclists !!

To my mind, the joys and benefits of commuting by bike are non-existent ! and judging by the experiences described by others in this thread, that seems to be the view of many.

Never-the-less................................cyclists who wish to access the road system .................

Commuting 60 miles by fossil fuel powered private car is bad.

It is unfriendly to the environment, uses dwindling fossil fuel, costs a lot, is hazardous to own health and that of other road users because it is all too easy to do it in 'automaton' mode driving almost subconsciously with resultant slowed reaction times, and last but by no means least it takes an inordinate amount of that most precious of all commodities, time. 

At that distance cycling is certainly not likely to be a viable solution even though it addresses some of the issues. You should live closer to work, or retire.

(At one time I also commuted an inordinate distance, though only 2/3rds of yours, and once I moved I swore never again, the time being too precious by far. I am lucky in living less than 3 miles from work, yet in the countryside, and it ocntributes immeasurably to my quality of life.)

IB, I described my current commute. I do "commute" to other airfields. Newbury is fairly central to Oxford, Blacbushe, Kemble, High Wycombe. Relocating would be pointless.

I have no intention to retire. Yet. 

The diesel Merc does mange to get 70 mpg and I don't see Saudi or the Emirates panicking just yet ! Perhaps when the scrappage scheme gets underway I will change to petrol !

Don Atkinson posted:

Cdb posted:

ChrisR_EPL posted:

@CDB - I too live in MK and the redway system there is noted in planning circles as an example of how not to do it. It's a dreadful way of getting to work, although if you have a wish to cycle much more slowly and to go further for no reason other than planning simplicity, and you have a fancy for getting tangled up in dog leads or coming across dumped furniture in the underpasses or enjoy second-guessing which way a bunch of schoolkids might suddenly go, fill yer boots - the MK redway is your lobster.

Hi Chris
Yes, I have experienced all that on the redways at various times. I'm retired now but I found commuting in MK a bit of a dilemma as the choice between the redways and the roads was not much of a choice at all. I use the main roads but during the rush hour they are a nightmare.  Using the redways as an example was part of my attempt to introduce some rationality about cycling to the thread but I gave up on that finally earlier today. 
Clive

Clive, Chris,

You both mentioned the Redways in MK. But none of your descriptions inspire any confidence that these are a solution to the commuting cyclist. Nor, BTW do you appear to consider using the MK road system to be a solution.

I'm not really too sure what aspect of commuter-cycling you are trying to extol with the MK system ?

 

 

Don,

I think you have misread both me and Chris. The point I was making - way up this thread - was in response to your argument that a separate cycle network could be created. The MK Redway system might look like this sort of solution but it isn't, for the sorts of reasons that Chris listed. In other words I wasn't trying to extol the MK Redway system, the opposite in fact. On the other hand going onto the roads in MK during the rush hour is fairly scary - in particular I find the roundabouts dangerous. The traffic generally in MK is fast moving (wide roads, no pavements and little street furniture) and trying to get onto a roundabout from a standing start is risky, while I also worry about cars coming up from behind turning left and not realising there is a cyclist present. The other problem with roundabouts is that on the busy ones there are queues of vehicles, which hold me up as a cyclist. For me this was frustrating as I wanted to commute regularly by bike - my decision ultimately was on balance to choose safety and go on the Redways.

Clive

Cdb posted:

Don Atkinson posted:

Cdb posted:

ChrisR_EPL posted:

@CDB - I too live in MK and the redway system there is noted in planning circles as an example of how not to do it. It's a dreadful way of getting to work, although if you have a wish to cycle much more slowly and to go further for no reason other than planning simplicity, and you have a fancy for getting tangled up in dog leads or coming across dumped furniture in the underpasses or enjoy second-guessing which way a bunch of schoolkids might suddenly go, fill yer boots - the MK redway is your lobster.

Hi Chris
Yes, I have experienced all that on the redways at various times. I'm retired now but I found commuting in MK a bit of a dilemma as the choice between the redways and the roads was not much of a choice at all. I use the main roads but during the rush hour they are a nightmare.  Using the redways as an example was part of my attempt to introduce some rationality about cycling to the thread but I gave up on that finally earlier today. 
Clive

Clive, Chris,

You both mentioned the Redways in MK. But none of your descriptions inspire any confidence that these are a solution to the commuting cyclist. Nor, BTW do you appear to consider using the MK road system to be a solution.

I'm not really too sure what aspect of commuter-cycling you are trying to extol with the MK system ?

 

 

Don,

I think you have misread both me and Chris. The point I was making - way up this thread - was in response to your argument that a separate cycle network could be created. The MK Redway system might look like this sort of solution but it isn't, for the sorts of reasons that Chris listed. In other words I wasn't trying to extol the MK Redway system, the opposite in fact. On the other hand going onto the roads in MK during the rush hour is fairly scary - in particular I find the roundabouts dangerous. The traffic generally in MK is fast moving (wide roads, no pavements and little street furniture) and trying to get onto a roundabout from a standing start is risky, while I also worry about cars coming up from behind turning left and not realising there is a cyclist present. The other problem with roundabouts is that on the busy ones there are queues of vehicles, which hold me up as a cyclist. For me this was frustrating as I wanted to commute regularly by bike - my decision ultimately was on balance to choose safety and go on the Redways.

Clive

 

Clive,

I think I got your general point, it was only that the Redways (if I understand correctly) are shared cycle/pedestrian routes and your report suggested the pedestrians were somewhat unpredictable in their behaviour.

My proposal was commuter cycle paths exclusively for commuter cyclists. A bit expensive, but then most infrastructure is.

The MK redways are shared use, but are often no wider than standard footpaths. As well as the debris and unpredictable pedestrian behaviour they were designed to remove cyclists from the road network, not to make life better for cyclists. As a result a redway running alongside a main road will meander well away from junctions and then back again to cross estate roads and then on major road junctions will drop down below the road level into underpasses and back up the other side, again with some quite lengthy detours. Maintenance is limited or non-existent so the surfaces have become very potted over the years, esp the main east-west runs. I've experimented, not v scientifically, and a lap of the city on the roads at about 17-18mph is achievable for me. Others may be significantly faster, or slower. Putting in the same effort on a similar route but sticking to the redways drops that average speed by around 3-4mph. That's not distance, it's the additional climbing out of underpasses, the give ways at every minor road where cars have absolute priority. Compare with how our chums in Belgium & Holland etc do that...

Fwiw I used to commute across town on the main road and a mix of decent lights and visible clothing plus keeping a decent speed up and the right level of confidence and positioning on the road made it quite stress-free and hassle-free. That was about 15 years ago, not sure that I'd be so keen to mix it with rush hour traffic these days as there's so much more of it and the prevalence of the internet has opened my eyes to just how much some drivers dislike being held up by cyclists, even if we do everything right - we don't pay enough tax, we all jump red lights, we don't belong on the roads - apparently. All wrong, but there are too many nutters out there, some are obvious about it, some manage to keep it under the surface. But it's there, you can tell by the prevailing attitudes. 

Spent the last 10 years going in the opposite direction, 21 miles on the back roads across the Bucks countryside. It was bliss, the best way ever of getting to work come summer or winter. Shame I now have to lug a laptop about and rarely go into that office these days. Ho hum.

 

My proposal was commuter cycle paths exclusively for commuter cyclists.

Is there any way that such a scheme could even begin to exist in the real world? How can anything like that be exclusively for one group of users? Do we build paths to every SME? Do we stop kids cycling to school on them, or families out for a bimble? Btw that - family rides - is where the MK Redways excel, for pottering along with no need to be somewhere specific by a given time, just cycling slowly for its own sake.

Sorry Don, but little of what you've said anywhere in this thread suggests that you have any serious grasp of these sort of issues, other than coming up with variations of 'get off my roads'. Sorry if I've misunderstood you, but that's due to the words you write.

To summarise, so far :-

Not much advice on how a pedestrian should deal with aggressive cyclists eg on a narrow towpath or when a family group is enjoying a shared cycle/path route. Disappointing, to say the least.

Plenty of cyclists asserting their right to use the road system and that motorists have a duty of care towards cyclists. I don’t disagree with these points of view nor the opinion that cycling provides good exercise and health benefits.

The health benefits could be gained by recreational cycling, off-road. That’s what we do, along with lots of other recreational activities such as hiking, back-packing and swimming.

This leaves the commuter-cyclists.  Sometimes aggressive.  Increasingly assertive, even demanding of their rights. If their numbers are going to increase, then things have to change IMHO.

30 million motorists  in the UK are not going to evaporate. Colin Buchanan figured that out back in the 60’s and we invested in our roads. Call it what you like - VED, fuel tax etc but, a car is only allowed to use the roads if the appropriate tax has been paid. I am simply promoting a change, in that commuter-cyclists should pay a tax, in a similar way to that of a motorist, in order to use the road system. How much ? An initial estimate, based on road-occupancy, was about £2k pa. The funds could be ring-fenced for cycle-ways, or simply rolled into the government general funds like VED and fuel tax etc. and hope the gov responds to the commuter-cycling community for sensible investment.

Seems eminently reasonable to me. I can't understand the reluctance expressed so positively here !

Don Atkinson posted:

....I can't understand the reluctance expressed so positively here !

To me it's about manners, not rights or taxation.

C.

Living in rural Mid-Sussex our lane is frequently plagued by hoards of cyclists who quite often cough, spit, pee and do the other up and down the lane - as well as riding three abreast - although they do get out of the way when I'm out and about in the Land Rover. What lovely polite people some of them are

Don Atkinson posted:

...This leaves the commuter-cyclists.  Sometimes aggressive.  Increasingly assertive, even demanding of their rights. If their numbers are going to increase, then things have to change IMHO.

Didn't they used to say similar things about the Suffragettes??!!

Peter

Perhaps we should organise a Padded Cell cycle through London to help enlighten Don?  Who knows, you might even enjoy it!  You'd certainly get a grasp of my comments about the 'thrills' of dedicated cycle lanes, particularly if we start around 8:30 am when the lanes are well populated.  It may even persuade you of the merit for the Mayor of London to offer £2k per anum sponsorship for cyclist commuters, rather than try to charge them.... Are you up for it Don?

Peter

Ravenswood10 posted:

Living in rural Mid-Sussex our lane is frequently plagued by hoards of cyclists who quite often cough, spit, pee and do the other up and down the lane - as well as riding three abreast - although they do get out of the way when I'm out and about in the Land Rover. What lovely polite people some of them are

Doing the other is intriguing.....   

Regardless, there is no excuse for rudenes, and as for urinating in a public place, except whan racing, which is illegal on open public roads, there is no excuse for urinating while on a bike, and I have heard of people being prosecuted for urinating in a public place, though possibly that is down to local bye-laws in towns. However a camera and send photos to local press and police if you catch anyone "in action" (any of them!)

Ravenswood10 posted:

Living in rural Mid-Sussex our lane is frequently plagued by hoards of cyclists who quite often cough, spit, pee and do the other up and down the lane - as well as riding three abreast - although they do get out of the way when I'm out and about in the Land Rover. What lovely polite people some of them are

At least they are not killing people with their exhaust. 

I'd sooner that than  have human excrement to clear up...not nice. And they swear - orrible lot!