On 2024-01-14, Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> On 1/14/2024 8:41 AM, John B. wrote:
>> On Sun, 14 Jan 2024 09:34:07 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 13 Jan 2024 17:09:57 -0500, Catrike Ryder
>>>> <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, 13 Jan 2024 15:16:25 -0600, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 1/13/2024 3:02 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sat, 13 Jan 2024 14:49:19 -0600, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 1/13/2024 1:59 PM, Wolfgang Strobl wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Am Sat, 13 Jan 2024 18:33:51 GMT schrieb Roger Merriman
>>>>>>>>> <roger@sarlet.com>:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> But it is talking about a rather different set up ie some painted lane for
>>>>>>>>>> bikes on the road, the segregated stuff in my experience is clear of road
>>>>>>>>>> debris ie spray of gravel/glass/bits of cars doesn?t stop leaf litter and
>>>>>>>>>> so on. But such set ups are urban/suburban in nature and so will get some
>>>>>>>>>> sort of street cleaning regularly if not often depending on the area.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Likewise I suspect that Catstrikes trails require much less maintenance
>>>>>>>>>> than the roads.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> No. The tires of fast-moving cars grind up and remove all kinds of
>>>>>>>>> stuff, debris, trash and dirt from the surfaces they roll on. In short,
>>>>>>>>> car tires clean and dry the roads as a side effect of their use. On
>>>>>>>>> other surfaces not touched by the tires, what lands on them remains and
>>>>>>>>> accumulates and rots there, be it liquid or frozen water, discarded
>>>>>>>>> newspapers or sand, leaves, smaller branches, dead animals, cola cans,
>>>>>>>>> soil, grass, vegetation sprouting from cracks, etc. pp. ad nauseam.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> In short: that difference is no difference, self-cleaning is only
>>>>>>>>> happening on those parts of the road that are used by cars.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Jobst noted that here and it exactly fits my experience as well.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I never had troubles with slippery surfaces, even when I rode
>>>>>>> two-wheelers, but I have gotten flats from road debri, even on bike
>>>>>>> trails well away from any vehicle traffic.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I know nothing of paved Florida bike paths.
>>>>>> In my world, the choice of what part of the road to choose
>>>>>> is clear and obvious:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://content.bikeroar.com/system/content/000/097/877/original/bike_lane_debris.jpg?1430246189
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> That looks worse than the bridges I had to ride along US highway one
>>>>> down through the Florida keys. There wasn't so much beer cans as there
>>>>> was glass and tire debri. Two lanes, 60+ MPH traffic both ways, and
>>>>> lots of big trucks. One bridge is seven miles long and no place to get
>>>>> off till you got to the other side. I did it both directions two years
>>>>> in a row, but I'm too old and too wise to do it again.
>>>>
>>>> What I don't understand is why your roads are so dirty and here I
>>>> don't ever remember ever seeing as much debris as the reference shows
>>>> in any of the countries where I've ridden this part of the world.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Probably selective? Only place might find such stuff though even then much
>>> less is some of the urban dual carriageways.
>>>
>>> Which might well have debris and if high speed due to being more awkward to
>>> clean I can’t just use a man and trolley and might need to close a lane to
>>> do so.
>>>
>>> Roger Merriman
>>
>> Maybe it's the weather? Moon phase? Who knows what. In Bangkok there
>> are street sweepers = women with brooms -
>> http://tinyurl.com/3mdbtwuf
>>
>> But here, about 200 km N.E. of Bangkok, I've never seen them. But, the
>> streets are still clean. not clean as in eat a meal off the highway,
>> but certainly clean in the sense of you don't have to dodge junk when
>> on a bicycle.
>
> I'm sure laws have an effect, if very diligently enforced. But it's hard
> to see how cops can prevent someone from tossing junk out of a moving
> car window.
>
> I think it's mostly a matter of local culture and attitudes - that is,
> whether typical people in a certain locale have a sense of
> responsibility about caring for their surroundings, including
> controlling their trash.
>
> In our early bicycling days we lived in the Deep South of the U.S. The
> culture was such that broken glass (e.g. from beer bottles) was a
> constant risk. So were loose aggressive dogs, which while not directly
> related, illustrates the general mindset.
>
> The first League of American Bicyclists national rally we attended was
> 1978, in Michigan, quite a long drive. I was astonished at how clean the
> rural roads were compared to where we were living. I think Michigan had
> a "bottle bill," meaning there was a deposit on glass containers, which
> encouraged turning them back in rather than chucking them out the
> window. But other (non-glass) roadside litter was also much, much less
> in rural Michigan.
>
> And speaking of attitudes, decades later I recall riding through a tiny
> village in Austria and encountering a woman sweeping the public street
> in front of her house. That would be a VERY rare sight in America.
>

When bike camping in Switzerland one time w/ my wife there was a intense
cloudburst/storm. When the weather cleared, all the Swiss campers came and
swept the pathways, paved trails of their camping areas and THEN all the
public areas and roads until all was Swiss-tidy again. That was a
phenomenal sight.

Pretty opposite of riding the train in Italy where you had to be careful of
bottles (empty) flying out the windows as you travelled down the track at
hight speed.

pH

On 1/14/2024 8:20 PM, AMuzi wrote:
> On 1/14/2024 6:40 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> On 1/14/2024 6:15 PM, Roger Merriman wrote:
>>> Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> These days my area still has blessedly few bike lanes, but they are
>>>> beginning to pop up. The street sweeping around here is done once every
>>>> six months.
>>>>
>>> Seriously what on earth to they spend your money on? I mean
>>> road/pavement
>>> cleaning is hardly particularly expensive.
>>
>> I believe a major reason our streets aren't swept more frequently is
>> that almost nobody cares much about minor road debris. This area does
>> not have a lot of bicycling but it has lots of motorists. Any road
>> debris smaller than, say, a beverage can doesn't matter to motorists
>> at all, no matter what it does to bicyclists.
>>
>> What do they spend money on? This time of year, road salt and snow
>> plowing are huge expenses (although there's been little need for that
>> so far this year). Filling potholes is a big expense, partly because
>> we see lots of freeze-thaw cycles which tends to break up the pavement.
>>
>> And as I've mentioned before, any given road around here may be
>> controlled by the state, by the county, by the township or by the
>> municipality (city or village). Each has its own funding. Our village
>> and our township roads got miles and miles of repaving done a few
>> years ago; but that leaves less money for sweeping. (I assume the
>> village and township pay another entity for sweeping; AFAIK they don't
>> own any equipment for that.)
>>
>> And our county roads are always hurting for money. There's a big pot
>> of state money given annually to counties for "county road" work, but
>> it's divided evenly by Ohio's 88 counties. Some counties have
>> relatively few miles of county roads. Ours is near the top in county
>> road miles. As the county engineer said in one presentation, it would
>> make much more sense to distribute the money on a per-mile basis; but
>> about 87 other counties would vote against that.
>>
>
> Lots of subject areas there and many good points, but in societies where
> people take personal responsibility there just isn't litter to be
> removed.  I'm sure we have all noticed which neighborhoods are covered
> in crap and which are not.  Even here in rural Wisconsin I have
> occasionally seen cars toss fast food litter- wrappers, napkins, bags
> and cups - out of vehicle windows. It's beyond perplexing, makes one
> quite angry.

I agree with that, but I was primarily discussing other road debris, not
tossed-out litter. When I'm riding, a McDonalds wrapper on the road is
ugly but easily avoidable. Broken glass is different; it can cause
flats. Gravel on turns can cause a fall. That's the stuff I'd like to
see swept up.

BTW, for many years members of our bike club have volunteered to clean
up roadside litter. I think it's a shame it needs to be done. I helped
only once; I found it to be just an ugly job. Kudos to those who volunteer.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On Monday, January 15, 2024 at 2:20:17 AM UTC+1, AMuzi wrote:
> On 1/14/2024 6:40 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> > On 1/14/2024 6:15 PM, Roger Merriman wrote:
> >> Frank Krygowski <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> These days my area still has blessedly few bike lanes,
> >>> but they are
> >>> beginning to pop up. The street sweeping around here is
> >>> done once every
> >>> six months.
> >>>
> >> Seriously what on earth to they spend your money on? I
> >> mean road/pavement
> >> cleaning is hardly particularly expensive.
> >
> > I believe a major reason our streets aren't swept more
> > frequently is that almost nobody cares much about minor road
> > debris. This area does not have a lot of bicycling but it
> > has lots of motorists. Any road debris smaller than, say, a
> > beverage can doesn't matter to motorists at all, no matter
> > what it does to bicyclists.
> >
> > What do they spend money on? This time of year, road salt
> > and snow plowing are huge expenses (although there's been
> > little need for that so far this year). Filling potholes is
> > a big expense, partly because we see lots of freeze-thaw
> > cycles which tends to break up the pavement.
> >
> > And as I've mentioned before, any given road around here may
> > be controlled by the state, by the county, by the township
> > or by the municipality (city or village). Each has its own
> > funding. Our village and our township roads got miles and
> > miles of repaving done a few years ago; but that leaves less
> > money for sweeping. (I assume the village and township pay
> > another entity for sweeping; AFAIK they don't own any
> > equipment for that.)
> >
> > And our county roads are always hurting for money. There's a
> > big pot of state money given annually to counties for
> > "county road" work, but it's divided evenly by Ohio's 88
> > counties. Some counties have relatively few miles of county
> > roads. Ours is near the top in county road miles. As the
> > county engineer said in one presentation, it would make much
> > more sense to distribute the money on a per-mile basis; but
> > about 87 other counties would vote against that.
> >
> Lots of subject areas there and many good points, but in
> societies where people take personal responsibility there
> just isn't litter to be removed. I'm sure we have all
> noticed which neighborhoods are covered in crap and which
> are not. Even here in rural Wisconsin I have occasionally
> seen cars toss fast food litter- wrappers, napkins, bags and
> cups - out of vehicle windows. It's beyond perplexing, makes
> one quite angry.

+1 Unbelievable, what are the people thinking when the toss a glass bottle out of the window.

Lou

On Mon, 15 Jan 2024 05:09:36 -0800 (PST), Lou Holtman
<lou.holtman@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Monday, January 15, 2024 at 2:20:17?AM UTC+1, AMuzi wrote:
>> On 1/14/2024 6:40 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> > On 1/14/2024 6:15 PM, Roger Merriman wrote:
>> >> Frank Krygowski <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> These days my area still has blessedly few bike lanes,
>> >>> but they are
>> >>> beginning to pop up. The street sweeping around here is
>> >>> done once every
>> >>> six months.
>> >>>
>> >> Seriously what on earth to they spend your money on? I
>> >> mean road/pavement
>> >> cleaning is hardly particularly expensive.
>> >
>> > I believe a major reason our streets aren't swept more
>> > frequently is that almost nobody cares much about minor road
>> > debris. This area does not have a lot of bicycling but it
>> > has lots of motorists. Any road debris smaller than, say, a
>> > beverage can doesn't matter to motorists at all, no matter
>> > what it does to bicyclists.
>> >
>> > What do they spend money on? This time of year, road salt
>> > and snow plowing are huge expenses (although there's been
>> > little need for that so far this year). Filling potholes is
>> > a big expense, partly because we see lots of freeze-thaw
>> > cycles which tends to break up the pavement.
>> >
>> > And as I've mentioned before, any given road around here may
>> > be controlled by the state, by the county, by the township
>> > or by the municipality (city or village). Each has its own
>> > funding. Our village and our township roads got miles and
>> > miles of repaving done a few years ago; but that leaves less
>> > money for sweeping. (I assume the village and township pay
>> > another entity for sweeping; AFAIK they don't own any
>> > equipment for that.)
>> >
>> > And our county roads are always hurting for money. There's a
>> > big pot of state money given annually to counties for
>> > "county road" work, but it's divided evenly by Ohio's 88
>> > counties. Some counties have relatively few miles of county
>> > roads. Ours is near the top in county road miles. As the
>> > county engineer said in one presentation, it would make much
>> > more sense to distribute the money on a per-mile basis; but
>> > about 87 other counties would vote against that.
>> >
>> Lots of subject areas there and many good points, but in
>> societies where people take personal responsibility there
>> just isn't litter to be removed. I'm sure we have all
>> noticed which neighborhoods are covered in crap and which
>> are not. Even here in rural Wisconsin I have occasionally
>> seen cars toss fast food litter- wrappers, napkins, bags and
>> cups - out of vehicle windows. It's beyond perplexing, makes
>> one quite angry.
>
>
>+1 Unbelievable, what are the people thinking when the toss a glass bottle out of the window.
>
>Lou

Sometimes I think it's an act of defiance. There's people who simply
want to disrupt and disturb. It seems like the USA and maybe the
whole world is full of people who hate everything that doesn't fit
their own personal mindset.

Maybe it's always been like that and it's only now with a constant
barrage of "news" that it's so noticable, or maybe it's all that
"news" that's made it worse.

Am Sun, 14 Jan 2024 23:54:21 GMT schrieb Roger Merriman
<roger@sarlet.com>:

>Wolfgang Strobl <news5@mystrobl.de> wrote:
>> Am Sat, 13 Jan 2024 21:34:10 GMT schrieb Roger Merriman
>> <roger@sarlet.com>:
>>
>>> Wolfgang Strobl <news5@mystrobl.de> wrote:
>>>> Am Sat, 13 Jan 2024 18:33:51 GMT schrieb Roger Merriman
>>>> <roger@sarlet.com>:
>>>>
>>>>> But it is talking about a rather different set up ie some painted lane for
>>>>> bikes on the road, the segregated stuff in my experience is clear of road
>>>>> debris ie spray of gravel/glass/bits of cars doesn’t stop leaf litter and
>>>>> so on. But such set ups are urban/suburban in nature and so will get some
>>>>> sort of street cleaning regularly if not often depending on the area.
>>>>>
>>>>> Likewise I suspect that Catstrikes trails require much less maintenance
>>>>> than the roads.
>>
>> I suspect that these are either fairy tales or it is simply a kind of
>> self selection bias. My experience is mostly from times where I didn't
>> have much choice which route to take, while commuting by bike all year
>> for decades, both across the city and accross the country. I learned to
>> avoid "cycling infrastructure" the hard way, that's for sure!
>>
>> If cycle paths next to roads were so much better than using the road,
>> which is also used with motor vehicles, then people would be using these
>> facilities voluntarily and the ban on road use wouldn't be necessary.
>
>Define next to road? As ever cycle infrastructure varies wildly.

Of course it does. It varies between bad and worse.

"Cycle infrastructure" or "Radverkehrsinfrastructur" in German language
is an euphemism used to avoid the established term "Radweg", denoting
any construct sidelining a road having one of the many signs shown in
<https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radverkehrsanlage>. Any such way that is
next to a road (near enough) having such a sign is compulsory, in most
of Europe.

Mandatory cycle lanes have gotten a bad reputation over the years, so
the groups that advocate pushing cycling off the roads have started
using a less loaded term.

....

>> Do you believe that dirt shown on the segregated bike path in the
>> following picture is from or was caused by cars? Do you believe that
>> this road had been cleaned, during the night?
>>
>> <https://www.mystrobl.de/ws/pic/fahrrad/20081124/P1080297.jpg>
>>
>> I took this photo on my commute, in 2008. I took a lot of similar
>> pictures, clean roads, sidelined by painted bike lanes, segregated bike
>> paths and completely segregated so called "biycle infrastructure",
>> trashed with all kindes of trash and dirt, from sand, gravel, garbage
>> and all kinds of vegetation in variing state of decay. It's getting
>> somewhat old to document all that, when it is dismissed that way, out of
>> ignorance.
>>
>
>Seems unlikely to have been bikes either though seems an odd places to get
>clumps of mud left? But looks rural? Which really isn’t the sort of thing
>that the UK does ie you’d use the road than expect a bike lane there? Which
>tend to be urban/suburban in nature at least transport/utility types get
>leisure routes clearly.

Please try again. I don't understand what you a trying to say or to ask
here. That I should have looked for another workplace so that I didn't
have to cycle on a country road or on a mandatory dirt track along this
country road?

My photo displays a clean district road lined by a dirty mandatory
two-way cycle path, which is also used by pedestrians and horse riders.

There were a lot more traps and obstacles on that short part of my
commute, some obvious, some almost invisible, which would have needed
more photos for display.

But like I said, this is getting old. You're just trying to avoid
answering my question.

There certainly exist _some_ bicycle ways which don't get much dirt, for
example those lost places in urban environmens that don't even get
pedestrian traffic. Somebody riding their bicycle only there, on sunny
days in summer, might praise that as "bicycle infrastructure".

But it isn't. Roads are bicycle infrastructure. There is no place in
Europe I coldn't reach by just using one of my bicycles on ordinary
roads - as long as so called "bicycle infrastructure" doesn't ban
cyclists from using those roads.

I simply had to use _this_ road for my commute, not some mythical
cordoned-off, rubber-lined playground that is cleaned and sanitized
every morning and evening by busy kindergarteners.

--
Thank you for observing all safety precautions

Am Sun, 14 Jan 2024 14:16:15 -0500 schrieb Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net>:

>On 1/14/2024 7:03 AM, Wolfgang Strobl wrote:
>>
>>
>> I took this photo on my commute, in 2008. I took a lot of similar
>> pictures, clean roads, sidelined by painted bike lanes, segregated bike
>> paths and completely segregated so called "biycle infrastructure",
>> trashed with all kindes of trash and dirt, from sand, gravel, garbage
>> and all kinds of vegetation in variing state of decay. It' getting
>> somewhat old to document all that, when it is dismissed that way, out of
>> ignorance.
>
>
>It was in 2003 that my wife, daughter and I rode coast to coast,
>Atlantic to Pacific. In those days there were blessedly few bike lanes.

I still remember this too, from our first long bike tours through France
in the 1980s. But the madness began well before 2000, here in Germany.

>
>But when we approached Portland, Oregon from the west, we hit a suburb
>with lots of bike lanes along our route. Riding in the lead, I was
>constantly calling warnings back to the ladies: "Glass!" or "Trash!" or
>"Broken muffler!" It was so common that we first began laughing about
>it; then I stopped and consulted a map, and we located a street without
>bike lanes to get us into the heart of Portland.
>
>In later years, visiting Portland, I phoned some bike advocacy group to
>complain about the debris in bike lanes. The guy who answered very
>sincerely told me that they had a program to take care of that! It was a
>system of post cards. I could pick up a post card at a bike shop, fill
>it in to describe where the debris was, and someone would (eventually)
>come out to clear the debris away.

That's funny, sortr of. Long ago and for only a short time, I was on the
other side of that nonsense, having the the job to collect and process
such cards for the local branch of our national cycling club.

In reality, this is simply an infamous form of membership recruitment;
members or potential members who found such cards in the club magazine
displayed in local bike stores were given the impression that they were
contacting an authority that had something to say on the matter. In
fact, my options were even more limited than those of a random citizen
picking up the phone. Because unlike him or her, I had an obligation to
treat the contacts in the local administration with kid gloves. And they
knew that very well.

>
>Think about how long that would take!

Most of the time, very long. But not always. Most administrations with
tiny budgets and angry customers aren't stupid. When you ask nicely, if
somebody makes enough noise, there might be a fast reaction.

IF you ask nicely and an employee or a device needs to be kept occupied,
the response sometimes is quick. A customer who sings the praises of
good service in the newspapers (back then) or on the networks (today) is
worth a lot - even if that reaction was and remains a flash in the pan.

>
>These days my area still has blessedly few bike lanes, but they are
>beginning to pop up. The street sweeping around here is done once every
>six months.

The street where we live is swept once a week, or to be more precise,
the gutter is swept because the dirt from the car tires ends up there.
We pay for this with our resident's fee. Some roads outside cities and
villages are cleared in winter, but the snow usually ends up on the
cycle paths. From the duration of clay contamination remains on rural
roads, I conclude that there is no general street cleaning outside
built-up areas. Not having seen any cleaning vehicles during my
extensive rides after retirement seems to confirm that.

--
Wir danken für die Beachtung aller Sicherheitsbestimmungen

On Mon, 15 Jan 2024 08:56:25 -0500, Catrike Ryder
<Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:

>On Mon, 15 Jan 2024 05:09:36 -0800 (PST), Lou Holtman
><lou.holtman@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Monday, January 15, 2024 at 2:20:17?AM UTC+1, AMuzi wrote:
>>> On 1/14/2024 6:40 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>> > On 1/14/2024 6:15 PM, Roger Merriman wrote:
>>> >> Frank Krygowski <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>> These days my area still has blessedly few bike lanes,
>>> >>> but they are
>>> >>> beginning to pop up. The street sweeping around here is
>>> >>> done once every
>>> >>> six months.
>>> >>>
>>> >> Seriously what on earth to they spend your money on? I
>>> >> mean road/pavement
>>> >> cleaning is hardly particularly expensive.
>>> >
>>> > I believe a major reason our streets aren't swept more
>>> > frequently is that almost nobody cares much about minor road
>>> > debris. This area does not have a lot of bicycling but it
>>> > has lots of motorists. Any road debris smaller than, say, a
>>> > beverage can doesn't matter to motorists at all, no matter
>>> > what it does to bicyclists.
>>> >
>>> > What do they spend money on? This time of year, road salt
>>> > and snow plowing are huge expenses (although there's been
>>> > little need for that so far this year). Filling potholes is
>>> > a big expense, partly because we see lots of freeze-thaw
>>> > cycles which tends to break up the pavement.
>>> >
>>> > And as I've mentioned before, any given road around here may
>>> > be controlled by the state, by the county, by the township
>>> > or by the municipality (city or village). Each has its own
>>> > funding. Our village and our township roads got miles and
>>> > miles of repaving done a few years ago; but that leaves less
>>> > money for sweeping. (I assume the village and township pay
>>> > another entity for sweeping; AFAIK they don't own any
>>> > equipment for that.)
>>> >
>>> > And our county roads are always hurting for money. There's a
>>> > big pot of state money given annually to counties for
>>> > "county road" work, but it's divided evenly by Ohio's 88
>>> > counties. Some counties have relatively few miles of county
>>> > roads. Ours is near the top in county road miles. As the
>>> > county engineer said in one presentation, it would make much
>>> > more sense to distribute the money on a per-mile basis; but
>>> > about 87 other counties would vote against that.
>>> >
>>> Lots of subject areas there and many good points, but in
>>> societies where people take personal responsibility there
>>> just isn't litter to be removed. I'm sure we have all
>>> noticed which neighborhoods are covered in crap and which
>>> are not. Even here in rural Wisconsin I have occasionally
>>> seen cars toss fast food litter- wrappers, napkins, bags and
>>> cups - out of vehicle windows. It's beyond perplexing, makes
>>> one quite angry.
>>
>>
>>+1 Unbelievable, what are the people thinking when the toss a glass bottle out of the window.
>>
>>Lou
>
>Sometimes I think it's an act of defiance. There's people who simply
>want to disrupt and disturb. It seems like the USA and maybe the
>whole world is full of people who hate everything that doesn't fit
>their own personal mindset.
>
>Maybe it's always been like that and it's only now with a constant
>barrage of "news" that it's so noticable, or maybe it's all that
>"news" that's made it worse.

Perhaps now that USians have "bicycle paths" it is time to make
cycling even safer and ban them from those dangerious roads that
automobiles travel on.
And of course traveling solely on their own "paths" bicycling will
become a 100% safe activity.
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Tue, 16 Jan 2024 06:11:41 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On Mon, 15 Jan 2024 08:56:25 -0500, Catrike Ryder
><Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 15 Jan 2024 05:09:36 -0800 (PST), Lou Holtman
>><lou.holtman@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Monday, January 15, 2024 at 2:20:17?AM UTC+1, AMuzi wrote:
>>>> On 1/14/2024 6:40 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>> > On 1/14/2024 6:15 PM, Roger Merriman wrote:
>>>> >> Frank Krygowski <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> These days my area still has blessedly few bike lanes,
>>>> >>> but they are
>>>> >>> beginning to pop up. The street sweeping around here is
>>>> >>> done once every
>>>> >>> six months.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >> Seriously what on earth to they spend your money on? I
>>>> >> mean road/pavement
>>>> >> cleaning is hardly particularly expensive.
>>>> >
>>>> > I believe a major reason our streets aren't swept more
>>>> > frequently is that almost nobody cares much about minor road
>>>> > debris. This area does not have a lot of bicycling but it
>>>> > has lots of motorists. Any road debris smaller than, say, a
>>>> > beverage can doesn't matter to motorists at all, no matter
>>>> > what it does to bicyclists.
>>>> >
>>>> > What do they spend money on? This time of year, road salt
>>>> > and snow plowing are huge expenses (although there's been
>>>> > little need for that so far this year). Filling potholes is
>>>> > a big expense, partly because we see lots of freeze-thaw
>>>> > cycles which tends to break up the pavement.
>>>> >
>>>> > And as I've mentioned before, any given road around here may
>>>> > be controlled by the state, by the county, by the township
>>>> > or by the municipality (city or village). Each has its own
>>>> > funding. Our village and our township roads got miles and
>>>> > miles of repaving done a few years ago; but that leaves less
>>>> > money for sweeping. (I assume the village and township pay
>>>> > another entity for sweeping; AFAIK they don't own any
>>>> > equipment for that.)
>>>> >
>>>> > And our county roads are always hurting for money. There's a
>>>> > big pot of state money given annually to counties for
>>>> > "county road" work, but it's divided evenly by Ohio's 88
>>>> > counties. Some counties have relatively few miles of county
>>>> > roads. Ours is near the top in county road miles. As the
>>>> > county engineer said in one presentation, it would make much
>>>> > more sense to distribute the money on a per-mile basis; but
>>>> > about 87 other counties would vote against that.
>>>> >
>>>> Lots of subject areas there and many good points, but in
>>>> societies where people take personal responsibility there
>>>> just isn't litter to be removed. I'm sure we have all
>>>> noticed which neighborhoods are covered in crap and which
>>>> are not. Even here in rural Wisconsin I have occasionally
>>>> seen cars toss fast food litter- wrappers, napkins, bags and
>>>> cups - out of vehicle windows. It's beyond perplexing, makes
>>>> one quite angry.
>>>
>>>
>>>+1 Unbelievable, what are the people thinking when the toss a glass bottle out of the window.
>>>
>>>Lou
>>
>>Sometimes I think it's an act of defiance. There's people who simply
>>want to disrupt and disturb. It seems like the USA and maybe the
>>whole world is full of people who hate everything that doesn't fit
>>their own personal mindset.
>>
>>Maybe it's always been like that and it's only now with a constant
>>barrage of "news" that it's so noticable, or maybe it's all that
>>"news" that's made it worse.
>
>Perhaps now that USians have "bicycle paths" it is time to make
>cycling even safer and ban them from those dangerious roads that
>automobiles travel on.
>And of course traveling solely on their own "paths" bicycling will
>become a 100% safe activity.

No, but I wouldn't agrue against banning electric scooters from
bicycle paths.

On Mon, 15 Jan 2024 18:24:22 -0500, Catrike Ryder
<Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:

>On Tue, 16 Jan 2024 06:11:41 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 15 Jan 2024 08:56:25 -0500, Catrike Ryder
>><Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
>>
>>>On Mon, 15 Jan 2024 05:09:36 -0800 (PST), Lou Holtman
>>><lou.holtman@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Monday, January 15, 2024 at 2:20:17?AM UTC+1, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>> On 1/14/2024 6:40 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>> > On 1/14/2024 6:15 PM, Roger Merriman wrote:
>>>>> >> Frank Krygowski <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>> These days my area still has blessedly few bike lanes,
>>>>> >>> but they are
>>>>> >>> beginning to pop up. The street sweeping around here is
>>>>> >>> done once every
>>>>> >>> six months.
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >> Seriously what on earth to they spend your money on? I
>>>>> >> mean road/pavement
>>>>> >> cleaning is hardly particularly expensive.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > I believe a major reason our streets aren't swept more
>>>>> > frequently is that almost nobody cares much about minor road
>>>>> > debris. This area does not have a lot of bicycling but it
>>>>> > has lots of motorists. Any road debris smaller than, say, a
>>>>> > beverage can doesn't matter to motorists at all, no matter
>>>>> > what it does to bicyclists.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > What do they spend money on? This time of year, road salt
>>>>> > and snow plowing are huge expenses (although there's been
>>>>> > little need for that so far this year). Filling potholes is
>>>>> > a big expense, partly because we see lots of freeze-thaw
>>>>> > cycles which tends to break up the pavement.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > And as I've mentioned before, any given road around here may
>>>>> > be controlled by the state, by the county, by the township
>>>>> > or by the municipality (city or village). Each has its own
>>>>> > funding. Our village and our township roads got miles and
>>>>> > miles of repaving done a few years ago; but that leaves less
>>>>> > money for sweeping. (I assume the village and township pay
>>>>> > another entity for sweeping; AFAIK they don't own any
>>>>> > equipment for that.)
>>>>> >
>>>>> > And our county roads are always hurting for money. There's a
>>>>> > big pot of state money given annually to counties for
>>>>> > "county road" work, but it's divided evenly by Ohio's 88
>>>>> > counties. Some counties have relatively few miles of county
>>>>> > roads. Ours is near the top in county road miles. As the
>>>>> > county engineer said in one presentation, it would make much
>>>>> > more sense to distribute the money on a per-mile basis; but
>>>>> > about 87 other counties would vote against that.
>>>>> >
>>>>> Lots of subject areas there and many good points, but in
>>>>> societies where people take personal responsibility there
>>>>> just isn't litter to be removed. I'm sure we have all
>>>>> noticed which neighborhoods are covered in crap and which
>>>>> are not. Even here in rural Wisconsin I have occasionally
>>>>> seen cars toss fast food litter- wrappers, napkins, bags and
>>>>> cups - out of vehicle windows. It's beyond perplexing, makes
>>>>> one quite angry.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>+1 Unbelievable, what are the people thinking when the toss a glass bottle out of the window.
>>>>
>>>>Lou
>>>
>>>Sometimes I think it's an act of defiance. There's people who simply
>>>want to disrupt and disturb. It seems like the USA and maybe the
>>>whole world is full of people who hate everything that doesn't fit
>>>their own personal mindset.
>>>
>>>Maybe it's always been like that and it's only now with a constant
>>>barrage of "news" that it's so noticable, or maybe it's all that
>>>"news" that's made it worse.
>>
>>Perhaps now that USians have "bicycle paths" it is time to make
>>cycling even safer and ban them from those dangerious roads that
>>automobiles travel on.
>>And of course traveling solely on their own "paths" bicycling will
>>become a 100% safe activity.
>
>No, but I wouldn't agrue against banning electric scooters from
>bicycle paths.

But... if banning electric (powered) bike from bicycle paths makes
them safer for the bicycle then logic would indicate equally that
banning bicycles from automobile paths would also make it safer.
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Tue, 16 Jan 2024 06:33:08 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On Mon, 15 Jan 2024 18:24:22 -0500, Catrike Ryder
><Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 16 Jan 2024 06:11:41 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Mon, 15 Jan 2024 08:56:25 -0500, Catrike Ryder
>>><Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Mon, 15 Jan 2024 05:09:36 -0800 (PST), Lou Holtman
>>>><lou.holtman@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Monday, January 15, 2024 at 2:20:17?AM UTC+1, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>> On 1/14/2024 6:40 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>> > On 1/14/2024 6:15 PM, Roger Merriman wrote:
>>>>>> >> Frank Krygowski <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>> >>> These days my area still has blessedly few bike lanes,
>>>>>> >>> but they are
>>>>>> >>> beginning to pop up. The street sweeping around here is
>>>>>> >>> done once every
>>>>>> >>> six months.
>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>> >> Seriously what on earth to they spend your money on? I
>>>>>> >> mean road/pavement
>>>>>> >> cleaning is hardly particularly expensive.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > I believe a major reason our streets aren't swept more
>>>>>> > frequently is that almost nobody cares much about minor road
>>>>>> > debris. This area does not have a lot of bicycling but it
>>>>>> > has lots of motorists. Any road debris smaller than, say, a
>>>>>> > beverage can doesn't matter to motorists at all, no matter
>>>>>> > what it does to bicyclists.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > What do they spend money on? This time of year, road salt
>>>>>> > and snow plowing are huge expenses (although there's been
>>>>>> > little need for that so far this year). Filling potholes is
>>>>>> > a big expense, partly because we see lots of freeze-thaw
>>>>>> > cycles which tends to break up the pavement.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > And as I've mentioned before, any given road around here may
>>>>>> > be controlled by the state, by the county, by the township
>>>>>> > or by the municipality (city or village). Each has its own
>>>>>> > funding. Our village and our township roads got miles and
>>>>>> > miles of repaving done a few years ago; but that leaves less
>>>>>> > money for sweeping. (I assume the village and township pay
>>>>>> > another entity for sweeping; AFAIK they don't own any
>>>>>> > equipment for that.)
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > And our county roads are always hurting for money. There's a
>>>>>> > big pot of state money given annually to counties for
>>>>>> > "county road" work, but it's divided evenly by Ohio's 88
>>>>>> > counties. Some counties have relatively few miles of county
>>>>>> > roads. Ours is near the top in county road miles. As the
>>>>>> > county engineer said in one presentation, it would make much
>>>>>> > more sense to distribute the money on a per-mile basis; but
>>>>>> > about 87 other counties would vote against that.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> Lots of subject areas there and many good points, but in
>>>>>> societies where people take personal responsibility there
>>>>>> just isn't litter to be removed. I'm sure we have all
>>>>>> noticed which neighborhoods are covered in crap and which
>>>>>> are not. Even here in rural Wisconsin I have occasionally
>>>>>> seen cars toss fast food litter- wrappers, napkins, bags and
>>>>>> cups - out of vehicle windows. It's beyond perplexing, makes
>>>>>> one quite angry.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>+1 Unbelievable, what are the people thinking when the toss a glass bottle out of the window.
>>>>>
>>>>>Lou
>>>>
>>>>Sometimes I think it's an act of defiance. There's people who simply
>>>>want to disrupt and disturb. It seems like the USA and maybe the
>>>>whole world is full of people who hate everything that doesn't fit
>>>>their own personal mindset.
>>>>
>>>>Maybe it's always been like that and it's only now with a constant
>>>>barrage of "news" that it's so noticable, or maybe it's all that
>>>>"news" that's made it worse.
>>>
>>>Perhaps now that USians have "bicycle paths" it is time to make
>>>cycling even safer and ban them from those dangerious roads that
>>>automobiles travel on.
>>>And of course traveling solely on their own "paths" bicycling will
>>>become a 100% safe activity.
>>
>>No, but I wouldn't agrue against banning electric scooters from
>>bicycle paths.
>
>
>But... if banning electric (powered) bike from bicycle paths makes
>them safer for the bicycle then logic would indicate equally that
>banning bicycles from automobile paths would also make it safer.

Safer for whom?

Wolfgang Strobl wrote:
> No. The tires of fast-moving cars grind up and remove all kinds of
> stuff, debris, trash and dirt from the surfaces they roll on. In short,
> car tires clean and dry the roads as a side effect of their use. On
> other surfaces not touched by the tires, what lands on them remains and
> accumulates and rots there, be it liquid or frozen water, discarded
> newspapers or sand, leaves, smaller branches, dead animals, cola cans,
> soil, grass, vegetation sprouting from cracks, etc. pp. ad nauseam.
>
> In short: that difference is no difference, self-cleaning is only
> happening on those parts of the road that are used by cars.
But all the debris simply gets pushed out to the space where cars don't
go as frequently. Thus, the amount of "clean" space is usually not more
than about the width of 2 car tires. If there's a bike lane in the
outer space, then it all accumulates in the bike lane, until the entire
space is swept.

Smith

On Mon, 15 Jan 2024 18:58:20 -0500, Catrike Ryder
<Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:

>On Tue, 16 Jan 2024 06:33:08 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 15 Jan 2024 18:24:22 -0500, Catrike Ryder
>><Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 16 Jan 2024 06:11:41 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Mon, 15 Jan 2024 08:56:25 -0500, Catrike Ryder
>>>><Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Mon, 15 Jan 2024 05:09:36 -0800 (PST), Lou Holtman
>>>>><lou.holtman@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On Monday, January 15, 2024 at 2:20:17?AM UTC+1, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>> On 1/14/2024 6:40 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>>> > On 1/14/2024 6:15 PM, Roger Merriman wrote:
>>>>>>> >> Frank Krygowski <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>> These days my area still has blessedly few bike lanes,
>>>>>>> >>> but they are
>>>>>>> >>> beginning to pop up. The street sweeping around here is
>>>>>>> >>> done once every
>>>>>>> >>> six months.
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >> Seriously what on earth to they spend your money on? I
>>>>>>> >> mean road/pavement
>>>>>>> >> cleaning is hardly particularly expensive.
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > I believe a major reason our streets aren't swept more
>>>>>>> > frequently is that almost nobody cares much about minor road
>>>>>>> > debris. This area does not have a lot of bicycling but it
>>>>>>> > has lots of motorists. Any road debris smaller than, say, a
>>>>>>> > beverage can doesn't matter to motorists at all, no matter
>>>>>>> > what it does to bicyclists.
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > What do they spend money on? This time of year, road salt
>>>>>>> > and snow plowing are huge expenses (although there's been
>>>>>>> > little need for that so far this year). Filling potholes is
>>>>>>> > a big expense, partly because we see lots of freeze-thaw
>>>>>>> > cycles which tends to break up the pavement.
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > And as I've mentioned before, any given road around here may
>>>>>>> > be controlled by the state, by the county, by the township
>>>>>>> > or by the municipality (city or village). Each has its own
>>>>>>> > funding. Our village and our township roads got miles and
>>>>>>> > miles of repaving done a few years ago; but that leaves less
>>>>>>> > money for sweeping. (I assume the village and township pay
>>>>>>> > another entity for sweeping; AFAIK they don't own any
>>>>>>> > equipment for that.)
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > And our county roads are always hurting for money. There's a
>>>>>>> > big pot of state money given annually to counties for
>>>>>>> > "county road" work, but it's divided evenly by Ohio's 88
>>>>>>> > counties. Some counties have relatively few miles of county
>>>>>>> > roads. Ours is near the top in county road miles. As the
>>>>>>> > county engineer said in one presentation, it would make much
>>>>>>> > more sense to distribute the money on a per-mile basis; but
>>>>>>> > about 87 other counties would vote against that.
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> Lots of subject areas there and many good points, but in
>>>>>>> societies where people take personal responsibility there
>>>>>>> just isn't litter to be removed. I'm sure we have all
>>>>>>> noticed which neighborhoods are covered in crap and which
>>>>>>> are not. Even here in rural Wisconsin I have occasionally
>>>>>>> seen cars toss fast food litter- wrappers, napkins, bags and
>>>>>>> cups - out of vehicle windows. It's beyond perplexing, makes
>>>>>>> one quite angry.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>+1 Unbelievable, what are the people thinking when the toss a glass bottle out of the window.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Lou
>>>>>
>>>>>Sometimes I think it's an act of defiance. There's people who simply
>>>>>want to disrupt and disturb. It seems like the USA and maybe the
>>>>>whole world is full of people who hate everything that doesn't fit
>>>>>their own personal mindset.
>>>>>
>>>>>Maybe it's always been like that and it's only now with a constant
>>>>>barrage of "news" that it's so noticable, or maybe it's all that
>>>>>"news" that's made it worse.
>>>>
>>>>Perhaps now that USians have "bicycle paths" it is time to make
>>>>cycling even safer and ban them from those dangerious roads that
>>>>automobiles travel on.
>>>>And of course traveling solely on their own "paths" bicycling will
>>>>become a 100% safe activity.
>>>
>>>No, but I wouldn't agrue against banning electric scooters from
>>>bicycle paths.
>>
>>
>>But... if banning electric (powered) bike from bicycle paths makes
>>them safer for the bicycle then logic would indicate equally that
>>banning bicycles from automobile paths would also make it safer.
>
>Safer for whom?

Bicycles of course.

After all, the justification for the bike paths is to make cycling
safer as there are no automobiles to attack the cyclist. So logic
would have it that cars and bicycle don't mix. Thus, no cars on bike
paths and no bikes on car "paths" will be safer then safe :-)
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Tue, 16 Jan 2024 07:57:15 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On Mon, 15 Jan 2024 18:58:20 -0500, Catrike Ryder
><Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 16 Jan 2024 06:33:08 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Mon, 15 Jan 2024 18:24:22 -0500, Catrike Ryder
>>><Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Tue, 16 Jan 2024 06:11:41 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Mon, 15 Jan 2024 08:56:25 -0500, Catrike Ryder
>>>>><Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On Mon, 15 Jan 2024 05:09:36 -0800 (PST), Lou Holtman
>>>>>><lou.holtman@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On Monday, January 15, 2024 at 2:20:17?AM UTC+1, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 1/14/2024 6:40 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>>>> > On 1/14/2024 6:15 PM, Roger Merriman wrote:
>>>>>>>> >> Frank Krygowski <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>>> >>> These days my area still has blessedly few bike lanes,
>>>>>>>> >>> but they are
>>>>>>>> >>> beginning to pop up. The street sweeping around here is
>>>>>>>> >>> done once every
>>>>>>>> >>> six months.
>>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>>> >> Seriously what on earth to they spend your money on? I
>>>>>>>> >> mean road/pavement
>>>>>>>> >> cleaning is hardly particularly expensive.
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > I believe a major reason our streets aren't swept more
>>>>>>>> > frequently is that almost nobody cares much about minor road
>>>>>>>> > debris. This area does not have a lot of bicycling but it
>>>>>>>> > has lots of motorists. Any road debris smaller than, say, a
>>>>>>>> > beverage can doesn't matter to motorists at all, no matter
>>>>>>>> > what it does to bicyclists.
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > What do they spend money on? This time of year, road salt
>>>>>>>> > and snow plowing are huge expenses (although there's been
>>>>>>>> > little need for that so far this year). Filling potholes is
>>>>>>>> > a big expense, partly because we see lots of freeze-thaw
>>>>>>>> > cycles which tends to break up the pavement.
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > And as I've mentioned before, any given road around here may
>>>>>>>> > be controlled by the state, by the county, by the township
>>>>>>>> > or by the municipality (city or village). Each has its own
>>>>>>>> > funding. Our village and our township roads got miles and
>>>>>>>> > miles of repaving done a few years ago; but that leaves less
>>>>>>>> > money for sweeping. (I assume the village and township pay
>>>>>>>> > another entity for sweeping; AFAIK they don't own any
>>>>>>>> > equipment for that.)
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > And our county roads are always hurting for money. There's a
>>>>>>>> > big pot of state money given annually to counties for
>>>>>>>> > "county road" work, but it's divided evenly by Ohio's 88
>>>>>>>> > counties. Some counties have relatively few miles of county
>>>>>>>> > roads. Ours is near the top in county road miles. As the
>>>>>>>> > county engineer said in one presentation, it would make much
>>>>>>>> > more sense to distribute the money on a per-mile basis; but
>>>>>>>> > about 87 other counties would vote against that.
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> Lots of subject areas there and many good points, but in
>>>>>>>> societies where people take personal responsibility there
>>>>>>>> just isn't litter to be removed. I'm sure we have all
>>>>>>>> noticed which neighborhoods are covered in crap and which
>>>>>>>> are not. Even here in rural Wisconsin I have occasionally
>>>>>>>> seen cars toss fast food litter- wrappers, napkins, bags and
>>>>>>>> cups - out of vehicle windows. It's beyond perplexing, makes
>>>>>>>> one quite angry.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>+1 Unbelievable, what are the people thinking when the toss a glass bottle out of the window.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Lou
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Sometimes I think it's an act of defiance. There's people who simply
>>>>>>want to disrupt and disturb. It seems like the USA and maybe the
>>>>>>whole world is full of people who hate everything that doesn't fit
>>>>>>their own personal mindset.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Maybe it's always been like that and it's only now with a constant
>>>>>>barrage of "news" that it's so noticable, or maybe it's all that
>>>>>>"news" that's made it worse.
>>>>>
>>>>>Perhaps now that USians have "bicycle paths" it is time to make
>>>>>cycling even safer and ban them from those dangerious roads that
>>>>>automobiles travel on.
>>>>>And of course traveling solely on their own "paths" bicycling will
>>>>>become a 100% safe activity.
>>>>
>>>>No, but I wouldn't agrue against banning electric scooters from
>>>>bicycle paths.
>>>
>>>
>>>But... if banning electric (powered) bike from bicycle paths makes
>>>them safer for the bicycle then logic would indicate equally that
>>>banning bicycles from automobile paths would also make it safer.
>>
>>Safer for whom?
>
>Bicycles of course.
>
>After all, the justification for the bike paths is to make cycling
>safer as there are no automobiles to attack the cyclist. So logic
>would have it that cars and bicycle don't mix. Thus, no cars on bike
>paths and no bikes on car "paths" will be safer then safe :-)

Protecting a person from their own actions is what a nanny government
would do. I'm not a fan of any entity or individual telling others
what's in their best interest.

OTOH, protecting people on bike and multi-use trails from high speed
motorized traffic is protecting them from what other people do, not
totally unlike laws against theft and assault.

Am Mon, 15 Jan 2024 17:29:14 -0700 schrieb NFN Smith
<worldoff9908@gmail.com>:

>Wolfgang Strobl wrote:
>> No. The tires of fast-moving cars grind up and remove all kinds of
>> stuff, debris, trash and dirt from the surfaces they roll on. In short,
>> car tires clean and dry the roads as a side effect of their use. On
>> other surfaces not touched by the tires, what lands on them remains and
>> accumulates and rots there, be it liquid or frozen water, discarded
>> newspapers or sand, leaves, smaller branches, dead animals, cola cans,
>> soil, grass, vegetation sprouting from cracks, etc. pp. ad nauseam.
>>
>> In short: that difference is no difference, self-cleaning is only
>> happening on those parts of the road that are used by cars.

>But all the debris simply gets pushed out to the space where cars don't
>go as frequently.

Exactly. It gets pushed to the space where they usually paint bike
lanes or build sidelining but segregated bike paths, like "protected
bike linkes" or the compulsory bike path from my commute I've shown
here:
<https://www.mystrobl.de/ws/pic/fahrrad/20081124/P1080297.jpg>

For a little bit more context, another view
<https://www.mystrobl.de/ws/pic/fahrrad/20081124/k8reitgehradweg.jpg>

>Thus, the amount of "clean" space is usually not more
>than about the width of 2 car tires.

Initially, yes, but not for long. Dirt staying on the road would need
two assumptions:

- that cars are driven like trains on rails. Fortunately, it ain't so.
- that all motorized vehicles frequenting a road have equal axle width.
It ain' so, either. There are busses, trucks with twin tires, too.

Have a look again at a picture I showed earlier:
<https://www.mystrobl.de/ws/pic/fahrrad/20220821/DSC01133.jpg>

The picture is from the summer, no rain in sight. About a third of the
roadway is slightly less worn in the middle than the rest, and part of
the difference in reflective behavior is caused by oil from leaking
engines, not from wear. A similar pattern can be observed after a rain
shower, but only for a short time. Water, like most dirt, is not only
pushed around by tires, but also blown around, until it is moved to the
side of the road. After a while you no longer see any traces.

There are exeptions. Lanes which are narrow in comparison to vehicle
size may get track grooves, making aquaplaning more common and more
risky. Some Autobahn lanes had been destroyed in a few years by spikes.
Spikes have been banned in Germany for motorized vehicles, decades ago,
for that very reason. But even normal tires have a similar effect, just
not as strong, see the picture above.

Fortunately, most roads in Europe are still of the kind that allows some
variation, distributing wear and so making roads last a bit longer.

>If there's a bike lane in the
>outer space, then it all accumulates in the bike lane, until the entire
>space is swept.

Exactly. But let's not forget that stuff like sand, leaves, grass etc.
does not come out of thin air, becoming dirt on the road. That effect,
roads staying clean for a long time, without anybody doing anything but
using them for driving their cars and trucks there doesn't magically
extend to surfaces nearby.

In short, "bicycle infrastructure" is not an advantage, but a burden. Or
if you like that wording better: it isn't an asset, it's a liability.

--
Thank you for observing all safety precautions

On Tue, 16 Jan 2024 04:26:20 -0500, Catrike Ryder
<Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:

>On Tue, 16 Jan 2024 07:57:15 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 15 Jan 2024 18:58:20 -0500, Catrike Ryder
>><Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 16 Jan 2024 06:33:08 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Mon, 15 Jan 2024 18:24:22 -0500, Catrike Ryder
>>>><Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Tue, 16 Jan 2024 06:11:41 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On Mon, 15 Jan 2024 08:56:25 -0500, Catrike Ryder
>>>>>><Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On Mon, 15 Jan 2024 05:09:36 -0800 (PST), Lou Holtman
>>>>>>><lou.holtman@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>On Monday, January 15, 2024 at 2:20:17?AM UTC+1, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 1/14/2024 6:40 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>>>>> > On 1/14/2024 6:15 PM, Roger Merriman wrote:
>>>>>>>>> >> Frank Krygowski <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>>>> >>> These days my area still has blessedly few bike lanes,
>>>>>>>>> >>> but they are
>>>>>>>>> >>> beginning to pop up. The street sweeping around here is
>>>>>>>>> >>> done once every
>>>>>>>>> >>> six months.
>>>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>>>> >> Seriously what on earth to they spend your money on? I
>>>>>>>>> >> mean road/pavement
>>>>>>>>> >> cleaning is hardly particularly expensive.
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> > I believe a major reason our streets aren't swept more
>>>>>>>>> > frequently is that almost nobody cares much about minor road
>>>>>>>>> > debris. This area does not have a lot of bicycling but it
>>>>>>>>> > has lots of motorists. Any road debris smaller than, say, a
>>>>>>>>> > beverage can doesn't matter to motorists at all, no matter
>>>>>>>>> > what it does to bicyclists.
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> > What do they spend money on? This time of year, road salt
>>>>>>>>> > and snow plowing are huge expenses (although there's been
>>>>>>>>> > little need for that so far this year). Filling potholes is
>>>>>>>>> > a big expense, partly because we see lots of freeze-thaw
>>>>>>>>> > cycles which tends to break up the pavement.
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> > And as I've mentioned before, any given road around here may
>>>>>>>>> > be controlled by the state, by the county, by the township
>>>>>>>>> > or by the municipality (city or village). Each has its own
>>>>>>>>> > funding. Our village and our township roads got miles and
>>>>>>>>> > miles of repaving done a few years ago; but that leaves less
>>>>>>>>> > money for sweeping. (I assume the village and township pay
>>>>>>>>> > another entity for sweeping; AFAIK they don't own any
>>>>>>>>> > equipment for that.)
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> > And our county roads are always hurting for money. There's a
>>>>>>>>> > big pot of state money given annually to counties for
>>>>>>>>> > "county road" work, but it's divided evenly by Ohio's 88
>>>>>>>>> > counties. Some counties have relatively few miles of county
>>>>>>>>> > roads. Ours is near the top in county road miles. As the
>>>>>>>>> > county engineer said in one presentation, it would make much
>>>>>>>>> > more sense to distribute the money on a per-mile basis; but
>>>>>>>>> > about 87 other counties would vote against that.
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> Lots of subject areas there and many good points, but in
>>>>>>>>> societies where people take personal responsibility there
>>>>>>>>> just isn't litter to be removed. I'm sure we have all
>>>>>>>>> noticed which neighborhoods are covered in crap and which
>>>>>>>>> are not. Even here in rural Wisconsin I have occasionally
>>>>>>>>> seen cars toss fast food litter- wrappers, napkins, bags and
>>>>>>>>> cups - out of vehicle windows. It's beyond perplexing, makes
>>>>>>>>> one quite angry.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>+1 Unbelievable, what are the people thinking when the toss a glass bottle out of the window.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Lou
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Sometimes I think it's an act of defiance. There's people who simply
>>>>>>>want to disrupt and disturb. It seems like the USA and maybe the
>>>>>>>whole world is full of people who hate everything that doesn't fit
>>>>>>>their own personal mindset.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Maybe it's always been like that and it's only now with a constant
>>>>>>>barrage of "news" that it's so noticable, or maybe it's all that
>>>>>>>"news" that's made it worse.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Perhaps now that USians have "bicycle paths" it is time to make
>>>>>>cycling even safer and ban them from those dangerious roads that
>>>>>>automobiles travel on.
>>>>>>And of course traveling solely on their own "paths" bicycling will
>>>>>>become a 100% safe activity.
>>>>>
>>>>>No, but I wouldn't agrue against banning electric scooters from
>>>>>bicycle paths.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>But... if banning electric (powered) bike from bicycle paths makes
>>>>them safer for the bicycle then logic would indicate equally that
>>>>banning bicycles from automobile paths would also make it safer.
>>>
>>>Safer for whom?
>>
>>Bicycles of course.
>>
>>After all, the justification for the bike paths is to make cycling
>>safer as there are no automobiles to attack the cyclist. So logic
>>would have it that cars and bicycle don't mix. Thus, no cars on bike
>>paths and no bikes on car "paths" will be safer then safe :-)
>
>Protecting a person from their own actions is what a nanny government
>would do. I'm not a fan of any entity or individual telling others
>what's in their best interest.
>
>OTOH, protecting people on bike and multi-use trails from high speed
>motorized traffic is protecting them from what other people do, not
>totally unlike laws against theft and assault.

Exactly. On a bike path those savage automobiles can't get at you and
thus you are safer then on the roads and highways. So, in essence, it
is safe where autos can't get close so logically any situation that
separates bicycles and autos is a safer environment. So, a bike lane
is safe with no autos and equally a street or highway is safe if there
are no bicycles :-)

Be SAFE! Ride only where there are no automobiles!
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Tue, 16 Jan 2024 17:11:59 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On Tue, 16 Jan 2024 04:26:20 -0500, Catrike Ryder
><Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 16 Jan 2024 07:57:15 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Mon, 15 Jan 2024 18:58:20 -0500, Catrike Ryder
>>><Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Tue, 16 Jan 2024 06:33:08 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Mon, 15 Jan 2024 18:24:22 -0500, Catrike Ryder
>>>>><Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On Tue, 16 Jan 2024 06:11:41 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On Mon, 15 Jan 2024 08:56:25 -0500, Catrike Ryder
>>>>>>><Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>On Mon, 15 Jan 2024 05:09:36 -0800 (PST), Lou Holtman
>>>>>>>><lou.holtman@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>On Monday, January 15, 2024 at 2:20:17?AM UTC+1, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 1/14/2024 6:40 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> > On 1/14/2024 6:15 PM, Roger Merriman wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> >> Frank Krygowski <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>>>>> >>> These days my area still has blessedly few bike lanes,
>>>>>>>>>> >>> but they are
>>>>>>>>>> >>> beginning to pop up. The street sweeping around here is
>>>>>>>>>> >>> done once every
>>>>>>>>>> >>> six months.
>>>>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>>>>> >> Seriously what on earth to they spend your money on? I
>>>>>>>>>> >> mean road/pavement
>>>>>>>>>> >> cleaning is hardly particularly expensive.
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > I believe a major reason our streets aren't swept more
>>>>>>>>>> > frequently is that almost nobody cares much about minor road
>>>>>>>>>> > debris. This area does not have a lot of bicycling but it
>>>>>>>>>> > has lots of motorists. Any road debris smaller than, say, a
>>>>>>>>>> > beverage can doesn't matter to motorists at all, no matter
>>>>>>>>>> > what it does to bicyclists.
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > What do they spend money on? This time of year, road salt
>>>>>>>>>> > and snow plowing are huge expenses (although there's been
>>>>>>>>>> > little need for that so far this year). Filling potholes is
>>>>>>>>>> > a big expense, partly because we see lots of freeze-thaw
>>>>>>>>>> > cycles which tends to break up the pavement.
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > And as I've mentioned before, any given road around here may
>>>>>>>>>> > be controlled by the state, by the county, by the township
>>>>>>>>>> > or by the municipality (city or village). Each has its own
>>>>>>>>>> > funding. Our village and our township roads got miles and
>>>>>>>>>> > miles of repaving done a few years ago; but that leaves less
>>>>>>>>>> > money for sweeping. (I assume the village and township pay
>>>>>>>>>> > another entity for sweeping; AFAIK they don't own any
>>>>>>>>>> > equipment for that.)
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > And our county roads are always hurting for money. There's a
>>>>>>>>>> > big pot of state money given annually to counties for
>>>>>>>>>> > "county road" work, but it's divided evenly by Ohio's 88
>>>>>>>>>> > counties. Some counties have relatively few miles of county
>>>>>>>>>> > roads. Ours is near the top in county road miles. As the
>>>>>>>>>> > county engineer said in one presentation, it would make much
>>>>>>>>>> > more sense to distribute the money on a per-mile basis; but
>>>>>>>>>> > about 87 other counties would vote against that.
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> Lots of subject areas there and many good points, but in
>>>>>>>>>> societies where people take personal responsibility there
>>>>>>>>>> just isn't litter to be removed. I'm sure we have all
>>>>>>>>>> noticed which neighborhoods are covered in crap and which
>>>>>>>>>> are not. Even here in rural Wisconsin I have occasionally
>>>>>>>>>> seen cars toss fast food litter- wrappers, napkins, bags and
>>>>>>>>>> cups - out of vehicle windows. It's beyond perplexing, makes
>>>>>>>>>> one quite angry.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>+1 Unbelievable, what are the people thinking when the toss a glass bottle out of the window.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Lou
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Sometimes I think it's an act of defiance. There's people who simply
>>>>>>>>want to disrupt and disturb. It seems like the USA and maybe the
>>>>>>>>whole world is full of people who hate everything that doesn't fit
>>>>>>>>their own personal mindset.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Maybe it's always been like that and it's only now with a constant
>>>>>>>>barrage of "news" that it's so noticable, or maybe it's all that
>>>>>>>>"news" that's made it worse.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Perhaps now that USians have "bicycle paths" it is time to make
>>>>>>>cycling even safer and ban them from those dangerious roads that
>>>>>>>automobiles travel on.
>>>>>>>And of course traveling solely on their own "paths" bicycling will
>>>>>>>become a 100% safe activity.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>No, but I wouldn't agrue against banning electric scooters from
>>>>>>bicycle paths.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>But... if banning electric (powered) bike from bicycle paths makes
>>>>>them safer for the bicycle then logic would indicate equally that
>>>>>banning bicycles from automobile paths would also make it safer.
>>>>
>>>>Safer for whom?
>>>
>>>Bicycles of course.
>>>
>>>After all, the justification for the bike paths is to make cycling
>>>safer as there are no automobiles to attack the cyclist. So logic
>>>would have it that cars and bicycle don't mix. Thus, no cars on bike
>>>paths and no bikes on car "paths" will be safer then safe :-)
>>
>>Protecting a person from their own actions is what a nanny government
>>would do. I'm not a fan of any entity or individual telling others
>>what's in their best interest.
>>
>>OTOH, protecting people on bike and multi-use trails from high speed
>>motorized traffic is protecting them from what other people do, not
>>totally unlike laws against theft and assault.
>
>Exactly. On a bike path those savage automobiles can't get at you and
>thus you are safer then on the roads and highways. So, in essence, it
>is safe where autos can't get close so logically any situation that
>separates bicycles and autos is a safer environment. So, a bike lane
>is safe with no autos and equally a street or highway is safe if there
>are no bicycles :-)
>
>Be SAFE! Ride only where there are no automobiles!

On Tue, 16 Jan 2024 06:25:51 -0500, Catrike Ryder
<Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:

>On Tue, 16 Jan 2024 17:11:59 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 16 Jan 2024 04:26:20 -0500, Catrike Ryder
>><Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 16 Jan 2024 07:57:15 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Mon, 15 Jan 2024 18:58:20 -0500, Catrike Ryder
>>>><Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Tue, 16 Jan 2024 06:33:08 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On Mon, 15 Jan 2024 18:24:22 -0500, Catrike Ryder
>>>>>><Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On Tue, 16 Jan 2024 06:11:41 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>On Mon, 15 Jan 2024 08:56:25 -0500, Catrike Ryder
>>>>>>>><Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>On Mon, 15 Jan 2024 05:09:36 -0800 (PST), Lou Holtman
>>>>>>>>><lou.holtman@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>On Monday, January 15, 2024 at 2:20:17?AM UTC+1, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/14/2024 6:40 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> > On 1/14/2024 6:15 PM, Roger Merriman wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> >> Frank Krygowski <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>>>>>> >>> These days my area still has blessedly few bike lanes,
>>>>>>>>>>> >>> but they are
>>>>>>>>>>> >>> beginning to pop up. The street sweeping around here is
>>>>>>>>>>> >>> done once every
>>>>>>>>>>> >>> six months.
>>>>>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>>>>>> >> Seriously what on earth to they spend your money on? I
>>>>>>>>>>> >> mean road/pavement
>>>>>>>>>>> >> cleaning is hardly particularly expensive.
>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>> > I believe a major reason our streets aren't swept more
>>>>>>>>>>> > frequently is that almost nobody cares much about minor road
>>>>>>>>>>> > debris. This area does not have a lot of bicycling but it
>>>>>>>>>>> > has lots of motorists. Any road debris smaller than, say, a
>>>>>>>>>>> > beverage can doesn't matter to motorists at all, no matter
>>>>>>>>>>> > what it does to bicyclists.
>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>> > What do they spend money on? This time of year, road salt
>>>>>>>>>>> > and snow plowing are huge expenses (although there's been
>>>>>>>>>>> > little need for that so far this year). Filling potholes is
>>>>>>>>>>> > a big expense, partly because we see lots of freeze-thaw
>>>>>>>>>>> > cycles which tends to break up the pavement.
>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>> > And as I've mentioned before, any given road around here may
>>>>>>>>>>> > be controlled by the state, by the county, by the township
>>>>>>>>>>> > or by the municipality (city or village). Each has its own
>>>>>>>>>>> > funding. Our village and our township roads got miles and
>>>>>>>>>>> > miles of repaving done a few years ago; but that leaves less
>>>>>>>>>>> > money for sweeping. (I assume the village and township pay
>>>>>>>>>>> > another entity for sweeping; AFAIK they don't own any
>>>>>>>>>>> > equipment for that.)
>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>> > And our county roads are always hurting for money. There's a
>>>>>>>>>>> > big pot of state money given annually to counties for
>>>>>>>>>>> > "county road" work, but it's divided evenly by Ohio's 88
>>>>>>>>>>> > counties. Some counties have relatively few miles of county
>>>>>>>>>>> > roads. Ours is near the top in county road miles. As the
>>>>>>>>>>> > county engineer said in one presentation, it would make much
>>>>>>>>>>> > more sense to distribute the money on a per-mile basis; but
>>>>>>>>>>> > about 87 other counties would vote against that.
>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>> Lots of subject areas there and many good points, but in
>>>>>>>>>>> societies where people take personal responsibility there
>>>>>>>>>>> just isn't litter to be removed. I'm sure we have all
>>>>>>>>>>> noticed which neighborhoods are covered in crap and which
>>>>>>>>>>> are not. Even here in rural Wisconsin I have occasionally
>>>>>>>>>>> seen cars toss fast food litter- wrappers, napkins, bags and
>>>>>>>>>>> cups - out of vehicle windows. It's beyond perplexing, makes
>>>>>>>>>>> one quite angry.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>+1 Unbelievable, what are the people thinking when the toss a glass bottle out of the window.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Lou
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Sometimes I think it's an act of defiance. There's people who simply
>>>>>>>>>want to disrupt and disturb. It seems like the USA and maybe the
>>>>>>>>>whole world is full of people who hate everything that doesn't fit
>>>>>>>>>their own personal mindset.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Maybe it's always been like that and it's only now with a constant
>>>>>>>>>barrage of "news" that it's so noticable, or maybe it's all that
>>>>>>>>>"news" that's made it worse.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Perhaps now that USians have "bicycle paths" it is time to make
>>>>>>>>cycling even safer and ban them from those dangerious roads that
>>>>>>>>automobiles travel on.
>>>>>>>>And of course traveling solely on their own "paths" bicycling will
>>>>>>>>become a 100% safe activity.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>No, but I wouldn't agrue against banning electric scooters from
>>>>>>>bicycle paths.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>But... if banning electric (powered) bike from bicycle paths makes
>>>>>>them safer for the bicycle then logic would indicate equally that
>>>>>>banning bicycles from automobile paths would also make it safer.
>>>>>
>>>>>Safer for whom?
>>>>
>>>>Bicycles of course.
>>>>
>>>>After all, the justification for the bike paths is to make cycling
>>>>safer as there are no automobiles to attack the cyclist. So logic
>>>>would have it that cars and bicycle don't mix. Thus, no cars on bike
>>>>paths and no bikes on car "paths" will be safer then safe :-)
>>>
>>>Protecting a person from their own actions is what a nanny government
>>>would do. I'm not a fan of any entity or individual telling others
>>>what's in their best interest.
>>>
>>>OTOH, protecting people on bike and multi-use trails from high speed
>>>motorized traffic is protecting them from what other people do, not
>>>totally unlike laws against theft and assault.
>>
>>Exactly. On a bike path those savage automobiles can't get at you and
>>thus you are safer then on the roads and highways. So, in essence, it
>>is safe where autos can't get close so logically any situation that
>>separates bicycles and autos is a safer environment. So, a bike lane
>>is safe with no autos and equally a street or highway is safe if there
>>are no bicycles :-)
>>
>>Be SAFE! Ride only where there are no automobiles!
>
>Like I said, banning bicycles from streets and roads sso they don't
>encounter cars and trucks is protecting a bicyclist from his own
>actions, i.e. riding on streets and roads. That would like banning
>bicyclists from riding bike trails so they woudn't encounter motorized
>scooters.
>
>I prefer not having the government or anybody else trying to protect
>me from my own actions, as in the issue previously discussed,
>disproven, and dismissed here about having a gun making you more
>likely to be shot.

Wolfgang Strobl <news5@mystrobl.de> wrote:
> Am Sun, 14 Jan 2024 23:54:21 GMT schrieb Roger Merriman
> <roger@sarlet.com>:
>
>> Wolfgang Strobl <news5@mystrobl.de> wrote:
>>> Am Sat, 13 Jan 2024 21:34:10 GMT schrieb Roger Merriman
>>> <roger@sarlet.com>:
>>>
>>>> Wolfgang Strobl <news5@mystrobl.de> wrote:
>>>>> Am Sat, 13 Jan 2024 18:33:51 GMT schrieb Roger Merriman
>>>>> <roger@sarlet.com>:
>>>>>
>>>>>> But it is talking about a rather different set up ie some painted lane for
>>>>>> bikes on the road, the segregated stuff in my experience is clear of road
>>>>>> debris ie spray of gravel/glass/bits of cars doesn’t stop leaf litter and
>>>>>> so on. But such set ups are urban/suburban in nature and so will get some
>>>>>> sort of street cleaning regularly if not often depending on the area.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Likewise I suspect that Catstrikes trails require much less maintenance
>>>>>> than the roads.
>>>
>>> I suspect that these are either fairy tales or it is simply a kind of
>>> self selection bias. My experience is mostly from times where I didn't
>>> have much choice which route to take, while commuting by bike all year
>>> for decades, both across the city and accross the country. I learned to
>>> avoid "cycling infrastructure" the hard way, that's for sure!
>>>
>>> If cycle paths next to roads were so much better than using the road,
>>> which is also used with motor vehicles, then people would be using these
>>> facilities voluntarily and the ban on road use wouldn't be necessary.
>>
>> Define next to road? As ever cycle infrastructure varies wildly.
>
> Of course it does. It varies between bad and worse.
>
> "Cycle infrastructure" or "Radverkehrsinfrastructur" in German language
> is an euphemism used to avoid the established term "Radweg", denoting
> any construct sidelining a road having one of the many signs shown in
> <https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radverkehrsanlage>. Any such way that is
> next to a road (near enough) having such a sign is compulsory, in most
> of Europe.
>
> Mandatory cycle lanes have gotten a bad reputation over the years, so
> the groups that advocate pushing cycling off the roads have started
> using a less loaded term.

Certainly in uk be that both campaigners types, or more general, be that
cycling or otherwise mandatory cycle lanes doesn’t exist or likely to,
mandatory bike lanes mean it has solid white line that motorists aren’t
supposed to cross, or bikes I’d guess but entirely down to the cyclist
choice which they use.

In general mandatory helmets/infrastructure as you mean has been dismissed
by uk cyclists and mainstream politicians as bad idea for various reasons.

Are clearly motorists only roads mainly though not limited to the
motorways. But rights of way have fairly robust protections in uk, to
change this would require getting the law significantly changed and getting
it though parliament just not going to happen would need significant
support and time which just not going to happen.
>
> ...
>
>>> Do you believe that dirt shown on the segregated bike path in the
>>> following picture is from or was caused by cars? Do you believe that
>>> this road had been cleaned, during the night?
>>>
>>> <https://www.mystrobl.de/ws/pic/fahrrad/20081124/P1080297.jpg>
>>>
>>> I took this photo on my commute, in 2008. I took a lot of similar
>>> pictures, clean roads, sidelined by painted bike lanes, segregated bike
>>> paths and completely segregated so called "biycle infrastructure",
>>> trashed with all kindes of trash and dirt, from sand, gravel, garbage
>>> and all kinds of vegetation in variing state of decay. It's getting
>>> somewhat old to document all that, when it is dismissed that way, out of
>>> ignorance.
>>>
>>
>> Seems unlikely to have been bikes either though seems an odd places to get
>> clumps of mud left? But looks rural? Which really isn’t the sort of thing
>> that the UK does ie you’d use the road than expect a bike lane there? Which
>> tend to be urban/suburban in nature at least transport/utility types get
>> leisure routes clearly.
>
> Please try again. I don't understand what you a trying to say or to ask
> here. That I should have looked for another workplace so that I didn't
> have to cycle on a country road or on a mandatory dirt track along this
> country road?

More my surprise at a cycleway in such a location ie rural? Which uk
doesn’t generally do bar very old 1920/30 stuff next to big trunk roads, in
uk generally with rare exceptions you’d expect to be on the in that set up.
>
> My photo displays a clean district road lined by a dirty mandatory
> two-way cycle path, which is also used by pedestrians and horse riders.
>
> There were a lot more traps and obstacles on that short part of my
> commute, some obvious, some almost invisible, which would have needed
> more photos for display.
>
> But like I said, this is getting old. You're just trying to avoid
> answering my question.
>
> There certainly exist _some_ bicycle ways which don't get much dirt, for
> example those lost places in urban environmens that don't even get
> pedestrian traffic. Somebody riding their bicycle only there, on sunny
> days in summer, might praise that as "bicycle infrastructure".
>
> But it isn't. Roads are bicycle infrastructure. There is no place in
> Europe I coldn't reach by just using one of my bicycles on ordinary
> roads - as long as so called "bicycle infrastructure" doesn't ban
> cyclists from using those roads.
>
> I simply had to use _this_ road for my commute, not some mythical
> cordoned-off, rubber-lined playground that is cleaned and sanitized
> every morning and evening by busy kindergarteners.
>
>
Again I’d ask much like the American’s what do they spend your taxes on?
Cleaning cycleways/footpaths is certainly well expected service and again
hardly expensive maintenance, compared to roads.

Roger Merriman

On 1/16/2024 3:57 AM, Wolfgang Strobl wrote:
> Am Mon, 15 Jan 2024 17:29:14 -0700 schrieb NFN Smith
> <worldoff9908@gmail.com>:
>
>> Wolfgang Strobl wrote:
>>> No. The tires of fast-moving cars grind up and remove all kinds of
>>> stuff, debris, trash and dirt from the surfaces they roll on. In short,
>>> car tires clean and dry the roads as a side effect of their use. On
>>> other surfaces not touched by the tires, what lands on them remains and
>>> accumulates and rots there, be it liquid or frozen water, discarded
>>> newspapers or sand, leaves, smaller branches, dead animals, cola cans,
>>> soil, grass, vegetation sprouting from cracks, etc. pp. ad nauseam.
>>>
>>> In short: that difference is no difference, self-cleaning is only
>>> happening on those parts of the road that are used by cars.
>
>> But all the debris simply gets pushed out to the space where cars don't
>> go as frequently.
>
> Exactly. It gets pushed to the space where they usually paint bike
> lanes or build sidelining but segregated bike paths, like "protected
> bike linkes" or the compulsory bike path from my commute I've shown
> here:
> <https://www.mystrobl.de/ws/pic/fahrrad/20081124/P1080297.jpg>
>
> For a little bit more context, another view
> <https://www.mystrobl.de/ws/pic/fahrrad/20081124/k8reitgehradweg.jpg>
>
>
>> Thus, the amount of "clean" space is usually not more
>> than about the width of 2 car tires.
>
> Initially, yes, but not for long. Dirt staying on the road would need
> two assumptions:
>
> - that cars are driven like trains on rails. Fortunately, it ain't so.
> - that all motorized vehicles frequenting a road have equal axle width.
> It ain' so, either. There are busses, trucks with twin tires, too.
>
> Have a look again at a picture I showed earlier:
> <https://www.mystrobl.de/ws/pic/fahrrad/20220821/DSC01133.jpg>
>
> The picture is from the summer, no rain in sight. About a third of the
> roadway is slightly less worn in the middle than the rest, and part of
> the difference in reflective behavior is caused by oil from leaking
> engines, not from wear. A similar pattern can be observed after a rain
> shower, but only for a short time. Water, like most dirt, is not only
> pushed around by tires, but also blown around, until it is moved to the
> side of the road. After a while you no longer see any traces.
>
> There are exeptions. Lanes which are narrow in comparison to vehicle
> size may get track grooves, making aquaplaning more common and more
> risky. Some Autobahn lanes had been destroyed in a few years by spikes.
> Spikes have been banned in Germany for motorized vehicles, decades ago,
> for that very reason. But even normal tires have a similar effect, just
> not as strong, see the picture above.
>
> Fortunately, most roads in Europe are still of the kind that allows some
> variation, distributing wear and so making roads last a bit longer.
>
>
>> If there's a bike lane in the
>> outer space, then it all accumulates in the bike lane, until the entire
>> space is swept.
>
> Exactly. But let's not forget that stuff like sand, leaves, grass etc.
> does not come out of thin air, becoming dirt on the road. That effect,
> roads staying clean for a long time, without anybody doing anything but
> using them for driving their cars and trucks there doesn't magically
> extend to surfaces nearby.
>
> In short, "bicycle infrastructure" is not an advantage, but a burden. Or
> if you like that wording better: it isn't an asset, it's a liability.
>

Well written, thank you.

I received this email overnight regarding the formerly nice
for cycling North Clark Street in Chicago, which was
recently poxxed by 'infrastructure', that being concrete
antipersonnel barriers to 'chute' cyclists in to death traps:

"Today I walked an hour down Clark St
That is the street that used to be a favorite bike street
until this September when they made dangerous bike lanes
that look great to a non rider
Barricades. Green at night alters depth perception. There
are dips for sewers that are unavoidable. It used to be
very wide, no stop signs. Room for all to cruise.

Here is the real problem. Now the road is clean but the
barricaded bike path is full of snow and frozen rivers near
grates. I am about to march into Brandon’s office and
refuse to leave until he undoes every stupid bike lane and
paves all roads!

Uggg. So stupid. "

['Brandon' is Mayor Brandon Johnson, union flunkie currently
occupying City Hall's Fifth Floor.]

--
Andrew Muzi
am@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On 1/16/2024 9:39 AM, AMuzi wrote:
> On 1/16/2024 3:57 AM, Wolfgang Strobl wrote:
>> Am Mon, 15 Jan 2024 17:29:14 -0700 schrieb NFN Smith
>> <worldoff9908@gmail.com>:
>>
>>> Wolfgang Strobl wrote:
>>>> No. The tires of fast-moving cars grind up and remove all kinds of
>>>> stuff, debris, trash and dirt from the surfaces they roll on.  In
>>>> short,
>>>> car tires clean and dry the roads as a side effect of their use.  On
>>>> other surfaces not touched by the tires, what lands on them remains and
>>>> accumulates and rots there, be it liquid or frozen water, discarded
>>>> newspapers or sand, leaves, smaller branches, dead animals, cola cans,
>>>> soil, grass, vegetation sprouting from cracks, etc. pp. ad nauseam.
>>>>
>>>> In short: that difference is no difference, self-cleaning is only
>>>> happening on those parts of the road that are used by cars.
>>
>>> But all the debris simply gets pushed out to the space where cars don't
>>> go as frequently.
>>
>> Exactly.  It gets pushed to the space where they usually paint bike
>> lanes or build sidelining but segregated bike paths, like "protected
>> bike linkes" or the compulsory bike path from my commute I've shown
>> here:
>> <https://www.mystrobl.de/ws/pic/fahrrad/20081124/P1080297.jpg>
>>
>> For a little bit more context, another view
>> <https://www.mystrobl.de/ws/pic/fahrrad/20081124/k8reitgehradweg.jpg>
>>
>>
>>> Thus, the amount of "clean" space is usually not more
>>> than about the width of 2 car tires.
>>
>> Initially, yes, but not for long. Dirt staying on the road would need
>> two assumptions:
>>
>>   - that cars are driven like trains on rails. Fortunately, it ain't so.
>>   - that all motorized vehicles frequenting a road have equal axle width.
>> It ain' so, either. There are busses, trucks with twin tires, too.
>>
>> Have a look again at a picture I showed earlier:
>> <https://www.mystrobl.de/ws/pic/fahrrad/20220821/DSC01133.jpg>
>>
>> The picture is from the summer, no rain in sight. About a third of the
>> roadway is slightly less worn in the middle than the rest, and part of
>> the difference in reflective behavior is caused by oil from leaking
>> engines, not from wear. A similar pattern can be observed after a rain
>> shower, but only for a short time.  Water, like most dirt, is not only
>> pushed around by tires, but also blown around, until it is moved to the
>> side of the road. After a while you no longer see any traces.
>>
>> There are exeptions. Lanes which are narrow in comparison to vehicle
>> size may get track grooves, making aquaplaning more common and more
>> risky. Some Autobahn lanes had been destroyed in a few years by spikes.
>> Spikes have been banned in Germany for motorized vehicles, decades ago,
>> for that very reason.  But even normal tires have a similar effect, just
>> not as strong, see the picture above.
>>
>> Fortunately, most roads in Europe are still of the kind that allows some
>> variation, distributing wear and so making roads last a bit longer.
>>
>>
>>> If there's a bike lane in the
>>> outer space, then it all accumulates in the bike lane, until the entire
>>> space is swept.
>>
>> Exactly. But let's not forget that stuff like sand, leaves, grass etc.
>> does not come out of thin air, becoming dirt on the road. That effect,
>> roads staying clean for a long time, without anybody doing anything but
>> using them for driving their cars and trucks there doesn't magically
>> extend to surfaces nearby.
>>
>> In short, "bicycle infrastructure" is not an advantage, but a burden. Or
>> if you like that wording better: it isn't an asset, it's a liability.
>>
>
> Well written, thank you.
>
> I received this email overnight regarding the formerly nice for cycling
> North Clark Street in Chicago, which was recently poxxed by
> 'infrastructure', that being concrete antipersonnel barriers to 'chute'
> cyclists in to death traps:
>
> "Today I walked an hour down Clark St
> That is the street that used to be a favorite bike street until this
> September when they made dangerous bike lanes that look great to a non
> rider
> Barricades.  Green at night alters depth perception.  There are dips for
> sewers that are unavoidable.  It used to be very wide, no stop signs.
> Room for all to cruise.
>
> Here is the real problem.  Now the road is clean but the barricaded bike
> path is full of snow and frozen rivers near grates.  I am about to march
> into Brandon’s office and refuse to leave until he undoes every stupid
> bike lane and paves all roads!
>
> Uggg. So stupid. "
>
> ['Brandon' is Mayor Brandon Johnson, union flunkie currently occupying
> City Hall's Fifth Floor.]

Our major problem is that the Bikeway Promotional Complex (consulting
firms, biased researchers, LAB, etc.) has been hard at work for decades.
It's convinced the general public and most bicyclists (or wannabees)
that Any Bike Facility Is A Good Bike Facility.

A politician who approves any fancy or "innovative!" trap for cyclists
gets bonus points when he's up for election.

And any bicyclists who disagree, or who point out the errors, are either
ignored or attacked by the know-nothings.

--
- Frank Krygowski

Am Tue, 16 Jan 2024 13:56:22 GMT schrieb Roger Merriman
<roger@sarlet.com>:

>Wolfgang Strobl <news5@mystrobl.de> wrote:
>> Am Sun, 14 Jan 2024 23:54:21 GMT schrieb Roger Merriman
>> <roger@sarlet.com>:
>>
>>> Wolfgang Strobl <news5@mystrobl.de> wrote:
>>>> Am Sat, 13 Jan 2024 21:34:10 GMT schrieb Roger Merriman
>>>> <roger@sarlet.com>:
>>>>
>>>>> Wolfgang Strobl <news5@mystrobl.de> wrote:
>>>>>> Am Sat, 13 Jan 2024 18:33:51 GMT schrieb Roger Merriman
>>>>>> <roger@sarlet.com>:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But it is talking about a rather different set up ie some painted lane for
>>>>>>> bikes on the road, the segregated stuff in my experience is clear of road
>>>>>>> debris ie spray of gravel/glass/bits of cars doesn’t stop leaf litter and
>>>>>>> so on. But such set ups are urban/suburban in nature and so will get some
>>>>>>> sort of street cleaning regularly if not often depending on the area.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Likewise I suspect that Catstrikes trails require much less maintenance
>>>>>>> than the roads.
>>>>
>>>> I suspect that these are either fairy tales or it is simply a kind of
>>>> self selection bias. My experience is mostly from times where I didn't
>>>> have much choice which route to take, while commuting by bike all year
>>>> for decades, both across the city and accross the country. I learned to
>>>> avoid "cycling infrastructure" the hard way, that's for sure!
>>>>
>>>> If cycle paths next to roads were so much better than using the road,
>>>> which is also used with motor vehicles, then people would be using these
>>>> facilities voluntarily and the ban on road use wouldn't be necessary.
>>>
>>> Define next to road? As ever cycle infrastructure varies wildly.
>>
>> Of course it does. It varies between bad and worse.
>>
>> "Cycle infrastructure" or "Radverkehrsinfrastructur" in German language
>> is an euphemism used to avoid the established term "Radweg", denoting
>> any construct sidelining a road having one of the many signs shown in
>> <https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radverkehrsanlage>. Any such way that is
>> next to a road (near enough) having such a sign is compulsory, in most
>> of Europe.
>>
>> Mandatory cycle lanes have gotten a bad reputation over the years, so
>> the groups that advocate pushing cycling off the roads have started
>> using a less loaded term.
>
>Certainly in uk be that both campaigners types, or more general, be that
>cycling or otherwise mandatory cycle lanes doesn’t exist or likely to,
>mandatory bike lanes mean it has solid white line that motorists aren’t
>supposed to cross, or bikes I’d guess but entirely down to the cyclist
>choice which they use.

In Germany, and AFIK in most of Europe, there is. In Germany it doesn't
matter whether a way which is marked as "Radweg" by some of those blue
signs with a white bicycle is separated by a line, a curb, some plastic,
a stripe of grass or something else, as long as is factually part of the
road or if is separated, but near enough to the road, it is considered
part of the road and its use by cyclists is compulsory.

>
>In general mandatory helmets/infrastructure as you mean has been dismissed
>by uk cyclists and mainstream politicians as bad idea for various reasons.

I believe that there is not real written law in the UK, so it is hard to
compare. Doesn't matter for Europe, anyway.

>
>Are clearly motorists only roads mainly though not limited to the
>motorways. But rights of way have fairly robust protections in uk, to
>change this would require getting the law significantly changed and getting
>it though parliament just not going to happen would need significant
>support and time which just not going to happen.

Great. Do people actually use those rights, without getting molested?

>>
>> ...
>>
>>>> Do you believe that dirt shown on the segregated bike path in the
>>>> following picture is from or was caused by cars? Do you believe that
>>>> this road had been cleaned, during the night?
>>>>
>>>> <https://www.mystrobl.de/ws/pic/fahrrad/20081124/P1080297.jpg>
>>>>
>>>> I took this photo on my commute, in 2008. I took a lot of similar
>>>> pictures, clean roads, sidelined by painted bike lanes, segregated bike
>>>> paths and completely segregated so called "biycle infrastructure",
>>>> trashed with all kindes of trash and dirt, from sand, gravel, garbage
>>>> and all kinds of vegetation in variing state of decay. It's getting
>>>> somewhat old to document all that, when it is dismissed that way, out of
>>>> ignorance.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Seems unlikely to have been bikes either though seems an odd places to get
>>> clumps of mud left? But looks rural? Which really isn’t the sort of thing
>>> that the UK does ie you’d use the road than expect a bike lane there? Which
>>> tend to be urban/suburban in nature at least transport/utility types get
>>> leisure routes clearly.
>>
>> Please try again. I don't understand what you a trying to say or to ask
>> here. That I should have looked for another workplace so that I didn't
>> have to cycle on a country road or on a mandatory dirt track along this
>> country road?
>
>More my surprise at a cycleway in such a location ie rural?

Yes, that part is rural. There is a sign denoting a closed village at
each junction to the right.

<https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ortstafel_(Deutschland)>

Have a look again at this combination of three pictures.
<https://www.mystrobl.de/ws/pic/fahrrad/20081124/k8reitgehradweg.jpg>

Did you notice that sign containing the number 70 in a red circle? This
denotes a speed limit of 70 km/h. We have a speed limit of 100 km/h
outside of closed villages/towns ("geschlossene Ortschaft"), inside it's
50 km/h. In France it's 80 km/h outside and 50 km/h inside (down from 90
km/h and 60 km/h when I was young, AFAIR)

--
Wir danken für die Beachtung aller Sicherheitsbestimmungen

Am Tue, 16 Jan 2024 11:37:21 -0500 schrieb Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net>:

>On 1/16/2024 9:39 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>> On 1/16/2024 3:57 AM, Wolfgang Strobl wrote:
>>> Am Mon, 15 Jan 2024 17:29:14 -0700 schrieb NFN Smith
>>> <worldoff9908@gmail.com>:
>>>
>>>> Wolfgang Strobl wrote:
>>>>> No. The tires of fast-moving cars grind up and remove all kinds of
>>>>> stuff, debris, trash and dirt from the surfaces they roll on.  In
>>>>> short,
>>>>> car tires clean and dry the roads as a side effect of their use.  On
>>>>> other surfaces not touched by the tires, what lands on them remains and
>>>>> accumulates and rots there, be it liquid or frozen water, discarded
>>>>> newspapers or sand, leaves, smaller branches, dead animals, cola cans,
>>>>> soil, grass, vegetation sprouting from cracks, etc. pp. ad nauseam.
>>>>>
>>>>> In short: that difference is no difference, self-cleaning is only
>>>>> happening on those parts of the road that are used by cars.
>>>
>>>> But all the debris simply gets pushed out to the space where cars don't
>>>> go as frequently.
>>>
>>> Exactly.  It gets pushed to the space where they usually paint bike
>>> lanes or build sidelining but segregated bike paths, like "protected
>>> bike linkes" or the compulsory bike path from my commute I've shown
>>> here:
>>> <https://www.mystrobl.de/ws/pic/fahrrad/20081124/P1080297.jpg>
>>>
>>> For a little bit more context, another view
>>> <https://www.mystrobl.de/ws/pic/fahrrad/20081124/k8reitgehradweg.jpg>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Thus, the amount of "clean" space is usually not more
>>>> than about the width of 2 car tires.
>>>
>>> Initially, yes, but not for long. Dirt staying on the road would need
>>> two assumptions:
>>>
>>>   - that cars are driven like trains on rails. Fortunately, it ain't so.
>>>   - that all motorized vehicles frequenting a road have equal axle width.
>>> It ain' so, either. There are busses, trucks with twin tires, too.
>>>
>>> Have a look again at a picture I showed earlier:
>>> <https://www.mystrobl.de/ws/pic/fahrrad/20220821/DSC01133.jpg>
>>>
>>> The picture is from the summer, no rain in sight. About a third of the
>>> roadway is slightly less worn in the middle than the rest, and part of
>>> the difference in reflective behavior is caused by oil from leaking
>>> engines, not from wear. A similar pattern can be observed after a rain
>>> shower, but only for a short time.  Water, like most dirt, is not only
>>> pushed around by tires, but also blown around, until it is moved to the
>>> side of the road. After a while you no longer see any traces.
>>>
>>> There are exeptions. Lanes which are narrow in comparison to vehicle
>>> size may get track grooves, making aquaplaning more common and more
>>> risky. Some Autobahn lanes had been destroyed in a few years by spikes.
>>> Spikes have been banned in Germany for motorized vehicles, decades ago,
>>> for that very reason.  But even normal tires have a similar effect, just
>>> not as strong, see the picture above.
>>>
>>> Fortunately, most roads in Europe are still of the kind that allows some
>>> variation, distributing wear and so making roads last a bit longer.
>>>
>>>
>>>> If there's a bike lane in the
>>>> outer space, then it all accumulates in the bike lane, until the entire
>>>> space is swept.
>>>
>>> Exactly. But let's not forget that stuff like sand, leaves, grass etc.
>>> does not come out of thin air, becoming dirt on the road. That effect,
>>> roads staying clean for a long time, without anybody doing anything but
>>> using them for driving their cars and trucks there doesn't magically
>>> extend to surfaces nearby.
>>>
>>> In short, "bicycle infrastructure" is not an advantage, but a burden. Or
>>> if you like that wording better: it isn't an asset, it's a liability.
>>>
>>
>> Well written, thank you.
>>
>> I received this email overnight regarding the formerly nice for cycling
>> North Clark Street in Chicago, which was recently poxxed by
>> 'infrastructure', that being concrete antipersonnel barriers to 'chute'
>> cyclists in to death traps:
>>
>> "Today I walked an hour down Clark St
>> That is the street that used to be a favorite bike street until this
>> September when they made dangerous bike lanes that look great to a non
>> rider
>> Barricades.  Green at night alters depth perception.  There are dips for
>> sewers that are unavoidable.  It used to be very wide, no stop signs.
>> Room for all to cruise.
>>
>> Here is the real problem.  Now the road is clean but the barricaded bike
>> path is full of snow and frozen rivers near grates.  I am about to march
>> into Brandon’s office and refuse to leave until he undoes every stupid
>> bike lane and paves all roads!
>>
>> Uggg. So stupid. "
>>
>> ['Brandon' is Mayor Brandon Johnson, union flunkie currently occupying
>> City Hall's Fifth Floor.]
>
>Our major problem is that the Bikeway Promotional Complex (consulting
>firms, biased researchers, LAB, etc.) has been hard at work for decades.
>It's convinced the general public and most bicyclists (or wannabees)
>that Any Bike Facility Is A Good Bike Facility.

That's a very useful summary, a bit long for a signature, but just right
to counter the usual "we just need better cycling infrastructure"
argument.

>A politician who approves any fancy or "innovative!" trap for cyclists
>gets bonus points when he's up for election.

It's a convenient checklist item that parties who are enemies and have
neither anything to do with cycling nor anything in common can easily
agree on.

>
>And any bicyclists who disagree, or who point out the errors, are either
>ignored or attacked by the know-nothings.

As someone who uses real bicycles extensively for transportation and/or
road sports, one is surprised how similar these patterns are in Europe
and the US. But when you realize how many of those who have jumped on
this bandwagon cycle little or not at all, you are less surprised.

--
Bicycle helmets are the Bach flower remedies of traffic

Am Tue, 16 Jan 2024 08:39:18 -0600 schrieb AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org>:

>On 1/16/2024 3:57 AM, Wolfgang Strobl wrote:
>> Am Mon, 15 Jan 2024 17:29:14 -0700 schrieb NFN Smith
>> <worldoff9908@gmail.com>:
>>
>>> Wolfgang Strobl wrote:
>>>> No. The tires of fast-moving cars grind up and remove all kinds of
>>>> stuff, debris, trash and dirt from the surfaces they roll on. In short,
>>>> car tires clean and dry the roads as a side effect of their use. On
>>>> other surfaces not touched by the tires, what lands on them remains and
>>>> accumulates and rots there, be it liquid or frozen water, discarded
>>>> newspapers or sand, leaves, smaller branches, dead animals, cola cans,
>>>> soil, grass, vegetation sprouting from cracks, etc. pp. ad nauseam.
>>>>
>>>> In short: that difference is no difference, self-cleaning is only
>>>> happening on those parts of the road that are used by cars.
>>
>>> But all the debris simply gets pushed out to the space where cars don't
>>> go as frequently.
>>
>> Exactly. It gets pushed to the space where they usually paint bike
>> lanes or build sidelining but segregated bike paths, like "protected
>> bike linkes" or the compulsory bike path from my commute I've shown
>> here:
>> <https://www.mystrobl.de/ws/pic/fahrrad/20081124/P1080297.jpg>
>>
>> For a little bit more context, another view
>> <https://www.mystrobl.de/ws/pic/fahrrad/20081124/k8reitgehradweg.jpg>
>>
>>
>>> Thus, the amount of "clean" space is usually not more
>>> than about the width of 2 car tires.
>>
>> Initially, yes, but not for long. Dirt staying on the road would need
>> two assumptions:
>>
>> - that cars are driven like trains on rails. Fortunately, it ain't so.
>> - that all motorized vehicles frequenting a road have equal axle width.
>> It ain' so, either. There are busses, trucks with twin tires, too.
>>
>> Have a look again at a picture I showed earlier:
>> <https://www.mystrobl.de/ws/pic/fahrrad/20220821/DSC01133.jpg>
>>
>> The picture is from the summer, no rain in sight. About a third of the
>> roadway is slightly less worn in the middle than the rest, and part of
>> the difference in reflective behavior is caused by oil from leaking
>> engines, not from wear. A similar pattern can be observed after a rain
>> shower, but only for a short time. Water, like most dirt, is not only
>> pushed around by tires, but also blown around, until it is moved to the
>> side of the road. After a while you no longer see any traces.
>>
>> There are exeptions. Lanes which are narrow in comparison to vehicle
>> size may get track grooves, making aquaplaning more common and more
>> risky. Some Autobahn lanes had been destroyed in a few years by spikes.
>> Spikes have been banned in Germany for motorized vehicles, decades ago,
>> for that very reason. But even normal tires have a similar effect, just
>> not as strong, see the picture above.
>>
>> Fortunately, most roads in Europe are still of the kind that allows some
>> variation, distributing wear and so making roads last a bit longer.
>>
>>
>>> If there's a bike lane in the
>>> outer space, then it all accumulates in the bike lane, until the entire
>>> space is swept.
>>
>> Exactly. But let's not forget that stuff like sand, leaves, grass etc.
>> does not come out of thin air, becoming dirt on the road. That effect,
>> roads staying clean for a long time, without anybody doing anything but
>> using them for driving their cars and trucks there doesn't magically
>> extend to surfaces nearby.
>>
>> In short, "bicycle infrastructure" is not an advantage, but a burden. Or
>> if you like that wording better: it isn't an asset, it's a liability.
>>
>
>Well written, thank you.

Danke für das Lob. :-)

>
>I received this email overnight regarding the formerly nice
>for cycling North Clark Street in Chicago, which was
>recently poxxed by 'infrastructure', that being concrete
>antipersonnel barriers to 'chute' cyclists in to death traps:
>
>"Today I walked an hour down Clark St
>That is the street that used to be a favorite bike street
>until this September when they made dangerous bike lanes
>that look great to a non rider
>Barricades. Green at night alters depth perception. There
>are dips for sewers that are unavoidable. It used to be
>very wide, no stop signs. Room for all to cruise.
>
>Here is the real problem. Now the road is clean but the
>barricaded bike path is full of snow and frozen rivers near
>grates. I am about to march into Brandon’s office and
>refuse to leave until he undoes every stupid bike lane and
>paves all roads!
>
>Uggg. So stupid. "
>
>['Brandon' is Mayor Brandon Johnson, union flunkie currently
>occupying City Hall's Fifth Floor.]

Thanks for communicating this. It is usefull for discussing that stuff
around here, in Germany. For some strange reason, reports like these
seem to appear all the more credible the further away the report comes
from. If you point out such disasters in Germany, from Germany or from
your own region or or own city and illustrate them, they are
deliberately ignored. But if you bring up some glossy, third hand
marketing material from the Netherlands, Denmark or Finland, everyone
will believe it.

--
Thank you for observing all safety precautions

Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> On 1/16/2024 9:39 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>> On 1/16/2024 3:57 AM, Wolfgang Strobl wrote:
>>> Am Mon, 15 Jan 2024 17:29:14 -0700 schrieb NFN Smith
>>> <worldoff9908@gmail.com>:
>>>
>>>> Wolfgang Strobl wrote:
>>>>> No. The tires of fast-moving cars grind up and remove all kinds of
>>>>> stuff, debris, trash and dirt from the surfaces they roll on.  In
>>>>> short,
>>>>> car tires clean and dry the roads as a side effect of their use.  On
>>>>> other surfaces not touched by the tires, what lands on them remains and
>>>>> accumulates and rots there, be it liquid or frozen water, discarded
>>>>> newspapers or sand, leaves, smaller branches, dead animals, cola cans,
>>>>> soil, grass, vegetation sprouting from cracks, etc. pp. ad nauseam.
>>>>>
>>>>> In short: that difference is no difference, self-cleaning is only
>>>>> happening on those parts of the road that are used by cars.
>>>
>>>> But all the debris simply gets pushed out to the space where cars don't
>>>> go as frequently.
>>>
>>> Exactly.  It gets pushed to the space where they usually paint bike
>>> lanes or build sidelining but segregated bike paths, like "protected
>>> bike linkes" or the compulsory bike path from my commute I've shown
>>> here:
>>> <https://www.mystrobl.de/ws/pic/fahrrad/20081124/P1080297.jpg>
>>>
>>> For a little bit more context, another view
>>> <https://www.mystrobl.de/ws/pic/fahrrad/20081124/k8reitgehradweg.jpg>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Thus, the amount of "clean" space is usually not more
>>>> than about the width of 2 car tires.
>>>
>>> Initially, yes, but not for long. Dirt staying on the road would need
>>> two assumptions:
>>>
>>>   - that cars are driven like trains on rails. Fortunately, it ain't so.
>>>   - that all motorized vehicles frequenting a road have equal axle width.
>>> It ain' so, either. There are busses, trucks with twin tires, too.
>>>
>>> Have a look again at a picture I showed earlier:
>>> <https://www.mystrobl.de/ws/pic/fahrrad/20220821/DSC01133.jpg>
>>>
>>> The picture is from the summer, no rain in sight. About a third of the
>>> roadway is slightly less worn in the middle than the rest, and part of
>>> the difference in reflective behavior is caused by oil from leaking
>>> engines, not from wear. A similar pattern can be observed after a rain
>>> shower, but only for a short time.  Water, like most dirt, is not only
>>> pushed around by tires, but also blown around, until it is moved to the
>>> side of the road. After a while you no longer see any traces.
>>>
>>> There are exeptions. Lanes which are narrow in comparison to vehicle
>>> size may get track grooves, making aquaplaning more common and more
>>> risky. Some Autobahn lanes had been destroyed in a few years by spikes.
>>> Spikes have been banned in Germany for motorized vehicles, decades ago,
>>> for that very reason.  But even normal tires have a similar effect, just
>>> not as strong, see the picture above.
>>>
>>> Fortunately, most roads in Europe are still of the kind that allows some
>>> variation, distributing wear and so making roads last a bit longer.
>>>
>>>
>>>> If there's a bike lane in the
>>>> outer space, then it all accumulates in the bike lane, until the entire
>>>> space is swept.
>>>
>>> Exactly. But let's not forget that stuff like sand, leaves, grass etc.
>>> does not come out of thin air, becoming dirt on the road. That effect,
>>> roads staying clean for a long time, without anybody doing anything but
>>> using them for driving their cars and trucks there doesn't magically
>>> extend to surfaces nearby.
>>>
>>> In short, "bicycle infrastructure" is not an advantage, but a burden. Or
>>> if you like that wording better: it isn't an asset, it's a liability.
>>>
>>
>> Well written, thank you.
>>
>> I received this email overnight regarding the formerly nice for cycling
>> North Clark Street in Chicago, which was recently poxxed by
>> 'infrastructure', that being concrete antipersonnel barriers to 'chute'
>> cyclists in to death traps:
>>
>> "Today I walked an hour down Clark St
>> That is the street that used to be a favorite bike street until this
>> September when they made dangerous bike lanes that look great to a non
>> rider
>> Barricades.  Green at night alters depth perception.  There are dips for
>> sewers that are unavoidable.  It used to be very wide, no stop signs.
>> Room for all to cruise.
>>
>> Here is the real problem.  Now the road is clean but the barricaded bike
>> path is full of snow and frozen rivers near grates.  I am about to march
>> into Brandon’s office and refuse to leave until he undoes every stupid
>> bike lane and paves all roads!
>>
>> Uggg. So stupid. "
>>
>> ['Brandon' is Mayor Brandon Johnson, union flunkie currently occupying
>> City Hall's Fifth Floor.]
>
> Our major problem is that the Bikeway Promotional Complex (consulting
> firms, biased researchers, LAB, etc.) has been hard at work for decades.
> It's convinced the general public and most bicyclists (or wannabees)
> that Any Bike Facility Is A Good Bike Facility.
>
> A politician who approves any fancy or "innovative!" trap for cyclists
> gets bonus points when he's up for election.
>
> And any bicyclists who disagree, or who point out the errors, are either
> ignored or attacked by the know-nothings.
>

This seems to suggest half hearted efforts, ie bike lanes/cycleways in
somewhere that gets significant snow/ice without thinking how to cope, is
setting it up for failure.

This isn’t something uk does well either London to an extent gets a pass as
it’s rare to snow and frankly has about one gritting lorry per London
Council let alone snow plow.

But more northern cities do and don’t do much if anything.

But I’m told some European cities absolutely do cope just fine, as ever
it’s what you are willing to pay for and want/need.

Roger Merriman

Wolfgang Strobl <news5@mystrobl.de> wrote:
> Am Tue, 16 Jan 2024 13:56:22 GMT schrieb Roger Merriman
> <roger@sarlet.com>:
>
>> Wolfgang Strobl <news5@mystrobl.de> wrote:
>>> Am Sun, 14 Jan 2024 23:54:21 GMT schrieb Roger Merriman
>>> <roger@sarlet.com>:
>>>
>>>> Wolfgang Strobl <news5@mystrobl.de> wrote:
>>>>> Am Sat, 13 Jan 2024 21:34:10 GMT schrieb Roger Merriman
>>>>> <roger@sarlet.com>:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Wolfgang Strobl <news5@mystrobl.de> wrote:
>>>>>>> Am Sat, 13 Jan 2024 18:33:51 GMT schrieb Roger Merriman
>>>>>>> <roger@sarlet.com>:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> But it is talking about a rather different set up ie some painted lane for
>>>>>>>> bikes on the road, the segregated stuff in my experience is clear of road
>>>>>>>> debris ie spray of gravel/glass/bits of cars doesn’t stop leaf litter and
>>>>>>>> so on. But such set ups are urban/suburban in nature and so will get some
>>>>>>>> sort of street cleaning regularly if not often depending on the area.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Likewise I suspect that Catstrikes trails require much less maintenance
>>>>>>>> than the roads.
>>>>>
>>>>> I suspect that these are either fairy tales or it is simply a kind of
>>>>> self selection bias. My experience is mostly from times where I didn't
>>>>> have much choice which route to take, while commuting by bike all year
>>>>> for decades, both across the city and accross the country. I learned to
>>>>> avoid "cycling infrastructure" the hard way, that's for sure!
>>>>>
>>>>> If cycle paths next to roads were so much better than using the road,
>>>>> which is also used with motor vehicles, then people would be using these
>>>>> facilities voluntarily and the ban on road use wouldn't be necessary.
>>>>
>>>> Define next to road? As ever cycle infrastructure varies wildly.
>>>
>>> Of course it does. It varies between bad and worse.
>>>
>>> "Cycle infrastructure" or "Radverkehrsinfrastructur" in German language
>>> is an euphemism used to avoid the established term "Radweg", denoting
>>> any construct sidelining a road having one of the many signs shown in
>>> <https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radverkehrsanlage>. Any such way that is
>>> next to a road (near enough) having such a sign is compulsory, in most
>>> of Europe.
>>>
>>> Mandatory cycle lanes have gotten a bad reputation over the years, so
>>> the groups that advocate pushing cycling off the roads have started
>>> using a less loaded term.
>>
>> Certainly in uk be that both campaigners types, or more general, be that
>> cycling or otherwise mandatory cycle lanes doesn’t exist or likely to,
>> mandatory bike lanes mean it has solid white line that motorists aren’t
>> supposed to cross, or bikes I’d guess but entirely down to the cyclist
>> choice which they use.
>
> In Germany, and AFIK in most of Europe, there is. In Germany it doesn't
> matter whether a way which is marked as "Radweg" by some of those blue
> signs with a white bicycle is separated by a line, a curb, some plastic,
> a stripe of grass or something else, as long as is factually part of the
> road or if is separated, but near enough to the road, it is considered
> part of the road and its use by cyclists is compulsory.
>
>
>>
>> In general mandatory helmets/infrastructure as you mean has been dismissed
>> by uk cyclists and mainstream politicians as bad idea for various reasons.
>
>
> I believe that there is not real written law in the UK, so it is hard to
> compare. Doesn't matter for Europe, anyway.

The laws are written down, it’s more that there is no constitution but
plenty of old laws going back many centuries see

<https://www.legislation.gov.uk/aep/Hen3cc1415/52/1#:~:text=The%20Statute%20of%20Marlborough%201267%20%5BDistress%5D>

And it’s original text from 1267 which is the oldest still in use.

>
>>
>> Are clearly motorists only roads mainly though not limited to the
>> motorways. But rights of way have fairly robust protections in uk, to
>> change this would require getting the law significantly changed and getting
>> it though parliament just not going to happen would need significant
>> support and time which just not going to happen.
>
> Great. Do people actually use those rights, without getting molested?

Absolutely for example today having a wee loop I ignored the shared path as
while I occasionally use it, it has a poor exit and while can be useful
bypass during rush hour it didn’t warrant its use today so I kept on the
road as it was today a better choice, while yes London in particular does
have some good and successful cycle infrastructure it also has stuff that
is just not useful and awkward to use.

>
>
>>>
>>> ...
>>>
>>>>> Do you believe that dirt shown on the segregated bike path in the
>>>>> following picture is from or was caused by cars? Do you believe that
>>>>> this road had been cleaned, during the night?
>>>>>
>>>>> <https://www.mystrobl.de/ws/pic/fahrrad/20081124/P1080297.jpg>
>>>>>
>>>>> I took this photo on my commute, in 2008. I took a lot of similar
>>>>> pictures, clean roads, sidelined by painted bike lanes, segregated bike
>>>>> paths and completely segregated so called "biycle infrastructure",
>>>>> trashed with all kindes of trash and dirt, from sand, gravel, garbage
>>>>> and all kinds of vegetation in variing state of decay. It's getting
>>>>> somewhat old to document all that, when it is dismissed that way, out of
>>>>> ignorance.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Seems unlikely to have been bikes either though seems an odd places to get
>>>> clumps of mud left? But looks rural? Which really isn’t the sort of thing
>>>> that the UK does ie you’d use the road than expect a bike lane there? Which
>>>> tend to be urban/suburban in nature at least transport/utility types get
>>>> leisure routes clearly.
>>>
>>> Please try again. I don't understand what you a trying to say or to ask
>>> here. That I should have looked for another workplace so that I didn't
>>> have to cycle on a country road or on a mandatory dirt track along this
>>> country road?
>>
>> More my surprise at a cycleway in such a location ie rural?
>
>
> Yes, that part is rural. There is a sign denoting a closed village at
> each junction to the right.
>
> <https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ortstafel_(Deutschland)>
>
>
> Have a look again at this combination of three pictures.
> <www.mystrobl.de/ws/pic/fahrrad/20081124/k8reitgehradweg.jpg>
>
> Did you notice that sign containing the number 70 in a red circle? This
> denotes a speed limit of 70 km/h. We have a speed limit of 100 km/h
> outside of closed villages/towns ("geschlossene Ortschaft"), inside it's
> 50 km/h. In France it's 80 km/h outside and 50 km/h inside (down from 90
> km/h and 60 km/h when I was young, AFAIR)
>
I don’t particularly find speed limits them selfs particularly or wholly
linked to how nice a road is to cycle on, the A40 for example runs through
London and finishes when it runs out of land at the other side of the
country, its speed limit varies from 20mph to 70mph and cycling experience
will vary from fairly horrid to being a rather lovely road.
>
>
Roger Merriman