From: rlewis@muskwa.ucs.ualberta.ca (Robert Lewis)
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles,can.general,ont.general,soc.culture.canada,ott.general
Subject: Re: Interesting facts about bicycles in Ontario (from MoT)
Date: 28 Jul 92 21:10:27 GMT
Organization: University Of Alberta, Edmonton Canada

mlantin@csi.uottawa.ca (Maria Lantin) writes:

>In article <rlewis.712275993@muskwa.ucs.ualberta.ca> rlewis@muskwa.ucs.ualberta.ca (Robert Lewis) writes:
>>mlantin@csi.uottawa.ca (Maria Lantin) writes:
>>
>>>In article <g-lmw8d.tomk@netcom.com> tomk@netcom.com (Thomas H. Kunich) writes:
>>>Bicycle paths are not safe they are safer.  

>>Perhaps you could translate this for the rest of us.

>Sorry I didn't mean to be unclear.  I meant safer than roads in most cases.

Every study I have seen of the relative accident rates of roads and bike paths 
show that the latter have a higher accident rate than the former.

>I think if given the choice I would rather be hit by another cyclist than
>a car....

This really depends on the type of accident.  Not all accidents involving bikes 
and cars are more serious for the cyclist than are those involving two bikes or 
a bike and a pedestrian.  Of course nobody wants to be involved in the almost 
mythical situation of being hit from behind by a truck going 100 km/hr driven 
by a viscious killer entent on wiping out any cyclist he (it goes without 
saying) sees.  But that simply isn't a likely accident, rather the most common 
accidents involve being hit at an intersection by a motorist that either didn't 
see you or who saw you but couldn't figure out what you were going to do next,
this is exactly the situation which bike paths make worse.  The ideal thing is
to avoid any accident.

>(BTW I _have_ been hit by another cyclist on a bike path).

>>>A lot of cyclists do not have the
>>>first clue about how to ride on a bike path.  

>>That's becuase there is no way to ride properly or safely on a bike path.

>Do you state this from experience?  Signaling turns and calling out before
>passing is a start.

Calling out before passing, in my experience, at best makes no difference 
and at worst is more dangerous than getting by people (pedestrians or the 
average bike path cyclist, read poor cyclist) before they know that you are 
there.  If you call out to the average bike path cyclist they will look back, 
and because they do not know how to do a proper shoulder check without swerving
to the left, pull in front of you.  If you call out to a pedestrian they are as
likely to move to the left as to the right.  When signalling left of bike paths
I have had people look in the direction I was 'pointing'.  It should be clear 
that I now avoid bike paths when ever possible (which is almost always, 
thankful to the fact that Alberta has no law making use of bike paths mandatory
where available, though most motorists don't agree).

When the bike paths opened in this city in the mid 1970s I found at a 
very early date that they were extremely hazerdous places to ride at anything 
faster than a walking pace.  Since that time research into cycling accident 
records and the taking of CanBike I & II courses have reinforced my initial 
impressions.  But I take what I have read as having considerably more validity 
than my personal experience.  As you seem to believe your self, ("BTW I _have_ 
been hit by another cyclist on a bike path") personal experience is not the 
best basis for all sorts of judgements.  The fact that many people are more 
afraid of rideing (properly) on the road than on the bike paths (where there is 
no 'proper' way of riding) shows no more than that most people know almost 
nothing of cycling.  The more people cycle the less they like bike paths.  As 
proof of such note that of the regular posters to this group the majority would 
at least agree that existing bike paths are less safe than the roads whereas 
in the population at large I think that you would find that most think (or 
rationalize) that bike paths are safer than roads.

>				Maria

Robert Lewis