A few weeks ago I attended a cross-party meeting on cycling. MPs from Labour, National and the Greens were all in attendance and Bike NZ gave us an excellent presentation on practical steps they thought we could take to make our roads safer for cyclists. We had quite a lot of discussion about our ‘car is king’ culture. I have to admit that despite being a frequent cyclist myself I’m probably not the most cycle-aware driver when behind the wheel of car.
I’m interested in feedback on some of the suggestions Bike NZ put forward, such as:
- Lower speed limits in urban/rural areas (eg. around schools, shops, where the road is narrow)
- More comprehensive ‘Share the Road’ and ‘1.5 metre’ campaigns (should 1.5 metres be the legal passing space?)
- More designated cycle lanes and cycle routes (and should school kids be allowed to ride on footpaths?)
- A national bike skills in schools programme
- Better integration with public transport (eg. allowing bikes on trains and buses)
- Higher penalties for distracted driving
We also talked about the fact that a lot of government agencies (including local government) are doing bits here and there on cycling but there doesn’t appear to be an over-arching strategy. That’s certainly something I’d like to see the government address.
Kiwi enthusiasm for cycling is certainly increasing. It’s better for our health, reduces traffic congestion and carbon emissions, and it’s cheaper! We’ve still got a way to go if we’re going to properly address all the issues around cycling, so it’s great to see MPs from across the spectrum coming together to talk about it and work with each other.
When they see a group of 20 or so Cyclists riding 3-4 abreast along Tamaki Drive running every redlight and pedestrian crossing your average Joe Bloggs is hardly likely to show the same respect in regard to basic road laws in return let alone any additional ones put in place to cater specifically to this group.
On the suggestions I have to say I don’t think the 1.5m should be a legal requirement, it is a courtesy and it is not always necessary, it would sometimes make it impossible for a car to overtake a bike where roads are narrow. A campaign promoting it would be good though.
More cycle lanes are definitely needed, more of them need to be linked up as well. It can get confusing when they suddenly disappear.
Having more bike riding training in school I think would be an excellent idea to ensure kids know how to bike safely and to give those kids who do not have a bike or parents able to teach them a chance to learn.
The public transport in Wellington appears to allow bikes if there is room already…
Lower speed limits and harsher penalties for distracted driving are more of a general road safety issue than just bikes and should be considered as part of an overall scheme for safety for all not just bikes. Harsher penalties for distracted driving isn’t really what we need anyway as it seems to me that most forms of distracted driving do not have any penalty. Mobile phones became illegal this year but what about eating, turning around to talk to friends, putting on makeup, messing with your ipod over in your glovebox rather than looking at the road…there is quite simply so many stupid things people do which makes their driving unsafe and there is no general law against it. I think rather than harsher penalties you need to be looking at making an offence of distracted driving itself so any situation where the person isn’t looking at the road for long periods of time or is not looking properly is against the law.
I have no quarrel with more designated cycle lanes and cycle routes, but for god’s sake please make sure the local bodies responsible for making the decisions are also made more accountable to the public they serve.
I live in a popular holiday and tourist isthmus in the Auckland region which has only one main arterial road in and out of the area. Two to three years ago, the council put cycle lanes along both sides of the road with virtually no consultation with the public. The inevitible happened. During the rush hour times and every weekend the route is clogged with traffic. It’s dangerous for both cyclists and drivers, and it is only a matter of time before there is a major tragedy. What is worse, the locals knew what was going to happen but our ‘we know best’ city fathers and mothers ignored our pleas and effectively told us… “to go home and stop being naughty boys and girls. Everything will settle down you wait and see” It didn’t!
I owuld like to see a tv campaign… a shock campaign of the likes we see for intersections etc…
car door opening into a cyclist, turning into a cyclist…. cyclist flying through the air, to really UP people’s awareness.
I’d also like to see cyclists restricted to 1 abreast. It can be very frustrating to drivers on two lane roads, and only defeats the cyclists cause.
YES at bikes on trains and buses, absolutely. It works well in other countries, and in places like Auckland where public transport is not the best could be an answer for some. Ferries permit bikes, why not buses and trains. Buses, could have the same type of compartment as for prams, or bike racks on the back of the bus (just thinking out loud).
We need to encourage kids back onto bieks for getting to school. I am an aucklander and ther eis NO doubt that traffic halves during school holidays. TOO many travel by car to school.
I’m not sure about the school kids riding on footpaths, I’ve nearly been cleaned up by a kid going fast down a footpath on a steep street, he was sitting on a skateboard. It would have to be managed well so as not to impact on the elderly, sight impaired (who don’t always carry a cane), the deaf, and physically impaired.
Love the biking concept though
If your under 14 years old then you CAN ALREADY ride your bike on the foot path, along with your skate boards and other human powered wheeled devices.
Did you remind the Nat MPs that they had cut funding for local cycleways so they could build their ‘Roads of National Significance’?
Local cycleways are much more useful for health, congestion and environmental outcomes as they are close to where people live.
In many countries the cycle lanes are next to the footpath, the curb is between the path cycle lane and the road. Cyclists stick to thier lane so as not to run over pedestrians and the safety of cyclists in increased massively. This avoids cyclists having problems with car parking, car doors, bus lanes etc
It is a do it once and do it right solution as it is not just a matter of painting the road. The quality of riding surface is usually much better than when it is part of the roadway.
Also the penalties for hitting a cyclist are more stringent in serious cycling countries like the Netherlands.
That sounds like a stellar idea!
One thing I would like to see is a commitment to a usuable lane or shoulder on all State Highways (excluding motorways) for cyclists.
As you also ride from the Hutt to Town you will appreciate the lack of shoulder at places from Moonshine Road to Silverstream, and then again from the KGB to just past Melling. And going north is much worse from Melling to Belmont Domain. Having a 1.5 metre clearance won’t help as that would force traffic into on-coming lanes on the River Road.
Another thing is the cycle paths that are not usuable. Road bikes just aren’t able to cope with the path from Petone to Thorndon as it is too rough, especially from the Caltex station to Thorndon Quay where there is no shoulder.
Dexter/Tracey – I tend to agree, even on fairly wide shoulders I tend to ride single file unless passing. I’d only ride 2 abreast on very quiet roads and even then slip back if cars come.
Rob – I tend to agree that the 1.5 metre rule would be impractical if it became obligatory, but it is a useful guideline (having said that, in other countries if you get stuck behind a cyclist and there isn’t 1.5 to pass, that’s just bad luck, they must be more patient than us kiwis…)
Gnat Exterminator – I tend to ride through the Hutt Valley rather than go all the way along SH2. From Upper Hutt I go down Ferg Drive, past Stokes Valley (along the little bit of the river trail that is sealed from SV to Pomare) then down High St, Taita Drive, Harcourt Werry Drive, over the bridge at Melling, down Western Hutt Rd, and onto SH2 at Petone. There are some real danger spots and I’m disappointed the new Dowse interchange is so unfriendly to cyclists. I also think the cycle/pedestrian path from Ngauranga to Thorndon is a joke. Cars regularly park on it, on other parts weaving between pedestrians is even less safe than being on the road with the cars (for both the cyclists and the pedestrians!).
Related to the above, the Upper Hutt City Council are working on a sealed cycle lane alongside the existing train tracks from Upper Hutt to Silverstream. It’s in their LTCCP and I think it would be fantastic! I’m lobbying the regional council and the Lower Hutt council to see if they could extend it beyond Silverstream right down the valley.
“I also think the cycle/pedestrian path from Ngauranga to Thorndon is a joke. Cars regularly park on it,”
It’s all revenue so it’s odd the Council meter “maids” dont target such easy pickings…
Cycling in NZ is poor and getting worse not better, for example in Auckland cycling modeshare for the commute to work dropped from 2.0% in 1990 to 0.8% in 2006 just when we need it to head in the opposite direction, this can largely be attributed to the growing infrastructure for cars in Auckland and increasing car numbers, therefore increasing danger for cyclists, while cycling specific infrastructure is a poor joke at best…
While National is obviously the worst in discouraging cycle use through roading infrastructure Labour’s efforts during the last three terms were not much better… I hope that changes in future…
I agree with BikerNZ ideas & also with the bunch riding – as a cyclist I hate it and as a driver, I hate it even more. The problem is more and more people are becoming recreational riders (e.g. long weekend rides with the occasional race) and think they they own the road. They have all the gear and no brain – there is a Wellington group called Tarmac or something similar that are like this and are giving us all a bad name.
Basically we need to marry common sense with a need to share the road. Drivers need to recognise we need 1.5m bubble and that we actually go quite fast so don’t pass us on a downhill or even a 50km zone then jam on the anchors or turn left!
Likewise riders in the main cities especially need to realise that just because they are out in a big group that they are on par with 2 tonne of metal – they are not, the cars etc will always come off better. So unless it is known to be a very quiet road (e.g. Whiteman’s Valley) where you can hear the traffic, always ride single file and save the bunch riding for the races.
The best rule of thumb is look at the real roadies – you know, the ones that average 45km without breaking a sweat; they very rarely collide with cars as they know how to pick their moments.
Tracey – yes I’m surprised if people don’t get ticketed for parking on a cycleway as WCC is great at issuing tickets! Anyhoo, cycleways don’t help roadies – too much debris/small stones etc so road is usually the best option.
P.s. Chris check out this article written by Bruce Shepherd in December – just brilliant!
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/blogs/stirring-the-pot/3187159/Bloody-cyclists
We need to encourage cycling (because it’s green and good for you), and protect cyclists (because car, at car-like speeds, does a lot of damage to people on two wheels.
But after years of campaigns implying that motorist need to change their ways we need equally vociferous campaigning aimed at cyclists, and a period of strict enforcement by the police:
Obey the rules. Too often cyclists seem to consider themselves exempt from red lights or pedestrian crossings. The other day I’d stopped to let a couple of kids cross, and a cyclist speeding up on my inside nearly took them out. Not the first time I’ve witnessed this.
Wear clothing that means you can be seen. How on earth can someone even think about cycling on the road at night dressed all in black? It’s no use being in the right when they scrape you up off the road.
Have decent lights, front and rear, even at the half-light periods of each day. I dropped my daughter off at the bus stop one dark and rainy morning last year, checked my mirror, looked over my shoulder, pulled out and just missed wiping out a cyclist dressed in dark clothes with no front light who appeared from nowhere out of the gloom.
Share the road. Too many cyclists seem to want to own it. Unfortunately there seem to be a number of influential lobby groups who don’t seem to be content with this notion and feel that roading systems should be designed with them in mind. However popular cycling is it will always only be a minority method of getting around. The number of cars with bike racks on them shows that!
I live rurally in Rotorua and commute occasionally to Rotorua CBD, a journey of around 20km. As well as considering the 1.5m bubble how about considering these points
1) The state of the roads – the current practice of spread some tar, throw on some metal and walk away – is not conducive to encouraging commuting. The roads in NZ are poorly surfaced. Everyone is saying ‘use the shoulder’ – OK, I’ll ride through piles of gravel, ruts, weeds, not to mention the broken glass.
2) There are two types of NZ drivers – those who have ridden a bike on the road and those who have not. Those that have tend to give room, wait for the opportune moment to pass, give a friendly toot when you are on a narrow rural road; then there are those who don’t give a toss! They forget that you should only overtake when it is safe to do so – they would not force a truck off the road, but they are quite happy to do it to bikes.
3) Many serious cyclists can actually travel in urban areas at close to the 50km speed limit – why speed to overtake them.
4) Diesel fumes – NZ does not have a real emissions test for diesel vehicles – there is nothing worse than being stuck behind a dirty old Nissan Terrano inhaling soot. Other OECD countries have managed to banish those dinosaurs – time we did the same.
5) There are km’s of disused rail lines – make them into the cycle ways
6) Some places (e.g. Tauranga and Mount Maunganui) would be ideal for introducing light transit systems on existing lines – make these instead of roads and allow bikes on these!!
Did anyone notice that the suggestions were all about changing the behavior of the motorist/council (except the school skills)? Interesting how they don’t see the cyclist as having responsibility.
Yeah, don’t wear black on dark days / nights – reflective stuff good
, blendy in clothes bad 
Always wore black at night spud. Never need the cars to see me when I can see them!
@Jeremy, that is because in the overwhelming majority of cases when there is an accident between a car and cycle it is the drivers fault… LTNZ data shows that to be the case… Evidence is that drivers need to change…
Recently I had a chat with some tourists from USA. they were experienced – had ridden in several other countries. they told me that the word has spread amongst american cyclists that New Zealand is not a safe cycling country. On this their second day, they had already had comformation of this. This should be a worry to out Minister of Tourism – whoever that is!
Jeremy M Harris: except that more and more people are taking up cycling as a sport and since many of these same people are rubbish drivers, they are also rubbish cyclists in terms of failing to adhere to road rules and exercise a bit of common sense.
Responsibility falls in both camps, but bottom line, regardless of who is at fault, the cyclist is the vulnerable one so even if they are being a you-know-what, a bit more tolerance & patience wouldn’t hurt – much better than being caught up in an accident and waiting for a towy or worse still, an ambulance.
“Jeremy M Harris: except that more and more people are taking up cycling as a sport and since many of these same people are rubbish drivers, they are also rubbish cyclists in terms of failing to adhere to road rules and exercise a bit of common sense.”
And of course you have a reliable study to back up this sweeping generalisation, right..?
Sure do – just cycle & drive around Wellington, Taranki and Auckland and you will see plenty of evidence. I’ve done loads of both – bad cyclists and bad drivers are the bane of my existence and they give us all a bad name. Also look at events such as the 100k Flyer and Taupo Challenge which have increased dramatically in recreational numbers.
Loads of anecdotal stuff floating around too – check out this great wee piece from Bruce Shepherd
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/blogs/stirring-the-pot/3187159/Bloody-cyclists
But like I said, when an accident happens it really doesn’t matter who is at fault as 99.9% of the time the cyclist is going to be far worse off so is it too much to ask that drivers just chill out and be a little more patient….no matter how arrogant some roadies are?
Check this out from BikeNZ – the people who have also stated that there has been an “80% growth in recreational cycling since 2000″:
“Cyclists face the second highest risk of all road users of injury or death on our roads (motorcyclists face the highest risk.
The social cost of road crashes involving cyclists is $172 million per year.
Only 1% of cyclists, and 2.5% of the overall population ride to work. (2006 Census)
Crashes involving cyclists in NZ have been on the rise since 2004 (Ministry of Transport 2009
Since 2000 there has been an 81% increase in recreational cycling (SPARC Activity Surveys 2007-2008)
Despite the growth of recreational cycling and the purchase of bikes, the average km’s cycled per week per person for transport has consistently dropped since 1989, from 2.4km to 1.3km in 2008. (Ministry of Transport 2008)
The number of cyclists killed or injured has been trending upwards since 2004, at a time when the total distance spent cycling as a means of transport has fallen, showing improving safety for cyclists should be a priority.(Ministry of Transport 2008)
New spending as part of the National Land Transport Programme 2009-12 on cycling and walking facilities drops from $17.9 million in 2009/10, to $10.0 million and $10.6 million in the subsequent two years, despite an anticipated high demand for these funds from councils according to NZTA. (National Land Transport Programme 2009-2012, NZTA)”
What’s your point Rebecca..?
I’m saying that the safety education funding should be directed mainly at drivers, the evidence backs this position… I’m not really sure what you are trying to say…
Jeremy M Harris: I was wondering the same thing about your posts – as it turns out it would appear we are saying the same thing…..
You questioned my view that recreational cycling has increased dramatically so I provided some information that shows where I get it from.
My main point is that we have something like 70% of people think they are great drivers yet most people are not. You only have to drive on a main highway or in and around 50km zones and you will come across plenty of examples of drivers who fail to keep left unless passing, who fail to judge the speed of an oncoming car properly, fail to indicate, fail to keep to the speed limit etc.
These same people are getting back on their bicycles more and more. So it stands to reason that the same rubbish drivers who drive anyone with any skill and a decent amount of common sense insane, are the same people who when cycling, fail to follow the road rules, ride 2 abreast on busy stretches of road, break the speed limit etc.
However, while these riders maybe at fault, cars are the ones that kill them therefore, even if the riders are in the wrong, cars should still do more to give them their 1.5m bubble, wait another couple of seconds before passing etc.
The problem we have is that more and more people are getting out cycling and the roads have not kept up – we have more cars than ever on the road where there is not enough room for the cyclist and the car. Cars therefore, need to exercise a little more patience and tolerance, but at the same time, we need cyclists to take personal responsibility so as to keep themselves (as best they can) out of harms way.
No matter how much ‘education’ is aimed at drivers, if some cyclists insist on behaving like kamakazi pilots they will end up with the inevitable consequences.
Because of the huge imbalance between the power of cycles and motor vehicles cyclists need to be educated, nay indoctrinated, into defensive behaviour.
As I’ve said earlier, it doesn’t count that you’re in the right when they scrape you off the road.
Unfortunately many cyclists insist on exhibiting reckless behaviour (in terms of their own safety) in the face of overwhelmingly superior competition.
We’re targetting our campaigns in the wrong place if saving life and limb is the aim.
@george and rebecca… Cyclist bashing is easy but just saying “I’ve seen poor cyclists” isn’t evidence of anything except one tosser knows how to ride a bike…
The stats are quite clear (from memory):
- Cyclying is 18 times more dangerous than driving…
- 58% of car vs. cyclists crashes are deemed to definitively be the drivers fault and another 14% undecided (so if only half of these is the driver fault, drivers account for 65% of the crashes)…
So who should we be educating..? I reckon the people causing 2/3 the problem and suffering 1/18th the injuries…
Add to that:
- Cyclying as a means of commute is dropping (people who tend to ride slower), while number of recreational cyclists grows…
- Central and Local government has failed to provide adequate funding to improve cycleways anywhere near the needed amount…
Seems to me that central and local government need to massively increase cycling safety and infrastructure monies away from the roading construction budget and that is without considering the health and environmental positives…
@ Jeremy M – 58% of car vs. cyclists crashes are deemed to definitively be the drivers fault. Maybe we should ask the statistician. I know of two cases in the Media and via work another 2 where the driver has been convicted of a charge where by common sense shows they did not cause the accident. I also know of several pedestrian cases, and the police seem to charge (two meanings also pay lawyer & time stood down from work) and let the Judge decide rather than use discretion. Not counting the cop who was killed in Petone, when none in the system believed him re blind spots, everyone in the industry knew exactly what he was saying, but would anyone doubt he would be charged?
It does not help when these same police & the road code contradict the law of road by telling cyclists that if they don’t want to be overtaken (squeezed) on a narrow road they have a right to cycle in the middle of the road. This gives the feeds the attitude of the adrenaline pumping aggressive cyclist that he will enforce his rights.
This is also the problem with the newly marked cycle lanes. I will contradict myself here, but not only do they not feel a need to use them (Waione st bridge does belong to large trucks) yet others will use them rather than keeping left along the car parks that are empty, and why do 90% of cyclists not check behind when pulling out to pass a car? Common sense does seem to be lacking.
Good article Rebecca especially the point about running red lights, good just get out of my way. I much preferred Christchurch where the cyclists could use use the series of parks and alleys to separate and shortcut away from the traffic.
P.S. I just think they should ban Lycra. I am trying to point out that it is driving/cycling attitudes and expectations that create the problems. Never had a problem with Joe & Jane Plod wearing normal clothes riding their bike or teaching the kids. Only 50% of the cycle activists who seem to believe that they make the laws.
To clarify the cases I talk of – one in the media and the cops did apologize to the woman “hands were tied”. Cyclist on SH2, riding along white line, not even close to fence. Gust of wind, into peak hour traffic take your pick of cars to hit. Hit a car with no wof. Conclusively proved that defect had no contribution to accident (crash unit), no driver would have had a chance. Ticket straight away, and when Layers got it was convicted of ‘driving unroadworthy vehicle leading to death’. Should have been ‘driving unroadworthy vehicle leading to nothing’.
A Other cases I put down to judges dont like to be ‘fooled’ so fool themselves by discounting effects of the eyes, tricks of lights and not having been professional drivers, the large vehicle blind spots (clue do you know what side of a truck is the passing side and which is the suicide?).
@ Jermey M – I wasn’t engaging in cyclist bashing. I’m agen anyone who uses the road without concern and courtesy for other road users. We are all Jews and Germans…
HOWEVER – I think I was making the valid point that when motor vehicle hits cycle it’s generally the cyclist who comes off worse, regardless of who’s to blame. So wouldn’t a bit of defensive riding be sensible? And a campaign to drill the point home to cyclists? And an enforcement period to ensure that this behaviour was undertaken? (Police enforce the seat belt law with regard to motorists when failure to comply is only likely to harm the offender and no one else. Shouldn’t police enforce the rules against red light running cyclists for the same reason, regardless of whether they’re likely to come of worse in any collision or not.)
The sort of defensive riding I’m talking about is getting the message over to cyclists that when you’re speedily coming up on the inside of slow moving or stationary cars you need to be aware that vehicles turning right across the waiting traffic may not have seen you.
Yes, I know you had right of way.
I said “yes, I know you had right of way.”
I said “yes…” Too late.
@ George – Some good points But “Shouldn’t police enforce the rules against red light running cyclists for the same reason” I like it when a cyclist runs a red light as they get out of my way. And they are normally cautious knowing that they are vulnerable and wrong in the eyes of the law.
But I have seen police pull over Joe plods on bikes I’m guessing for no helmet or other offenses. Never seen Bunch riders stopped. 3 abreast is illegal, but police just drive passed. I’m guessing some in the bunch are also cops.
IIRC the stats were from LTNZ who I don’t have any reason to believe would distort or fudge the info…
I think we should spend money dealing with the problem as the stats suggest, namely spend 2/3 of the money available for cycling safety on educating drivers and the remaining 1/3 educating cyclists but I personally think when people are essentially saying “cyclists are red light running lunatics and we should educate them till they know how to be safe” to be a fundamental misunderstanding about what a road is and where the responsibility of road users lies…
Apart from that I feel my argument is so powerful it isn’t necessary to talk about it…
Jeremy M Harris says: “I personally think when people are essentially saying “cyclists are red light running lunatics and we should educate them till they know how to be safe” to be a fundamental misunderstanding about what a road is and where the responsibility of road users lies…”
Jeremy – get a grip on reality.
Pedestrians have the right to cross the road at a zebra crossings. But if motorists (or cyclists for that matter) are refusing to stop it’s equally important to educate pedestrians into a ‘you better look before stepping out’ culture as it is to educate motorists/cyclists on their responsibilities and obligations.
Perhaps even more so, because in a situation where 95% of motorists/cyclists behave correctly it may be impossible to get the message across to the remaining 5% who don’t drive/ride properly, and so if the pedestrian isn’t taught / encouraged / reminded to look out for himself then he could end up as the person who has ‘He was in the right’ carved on his tombstone.
It’s the same for cyclists. My observation is that the huge majority of motorists behave well towards them, even when this isn’t reciprocated. That might be no consideration when one or two in a hundred does something mindless, but reaching the last few percent of motorists in a public education campaign will be nigh on impossible.
So despite the rightness/wrongness of the issue, and the indisputable fact that when a bike hits a car the bike is going to come off worse, then educating cyclists to think and act defensively is likely to save more injury and death. It’s not a question of apportioning blame. That’s a stupid way to approach it.
I don’t see all cyclists as red light running lunatics, but they’re not all saints either. They can’t be. Some of them drive cars. Some even drive 4WDs!
George & Jeremy – you both make good points.
I think we are all saying the same things – that is, we want less cyclists been scraped off our roads.
To do this we most definitely need a 2-tonged approach whereby we educated drivers & riders so that both become better.
All I am saying is that it almost doesn’t matter how right or wrong the cyclist is, they are always going to be worse off.
Support of cyclists in terms of cycle lanes are only useful if they are kept free of debris etc otherwise roadies can’t use them. This is the main reason why we all ride close to the white line as all the crap from the road is flicked off by the cars into the shoulder or cycle lanes. Debris means punctures or in some cases, falling off if you don’t see it in time. We are talking about tires that are ultra skinny – this is why (& the light frames!) they can all go so fast.
Education of cyclists in terms of making yourself stand out like a Christmas tree, don’t bunch ride in well-known busy areas, obey the road rules etc would help and perhaps save a couple of lives or a couple of limbs from injury, but the real damage is the cars & trucks.
This means that the car & truck driver being in possession of the most lethal weapon on our roads should bare the most responsibility. One would hope that most cyclists naturally become better drivers towards other cyclists, so it is about focusing on all those morons who can’t wait for an extra 2 seconds to pass a cyclist who as moved out into the lane to avoid a parked car that has a drivers door about to open.
In 2008 in the K2 (200k) challenge in the Coromandel some idiot overtook a bunch and killed one of the competitors. If they can do that during race conditions where there is signage galore telling people a race is on and “watch for cyclists” then they will do it and have done it during more normal time – whether that be commuting or recreational riding.
I remember the SH2 accident too where the commuter cop was killed – classic case of a truck not bothering to wait for 2 seconds before he changed lanes to go hard left into Petone/Seaview. Morons like this are a dime a dozen. Ask any Wellington cyclist. We have an infinite list of stories – and this, Jeremy M Harris, is FACT for us as it is things we have seen with our own eyes.
I can’t count the number of times I or someone I have been riding with has almost been cleaned up – e.g. stuff like commuting in Wellington riding up past the university and the Buses passing so closely I nearly got sucked into their back wheels (almost a daily occurrence for about 2 years) or biking through the Akatarawas (single file on a very narrow road) and a car comes racing around the corner on the wrong side pushing us all into the ditch!
Another example was a few weeks ago I was out riding with friends in Whitemans Valley. We were all riding single file as we were on a very narrow stretch of road. We came around the corner and there was a girl walking her horse on the other side of the road and a huge old valiant charger coming towards us. There is no way car, cyclist & horse could fit. We and the horse were already the closest yet the car zoomed up and pushed through almost clipping our lead guy luckily he was fine, only got a slight wobble, but it was still a huge fright. The guy was late 40s/early 50s. Once again we filed an online police driver report…
Ask Trevor – he’s a commuter and a recreational rider, bet he has a few stories too….
Bottom line no matter how safe the cyclist can be or how good a rider they are, the drivers are the ones that kill us the most. Therefore emphasis good safe riding by all means, but lets do more to remind people that when they are in their cars they are driving 2 tonne of lethal metal.
Trucks need to be confined to inside and middle lanes on motorways, and if I see another truck using the entire passing lane on the open road to pass another truck, slowly, I will scream. Well, I wont cos I dont get that worked up… but I do see how some get worked up by this kind of behaviour.
I cycle rarely here in Auckland, and only outside peak hours, that s bad enough.
@George my grip on reality is fine thanks…
I find it curious, to say the least, that you believe that me thinking that educating the people causing the majority of the problem (and the overwhelming majority of road users) puts me out of touch with reality… I simply see evidence based funding as common sense…
But each to his own I guess, we shall have to agree to disagree…
Tracey yes that is highly frustrating.The other thing though is that drivers and cyclists need to know more things like when trucks go round a roundabout or turn off anywhere, that they need two lanes to do so. So many people try and outrace them. And truck drivers also need to remember how much their trailors can swing – some cut it very fine indeed on the motorway when racing past a cyclist.
Jeremy M – we’ve had education programmes aimed at drivers for years. Those who are going to be reached have been already. The evidence of my own eyes suggests that most drivers do behave acceptably in the presence of cyclists. They either didn’t need special education in this regard in the first place, or it has hit home. (NOTE – I’m not saying here that the small minority who are a problem aren’t still a significant problem, merely that the education programmes don’t seem to be reaching them).
What’s your problem with suggesting that cyclists take some responsibility for their own safety? I’m not trying to be controversial here, honest. It just seems a valid initiative to try.
It’s my right to leave home without locking my doors or closing my windows, but I’d be foolish to do so. I presume you believe it’s wrong for the government to engage in a crime prevention campaign reminding me to secure my house before I leave it? Under your apparent logic any education campaign in this area should be aimed at thieves as they’re 100% of the cause of break-ins and burgularies!
I have no problem with suggesting that cyclists take some responsibility for their own safety… In most cases they already do, have you seen the high vis vests..?
Some cyclists run red lights and take the risks but even with these jokers they are only a 1/3 of the problem, why educate them..?
I also have no problem spending money educating cyclists but in line with the amount of the problem they are causing…
I look at it this way, you have say $3 million dollars to spend on cycling safety in NZ and can buy X ad space on TVNZ, that will reach X people… Do you spend that money hoping to reach the 1% of people cycling to work and tell them to ride incredibly defensively (which most already do) trying to reduce the, at most, 35% of cycle vs car accident they are responsible for OR do you try to reach the 84% of people who commute to work by car and expand on the Look 4 Bikes and 1.5 metre campaigns..?
Common sense tells me you get better bang for your buck and will reach a much greater percentage of the population (who luckily are responsible for 66% of the problem) by aiming the ads at drivers…
Comparing cycling safety to burglary is pretty silly… One is premeditated for gain…
Jeremy M Harris I agree – personal responsibility always has its place, but as drivers are the ones that do the majority of the ‘killing’ (since when as an at-fault cyclist hit a car & killed the driver while they walk away with a mere bruise?) then they are the ones that would benefit most from any campaign.
No matter who is right or wrong if it’s cyclist vs car it is the cyclist the ambos are scraping off the road.
I regard myself to be a really safety conscience rider, I have always worn high vis gear, obeyed the road rules and yet this has not prevented any of the 100s of near misses I have experienced in the last 10 years of riding as a commuter and as a recreational cyclist.
Ah Rebecca, this means you indulge in a high risk “sporting” activity
Haha yes you got me Tracey – I also have health insurance and like I said on the other post, $6k a year in ACC levies I think we more than pay our fair share!
Jeremy M : “Comparing cycling safety to burglary is pretty silly…”
Not in this context Jeremy.
The analogy I gave was all about doing everything you can to make yourself safe and secure, rather than achieving that by relying on others to behave within the law.
How many times do I have to say it : Being in the right doesn’t matter! When you’re dead you’re dead!
In terms of cost effectiveness, dollar for dollar, an education campaign aimed at cyclists, pointing out everything they can do to prevent themselves becoming part of the statistics would probably far outpay yet another campaign imploring us to ’share the road’. Those of us who are listening do this already. It’s the law of diminishing returns, and the tipping point has been reached.
Cyclists, on the other hand, had a real vested interest in listening to education campaigns and acting on the information given. It’s their lives and limbs that are at stake.
I’m sure we’re all aiming for the same thing here – fewer bikers in A&E or, worst still, the morgue. Let’s not let the moral superiority of the biking clan get in the way of this, eh?
@ Rebecca – “I remember the SH2 accident too where the commuter cop was killed – classic case of a truck not bothering to wait for 2 seconds before he changed lanes to go hard left into Petone/Seaview. Morons like this are a dime a dozen. ” Actually the way the driver explained it, and the words he used it was a clear case of blind spots. Large vehicles have these all over the place and they do surprise experienced drivers. Personally one memory I have is loosing an entire rubbish truck for a couple of seconds when rounding a bend in Eastbourne. I have often wondered if giving people experience in truck driving would improve their skills/expectations of what trucks can do? The key is to keep moving your head, but with often 10-12 hours driving mistakes will get made. The judge did not believe him, but had not experienced this either. Just I’ve spent 5 years as an instructor of class 2&4 and I back myself to tell what has happened from someone who doesn’t know or is making excuses. The words he used convinced me.
Following from this Jeremy M, I was not suggesting fudging or misleading stats, just that legal responsibility does not necessarily mean the driver could have done anything different, based on their knowledge and skills before an accident. It is also my experience that the police do not like exercising judgment, but would rather have the court decide, and I know of plea bargains, miss testimonies, and wrong decisions. I also know of one foreign driver who took legal advice to plead guilty from police, and to save the expense of a lawyer, when he clearly had a strong case. I would be surprised if this did not form the LTSA stats.
@ Tracy- Why would you want to hold up a truck that can also reach the legal speed limit? Methinks you are thinking that your rights are more important than the driver, who would appreciate your consideration. Suppose we could flip it round and ask why would the driver let you pass, knowing the slower truck in front is holding him up, you will have a lot more opportunities in the future than the truck, if he lets you go some one else will just take your place and he may be trying to get off the road in the legally required time limit.
Plus a lot of people seem to be getting the right explanation, (actually all) but we still seem to be keeping the perspective of our own seat. As an example Rebecca “so it is about focusing on all those morons who can’t wait for an extra 2 seconds to pass a cyclist who as moved out into the lane to avoid a parked car that has a drivers door about to open” – Who is the moron, the driver, who has not performed effective Defensive Driving or the cyclist who did not look over their shoulder? (gotta love cycle mirrors).
Just strikes me as odd that the cyclists who have the problems are the ones wearing Lycra?? Never ever had problems with ‘Joe Citizen’ cyclists, and I put this down to their expectation and not being interested excuses.
Jeremy isn’t the speed limit for heavy vehicles 90km? So unless he intended on breaking the law, Tracey is right to be frustrated with actions of such drivers isn’t she?
In terms of the SH2 accident – the cop was crushed under the truck’s rear wheels which means the driver had to have passed him so no, I wouldn’t buy the blind spot argument either in this circumstance. He was either not paying attention or outraced him to cross over to the Petone/Seaview Lane. Either way he crossed the cycle lane in front of the cop.
In terms of your use of my quote in your 6.10pm post – the context was that it almost doesn’t matter who is right or wrong, the cyclist is always going to be the one that is scraped up off the road by the ambos so cars, no matter how in the right they are and how annoying and arrogant the commuters or lycra clad roadies are, need to be the better vehicle and exercise a little more patience.
Out of all the fatalities involving cyclists, how many were the fault of the cyclist? At a guess I would imagine very few. Perhaps in some cases the cyclist has annoyed the driver but I am not sure if they were the cause.
In terms of the “moron” in my example – both are morons, but the car is the one that kills.
And no, I experienced 2 years of adrenalin filled moments commuting to & from work when living in the northern suburbs of Wellington as did my hubby who used to work out in the Hutt and bike to & from. We had not discovered lycra in those days!!!!
And I guess you also drive only at 100K. The point there was that modern trucks have incredible power (more directed at pulling than top speed). Anyway 90K is reasonable for overtaking.
Don’t buy the blind spot? – as my point neither do most, you could come for a lesson if you wish, easier to demonstrate then explain. Look at the back of some trucks, they still carry warning signs (If you cant see my mirrors, I cant see you. or passing side – Suicide).
Do have to agree Wellington & Whitemans Valley – Rode bikes all my life and moved to Wellington, just decided I was not that stupid, so sold the bike. (only part of that is tongue in cheek).
The best bit about Christchurch was all the parks we could use as short cuts away from traffic, and much wider roads.