Fwd: American Bicyclist eNews: erasing the truth about bike lanes
Pete van Nuys
So LAB has its cycling shorts in a knot over changes in Fed
funding of bike "infra" and refocusing on road and bridge quality.
Well first, the original reason for the LAB's founding over 100
years ago was exactly the quality of US roads and bridges, a focus
that benefits ALL of us, not just us 1-2% who choose to be pedal
cyclists.
And in today's hyper-political world, can the handwringers at
the League really be surprised when the Dept of Transportation
removes web pages with the highly questionable claims which
Badvocates have pushed on its content managers? Including this
whopper, below:
Bicycle Lanes
Most fatal and serious injury bicyclist crashes occur at
non-intersection locations.
Nearly one-third of these crashes occur when motorists are
overtaking bicyclists
because the speed and size differential between vehicles and
bicycles can lead
to severe injury.
No citation. No link to substantiating material. Just the
fearmongering Badvocates always use to justify their next
sentence:
Many people are not comfortable riding a bicycle because of
their fear that this type of crash may occur.
Feeeee-lings, nothing more than feeeeee-lings.... And they
wonder why the Trumpers call 'em DEI bike lanes?
Every bit of data collected over decades of state accident
reports shows it's intersections where car/bike conflict occurs.
Rural roads and highways excepted, but accidents are much less
frequent there...
BTW, here's a link to the printed content of that page. Please, will someone try to find the source of the data used to make their wild-ass claim?
-------- Forwarded Message --------
| Subject: | American Bicyclist eNews: erasing the truth about bike lanes |
|---|---|
| Date: | Mon, 20 Jul 2026 17:06:58 -0400 (EDT) |
| From: | League of American Bicyclists <communi...@bikeleague.org> |
| Reply-To: | Communications <communi...@bikeleague.org> |
| To: | petev...@gmail.com |
|
John Eldon
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CABOforum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to caboforum+...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/caboforum/66ef64d3-ab9f-4c01-82f2-6c76dc3c8826%40cox.net.
Pete van Nuys
That's the thing: Badvocates have perverted "bike lane" to
mean every inch of the right side of the roadway dedicated by an
agency to "bicycle" use by paint or physical barrier (be it parked
cars, bollards, cement, or apparently foliage, so long as those
inched come from the roadway. They are so far vague as to
permitting use by motorized alt modes.
Sure, Class 2 painted BLs are generally OK, though in CA and OR
they're mandatory (subject to some exceptions) which results in
obvious confusion of motorists and bicyclists, as evidenced by
behavior at intersections.
Badvocates are most concerned about taking space from drivers,
less concerned with convenience or efficacy of cycling.
Does the author mean "[Class II] bike lanes," which many/most of us do support, or cycle tracks?
John
So LAB has its cycling shorts in a knot over changes in Fed funding of bike "infra" and refocusing on road and bridge quality.
Well first, the original reason for the LAB's founding over 100 years ago was exactly the quality of US roads and bridges, a focus that benefits ALL of us, just us 1-2% who choose to be pedal cyclists.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/caboforum/982649840.644150.1784654091854%40mail.yahoo.com.