In last week’s entry I offered statistical evidence that the presence of bicyclists makes the roads safer for all users. Several readers took issue with this. But the facts don’t lie. They point to the conclusion that as drivers become more aware of bicycles on the road and the possibility of encountering them, they slow down and pay closer attention to their driving, which reduces accidents.

I’ll admit that there are irresponsible bicyclists as well as irresponsible drivers, though I’m also convinced that the latter outnumber the former. But a few bicyclists flouting the laws do not justify the anger that impatient drivers direct at the rest of us. I’ve had horrible things screamed at me from the windows of passing cars when I’m doing nothing but minding my own business, pedaling along as far to the right as I safely can. I don’t think many bicyclists ride around yelling at drivers to “get the hell off the road.”

Bicyclists make few demands on the traffic infrastructure. If we had to pay an excise tax based on the costs of road and traffic maintenance on our behalf in proportion to motorized vehicles, it would come to less than a dollar a year. I’d consent to paying a buck, and I would still be subsidizing cars.

Where does the anger come from? I don’t know, but I will venture a guess that some drivers (note that I said some, because many drivers are courteous and considerate) are conditioned by decades of car-centric policies to think of the roads as theirs alone. We’ve been sold a romantic image of rolled-down windows, blasting stereos, and wide-open highways that offer no impediments to the bliss of tromping on the gas pedal. In this picture, bicyclists and pedestrians (not to mention wildlife and slower drivers) are unwelcome distractions.

But that world is changing. As I noted last week, there is a growing awareness of how harmful our American lifestyle of suburbs and shopping malls and drive-thru businesses is – on a personal, community and planetary scale. A person riding a bicycle to work is helping to combat obesity, suburban sprawl, and environmental degradation. A driver is exacerbating all those problems.

Given this truth, it’s reasonable to think that municipalities, businesses, schools and other organizations should encourage walking, bicycling, and public transportation. And it’s reasonable to expect drivers to make modest changes in their behavior to accommodate this growing movement.

Allow me to draw an imperfect analogy. I was living in California when that state became the first to prohibit smoking in bars. At first there was an outcry, from bar owners who feared loss of business, and from smokers who claimed their freedom was being curtailed. Twenty years later, nearly every state has followed California’s lead. Bars are much more pleasant places for everyone. If anything, they’ve gained business, from people who used to stay away. Smokers discovered that it was only a minor inconvenience to step outside.

As a bicyclist, all I ask of drivers is that they respect my right to use the roads, and that they drive with the awareness that a bicycle could be anywhere, over the top of the next hill or around the next curve. If this results in people driving a little more cautiously, it’s a win for everyone on the road.

In both cases, some people (smokers, drivers) are asked to slightly modify their behavior for the good of all. Drivers can operate at the speed limit, instead of five to ten miles an hour above it. A commuter traveling twenty miles to work will add two minutes to the trip – a small price to pay for public safety.

We are living in the Late Automobile Age. The problems caused by our dependence on cars are beginning to outweigh the motor vehicle’s obvious advantages. The time will come when a majority of Americans will no longer consider car ownership a necessity. Cars will still be around, of course, but we will be smarter in the way we use them and incorporate them into our daily lives.

Change happens slowly, and seldom without resistance. But as more people seek alternatives to the automobile, angry drivers will have to dial back their ire toward bicyclists. Maybe this conflict will lead to increased infrastructure, such as dedicated bike lanes and bike trails, along with more investment in public transportation and pedestrian-friendly business districts – all of which would be welcome.

But the anger’s got to go now. An angry driver is a danger to everyone.

[wpdevart_like_box profile_id=”slowertraffic” connections=”show” width=”300″ height=”550″ header=”small” cover_photo=”show” locale=”en_US”]

While researching this week’s post, I ran across a fascinating study, entitled “The Relationship Between Bicycles and Traffic Safety For All Road Users.” Its author, Jasmine A. Martin, submitted it in December 2014 as part of her master’s thesis in City Planning and Traffic Engineering at California Polytechnic State University.

The study, which runs over 60 pages, is nothing if not thorough. Some of the math is complicated, and the author is fond of engineering-ese, peppering her prose with terms like “modal splits” and “risk homeostasis.” Martin admits the difficulty of drawing ironclad conclusions in the presence of many variables, but she presents her information in an impartial, unbiased, and most importantly, scientific fashion.

Her results will come as a surprise to those people who rail against bicyclists and claim that their presence makes roads more dangerous. In fact, the opposite is true.

Martin begins by comparing the rate of traffic fatalities in the United States with other high-income countries. Traffic fatalities include drivers, passengers, bicyclists, and pedestrians. In 2010, the United States had 12.3 traffic fatalities per 100,000 residents (FHPY), according to statistics compiled by the World Health Organization. This compares with 9.2 in Canada, 5.7 in Australia, 3.9 in Japan, and 3.6 in the United Kingdom.

She then looks at American cities in comparison to Europe. The implication shown by the statistics is inescapable. Portland, Oregon, is the most bicycle-friendly large city in the United States. It’s also the safest for drivers, with 3.39 FHPY, barely above famously bike-friendly Amsterdam, which had 3.36 FHPY.

The next-safest American city is New York (3.49 FHPY), which has the lowest rate of car ownership in the United States, and where much business is done by bicycle. The cities with the least safe roads are also the most car-dominated: Los Angeles (7.64), Detroit (10.31), and Atlanta (10.97).

Note that even in the worst cities, the rate of car fatalities per 100,000 residents falls below the national average. This makes sense when you think about it, because people in rural areas drive more than their urban counterparts. They also tend to be less friendly to bicyclists, and more likely to view them as a nuisance and an inconvenience rather than as a normal part of traffic.

Bicycling is good for everyone on the road. The widespread presence of bicycles, coupled with marked lanes, traffic islands and other infrastructure designed with bikes and pedestrians in mind, has a calming effect on the behavior of drivers. This reduces accidents overall, as pointed out in the February 2011 issue of the Environmental Building News: “Cycling may improve traffic safety overall, not just for cyclists… drivers exercise more caution with more cyclists on the road.”

There are encouraging sign around Bangor that the city is beginning to take lessons from “the other Portland” to heart. The improvements along Main Street will have a moderating effect on car traffic. Bicycle racks are proliferating all over the city. A new group called Walk-n-Roll has formed to promote bicycling and walking in the greater Bangor area.

But more needs to be done. The article in the Environmental Building News goes on to report:

Portland offers 300 miles (480 km) of trails, lanes, and bicycle-friendly streets to encourage bicycle use. As this network has developed, the city’s overall crash mortality rate has dropped significantly, especially when compared with national figures. According to an analysis in New Urban News, the trends in Portland can’t all be attributed to Portland’s bicycle policies. Portland has also invested in reducing automobile use through improvements in mass transit, transit-oriented development, and limits on the availability of parking downtown.

That’s nice. Buses and bicycles work together, to make the roads safer for all of us, inside and outside of cars. It follows that Bangor and similar communities should pursue policies that encourage more of both. A good start would be to equip all the Community Connector buses with the larger bike racks that can hold three bicycles instead of two. Later evening hours would be a plus, too, as would restoring the lost Saturday Hampden and weekday Odlin Road routes, and expanding the service to other outlying communities such as Hermon and Orrington.

Every bicyclist and bus passenger is part of a growing movement. Our car-driven, shopping mall, drive-thru lifestyle is incredibly unhealthy. Bicyclists as an integral part of traffic are here to stay. Next year, and the year after that, and the year after that, there will be more of us.

[wpdevart_like_box profile_id=”slowertraffic” connections=”show” width=”300″ height=”550″ header=”small” cover_photo=”show” locale=”en_US”]

In warm weather I regularly bicycle between Orono and Bangor. If I’m pressed for time in the morning, I’ll put my bike on the rack on the Community Connector bus and ride home after my work is done. The return trip is marginally easier by bicycle, as it follows the Penobscot River, and all rivers flow down hill.

My only challenges along this route are two small hills south of Orono and a large one near Eastern Maine Medical Center. A younger, more physically fit person would hardly consider these hills at all. When I lived in California, I would have sneered at them, too.

I like to think I’m in pretty good shape for my age. I never go to a gym, and I gave up running after a sprained ankle in 2001. Exercise for its own sake bores me. I stay in shape by not owning a car. The idea of sitting on my butt all day and then driving to a place to work out strikes me as absurd. I would rather get exercise in the course of my daily life. A good time to do that is on the way to or from work.

My bicycle is transportation. That I burn calories instead of gasoline is a bonus. The extra time it takes to bicycle rather than drive is more than offset by the time I save not driving to some shopping mall to exercise on a machine in front of a television.

For most of the route, paved bike lanes provide a bit of a buffer from automobile traffic. But sometimes people park cars in them, and potholes and debris often make it necessary to swerve out into the main part of the road. I have a mirror on my left handlebar, which enables me to check for cars behind me before I do this.

But there’s a section of the road in Veazie where the bike lanes disappear. (The other main bicycle route between Orono and Bangor, Stillwater Avenue, has no bike lanes at all.) On this part of the road I often encounter motorists who don’t know or don’t care that the law requires them to give me three feet of space.

It’s unnerving to be passed by a car at such close quarters. Prudence dictates that I not ride in the middle of the road, and where possible, I stay to the side. But the law states that the three-foot rule applies no matter where the bicyclist is on the road.

 The ride from campus to Bangor takes me about fifty minutes. The drivers who can’t wait to pass me can cover the distance in less than twenty. Waiting until they have a safe place to pass adds seconds, not minutes, to their trip. What’s the rush?

But that’s the mentality the car culture hath wrought. Anything that slows down your trip – a slow light, a driver operating below the speed limit, a bicyclist using the road for the same legitimate purpose – is regarded as a nuisance. As more and more people use bicycles for transportation, this mentality will have to change.

I have heard drivers argue that bicyclists don’t obey traffic rules, that they create dangerous situations, that they don’t pay registration fees or excise tax. All these arguments are easily demolished. Drivers don’t obey the rules. If you don’t believe me, go out on the highway and drive the posted speed limit. Bicyclists are in much more danger from cars than vice versa. And half of all road maintenance costs come from general taxes, paid by drivers and non-drivers alike.

Wherever bicyclists proliferate, traffic safety improves. Drivers learn to accept bicyclists as a normal, everyday part of the traffic picture instead of an occasional nuisance. Overall automotive traffic is reduced; existing parking becomes more available. It’s a win-win for everybody.

Besides, most reasonable people would agree that Americans are overweight, and that we depend too much on fossil fuels. Bicycling addresses those problems while driving exacerbates them. Every bicyclist, like every bus passenger and pedestrian, reduces the number of cars on the road. We are making life easier for everyone who continues to own a car and drive. All we ask for in return is a little respect.

[wpdevart_like_box profile_id=”slower traffic” connections=”6″ width=”300″ height=”550″ header=”0″ locale=”en_US”]