What’s keeping Brits off the bike? In a word: fear, says new study

[[[[[ Well lucky you then, ALLEZ NEG. Are you a big geezer? I'm positive the size, weight and height, --and sex-- of a cyclist will affect the degree of road-space and respect given by a certain kind of driver. I'm just average height and weight, male, a very experienced ex-club rider, in SW London (and, as far as I know, not yet been killed) and still about 10% of vehicles around me get too close, at least three have knocked me off, and I assure you my riding style HAS to alternate between "defensive" and "assertive" for much of my time on two wheels.
So much for city cycling....hit the country lanes outside the centre and you're among boy-racers, and girl- racers, tearing round blind bends at 60mph or more and, b4 long, you just wanna get back to the relative safety of the Big Smoke! I could go on....or maybe I just did.
P.R.

I live in rural France which is the total opposite of your post, in the 4 years I have been riding over here (4 or 5 times a week) in that time I have had two incidents.

One with an English driver! But he could have misunderstood the insane priority to the right rule over here not realising (forgot, didn't care) I actually had right of way from the minor road to his right (maybe).

The other was with a BIG lorry passing me and the driver pulled right over to give me room it was just the suction caused by this humongous truck. Pulled me all over the place.

Further I have just come back from a 3 day visit to the South East of England and the traffic is just bloody awful no way would I ride there.

Strange thing is except for that one incident with the UK vehicle I have had no problems with other UK cars and the continental drivers always give plenty of room some have sat behind me on narrow roads for the best end of half a mile possibly more before overtaking when it was safe to do so, and no revving of engines, shouted obscenities or any of that other crap.

But even with the situation over here I still ride defensively cause as you say the arse behind could be just that a total arse!!

comm88 wrote:

Let's make no bones about it - riding on the UK's roads is very scary!!! Even for very experienced riders, it pushes you to the limits - just to try to stay alive!!! Every ride I've had in the past 5 years or so has involved at least one near madness encounter. Sometimes more. You have to keep your wits about you - at all times - and expect that the driver behind you - or coming at you - will do something stupid. Frequently - they do!;

I cant agree enough.....I would say that easily 80/90% of my rides have some incident and I am a very very defensive rider as I value my legs.

Generally I would say these incidents fall into the non malicious kind, people just not thinking (caring) but I have had occasions when people have pulled alongside to shout abuse or driven behind blowing the horn. Its is just beyond words.

comm88 wrote:

Every ride I've had in the past 5 years or so has involved at least one near madness encounter. Sometimes more.

My sympathies, but in the last five years, and riding almost every day, I haven't experienced any "near madness encounter".

Admittedly I'm extra cautious, often riding a quieter (but less direct) route, slowing right down when in town, only putting the hammer down when I'm well away from people and traffic, wearing a hi-viz, using cycle paths if they're half decent, staggering my ride times to avoid the rush hour, and often walking across a complex junction rather than cycling through it. I can honestly say that I haven't come across anything remotely close to a near miss.

However, and this isn't aimed at you because I obviously don't know what riding you do, but I do see a depressingly large number of cyclists riding in a manner, or at a particular time and location, that give me the distinct impression that their day to day survival is purely a matter of luck.

Neil753 wrote:

comm88 wrote:

Every ride I've had in the past 5 years or so has involved at least one near madness encounter. Sometimes more.

My sympathies, but in the last five years, and riding almost every day, I haven't experienced any "near madness encounter".

Admittedly I'm extra cautious, often riding a quieter (but less direct) route, slowing right down when in town, only putting the hammer down when I'm well away from people and traffic, wearing a hi-viz, using cycle paths if they're half decent, staggering my ride times to avoid the rush hour, and often walking across a complex junction rather than cycling through it. I can honestly say that I haven't come across anything remotely close to a near miss.

However, and this isn't aimed at you because I obviously don't know what riding you do, but I do see a depressingly large number of cyclists riding in a manner, or at a particular time and location, that give me the distinct impression that their day to day survival is purely a matter of luck.

You seem to be insinuating that the near misses are mostly the fault of cyclists. Perhaps all cyclists should avoid rush-hour, wouldn't want to get in the way of traffic now would we.

You say you haven't experienced a near miss, what about close passes, tail-gating, speeding, ASL hogging and all of the other rudeness that is typical on the roads.

Neil753 wrote:

comm88 wrote:

Every ride I've had in the past 5 years or so has involved at least one near madness encounter. Sometimes more.

My sympathies, but in the last five years, and riding almost every day, I haven't experienced any "near madness encounter".

Admittedly I'm extra cautious, often riding a quieter (but less direct) route, slowing right down when in town, only putting the hammer down when I'm well away from people and traffic, wearing a hi-viz, using cycle paths if they're half decent, staggering my ride times to avoid the rush hour, and often walking across a complex junction rather than cycling through it. I can honestly say that I haven't come across anything remotely close to a near miss.

However, and this isn't aimed at you because I obviously don't know what riding you do, but I do see a depressingly large number of cyclists riding in a manner, or at a particular time and location, that give me the distinct impression that their day to day survival is purely a matter of luck.

I agree more with comm88. I'm not sure about 'near miss' exactly, but every single ride I encounter some kind of arrogant, law-breaking, and plain annoying behaviour by drivers. There's a never-ending burden on _me_ to watch out for _them_ which is far more tiring than the physical exertion involved. Not to mention getting annoyed is also exhausting!

And your final paragraph just seems to point to its own flaw - if so many cyclists ride like that, how do they, statistically, all manage to be so lucky all the time? "Luck" evens out across a large sample. Such bad riding would be self-limiting for, crudely, Darwinian reasons.

(A big exception would be the pavement-jockeys. They of course put pedestrians at risk rather than themselves.)

And riding a 'quieter' route isn't always possible. Quiet roads have masses of parking with cars coming at you fast and head-on down the very narrow remaining part of empty roadspace. Its particularly impractical if you don't know the route, as personally I usually get lost on those quiet routes and end up on the busy one anyway.

Beaufort wrote:

Find yer local backroads and stick to them if you're worried about traffic. I ride near Bedford - in the busy centre of the country - and can ride for hours, only seeing cars very occasionally. I have no interest in riding in towns or cities.

Might work in Bedford, but not possible in large chunks of London, back roads = rat runs. Some councils stop the rat runs, some don't (Westminster does nothing about them).

Airzound wrote:

Most people in the UK are too fat and too lazy to cycle. End of.

Laziest. Comment. Ever.

Also... steady on. I'm a bit of a podger and as lazy as they come, yet I manage fine.

seven wrote:

Airzound wrote:

Most people in the UK are too fat and too lazy to cycle. End of.

Laziest. Comment. Ever.

Also... steady on. I'm a bit of a podger and as lazy as they come, yet I manage fine.

You can't be that lazy if you cycle regularly. I'll take your word for it with regard to your waistline.

I think a lot of people are actually scared of change, as much as they are of the roads. The fact is that the UK road network is actually a good deal safer than it was in the bad old days of the 70s and 80s. But so many scare stories about the dangers of cycling have put people off. Yes there are aggressive and careless drivers out there but the level of drink driving is a fraction of what it was and that was the real killer back in the day.

OldRidgeback wrote:

I think a lot of people are actually scared of change, as much as they are of the roads. The fact is that the UK road network is actually a good deal safer than it was in the bad old days of the 70s and 80s. But so many scare stories about the dangers of cycling have put people off. Yes there are aggressive and careless drivers out there but the level of drink driving is a fraction of what it was and that was the real killer back in the day.

But what about the sheer volume of motorised traffic? That's something that has grown markedly since the 70s and 80s.

When the car is sat in the driveway or parked on the road/pavement outside the house then the easy option will always win for most people. They'll whine about the queues, the cost, the weather, the bad driving... and then get back in the car again to go shopping or pop round to someone's house.

As for drink-driving, I wouldn't be so sure it's been confined to history. Arrests are on the increase where I live:
http://www.shropshirestar.com/news/2014/03/04/shropshire-drink-drive-arr...
The article indicates arrests are up by 45% but doesn't give the number of drivers stopped compared to previous years. If police resources are stretched further and further, as we are told, then you'd be forgiven for thinking that there are fewer police on the roads, leading to fewer drivers being stopped (so more getting away with it).

Simon E wrote:

OldRidgeback wrote:

I think a lot of people are actually scared of change, as much as they are of the roads. The fact is that the UK road network is actually a good deal safer than it was in the bad old days of the 70s and 80s. But so many scare stories about the dangers of cycling have put people off. Yes there are aggressive and careless drivers out there but the level of drink driving is a fraction of what it was and that was the real killer back in the day.

But what about the sheer volume of motorised traffic? That's something that has grown markedly since the 70s and 80s.

When the car is sat in the driveway or parked on the road/pavement outside the house then the easy option will always win for most people. They'll whine about the queues, the cost, the weather, the bad driving... and then get back in the car again to go shopping or pop round to someone's house.

As for drink-driving, I wouldn't be so sure it's been confined to history. Arrests are on the increase where I live:
http://www.shropshirestar.com/news/2014/03/04/shropshire-drink-drive-arr...
The article indicates arrests are up by 45% but doesn't give the number of drivers stopped compared to previous years. If police resources are stretched further and further, as we are told, then you'd be forgiven for thinking that there are fewer police on the roads, leading to fewer drivers being stopped (so more getting away with it).

The fatality rate from drink driving for 2013 was 1/6th of what it was in 1979 according to DfT figures. Road deaths in the UK peaked in the late 70s and early 80s. The fatality rate on the UK's roads is now at much the same level as it was in the late 1940s. This is of note, given the massive increase in vehicle numbers and total distance travelled since then.

The perceived danger of cycling on the road today is something quite different from the actual risk, which was significantly higher in the 70s and 80s and when road deaths simply weren't reported in anything like the detail they are now.

crazy-legs wrote:

Malta is bloody lethal. For such a tiny island, (and not even an especially hilly one either) there is virtually no cycling and certainty no cycling provision. The roads are either beautifully surfaced but dual carriageway or little more than cart tracks. And everyone drives everywhere, its just insane.

.

I remember Malta being mentioned in relation to the UK's embarrassing obesity rates. Weren't they one of the tiny number of countries we could point to as being worse than us?

here we go...

http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20110501/local/Maltese-are-amo...

I think they are pretty much level-pegging with the UK, though.

Malta does have strict liability, according to this briefing from Roadpeace: http://www.roadpeace.org/resources/RoadPeace_Strict_liability_discussion...

Point is, loads of countries already have strict liability laws. But not all of them have high rates of everyday cycling.

By the time someone's knocked you off your bike and you're arguing over who pays the medical bills, it's a bit late, isn't it?

Mr Agreeable wrote:

Malta does have strict liability, according to this briefing from Roadpeace: http://www.roadpeace.org/resources/RoadPeace_Strict_liability_discussion...

Point is, loads of countries already have strict liability laws. But not all of them have high rates of everyday cycling.

By the time someone's knocked you off your bike and you're arguing over who pays the medical bills, it's a bit late, isn't it?

I agree that the evidence is that strict liability doesn't do much, if anything, on its own. Personally I like the idea for simple moral reasons, it seems morally right to me that the onus should be on the one who creates the danger by wielding a dangerous weapon. It might help get back to the idea that driving is a _choice_ and a privilege, not an essential right.

But as a practical measure it probably won't change anything, plus I don't think many people in this country agree with me about the morality of it either, so I think its not the best place to expend political effort.