Geocaching by Bicycle

[+NYPaddleCacher]

Actually, I do not think that the OP has not experienced such situations.

 

You are wrong and I wish I had photos to prove you wrong. I don't normally stop to photograph narrow public roads while I am riding.

 

Neither did on4bam. He posted a couple of sets of coordinates with the suggestion to look at the locations on Google Street View. Ironically, one of the best mountain biking spots in my area (it's actually been mention in biking magazines as one of the best in the country) is about 13 miles from where I live. There is no Google Street View for most of the route even though the roads are all paved and fairly well traveled except for the last half mile.

 

It's obvious that you're an avid bicyclist. However, I suspect that most that use a bicycle while geocaching don't share the same passion about cycling that you do. If this were a cycling forum your advocacy for riding a bike on surface roads to get to a trail head might be received better but it's not. It's a geocaching forum. If I find an area where I want to go geocaching that's, say, 30 miles away and drive to that location, I don't consider how I got to the area to be geocaching; I consider it driving. Riding a bike from ones home or hotel to an area where one is going to look for caches isn't geocaching either; it's riding a bike.

[+Team_Vod]

 

Apparently, I am not a bike rider.

 

I only rode practically every weekend, typically more than 40 miles each day that I rode, often more than 100 miles in a weekend, and over 1000 miles in a season ...

I only stopped and got probably 100 geocaches along the way ...

 

But I ride on trails, recreationally, not on roads, which are dangerous on my recumbent bike. While I can ride from my neighborhood a bit, I can only get so far ...

 

I ride a Vision R 40 short wheel base with over seat steering. I bought mine in September of 2001, right after 9/11. What do you ride?

 

I ride on a combination of public roadways and multi-use trails. Because trails do not go to every destination I need to ride I use use the roadways despite the anti-bike culture where people think bikes only belong on the trails. People have actually stated "you can transport your bike to the trail head and unload it it and ride the trail, then transport it back home on your car." No, I am not going to and do not do this as long as the state law continues to state I have a legal right to the roadways on my bike and I can ride as far to the right as practicable, NOT possible, I will use the public roadways and trails both.

 

I ride a BikeE short wheel base recumbent. More upright than some recumbents, but still.

 

And I agree with the cars -- bikes should ride on trails, not roads.

A mistake by a driver (texting, anyone?), and I would be the one who ends up dead or severely injured.

Right of way and legally allowed or not, it is just not worth the risk.

There are 1000's of miles of great trails for recreational purposes.

 

Additionally, We have 100's of miles of great trails in Ohio. I went to a great set of trails in Michigan. I went to another great trail in PA. I was able to go to these farther out places in a reasonable amount of time, because I drove to them, and then rode along the nice trail. Otherwise, all I would see is roadside between here and there, and not just the nice trails.

 

I test rode a BikeE when I was trying to decide what kind of 'bent I wanted. Did not like it, way to much of a rough ride and the gearing was horrendous for my needs. Did not do well on the roadways, but did fine on trails, perfect gearing for it in fact. For you it seems you have the perfect recumbent for trail riding. Not so much for the roadways though. I have repeatedly heard your biased, subjective opinion, premise/argument for riding on the trails instead of the roadways, from many others who are cyclists themselves, and do indeed have unbiased, objective, reasonable and logical counter-premise/argument to it that can be cited with and backed up by primary, scholarly and peer reviewed proof. But this really isn't the place to get into that particular debate, so lets agree to disagree on the matter of riding on roadways vs. trail only.

 

But where in Michigan did you ride and did you do any geocaching along the trails there?

Edited May 24, 2016 by SUX_VR_40_Rider

[cezanne]

 

Actually, I do not think that the OP has not experienced such situations.

 

So you think I hve never experienced such road conditions? OK, that is fine, but you are wrong and I wish I had photos to prove you wrong. I don't normally stop to photograph narrow public roads while I am riding.

 

No, as others have pointed out already I do believe you and there is no need to provide photos. My reply was directed to on4bam.

[+Team_Vod]

 

Actually, I do not think that the OP has not experienced such situations.

 

So you think I hve never experienced such road conditions? OK, that is fine, but you are wrong and I wish I had photos to prove you wrong. I don't normally stop to photograph narrow public roads while I am riding.

 

No, as others have pointed out already I do believe you and there is no need to provide photos. My reply was directed to on4bam.

 

OK, apologies then. And thank you.

[cezanne]

And I agree with the cars -- bikes should ride on trails, not roads.

A mistake by a driver (texting, anyone?), and I would be the one who ends up dead or severely injured.

Right of way and legally allowed or not, it is just not worth the risk.

There are 1000's of miles of great trails for recreational purposes.

 

It's of course your choice.

 

However do not ignore the fact that not every travel by bicycle is for recreational purposes (a frequent mistake made by a lot of people). If I go to work or do my shopping by bicycle, I have to use roads and cyclists need much less space and create no pollution.

 

Moreover, if the road is narrow and car drivers cannot overtake they simply have to be patient - they do not have a higher priority to use roads that can be legally used by both cars and bicycles.

If someone drives through an urban area, they have to accept that cyclists use these routes too.

 

BTW: I know a nice elderly couple who started to cache about more than a year ago and they do not even own a car. They have to use their tandem bicycle or trains or busses to reach the starting point of caches. Many starting points are not reachable by public transportation and so they have to rely much on their bicycle.

[+fuzziebear3]

 

Apparently, I am not a bike rider.

 

I only rode practically every weekend, typically more than 40 miles each day that I rode, often more than 100 miles in a weekend, and over 1000 miles in a season ...

I only stopped and got probably 100 geocaches along the way ...

 

But I ride on trails, recreationally, not on roads, which are dangerous on my recumbent bike. While I can ride from my neighborhood a bit, I can only get so far ...

 

I ride a Vision R 40 short wheel base with over seat steering. I bought mine in September of 2001, right after 9/11. What do you ride?

 

I ride on a combination of public roadways and multi-use trails. Because trails do not go to every destination I need to ride I use use the roadways despite the anti-bike culture where people think bikes only belong on the trails. People have actually stated "you can transport your bike to the trail head and unload it it and ride the trail, then transport it back home on your car." No, I am not going to and do not do this as long as the state law continues to state I have a legal right to the roadways on my bike and I can ride as far to the right as practicable, NOT possible, I will use the public roadways and trails both.

 

I ride a BikeE short wheel base recumbent. More upright than some recumbents, but still.

 

And I agree with the cars -- bikes should ride on trails, not roads.

A mistake by a driver (texting, anyone?), and I would be the one who ends up dead or severely injured.

Right of way and legally allowed or not, it is just not worth the risk.

There are 1000's of miles of great trails for recreational purposes.

 

Additionally, We have 100's of miles of great trails in Ohio. I went to a great set of trails in Michigan. I went to another great trail in PA. I was able to go to these farther out places in a reasonable amount of time, because I drove to them, and then rode along the nice trail. Otherwise, all I would see is roadside between here and there, and not just the nice trails.

 

I test rode a BikeE when I was trying to decide what kind of 'bent I wanted. Did not like it, way to much of a rough ride and the gearing was horrendous for my needs. Did not do well on the roadways, but did fine on trails, perfect gearing for it in fact. For you it seems you have the perfect recumbent for trail riding. Not so much for the roadways though. I have repeatedly heard your biased, subjective opinion, premise/argument for riding on the roadways and do indeed have unbiased, objective, reasonable and logical counter-premise/argument to it that can be cited with and backed up by primary, scholarly and peer reviewed proof. But this really isn't the place to get into that particular debate, so lets agree to disagree on the matter of riding on roadways vs. trail only.

 

Exactly my point. Different points to activities, different equipments, different reasons to want to ride.

 

Now, on to a better question, how about biking and geocaching together?

 

I do it sometimes. A lot of times I am just as happy to walk the multi use bike trail and get geocaches as I am to ride and get geocaches.

Since a trail is basically a linear park, figure that there are caches about every .1 miles along the trail.

 

Riding and stopping every .1 miles is actually a little bit annoying. Better to pick every other one on the way out and then get the others on the return. Or actually I just get one every few miles when I stop, and then ride the trail again another day and pick different stops.

 

Walking, .1 miles is a pretty nice distance between searches, and I am inclined to walk a little farther to get another one that way. I'm in it for the steps and the exercise, the caches are like little rewards.

 

If I had other places to ride to get caches, I would stop and get them by bike, that's fine. I tend to be in my car more though (such as between work and home, lunchtime, etc), so I will often drive to a park or trailhead and hike out; or if it is an urban park and grab, then I'm likely to drive there.

[+fuzziebear3]

 

But where in Michigan did you ride and did you do any geocaching along the trails there?

 

Petoskey to Charlevoix (and back).

Charleviox was absolutely beautiful, we had lunch there at a great bistro.

The trail along Lake Michigan was spectacular -- I never knew that the lake waters could be so crystal blue.

Pestoskey was a good start and end point.

The trail North of Petoskey wasn't much, kinda industrial and much less enjoyable.

 

Yes, there were several parks along that route that had geocaches, and we stopped and enjoyed the parks and had a rest and got the caches.

[+Ambrosia]

 

But where in Michigan did you ride and did you do any geocaching along the trails there?

 

Petoskey to Charlevoix (and back).

Charleviox was absolutely beautiful, we had lunch there at a great bistro.

The trail along Lake Michigan was spectacular -- I never knew that the lake waters could be so crystal blue.

Pestoskey was a good start and end point.

The trail North of Petoskey wasn't much, kinda industrial and much less enjoyable.

 

Yes, there were several parks along that route that had geocaches, and we stopped and enjoyed the parks and had a rest and got the caches.

 

Charlevoix is so pretty. It's my mom's favorite town (we used to live in Michigan). Haven't been there in years, I've been wanting to go back to Michigan and explore. It's one of the few states that I haven't found a cache in.

 

My dad and I are rock hounds. He has a really nice petoskey collection.

Edited May 24, 2016 by Ambrosia

[+niraD]

If I had, say 6 hours available I would prefer to spend most of it on a nice trail than riding with motorized traffic spewing dirty air.

Yeah, the first time I led a trail-biking trip for the kids at church, we decided to cycle to a park in the area that has a good network of easy cycling trails. We had the bright idea that we could ride our bikes from church to the park, and ended up spending more time riding our bikes to and from the park, than actually riding them on the trails.

 

For all our later trail-biking trips, we drove to the trailhead (usually having everyone just meet us there), so we could spend our time trail-biking.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

And I agree with the cars -- bikes should ride on trails, not roads.

A mistake by a driver (texting, anyone?), and I would be the one who ends up dead or severely injured.

Right of way and legally allowed or not, it is just not worth the risk.

There are 1000's of miles of great trails for recreational purposes.

 

It's of course your choice.

 

However do not ignore the fact that not every travel by bicycle is for recreational purposes (a frequent mistake made by a lot of people). If I go to work or do my shopping by bicycle, I have to use roads and cyclists need much less space and create no pollution.

 

Moreover, if the road is narrow and car drivers cannot overtake they simply have to be patient - they do not have a higher priority to use roads that can be legally used by both cars and bicycles.

If someone drives through an urban area, they have to accept that cyclists use these routes too.

 

 

Legally, I'm sure that's true...at least in your country. In practice, there are plenty of impatient drivers that won't wait. Have you ever heard of the rule of greater tonnage? Although legally a bicyclist may have the right of way, if a semi truck drivers decides not to grant it, are you really going to argue?

 

Coincidentally, my niece is currently on a summer internship with an organization called NARP (National Association of Rail Passengers). Her project (summerbyrail.com) involves taking the train and here bicycle (which she's named Stevie) on a 35 day tour across the country and back in an effort to bring awareness about multi-model transportation, connecting the train, bicycling, and other public transportation. I though it would be cool if she geocached along the way but with all the meetings she's doing with radio stations, local cycling organizations, and others (including mayors) she's already pretty busy.

 

 

[cezanne]

Legally, I'm sure that's true...at least in your country. In practice, there are plenty of impatient drivers that won't wait.

 

Of course they wait in this sort of situation. If not, their own risk and the risk for a car driver coming in the other direction is much higher than the risk for the cyclist - this of course concerns the case

which was mentioned by on4bam (who lives in Belgium where the situation is very comparable to my country), not every case of using a bicycle on a road.

When cycling in my home town I often take longer routes that avoid some roads with very heavy traffic but sometimes there is no choice and narrow roads are unavoidable in many European city centres.

 

What's a greater issue is the danger that someone opens the car door without looking. One need to be prepared to brake quickly.

 

Have you ever heard of the rule of greater tonnage? Although legally a bicyclist may have the right of way, if a semi truck drivers decides not to grant it, are you really going to argue?

 

I certainly would not get off the bicycle and let the truck or any other car pass just because it hoots.

[+Team_Vod]

 

But where in Michigan did you ride and did you do any geocaching along the trails there?

 

Petoskey to Charlevoix (and back).

Charleviox was absolutely beautiful, we had lunch there at a great bistro.

The trail along Lake Michigan was spectacular -- I never knew that the lake waters could be so crystal blue.

Pestoskey was a good start and end point.

The trail North of Petoskey wasn't much, kinda industrial and much less enjoyable.

 

Yes, there were several parks along that route that had geocaches, and we stopped and enjoyed the parks and had a rest and got the caches.

 

Wife, mother in law and I took a trip to northern Michigan, Mackinaw City, in June of 2011. I participated in the Big Mac Shoreline Bike Ride a two day event with the second day being a ride across the Mackinaw Bridge. It was absolutely astounding to look out over Lake Huron, as going north across the bridge that is the side you are on, and seeing the sun still rising in the east over Round and Mackinaw Islands. I also took my bike across to Mackinaw Island and rode the perimeter road. With the exception of emergency and government service vehicles no motor vehicles are allowed on Mackinaw Island and have not been since the early 1900's.

 

After Mackinaw area we traveled down to where my wife was born and her home town: Grand Rapids and Rockford, Michigan. Stayed at a B&B in the historic Heritage Hill Historic District. Attended a family get together at The Corner Bar in Rockford, my wife's hometown. The day of the get together I rode from the B&B in Grand Rapids through the city, to the White Pine Trail and then onto Rockford, MI. The Corner Bar has the best chili dogs ever and a great craft beer selection. This was before I started geocaching but I have checked since and there are caches along the trail and all over that area of Michigan. We are going to return again but just to the Grand Rapids and Rockford area where I will certainly do some geocaching via my bike.

[cezanne]

Riding and stopping every .1 miles is actually a little bit annoying.

 

Certainly, that's also very annoying for me when walking. When walking I'd like to have at least 1 km but rather more between stages and caches.

When riding a bicycle at least 3 km, but preferably more than 5km.

 

When I read riding or walking a trail, I did not think about a cache trail where lots of caches are hidden along a trail.

[+Team_Vod]

Legally, I'm sure that's true...at least in your country. In practice, there are plenty of impatient drivers that won't wait.

 

Of course they wait in this sort of situation. If not, their own risk and the risk for a car driver coming in the other direction is much higher than the risk for the cyclist - this of course concerns the case

which was mentioned by on4bam (who lives in Belgium where the situation is very comparable to my country), not every case of using a bicycle on a road.

When cycling in my home town I often take longer routes that avoid some roads with very heavy traffic but sometimes there is no choice and narrow roads are unavoidable in many European city centres.

 

What's a greater issue is the danger that someone opens the car door without looking. One need to be prepared to brake quickly.

 

Have you ever heard of the rule of greater tonnage? Although legally a bicyclist may have the right of way, if a semi truck drivers decides not to grant it, are you really going to argue?

 

I certainly would not get off the bicycle and let the truck or any other car pass just because it hoots.

 

NYPaddlerCacher, yes I have heard of the bull crap and so called rule of greater tonnage. It is brought up ever time there is an FB discussion over a news article posted about an incident between a motorist and a cyclist, even when the motorist is at fault. People have actually accused the cyclist and stated he or she had it coming because of the rule of greater tonnage. This so called rule of greater tonnage is not a real rule, just some made up crap by the anti-cyclist establishment. It has no legal bearing and does not hold up in a court of law, although it has actually been attempted in both a court of law and at the Iowa state legislative level to ban cyclists from the public roadways. It has been overruled in court and defeated every time during the state legislative session.

 

Ironically several years ago there was a group who called themselves the Safety Coalition of Iowa who once tried to use this so called rule and other means to ban cyclists from the roadways at the legislative level. It was discovered most of this group were what can only be described as 2nd Amendment thumpers and gun nuts. When this was discovered a large group of cyclists in Iowa made it a point to call them out as hypocrites for their actions against cyclists. The cyclists saw this as an infringement on our rights to the roadways and small group of these cyclists even went as far as going after this safety coalition's rights to gun ownership. Needless to say this prompted the safety coalition to drop their case and push to ban cyclists from the roadways.

 

We may want to get back on topic here as the mod/admin may shut this discussion down.

Edited May 24, 2016 by SUX_VR_40_Rider

[+niraD]

What's a greater issue is the danger that someone opens the car door without looking. One need to be prepared to brake quickly.

I just stay out of the door zone. The 1m or so next to a parked car is not a bike lane, no matter what the paint on the pavement says.

[+Team_Vod]

What's a greater issue is the danger that someone opens the car door without looking. One need to be prepared to brake quickly.

I just stay out of the door zone. The 1m or so next to a parked car is not a bike lane, no matter what the paint on the pavement says.

 

Exactly why I hate and avoid using most bike lanes as they are directly in the door zone for parallel parking or the backing zone for angled parking. What makes this poor bike lane design worse is when city's in Iowa have an ordinance that states cyclists shall use the bike lane when one is present rather than ride in the travel lane of the roadway. This is one local law I violate every time and will do so until the city corrects the poorly designed bike lane problem. I have yet to be cited for it because even the police know it puts cyclists in harms way if they use the bike lanes.

 

I have how ever had to cross a bike lane, from the travel lane, and pull into a public parking spot to search for geocaches designated as P&G's.

Edited May 24, 2016 by SUX_VR_40_Rider

[cezanne]

I just stay out of the door zone. The 1m or so next to a parked car is not a bike lane, no matter what the paint on the pavement says.

 

First 1 m does not suffice. Second, in narrow city roads you cannot always keep as much distance as you would prefer to do otherwise. Third you need to balance out the risk of having an issue with a car door or with a risky overtaking manoeuvers.

[+niraD]

Exactly why I hate and avoid using most bike lanes as they are directly in the door zone for parallel parking or the backing zone for angled parking.

Around here, some cities have started replacing door-zone bike lanes with "sharrows" painted in the right-most traffic lane. They work pretty well to indicate that bikes don't belong in the door zone, and should ride in the right-most lane, out of the door zone.

 

Of course, that still doesn't make riding on those streets pleasant, but sometimes they're a necessary connection as part of your route.

[+noncentric]

Legally, I'm sure that's true...at least in your country. In practice, there are plenty of impatient drivers that won't wait.

+1

There are plenty of families mourning the loss of their loved ones that were killed while legally riding their bikes on roadways. Distracted drivers, drunk drivers, road ragers, etc. Personally, I have too many responsibilities to take a chance at enforcing my legal right to ride on a busy street. When I do ride, I ride defensively and am acutely aware of the cars around me. If the street is too busy, then I'll ride (slowly) on the sidewalk.

 

Have you ever heard of the rule of greater tonnage? Although legally a bicyclist may have the right of way, if a semi truck drivers decides not to grant it, are you really going to argue?

I certainly would not get off the bicycle and let the truck or any other car pass just because it hoots.

There are at least 2 ghost bikes along the road I would take to work, if I commuted by bike. In one case, a bike's tire got snagged in a railroad rail and the biker fell and collided with a semi-truck. In the other, a driver made an illegal turn and hit a cyclist. I wouldn't call it the cyclist's fault in either case, but in both cases the cyclist is dead. I don't think their families feel better knowing that their loved ones had the right of way. In such accidents the truck/car driver had no physical injuries.

 

There are many more ghost bikes around the city, and several more unmarked locations, where cyclists have died after collisions with vehicles. In some of these cases, the vehicle driver was punished, but that still doesn't reverse the damage.

 

If the situation for cyclists is better in Austria, then that's wonderful. I'm not sure the roads will ever be 'safe' for cyclists in the US. Bicycle lanes can help, but the risk of biking in the roadway will never go away.

[+lee737]

I used a bike when finding my first cache in August 2003:

 

 

The yellow spot on the handle bar is a Garmin Geko.

 

Though usually I use public transport and walking, from time to time I still use a bike to geocache (either searching or maintaining my own ones). Especially the combination of public transport (rail and light rail) together with a bike is nice. I have a flatrate ticket for public transport which allows me to take a bike for free on weekends and after 19:00 o'clock on workdays.

 

Apart from that I commute by bike. Everyday, all year round, 9 km (single trip).

 

Cool.... I bought a Garmin Geko in 2004 before I went on holidays to NZ, I loved it, I also loved bushwalking, I'm still sad I didn't discover geocaching back then! I sill have the Geko, it sits in my pack as my spare GPS.....

[+noncentric]

Exactly why I hate and avoid using most bike lanes as they are directly in the door zone for parallel parking or the backing zone for angled parking.

Around here, some cities have started replacing door-zone bike lanes with "sharrows" painted in the right-most traffic lane. They work pretty well to indicate that bikes don't belong in the door zone, and should ride in the right-most lane, out of the door zone.

 

Of course, that still doesn't make riding on those streets pleasant, but sometimes they're a necessary connection as part of your route.

In Seattle, there are some downtown streets that just don't allow parking. That's where they put the bike lanes. However, some cyclists don't want to go one city block out of their way and so they ride on the streets that run parallel to the bike-lane street. These other streets have a lot of cars and parking on both sides. There are a lot of cycling initiatives in the Seattle area. Along with that are a lot of debates about whether the initiatives are truly helping or not.

[+Team_Vod]

Legally, I'm sure that's true...at least in your country. In practice, there are plenty of impatient drivers that won't wait.

+1

There are plenty of families mourning the loss of their loved ones that were killed while legally riding their bikes on roadways. Distracted drivers, drunk drivers, road ragers, etc. Personally, I have too many responsibilities to take a chance at enforcing my legal right to ride on a busy street. When I do ride, I ride defensively and am acutely aware of the cars around me. If the street is too busy, then I'll ride (slowly) on the sidewalk.

 

Have you ever heard of the rule of greater tonnage? Although legally a bicyclist may have the right of way, if a semi truck drivers decides not to grant it, are you really going to argue?

I certainly would not get off the bicycle and let the truck or any other car pass just because it hoots.

There are at least 2 ghost bikes along the road I would take to work, if I commuted by bike. In one case, a bike's tire got snagged in a railroad rail and the biker fell and collided with a semi-truck. In the other, a driver made an illegal turn and hit a cyclist. I wouldn't call it the cyclist's fault in either case, but in both cases the cyclist is dead. I don't think their families feel better knowing that their loved ones had the right of way. In such accidents the truck/car driver had no physical injuries.

 

There are many more ghost bikes around the city, and several more unmarked locations, where cyclists have died after collisions with vehicles. In some of these cases, the vehicle driver was punished, but that still doesn't reverse the damage.

 

If the situation for cyclists is better in Austria, then that's wonderful. I'm not sure the roads will ever be 'safe' for cyclists in the US. Bicycle lanes can help, but the risk of biking in the roadway will never go away.

 

Again this argument has been repeatedly hashed out and debated over the last few decades at least. The thing is nothing and I mean nothing will ever change my mind about riding in the roadways. I admit part of it is because I have become so galvanized on the matter because of the anti-cyclists who like to try and tell me where they think I shall ride. So yes it is stubborn resistance and for me that will never change so long as others keep telling me where they think I shall ride, some have at least alluded to as much in this very discussion. The other part of it is what the law says I can do and the fact that it backs up my position and legal access to the public roadways. If others do not like that is simply too bad they should figure out a way to deal with it because I am never going to change and neither will a lot of other cyclists.

 

The roads are plenty safe for cyclists in the U.S. This position as a lot of others from the anti-cyclists is very subjective, opinionated and this premise/argument cannot be supported by objective, primary proof.

[+Harry Dolphin]

I guess my problem is that bicyclists need to know that they are required to obey traffic laws. Stop for red lights and stop signs. Do not ride on sidewalks. Yield to pedestrians. Ride on the right-hand side on the road. Traffic laws apply to bicyclists as well as to motor vehicle drivers.

Riverside Drive in NYC. We waited for the light to change, and started crossing the road. Two bicyclists came zooming down the road, right through the red light, and almost hit us! Hey! Stop for red lights, and yield to pedestrians in the cross walk! (Okay. A lot of motorists don't believe in obeying traffic laws either...)

[+Team_Vod]

I guess my problem is that bicyclists need to know that they are required to obey traffic laws. Stop for red lights and stop signs. Do not ride on sidewalks. Yield to pedestrians. Ride on the right-hand side on the road. Traffic laws apply to bicyclists as well as to motor vehicle drivers.

Riverside Drive in NYC. We waited for the light to change, and started crossing the road. Two bicyclists came zooming down the road, right through the red light, and almost hit us! Hey! Stop for red lights, and yield to pedestrians in the cross walk! (Okay. A lot of motorists don't believe in obeying traffic laws either...)

 

You're right we should obey traffic laws. I agree with you 100% on this one, except for one thing. That you claim we shall ride on the right hand side of the road. First and foremost I will say a resounding NO!, not when cyclists have the right to ride as far to the right as practicable. What about when we need to change lanes and make a left turn? Do you expect us to do so from the far right side of the roadway or not make any left turns at all which is what some in the anti-cycling establishment want?

 

In most if not all states the law says bicycle traffic is to ride as far to the right as practicable. They do NOT say as far to the right as possible. Some even have the word "reasonably" in front of practicable. What this means is a cyclist can and is legally allowed to ride within the travel lane, NOT in the road gutter or against the curb or extreme edge of the roadway. It also means we can legally change lanes and make left turns when necessary. In some stats and municipalities there is a provision that allows for lane splitting. Although legal in some areas I find it an unsafe maneuver.

 

If you actually do a ratio of total population of motorists in any given state who are legally licensed to drive who obey all traffic laws to those that do not and the same for cyclists you will find the percentage of motorists who do not obey all traffic laws is far greater by comparison to cyclists. Please note I did not say compare motorists to cyclists.

[+noncentric]

Legally, I'm sure that's true...at least in your country. In practice, there are plenty of impatient drivers that won't wait.

+1

There are plenty of families mourning the loss of their loved ones that were killed while legally riding their bikes on roadways. Distracted drivers, drunk drivers, road ragers, etc. Personally, I have too many responsibilities to take a chance at enforcing my legal right to ride on a busy street. When I do ride, I ride defensively and am acutely aware of the cars around me. If the street is too busy, then I'll ride (slowly) on the sidewalk.

 

Have you ever heard of the rule of greater tonnage? Although legally a bicyclist may have the right of way, if a semi truck drivers decides not to grant it, are you really going to argue?

I certainly would not get off the bicycle and let the truck or any other car pass just because it hoots.

There are at least 2 ghost bikes along the road I would take to work, if I commuted by bike. In one case, a bike's tire got snagged in a railroad rail and the biker fell and collided with a semi-truck. In the other, a driver made an illegal turn and hit a cyclist. I wouldn't call it the cyclist's fault in either case, but in both cases the cyclist is dead. I don't think their families feel better knowing that their loved ones had the right of way. In such accidents the truck/car driver had no physical injuries.

 

There are many more ghost bikes around the city, and several more unmarked locations, where cyclists have died after collisions with vehicles. In some of these cases, the vehicle driver was punished, but that still doesn't reverse the damage.

 

If the situation for cyclists is better in Austria, then that's wonderful. I'm not sure the roads will ever be 'safe' for cyclists in the US. Bicycle lanes can help, but the risk of biking in the roadway will never go away.

Again this argument has been repeatedly hashed out and debated over the last few decades at least. The thing is nothing and I mean nothing will ever change my mind about riding in the roadways. I admit part of it is because I have become so galvanized on the matter because of the anti-cyclists who like to try and tell me where they think I shall ride. So yes it is stubborn resistance and for me that will never change so long as others keep telling me where they think I shall ride, some have at least alluded to as much in this very discussion. The other part of it is what the law says I can do and the fact that it backs up my position and legal access to the public roadways. If others do not like that is simply too bad they should figure out a way to deal with it because I am never going to change and neither will a lot of other cyclists.

 

The roads are plenty safe for cyclists in the U.S. This position as a lot of others from the anti-cyclists is very subjective, opinionated and this premise/argument cannot be supported by objective, primary proof.

What "argument" are you referring to?

-- I started by stating that cyclists have died while legally biking on roads. That is a fact, not a subjective or opinionated position.

-- I said that I, personally, would rather not enforce my right-of-way on roads. That is my personal choice, just as you can personally choose to do the opposite.

-- I mentioned the ghost bikes in my area. Those ghost bikes are not decorations and the stories behind them are neither subjective nor opinionated.

 

My comments didn't say "don't ride your bike". My comments were about why I don't ride my bike on the roads/streets. If you consider my comments to be "anti-cyclist", then that's your prerogative. They were not meant to be. They weren't even directed towards you, as I was replying to NYPC's and cezanne's statements.

[+firennice]

We have degraded from Geocaching and Bicycling (the topic) to traffic rules. Perhaps this should be in the off topic forum.

[+Team_Vod]

Legally, I'm sure that's true...at least in your country. In practice, there are plenty of impatient drivers that won't wait.

+1

There are plenty of families mourning the loss of their loved ones that were killed while legally riding their bikes on roadways. Distracted drivers, drunk drivers, road ragers, etc. Personally, I have too many responsibilities to take a chance at enforcing my legal right to ride on a busy street. When I do ride, I ride defensively and am acutely aware of the cars around me. If the street is too busy, then I'll ride (slowly) on the sidewalk.

 

Have you ever heard of the rule of greater tonnage? Although legally a bicyclist may have the right of way, if a semi truck drivers decides not to grant it, are you really going to argue?

I certainly would not get off the bicycle and let the truck or any other car pass just because it hoots.

There are at least 2 ghost bikes along the road I would take to work, if I commuted by bike. In one case, a bike's tire got snagged in a railroad rail and the biker fell and collided with a semi-truck. In the other, a driver made an illegal turn and hit a cyclist. I wouldn't call it the cyclist's fault in either case, but in both cases the cyclist is dead. I don't think their families feel better knowing that their loved ones had the right of way. In such accidents the truck/car driver had no physical injuries.

 

There are many more ghost bikes around the city, and several more unmarked locations, where cyclists have died after collisions with vehicles. In some of these cases, the vehicle driver was punished, but that still doesn't reverse the damage.

 

If the situation for cyclists is better in Austria, then that's wonderful. I'm not sure the roads will ever be 'safe' for cyclists in the US. Bicycle lanes can help, but the risk of biking in the roadway will never go away.

Again this argument has been repeatedly hashed out and debated over the last few decades at least. The thing is nothing and I mean nothing will ever change my mind about riding in the roadways. I admit part of it is because I have become so galvanized on the matter because of the anti-cyclists who like to try and tell me where they think I shall ride. So yes it is stubborn resistance and for me that will never change so long as others keep telling me where they think I shall ride, some have at least alluded to as much in this very discussion. The other part of it is what the law says I can do and the fact that it backs up my position and legal access to the public roadways. If others do not like that is simply too bad they should figure out a way to deal with it because I am never going to change and neither will a lot of other cyclists.

 

The roads are plenty safe for cyclists in the U.S. This position as a lot of others from the anti-cyclists is very subjective, opinionated and this premise/argument cannot be supported by objective, primary proof.

What "argument" are you referring to?

-- I started by stating that cyclists have died while legally biking on roads. That is a fact, not a subjective or opinionated position.

-- I said that I, personally, would rather not enforce my right-of-way on roads. That is my personal choice, just as you can personally choose to do the opposite.

-- I mentioned the ghost bikes in my area. Those ghost bikes are not decorations and the stories behind them are neither subjective nor opinionated.

 

My comments didn't say "don't ride your bike". My comments were about why I don't ride my bike on the roads/streets. If you consider my comments to be "anti-cyclist", then that's your prerogative. They were not meant to be. They weren't even directed towards you, as I was replying to NYPC's and cezanne's statements.

 

As was I, directing it to NYPC's and cezanne that is. sorry about that. I did not take your comments to be an unsupported argument. But some have tried to incorporate the type of things you have stated into an unsupported argument. You would not believe the crap the anti-cyclist establishment espouses to try and sound good at what they are saying.

[+Team_Vod]

We have degraded from Geocaching and Bicycling (the topic) to traffic rules. Perhaps this should be in the off topic forum.

 

That, or get it back on track and on topic as I have tried to do once already.

[+noncentric]

The other part of it is what the law says I can do and the fact that it backs up my position and legal access to the public roadways.

Except for the law that you "violate every time":

Exactly why I hate and avoid using most bike lanes as they are directly in the door zone for parallel parking or the backing zone for angled parking. What makes this poor bike lane design worse is when city's in Iowa have an ordinance that states cyclists shall use the bike lane when one is present rather than ride in the travel lane of the roadway. This is one local law I violate every time and will do so until the city corrects the poorly designed bike lane problem. I have yet to be cited for it because even the police know it puts cyclists in harms way if they use the bike lanes.

[+noncentric]

As was I, directing it to NYPC's and cezanne that is. sorry about that. I did not take your comments to be an unsupported argument. But some have tried to incorporate the type of things you have stated into an unsupported argument. You would not believe the crap the anti-cyclist establishment espouses to try and sound good at what they are saying.

Okay. Your reply quoted my post, so it seemed directed at my comments. It might help to "Preview Post" when including quotes in your reply. I find it helpful to avoid misquotes. Most of the time, anyway.

[+Alkhalikoi]

I started riding a bicycle again because I started caching but, no, I don't ride all the way to a desired trail head and then ride some more. I drive my car, unload my bike (and the kids bikes) and start pedaling. I do, however, be sure to leave the engine on and the car idling so as not to miss out on the opportunity to annoy bicyclists who hate cars.

[+Team_Vod]

The other part of it is what the law says I can do and the fact that it backs up my position and legal access to the public roadways.

Except for the law that you "violate every time":

Exactly why I hate and avoid using most bike lanes as they are directly in the door zone for parallel parking or the backing zone for angled parking. What makes this poor bike lane design worse is when city's in Iowa have an ordinance that states cyclists shall use the bike lane when one is present rather than ride in the travel lane of the roadway. This is one local law I violate every time and will do so until the city corrects the poorly designed bike lane problem. I have yet to be cited for it because even the police know it puts cyclists in harms way if they use the bike lanes.

 

The law in question is a local ordinance that needs to be repealed and was put in place decades ago by a group known for their anti-cycling stance in the area. They somehow convinced the city council at the time to enact this ordinance. It actually violates state code. Also any law that puts a citizen in harms way, intentionally or not cannot be legally enforced. And if the municipality is notified and reported of such a hazard and they do nothing to correct the problem in a reasonable amount of time when someone is injured as a result the municipality can be held liable and responsible for the persons injuries. But the key the problem or hazard has to be reported and documents and the city given enough reasonable time to correct it once it is reported.

 

The ordinance in question is actually not enforceable. I have literally ridden with police officers on the public roadway rather than the adjacent bicycle facility and was never cited for it. I asked about the ordinance. They have advised they wish the city would repeal it and they never issue citations for violation of the ordinance because they know it violates state law.

[+Team_Vod]

I started riding a bicycle again because I started caching but, no, I don't ride all the way to a desired trail head and then ride some more. I drive my car, unload my bike (and the kids bikes) and start pedaling. I do, however, be sure to leave the engine on and the car idling so as not to miss out on the opportunity to annoy bicyclists who hate cars.

 

I'm not sure how an idling car would annoy a cyclist as most of us own and drive motor vehicles ourselves. But what ever trips your trigger.

[+colleda]

can we get back on track or close this thread?

[Keystone]

can we get back on track or close this thread?

Agreed. Talk about traffic laws governing bicycles and other "cycling advocacy" discussion belongs in the Off Topic forum.

[+TriciaG]

I haven't read through the thread yet; only the OP.

 

I'm a casual cyclist. My limit is about 25-30 km. I've done 3 charity rides of 25 km each. I ride a yard sale special mountain bike - my husband's hand-me-down. But it has disk brakes and rides nicely, so I'm happy with it.

 

My husband, on the other hand, regularly cycles home from work (55 km) and has cycled over 160 km in one ride. He just bought a road bike this spring. The 160 km and other long rides of the past he did on his mountain bike. He's done 3 charity rides, too: 2 of 50 km (one of which he stretched out to 100 km) and one officially 100 km. Of over 100 riders for the 100-160 km distances at that one, he and one other guy were on mountain bikes. AND he kept up and came in before many of those on road bikes. At one event, he had a guy on a road bike say it's the first time he'd ever drafted a mountain bike.

 

OK, enough bragging on my husband...

 

Yes, we geocache by bike. Two problems we've run into are (1) Hubby doesn't like leaving the bikes alone for long while we go search for caches, so we don't do caches far off the trail; and (2) he doesn't like hiking around looking for caches in his bike shoes. OK, and (3) mosquitoes love me, so after working up a sweat, it's not fun going into the woods where the mosquitoes swarm in order to look for a geocache. I do put on bug spray, but with that much natural scent being exuded, bug spray isn't very effective.

[+Team_Vod]

I haven't read through the thread yet; only the OP.

 

I'm a casual cyclist. My limit is about 25-30 km. I've done 3 charity rides of 25 km each. I ride a yard sale special mountain bike - my husband's hand-me-down. But it has disk brakes and rides nicely, so I'm happy with it.

 

My husband, on the other hand, regularly cycles home from work (55 km) and has cycled over 160 km in one ride. He just bought a road bike this spring. The 160 km and other long rides of the past he did on his mountain bike. He's done 3 charity rides, too: 2 of 50 km (one of which he stretched out to 100 km) and one officially 100 km. Of over 100 riders for the 100-160 km distances at that one, he and one other guy were on mountain bikes. AND he kept up and came in before many of those on road bikes. At one event, he had a guy on a road bike say it's the first time he'd ever drafted a mountain bike.

 

OK, enough bragging on my husband...

 

Yes, we geocache by bike. Two problems we've run into are (1) Hubby doesn't like leaving the bikes alone for long while we go search for caches, so we don't do caches far off the trail; and (2) he doesn't like hiking around looking for caches in his bike shoes. OK, and (3) mosquitoes love me, so after working up a sweat, it's not fun going into the woods where the mosquitoes swarm in order to look for a geocache. I do put on bug spray, but with that much natural scent being exuded, bug spray isn't very effective.

 

Mosquito are not attracted to you by your body odor or how your sweat smells, they are attracted to the carbon dioxide we exhale. So unless you are going to hold your breath the only thing you can do is use a good deet based product to help prevent them away.

 

As far as bike shoes and doing things like geocaching in them I can relate. Which is why in 2010 I switched to Shimano SPD bike sandals and yes I wear socks with them. I can do most anything in them even geocaching. I had a pair of Look style carbon fiber sole road shoes which were very hard to walk in off the bike, even with the cleat covers I used. The sandals I wear have a nice wide sole and offers excellent stability when walking over most surfaces, even uneven ground.

[+cheech gang]

can we get back on track or close this thread?

Agreed. Talk about traffic laws governing bicycles and other "cycling advocacy" discussion belongs in the Off Topic forum.

 

The OP doesn't have access to the Off Topic forum so we are subject to his ruminations here.

[cezanne]

Agreed. Talk about traffic laws governing bicycles and other "cycling advocacy" discussion belongs in the Off Topic forum.

 

Well, I'm not really sure whether the aspects discussed here can easily separated and whether that really makes sense (apart from the fact that one some of the participants including the OP could not take part).

 

I'm not surprised that the number of cachers who is willing/able to rely almost exclusively on a bicycle as means for transportation for geocaching is small.

 

Aspects that seem interesting at least to me are the following:

 

Could the availability of better cycling infrastructure (more bicycle lanes, higher priority for bicycles etc)

motivate more cachers who live in urban areas to use a bicycle to travel to urban caches in their home area? This is the area where I see large potential for geocaching by bicycle. I know many more people who use a bicycle regularly for their trips in the city than I know geocachers who travel to urban caches by bicycle. A lot of modern caching has been turned into finding many caches per tour and being fast when it comes to a new cache.

 

How much inconvenience (for example longer travel times, waiting times, depedency on the schedule) are cachers willing to accept when they could arrange a cache tour as a combined train+bicycle trip in comparison to a pure car travel or combined car+bicycle trip. Of course this question only ´becomes relevant when the train option exists?

 

There are actually at least four different reasons why someone could use a bicycle for caching trips:

(i) no other transportation option available

(ii) enjoyment of cycling

(iii) physical activity (even when one that much appreciated)

(iv) environmental reasons

 

(iv) is an important issue in my opinion as geocaching often creates a lot of car travels that easily could be avoided. While noone can force anyone else how to visit geocaches, I wonder what could be done to achieve that more cachers (not all cachers! -it's clear that there are many circumstances where the bike option is infeasible) consider using bicycles for urban trips and other short trips.

Edited May 25, 2016 by cezanne

[+NYPaddleCacher]

We have degraded from Geocaching and Bicycling (the topic) to traffic rules. Perhaps this should be in the off topic forum.

 

I was going to suggest that and had not followed up on my earlier post because it's going way off topic. Unfortunately, not all the participants in the discussion are premium members (nudge, nudge) so moving the discussion wouldn't allow everyone to to continue to express their opinion or even read what others are writing.

 

 

 

[+narcissa]

Agreed. Talk about traffic laws governing bicycles and other "cycling advocacy" discussion belongs in the Off Topic forum.

 

Well, I'm not really sure whether the aspects discussed here can easily separated and whether that really makes sense (apart from the fact that one some of the participants including the OP could not take part).

 

I'm not surprised that the number of cachers who is willing/able to rely almost exclusively on a bicycle as means for transportation for geocaching is small.

 

Aspects that seem interesting at least to me are the following:

 

Could the availability of better cycling infrastructure (more bicycle lanes, higher priority for bicycles etc)

motivate more cachers who live in urban areas to use a bicycle to travel to urban caches in their home area? This is the area where I see large potential for geocaching by bicycle. I know many more people who use a bicycle regularly for their trips in the city than I know geocachers who travel to urban caches by bicycle. A lot of modern caching has been turned into finding many caches per tour and being fast when it comes to a new cache.

 

How much inconvenience (for example longer travel times, waiting times, depedency on the schedule) are cachers willing to accept when they could arrange a cache tour as a combined train+bicycle trip in comparison to a pure car travel or combined car+bicycle trip. Of course this question only ´becomes relevant when the train option exists?

 

There are actually at least four different reasons why someone could use a bicycle for caching trips:

(i) no other transportation option available

(ii) enjoyment of cycling

(iii) physical activity (even when one that much appreciated)

(iv) environmental reasons

 

(iv) is an important issue in my opinion as geocaching often creates a lot of car travels that easily could be avoided. While noone can force anyone else how to visit geocaches, I wonder what could be done to achieve that more cachers (not all cachers! -it's clear that there are many circumstances where the bike option is infeasible) consider using bicycles for urban trips and other short trips.

 

I just don't feel safe riding a bicycle in city traffic. There are white ghost bikes all over the city where cyclists have been killed in traffic. I'll gladly take my bike to nice trails or country roads but I am not going to bicycle around the city for anything. The laws might be in my favour but the traffic realities are not.

[+MartyBartfast]

Agreed. Talk about traffic laws governing bicycles and other "cycling advocacy" discussion belongs in the Off Topic forum.

 

Well, I'm not really sure whether the aspects discussed here can easily separated and whether that really makes sense (apart from the fact that one some of the participants including the OP could not take part).

 

I'm not surprised that the number of cachers who is willing/able to rely almost exclusively on a bicycle as means for transportation for geocaching is small.

 

Aspects that seem interesting at least to me are the following:

 

Could the availability of better cycling infrastructure (more bicycle lanes, higher priority for bicycles etc)

motivate more cachers who live in urban areas to use a bicycle to travel to urban caches in their home area? This is the area where I see large potential for geocaching by bicycle. I know many more people who use a bicycle regularly for their trips in the city than I know geocachers who travel to urban caches by bicycle. A lot of modern caching has been turned into finding many caches per tour and being fast when it comes to a new cache.

 

How much inconvenience (for example longer travel times, waiting times, depedency on the schedule) are cachers willing to accept when they could arrange a cache tour as a combined train+bicycle trip in comparison to a pure car travel or combined car+bicycle trip. Of course this question only ´becomes relevant when the train option exists?

 

There are actually at least four different reasons why someone could use a bicycle for caching trips:

(i) no other transportation option available

(ii) enjoyment of cycling

(iii) physical activity (even when one that much appreciated)

(iv) environmental reasons

 

(iv) is an important issue in my opinion as geocaching often creates a lot of car travels that easily could be avoided. While noone can force anyone else how to visit geocaches, I wonder what could be done to achieve that more cachers (not all cachers! -it's clear that there are many circumstances where the bike option is infeasible) consider using bicycles for urban trips and other short trips.

 

I just don't feel safe riding a bicycle in city traffic. There are white ghost bikes all over the city where cyclists have been killed in traffic. I'll gladly take my bike to nice trails or country roads but I am not going to bicycle around the city for anything. The laws might be in my favour but the traffic realities are not.

 

In London we have a cycle hire scheme (commonly known as Boris Bikes), which I frequently use for caching trips. It's usually quicker than using public transport (bus/tube) and allows me to cover much greater distances than would be possible on foot. Using a Boris Bike means I don't need to worry about leaving my bike somewhere as I can just return the bike to the nearest docking station to the cache (I have all the docking stations in my GPS as waypoints), and pick up another when I want to move on. I also find the bike can be used as a cover while searching for caches.

 

While it is undoubtedly potentially dangerous cycling in busy cities I've never had any problems myself, you need to be extra vigilant, ride defensively, and remember that every car/bus/lorry driver is potentially trying to kill you !

[cezanne]

I just don't feel safe riding a bicycle in city traffic.

 

I fully understand that. There are also cities where I would not want to ride a bicycle and I have never been in your place.

From the perspective of bicycle travel, I'd love to live in Copenhagen.

 

There are white ghost bikes all over the city where cyclists have been killed in traffic.

 

I just wonder how many car drivers got killed in traffic. Are those spots marked too?

 

I'll gladly take my bike to nice trails or country roads but I am not going to bicycle around the city for anything. The laws might be in my favour but the traffic realities are not.

 

That's why I also asked about what could be done in terms of infrastructure (bike lanes, priorities for bicycles, attitude changes). Today's traffic realities need not stay forever.

 

Moreover, what I observed is that proportionally way more people ride a bicycle in for example my city than cachers use a bicycle for visiting urban caches in my city which cannot be explained by

the reasons you provide for your personal decision.

 

 

Quite some time ago I had ideas like setting up a multi cache with stages at say all objects of a certain type in my city (e.g. churches of a certain type, castles, cemeteries) but rejected my plans as almost all cachers would drive around town and accumulate many wasted km of car travel. I just do not want to the person who makes them do that. That's one of the reasons why I think that the whole bicycle topic cannot be separated into one about caching and one about the traffic situation.

Edited May 25, 2016 by cezanne

[+narcissa]

Agreed. Talk about traffic laws governing bicycles and other "cycling advocacy" discussion belongs in the Off Topic forum.

 

Well, I'm not really sure whether the aspects discussed here can easily separated and whether that really makes sense (apart from the fact that one some of the participants including the OP could not take part).

 

I'm not surprised that the number of cachers who is willing/able to rely almost exclusively on a bicycle as means for transportation for geocaching is small.

 

Aspects that seem interesting at least to me are the following:

 

Could the availability of better cycling infrastructure (more bicycle lanes, higher priority for bicycles etc)

motivate more cachers who live in urban areas to use a bicycle to travel to urban caches in their home area? This is the area where I see large potential for geocaching by bicycle. I know many more people who use a bicycle regularly for their trips in the city than I know geocachers who travel to urban caches by bicycle. A lot of modern caching has been turned into finding many caches per tour and being fast when it comes to a new cache.

 

How much inconvenience (for example longer travel times, waiting times, depedency on the schedule) are cachers willing to accept when they could arrange a cache tour as a combined train+bicycle trip in comparison to a pure car travel or combined car+bicycle trip. Of course this question only ´becomes relevant when the train option exists?

 

There are actually at least four different reasons why someone could use a bicycle for caching trips:

(i) no other transportation option available

(ii) enjoyment of cycling

(iii) physical activity (even when one that much appreciated)

(iv) environmental reasons

 

(iv) is an important issue in my opinion as geocaching often creates a lot of car travels that easily could be avoided. While noone can force anyone else how to visit geocaches, I wonder what could be done to achieve that more cachers (not all cachers! -it's clear that there are many circumstances where the bike option is infeasible) consider using bicycles for urban trips and other short trips.

 

I just don't feel safe riding a bicycle in city traffic. There are white ghost bikes all over the city where cyclists have been killed in traffic. I'll gladly take my bike to nice trails or country roads but I am not going to bicycle around the city for anything. The laws might be in my favour but the traffic realities are not.

 

In London we have a cycle hire scheme (commonly known as Boris Bikes), which I frequently use for caching trips. It's usually quicker than using public transport (bus/tube) and allows me to cover much greater distances than would be possible on foot. Using a Boris Bike means I don't need to worry about leaving my bike somewhere as I can just return the bike to the nearest docking station to the cache (I have all the docking stations in my GPS as waypoints), and pick up another when I want to move on. I also find the bike can be used as a cover while searching for caches.

 

While it is undoubtedly potentially dangerous cycling in busy cities I've never had any problems myself, you need to be extra vigilant, ride defensively, and remember that every car/bus/lorry driver is potentially trying to kill you !

 

We had something like that here but it failed. The city isn't big enough for locals to use it, and the city isn't safe or accessible enough for tourists to use it.

 

I would just rather get where I am going without being mowed down by a bus, and then ride the bike in peace and quiet and find some geocaches. We've been enjoying our bicycles a bit more frequently this year but we'll never be bicycle-only travellers. It's just not worth the risk for us.

[+narcissa]

I just don't feel safe riding a bicycle in city traffic.

 

I fully understand that. There are also cities where I would not want to ride a bicycle and I have never been in your place.

From the perspective of bicycle travel, I'd love to live in Copenhagen.

 

There are white ghost bikes all over the city where cyclists have been killed in traffic.

 

I just wonder how many car drivers got killed in traffic. Are those spots marked too?

 

I'll gladly take my bike to nice trails or country roads but I am not going to bicycle around the city for anything. The laws might be in my favour but the traffic realities are not.

 

That's why I also asked about what could be done in terms of infrastructure (bike lanes, priorities for bicycles, attitude changes). Today's traffic realities need not stay forever.

 

Moreover, what I observed is that proportionally way more people ride a bicycle in for example my city than cachers use a bicycle for visiting urban caches in my city which cannot be explained by

the reasons you provide for your personal decision.

 

We have bike lanes and paths. There has been substantial investment in it and it goes unused. At a certain point it's silly to expect people in a winter climate to take up year-round cycling on a large scale.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

 

In London we have a cycle hire scheme (commonly known as Boris Bikes), which I frequently use for caching trips. It's usually quicker than using public transport (bus/tube) and allows me to cover much greater distances than would be possible on foot. Using a Boris Bike means I don't need to worry about leaving my bike somewhere as I can just return the bike to the nearest docking station to the cache (I have all the docking stations in my GPS as waypoints), and pick up another when I want to move on. I also find the bike can be used as a cover while searching for caches.

 

While it is undoubtedly potentially dangerous cycling in busy cities I've never had any problems myself, you need to be extra vigilant, ride defensively, and remember that every car/bus/lorry driver is potentially trying to kill you !

 

First, thank you to Cezanne for bringing the thread back on topic.

 

Bicycle rental services like Boris bikes have become very common in cities all over the world. Several years ago I attended a conference in Montpellier, France and took the train from there to Barcelona where I spend a dayand a half then flew home from there. I found a bicycle rental shop just down the road from my hotel and rented a bicycle for the day. In a city with lots of narrow one way streets the bicycle was a great way to explore the city and cover a much bigger area than I could have on foot and not be dependent upon the routes and schedules of public transportation.

 

 

[+on4bam]

Copenhagen is the perfect bike city. they have the advantage of very wide roads of which a wide part is reserved for bikes. Infrastructure does not allow that in every city though.

Belgium has 10's (44 at this time)of cities where you can rent "blue bikes". Downside is you have to register in advance and it's only for Belgian citizens. Another downside: rental locations are not always near the caches we want to do. They are OK for (the 44) cities but in cities we prefer to walk as citycaches are winter destinations for us (on a typical cacheday we walk approx. 20Km).

[+fuzziebear3]

 

In London we have a cycle hire scheme (commonly known as Boris Bikes), which I frequently use for caching trips. It's usually quicker than using public transport (bus/tube) and allows me to cover much greater distances than would be possible on foot. Using a Boris Bike means I don't need to worry about leaving my bike somewhere as I can just return the bike to the nearest docking station to the cache (I have all the docking stations in my GPS as waypoints), and pick up another when I want to move on. I also find the bike can be used as a cover while searching for caches.

 

While it is undoubtedly potentially dangerous cycling in busy cities I've never had any problems myself, you need to be extra vigilant, ride defensively, and remember that every car/bus/lorry driver is potentially trying to kill you !

 

First, thank you to Cezanne for bringing the thread back on topic.

 

Bicycle rental services like Boris bikes have become very common in cities all over the world. Several years ago I attended a conference in Montpellier, France and took the train from there to Barcelona where I spend a dayand a half then flew home from there. I found a bicycle rental shop just down the road from my hotel and rented a bicycle for the day. In a city with lots of narrow one way streets the bicycle was a great way to explore the city and cover a much bigger area than I could have on foot and not be dependent upon the routes and schedules of public transportation.

 

Dayton has started one like this too. It costs $5 for a bike for 24 hours, you can check it in and out of stations all day (there are 24 stations throughout town), but you must check it in within 30 minutes or you incur an extra charge. An interesting model. Actually it could work pretty well for geocaching, as I could ride to each station and then walk and cache a bit, then ride to another station ... Sounds like a fun downtown caching experience actually.

[+MartyBartfast]

 

Dayton has started one like this too. It costs $5 for a bike for 24 hours, you can check it in and out of stations all day (there are 24 stations throughout town), but you must check it in within 30 minutes or you incur an extra charge. An interesting model. Actually it could work pretty well for geocaching, as I could ride to each station and then walk and cache a bit, then ride to another station ... Sounds like a fun downtown caching experience actually.

 

That's the same model as we've had in London for 6 years now, but it's £2 (~$3) for 24 hours to anyone who just turns up, or you can register and pay weekly/monthly/annually, and I think it works very well. The idea of the scheme is to encourage short journeys, rather than providing a long term hire scheme. Currently their record day is 73,000 bikes hired out in one day.

[+noncentric]

The driving from cache to cache does bother me sometimes. I've been trying to leave a smaller carbon footprint when caching in urban areas by combining caching with other necessary trips, parking in a central area and walking/biking around, etc. I'm not sure it makes that much of a difference in the grand scheme of things, but it makes me feel a bit better about my own impact.

 

In London we have a cycle hire scheme (commonly known as Boris Bikes), which I frequently use for caching trips. It's usually quicker than using public transport (bus/tube) and allows me to cover much greater distances than would be possible on foot. Using a Boris Bike means I don't need to worry about leaving my bike somewhere as I can just return the bike to the nearest docking station to the cache (I have all the docking stations in my GPS as waypoints), and pick up another when I want to move on. I also find the bike can be used as a cover while searching for caches.

 

While it is undoubtedly potentially dangerous cycling in busy cities I've never had any problems myself, you need to be extra vigilant, ride defensively, and remember that every car/bus/lorry driver is potentially trying to kill you !

 

We had something like that here but it failed. The city isn't big enough for locals to use it, and the city isn't safe or accessible enough for tourists to use it.

 

I would just rather get where I am going without being mowed down by a bus, and then ride the bike in peace and quiet and find some geocaches. We've been enjoying our bicycles a bit more frequently this year but we'll never be bicycle-only travellers. It's just not worth the risk for us.

The bike share program in Seattle has also been a failure. Besides the danger and hills, one of the other things that's been considered a 'problem' with the program is the helmet situation. Helmets are required here, and many people are not keen to use the rental helmets for various reasons.

 

MartyBarfast, I believe helmets are not required for biking in London. Is that correct? I wonder if not requiring helmets helps keep the program successful in your area of the world.