Increasing cyclist numbers?

[TrevA]

Of course lots of roadies out in the countryside may well mean lots more motor miles as they drive to their rides.

Isn't this just the snobbery of the old-school cyclist who thinks that everyone should cycle everywhere?

Our club ride used to meet on the edge of the suburbs and we'd ride out as a group along the main road. But the main road got busier and we found we were causing a nuisance. So now we meet 5 miles out of town and people ride out individually. Quite a few drive out to the new meeting place. We normally do a 40 mile round trip from the start point. Stronger riders can cope with the extra 5-8 miles at the start and end of each ride. Newer and more elderly riders cannot, so they drive out. Nothing wrong with that as far as I can see.

[Cyril Haearn]

Of course lots of roadies out in the countryside may well mean lots more motor miles as they drive to their rides.

Isn't this just the snobbery of the old-school cyclist who thinks that everyone should cycle everywhere?

Our club ride used to meet on the edge of the suburbs and we'd ride out as a group along the main road. But the main road got busier and we found we were causing a nuisance. So now we meet 5 miles out of town and people ride out individually. Quite a few drive out to the new meeting place. We normally do a 40 mile round trip from the start point. Stronger riders can cope with the extra 5-8 miles at the start and end of each ride. Newer and more elderly riders cannot, so they drive out. Nothing wrong with that as far as I can see.

A lot wrong with it I think
The TDS tragedy of drive-cycling has been discussed elsewhere
..
Vocab
I think there is no need to use the n-word
There are dozens of alternatives
Bullies, jobsworths, busybodies etc etc

Maybe the moderators could add the n-word to the list of words that are automatically changed into something else

[TrevA]

Of course lots of roadies out in the countryside may well mean lots more motor miles as they drive to their rides.

Isn't this just the snobbery of the old-school cyclist who thinks that everyone should cycle everywhere?

Our club ride used to meet on the edge of the suburbs and we'd ride out as a group along the main road. But the main road got busier and we found we were causing a nuisance. So now we meet 5 miles out of town and people ride out individually. Quite a few drive out to the new meeting place. We normally do a 40 mile round trip from the start point. Stronger riders can cope with the extra 5-8 miles at the start and end of each ride. Newer and more elderly riders cannot, so they drive out. Nothing wrong with that as far as I can see.

A lot wrong with it I think
The TDS tragedy of drive-cycling has been discussed elsewhere
..
Vocab
I think there is no need to use the n-word
There are dozens of alternatives
Bullies, jobsworths, busybodies etc etc

Maybe the moderators could add the n-word to the list of words that are automatically changed into something else

What N word? I'm sorry I just don't understand what you are on about here.

I'll inform our older members that they are no longer welcome on club rides because they drive to the start. Or perhaps I won't.

[mjr]

I'll inform our older members that they are no longer welcome on club rides because they drive to the start. Or perhaps I won't.

Or maybe clubs should start rides from the populated area instead of being driven out of town - in both senses.

[mjr]

"The answer to your question is no, modal share of all journeys (not just commuting) remained static at 2%. This was made clear last year in the latest figures. Whilst the number of overall miles has gone up slightly, the number of people cycling overall has remained static."

So who collects these figures and how accurate are they?

Follow the link gaz posted and it says the source...

[mattsccm]

Frankly I don't believe any survey that says numbers haven't risen. Just how have they collected data? I have never been asked and I see no cameras.
Selective data collection I suspect.
Prove that numbers haven't risen and I'll changecmy mind. Surveys are not proof.

[Oldjohnw]

Survey methodology, which is described in Gaz's link, whilst not perfect, is pretty well established and universally accepted as being accurate within agreed variations. Simply not trusting surveys really is a non-argument.

People are saying that the evidence of the survey does not agree with their observation. How many remember factories (or seeing film of) in the 1930s to 1960s: tens of thousands of people travelling to work each day by bike. Now they have massive car parks.

[roberts8]

Here in the Surrey Hills recreational cycling has really increased but I do realise it could be localised. The comment is fair on cyclists passing through Westminster. How are these statistics collected? Observation on busy roads would not be good as most people go for quiet routes and with modern devices much easier to find and surveys solely rely on the target group and asking enough people. Has the Cycling Uk membership moved as the same figure has been quoted for a while?

[thirdcrank]

... There's also no evidence of increases in general cycling due to sporting success despite the hundreds of millions poured in so that the elite can have a very comfortable lifestyle on top of the adulation, basically it's pretty futile in terms of getting people cycling. ....

Does this mean - literally - that evidence does not exist on the subject - possibly because it's not been collected - or that there is evidence supporting your assertion that it has been "pretty futile" ?

[deliquium]

My impression is of a large increase in cycling 'roadie' numbers here in Snowdonia over the last 10 years. And it's no longer rare to see solo female 'roadies'.

I cycle approx 360 days a year and have done for the last 6 years. Even on a short 7 mile pootle to the nearest village and back am almost guaranteed to see other cyclists (nearly always 'roadies'), even on weekdays. Mind you, our village is at the bottom of one of North Wales' iconic climbs

But there's also been a large increase in general non cycling tourist numbers as well.

By 'roadies' I mean all age range cyclists on mudguardless, 'road' bikes, full lycra gear and at least 99.9% helmeted + sunglasses whatever the weather

[Oldjohnw]

The methodology of the study gaz highlighted is within the study.

[100%JR]

By 'roadies' I mean all age range cyclists on mudguardless, 'road' bikes, full lycra gear and at least 99.9% helmeted + sunglasses whatever the weather

Or maybe,like me,they're actually wearing prescription riding glasses with transition lenses that at first glance look like "sunglasses"

[simonhill]

Of course lots of roadies out in the countryside may well mean lots more motor miles as they drive to their rides.

quote TrevA: Isn't this just the snobbery of the old-school cyclist who thinks that everyone should cycle everywhere?/quote]


I object to this interpretation. I merely pointed out the irony of more cyclists meaning more car journeys. I made no comment on it.

Edited because I messed up the quoting thing.

[simonhill]

I would certainly question the validity of how these stats were collected for cyclists. The link says they were collected from 12 hour manned surveys and cameras.

Given that cycling is a minority activity, the chance of missing bikes by being in the wrong place is very high. With other motor vehicles their density means they are much more evenly distributed.

As said by others above, many cyclists use smaller roads, footpaths, etc where surveys are unlikely to be placed. I have seen one of these surveys at a busy local junction. Unfortunately there are 3 less trafficked alternate routes that are often used by cyclists.

[mjr]

I would certainly question the validity of how these stats were collected for cyclists. The link says they were collected from 12 hour manned surveys and cameras.

Given that cycling is a minority activity, the chance of missing bikes by being in the wrong place is very high. With other motor vehicles their density means they are much more evenly distributed.

As said by others above, many cyclists use smaller roads, footpaths, etc where surveys are unlikely to be placed. I have seen one of these surveys at a busy local junction. Unfortunately there are 3 less trafficked alternate routes that are often used by cyclists.

Yes, those are among the problems with the DfT traffic count data. Other data sources are available, including National Travel Survey, Active Lives Survey (formerly Active People Survey) and the Census Cycle To Work questions (only every decade), which have their own flaws, which have been posted about before (stick them in the search box to see).

But if cycling is increasing (and I've not checked the other sources to see if they think it is), what would it mean if we're not seeing it in the DfT traffic count data? It means it's not happening on the main roads, basically, but on the quiet lanes and cycleways, which is itself interesting information - but will upset some on here!