Does Critical Mass still matter?
- By
Image by Flickr / Ariane Colenbrander
I was asked today by "networking ninja" Cecilia Lu of Kiwano Marketing for my thoughts on the debate over the Burrard Bridge lane re-allocation and Critical Mass for a blog post she's writing about the bike movement in Vancouver. I thought I'd just post them here for ya'll to discuss.
If you could, take a moment to comment with your thoughts and critiques, and hopefully some ideas of your own on how to solve the bike-car divide...
What used to be a movement guided and maintained by the die-hard DIY set who, rightly, felt oppressed by their car-driving counterparts has more recently been co-opted by non-protesters who just want a healthy way to get around that feels good and gets them outdoors. This is perhaps why Critical Mass seems so out of place for most of us nowadays.
I think when the CM protesters were a smaller group, more non-cyclists felt a level of sympathy for their "cause" and therefore were more easygoing about the delays the monthly protest caused. These days it seems almost anachronistic to demonstrate on the grounds that cyclists don’t have their proper place on the road. Sure, we have a long way to go toward making this city the Copenhagen of North America but that doesn’t mean we haven’t benefited from a wonderful network of dedicated bikeways—to say nothing of the recent lane re-allocation on the Burrard Bridge.
It just takes time, and buy-in. And that buy-in comes from making the city a safer, more pleasurable and efficient place to ride—something the current mayor and council are making great strides to do. The next step, and perhaps this is where the CM community could lend its voice and make itself a valuable lobbying group, is to craft better traffic and safety regulations that actually take the realities of cycling into account.
For example, many complain that cyclists too often roll through stop signs and red lights. Yes, given the current traffic laws, which were originally conceived by and for drivers, this is a problem; it is both unsafe and unpredictable, and it makes drivers hesitant to trust cyclists—thus relegating them to second-class road citizens. However, the current laws do not consider that a cyclist is more in control of his/her bike when in motion, and therefore is often safer not coming to a full stop. So as long as people put their own safety as their first priority, they will continue to break this law. Because any law that asks a person to act against their own safety doesn’t work.
Now, I’m not sure what the solution is, but I do know that the current situation is unsustainable, and there must be a compromise between the two extremes.
This is important because looking long-term, big picture, we can’t all own cars. That’s just a reality we will have to face at a certain point, considering we’ll all soon feel the effects of peak oil, population growth and the various taxes that go along with them. But, just as many are quick to point out, right now it just isn’t feasible for all of us, for example, to take our kids to school or do a full shopping trip on bikes. Yet. But in order for us to get to a point where the option to ride our bike is more appealing, equally safe, more convenient and as efficient (or more) as driving, we have to bring all players to the table. And we all have to be ready to listen and compromise.
For more on this issue:
Read my posts on the Burrard Bridge trial for more on my thoughts regarding Vancouver, cycling and long-term livability goals for the region:
Burrard, bikes and Vancouver’s long-term livability goals
Here’s our audio slideshow showing the other side of Critical Mass, the side that fosters community spirit and empowerment.
Here are some quotes from Vancouverites on why they bike to work.
Here are 6 reasons I love to bike to work.
And here's a whole wack of articles and blog posts on cycling in Vancouver.
I have never supported and do not support Critical Mass. It's my strong belief that CM does more harm than good and is simply an outlet for mischief protected by the shield of the mass turnout.
While Critical Mass members will no doubt take credit for the recent addition of bike lanes, these were the product of political vision, strategy and courage.
Critical Mass is irrelevant. The sooner they laso realize this, the better.
On the spectrum of cycling behaviour, mark me down in the "...non-protesters who just want a healthy way to get around that feels good and gets them outdoors." column. And yet... I continue to participate in almost every CM since I heard about it. Why ? Because cycling daily on city streets sets me in conflict with the majority of motor-powered road users. There is no escaping this ugly fact. They come at you from every which way, at every intersection and every straightaway. They drive too darn close, with blatant disregard for MY life and limb. I have to protest about that. There is no letup. This morning the powerful car gunning 6 inches from my left foot to squeeze between me and left-turners approaching the intersection of Quebec and 2nd Ave was an unmarked grey police cruiser. What protection do I have against that ? I have to find opportunities to tell the driving world their behaviour is unsustainable on so many levels. The normal mode of driving in BC is highly dangerous to the health of pedestrians and cyclists. Drivers cocooned behind the wheel of a speeding car don't see that reality. The one lane trial on Burrard Bridge has not yet created the sea-change in behaviour needed to make the streets of this city safe.
P.S. The image you posted is obviously NOT a photo of Critical Mass. We do NOT cross the street on crosswalks.
Motorists put the highest demand on road infrastructure, and therefore property taxes, of all users of our roads and sidewalks.
My first CM was after an intense week of conflict with cagers. Shouting matches, physical altercations, doors opening, cars tailgating and bullying; all within one week! When I happened to stumble upon CM gathering on my way home, it was like the heavens were speaking to me. I *needed* to be counted amongst all of those who face frustration with the existing system.
Having ridden more than a few times, there are a lot of reasons that I don't want to participate - I rarely agree with the loud voices during the mass and the altercations are as frustrating to us as much as it is food for the media. However, I feel strongly that my participation contributes to a stronger voice for all cyclists and hope to see CM grow to 20K participants. Then, we will be beyond complaining and media hysteria.
I'll add that I break traffic laws. I roll through stop signs because it's a hell of a lot of effort to start (especially if pointing uphill) from zero. I also ride on sidewalks if there is no dedicated bike lane. I'll take a ticket over getting run over any day. If someone tells me that I'm not allowed to ride on sidewalks, I'll lie and respond, "Yes, I am." I wear a helmet, but I don't understand it as a law - why don't we have drunkards wear helmets too? Why don't we have cars made of foam, car heights not to exceed a certain height and speed limits reduced?
Motorists have to have insurance and licenses not to pay for the roads, but to the damage they frequently do to themselves, other vehicles, other motorists and pedestrians with their cars. Driving something that weighs several thousand pounds and travels at very high speeds requires safety measures, and that's why we have safety measures like insurance and graduated licenses on MOTOR vehicles. As a sometimes-car driver, I wholly approve of these measures and recognize that they are there for my and others' safety, not a as a "ticket to ride" on our streets.
Common sense, people.
In the decade I've lived entirely as a pedestrian in downtown Vancouver I have never been hit by a car that has rolled through a stop sign or a red light. I have been hit 3 times by cyclists doing the very same thing, along with countless near misses. While I ended up sore and bruised, the cyclists got the worse end of it as they ended up crashing their bikes with bruises, road rash and in one case a broken wrist and nose. I have poor vision and so I can't always see the cyclists attempting to "safely" roll through red lights but I can hear the signal that tells me it is safe for me to cross because I have the green light. Cyclists have sworn at me, spit on me and berated me for not getting out of their way as they roll through stop signs and red lights and also as they ride on sidewalks. I realize it is not ALL cyclists, but it is certainly enough to make me, as a pedestrian, very fearful of them and their unpredictable behaviour.
There is a reason for stop signs and red lights and cyclists must respect the rules of the road not just for their own personal safety but for the safety of others as well. To argue anything less is simple arrogant, self-serving and selfish. We all have to share the road, it's not "us" against "them". It is "WE".
Back to the evolution of Critical mass, one of the prime arguments I hear for the mass, already stated by a commenter here, is that Critical Mass is the only time cyclists (in a large group that blocks off the rest of traffic) can feel safe.
I don't think anyone is arguing against a regularly-organized bike-parade. I'm happy to plan my route around it (as I do for other announced civic events).
But I (as a cyclist, motorist and pedestrian) object to being held hostage the last Friday of each month as the Mass decides on the fly whose route they'll disrupt next. If it's truly supposed to be a positive experience, how about you try working to make it positive to outsiders as well as insiders.
-Jen Watkiss
criticalmanners.wordpress.com
Until we cyclists stop talking only to each other and start to spread positive messages and collaborate with drivers AND pedestrians, we'll continue to ride in circles - spewing up a lot of dust but ultimately getting nowhere.
pedaletiquette.com
roads and streets are paid for largely via CITY PROPERTY TAXES, not insurance and licensing fees - which everyone pays whether they drive or not.
So if anyone should be outraged, it should be peds/cyclists who don't drive yet pay for insane amounts of infrastructure devoted only to cars.
Also, CM isn't naked. That's the World Naked Bike Ride you're thinking of. I have a feeling you don't have any clue what you're talking about. Try actually GOING to Critical Mass before passing judgement on it maybe?
Dude, if you come back to check up on your comment, can you answer these questions. I'm honestly just curious:
1) Are you suggesting that we require people to get licenses and insurance in order to ride a bike?
2) What set of right with respect to our shared use of transportation infrastructure do you envision for cyclists? Please keep in mind some people rely on bikes as their sole form of transportation because they cannot afford a car.
I ask this second question because usually when I hear people say something like "cyclists shouldn't have the same rights as cars" or "cyclists shouldn't get to ride on the road with cars", they usually also belive that cyclists shouldn't be allowed to ride on sidewalks and we shouldn't be devoting any public money to building dedicated cycling infrastructure. !?!? It all leaves cyclists in a bit of a bind, as you might imagine.
As I understood it, CM is meant to celebrate pedestrians too (anyone not in a car), but it does seem exclusive to cyclists. Not bemoaning this, but it just needs direction overall and a bit of organisation (I know this doesn't fit the anarachic ideal, but does that really exist these days?).
So I don't agree with the previous poster's comment about licensing and insurance, as people should be encouraged to ride their bikes. They take no real toll on the roads or environment, so why should they? They are also less risk to property and people, so don't require insurance. Don't forget that driving is a privilege, not a right. Paying for that privilege is part of it, not a punishment.
Leave Your Comment