Bike Share graveyard

On 2017-12-04 16:23, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 04 Dec 2017 12:33:20 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

On 2017-12-04 12:19, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 12/4/2017 1:42 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-12-03 13:48, jbeattie wrote:
On Sunday, December 3, 2017 at 8:03:21 AM UTC-8, Joerg wrote:
When I went to Placerville
last week two dirt bikers came from there. Illegal on the trail
but, oh well. When I got to the 3rd drop-off I saw tire tracks and
slide marks. One of them must have slightly misjudged it or had too
much speed and gotten to within a foot or so from sliding off a
rock face.

I'm sure it was super gnarly.

That section sure is. Had sent many people to the hospital.

Hmm. You're too timid to ride much on the roads, so you ride trails that
have sent many people to the hospital?

I'm not seeing much consistency there.


On trails my safety is under _my_ control. On busy roads my safety is
under the control of drivers in various states of distraction,
inebriation and more recently "stonedness".

Now that was simple, wasn't it?

If safety on trails under the control of the rider and you brag that
you ride on one trail that has sent many people to the hospital then
what are you saying here? That you ride on a trail where many people
can't control themselves? That many MTB riders can't or won't control
themselves?


They take excessive risks. "Doctor, I can swear 110% that this rock
wasn't in the trail last week".

Others think that since they are seasoned road bike riders they can
master an MTB no sweat. And then they crash. We had a classic example
posted here by someone, about a race where several riders completely
lacked the instincts to go behind the seat for an emergency slow-down
and they subsequently crashed into cars.


And what about the charging mountain lions and the horses and cattle,
not to mention the poison ivy and poison oak.


Mountain lions are a risk not only on trails but a low risk. Pit Bulls
can be another story and most attacks I know of happened into roads. Now
poison oak, that is a serious challenge. I am sensitive to that stuff
and got it numerous times. For people who have a large yard and who
mountain bike that is part of the game out here.


Damn! You are making the public highways look better and better.


They will never be better unless you remove the motor vehicles from
there. Or add segregated bikes paths like they did he

https://goo.gl/maps/NBzpVUA58tq

I still prefer singletrack.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

On Mon, 04 Dec 2017 16:41:22 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

On 2017-12-04 16:23, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 04 Dec 2017 12:33:20 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

On 2017-12-04 12:19, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 12/4/2017 1:42 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-12-03 13:48, jbeattie wrote:
On Sunday, December 3, 2017 at 8:03:21 AM UTC-8, Joerg wrote:
When I went to Placerville
last week two dirt bikers came from there. Illegal on the trail
but, oh well. When I got to the 3rd drop-off I saw tire tracks and
slide marks. One of them must have slightly misjudged it or had too
much speed and gotten to within a foot or so from sliding off a
rock face.

I'm sure it was super gnarly.

That section sure is. Had sent many people to the hospital.

Hmm. You're too timid to ride much on the roads, so you ride trails that
have sent many people to the hospital?

I'm not seeing much consistency there.


On trails my safety is under _my_ control. On busy roads my safety is
under the control of drivers in various states of distraction,
inebriation and more recently "stonedness".

Now that was simple, wasn't it?

If safety on trails under the control of the rider and you brag that
you ride on one trail that has sent many people to the hospital then
what are you saying here? That you ride on a trail where many people
can't control themselves? That many MTB riders can't or won't control
themselves?


They take excessive risks. "Doctor, I can swear 110% that this rock
wasn't in the trail last week".


If "they take excessive risks" then why do you claim that the "trail
has sent many people to the hospital"?

Or is it that a little exaggeration makes for a much more exciting
narration?

Others think that since they are seasoned road bike riders they can
master an MTB no sweat. And then they crash. We had a classic example
posted here by someone, about a race where several riders completely
lacked the instincts to go behind the seat for an emergency slow-down
and they subsequently crashed into cars.

Again, you are just describing people that are not competent in one
form or another of bicycling and so crashed. But like the trail that
sent all those to the hospital it just another example of people doing
something that they really weren't competent to do and blaming it on
the bike, or the trail, or whatever they can, to avoid admitting that
*they* were at fault.




And what about the charging mountain lions and the horses and cattle,
not to mention the poison ivy and poison oak.


Mountain lions are a risk not only on trails but a low risk. Pit Bulls
can be another story and most attacks I know of happened into roads. Now
poison oak, that is a serious challenge. I am sensitive to that stuff
and got it numerous times. For people who have a large yard and who
mountain bike that is part of the game out here.


Damn! You are making the public highways look better and better.


They will never be better unless you remove the motor vehicles from
there. Or add segregated bikes paths like they did he


But why should anyone bother. After all, in California bike crashes
amount to only something like 4% of all traffic deaths. In the CHP
study of traffic deaths in L.A. county it was found that in bicycle
crashes that more then half, in the cases where fault could be
determined, that the bicycle was at fault.

So, bicycles are involved in a relatively small percent of all traffic
deaths in California and of those deaths more in half are the fault of
the cyclist.

Another statistic. In San Francisco 25% of the bicyclists who died in
traffic accidents were found, during the autopsy, to have a BAC of
more then the legal limit. In short, they were drunk.

Perhaps rather then spend the public's money to build bicycle paths it
might be better to get the cyclists to obey the laws.

--
Cheers,

John B.

On 12/4/2017 7:41 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-12-04 16:23, John B. wrote:

Damn! You are making the public highways look better and better.


They will never be better unless you remove the motor vehicles from
there. Or add segregated bikes paths like they did he

https://goo.gl/maps/NBzpVUA58tq

That's not a segregated bike path. That's a shoulder on a road. In most
states it's not even considered part of the roadway. I know lots of
cyclists never leave the shoulder, but that can bring its own problems,
since legal protections often exist only for those operating on the
roadway.

The single most effective (and most cost effective) way to make the
roadways better is to have cyclists learn to ride properly.

But of course, that's difficult, because far too many cyclists share
your ignorant but overconfident attitude: "I already know how to ride a
bicycle."

That's what's said by the guys John mentioned, the ones who caused their
own fatal crashes, and the ones who died riding drunk. They were just as
confident of their skills as you are of yours.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On 2017-12-04 17:29, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 04 Dec 2017 16:41:22 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

On 2017-12-04 16:23, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 04 Dec 2017 12:33:20 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

On 2017-12-04 12:19, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 12/4/2017 1:42 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-12-03 13:48, jbeattie wrote:
On Sunday, December 3, 2017 at 8:03:21 AM UTC-8, Joerg wrote:
When I went to Placerville
last week two dirt bikers came from there. Illegal on the trail
but, oh well. When I got to the 3rd drop-off I saw tire tracks and
slide marks. One of them must have slightly misjudged it or had too
much speed and gotten to within a foot or so from sliding off a
rock face.

I'm sure it was super gnarly.

That section sure is. Had sent many people to the hospital.

Hmm. You're too timid to ride much on the roads, so you ride trails that
have sent many people to the hospital?

I'm not seeing much consistency there.


On trails my safety is under _my_ control. On busy roads my safety is
under the control of drivers in various states of distraction,
inebriation and more recently "stonedness".

Now that was simple, wasn't it?

If safety on trails under the control of the rider and you brag that
you ride on one trail that has sent many people to the hospital then
what are you saying here? That you ride on a trail where many people
can't control themselves? That many MTB riders can't or won't control
themselves?


They take excessive risks. "Doctor, I can swear 110% that this rock
wasn't in the trail last week".


If "they take excessive risks" then why do you claim that the "trail
has sent many people to the hospital"?

Or is it that a little exaggeration makes for a much more exciting
narration?


Looks like you have been away from America for too long to remember
common expressions.

[...]

Damn! You are making the public highways look better and better.


They will never be better unless you remove the motor vehicles from
there. Or add segregated bikes paths like they did he


But why should anyone bother. After all, in California bike crashes
amount to only something like 4% of all traffic deaths.


Ah yes. So they don't matter. And the life-changing injuries don't
either. Right.

[...]

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

On 2017-12-04 18:51, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 12/4/2017 7:41 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-12-04 16:23, John B. wrote:

Damn! You are making the public highways look better and better.


They will never be better unless you remove the motor vehicles from
there. Or add segregated bikes paths like they did he

https://goo.gl/maps/NBzpVUA58tq

That's not a segregated bike path. That's a shoulder on a road. In most
states it's not even considered part of the roadway. I know lots of
cyclists never leave the shoulder, but that can bring its own problems,
since legal protections often exist only for those operating on the
roadway.


Now go look for your glasses, put them on and take a peek again but this
time farther to the right. In case you still don't see it I have zoomed
it in for you here (but then please see an optometrist before operating
any vehicle):

https://goo.gl/maps/nreBX5Qc7eH2

[...]

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

On Tuesday, December 5, 2017 at 10:06:27 AM UTC-5, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-12-04 18:51, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 12/4/2017 7:41 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-12-04 16:23, John B. wrote:

Damn! You are making the public highways look better and better.


They will never be better unless you remove the motor vehicles from
there. Or add segregated bikes paths like they did he

https://goo.gl/maps/NBzpVUA58tq

That's not a segregated bike path. That's a shoulder on a road. In most
states it's not even considered part of the roadway. I know lots of
cyclists never leave the shoulder, but that can bring its own problems,
since legal protections often exist only for those operating on the
roadway.


Now go look for your glasses, put them on and take a peek again but this
time farther to the right. In case you still don't see it I have zoomed
it in for you here (but then please see an optometrist before operating
any vehicle):

https://goo.gl/maps/nreBX5Qc7eH2

Well, perhaps you should have posted that first, no?

- Frank Krygowski

On 2017-12-05 09:42, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Tuesday, December 5, 2017 at 10:06:27 AM UTC-5, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-12-04 18:51, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 12/4/2017 7:41 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-12-04 16:23, John B. wrote:

Damn! You are making the public highways look better and better.


They will never be better unless you remove the motor vehicles from
there. Or add segregated bikes paths like they did he

https://goo.gl/maps/NBzpVUA58tq

That's not a segregated bike path. That's a shoulder on a road. In most
states it's not even considered part of the roadway. I know lots of
cyclists never leave the shoulder, but that can bring its own problems,
since legal protections often exist only for those operating on the
roadway.


Now go look for your glasses, put them on and take a peek again but this
time farther to the right. In case you still don't see it I have zoomed
it in for you here (but then please see an optometrist before operating
any vehicle):

https://goo.gl/maps/nreBX5Qc7eH2

Well, perhaps you should have posted that first, no?


No. Look at the first link. It is clearly visible and I posted it to
show how well the separation between road and bike path is done. Also to
show that this has bike lanes plus bike path, like other roads in Folsom
do. If you didn't see that bike path I suggest to at least not operate a
motor vehicle unless your vision has been checked out.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

On Tue, 05 Dec 2017 07:03:03 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

On 2017-12-04 17:29, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 04 Dec 2017 16:41:22 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

On 2017-12-04 16:23, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 04 Dec 2017 12:33:20 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

On 2017-12-04 12:19, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 12/4/2017 1:42 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-12-03 13:48, jbeattie wrote:
On Sunday, December 3, 2017 at 8:03:21 AM UTC-8, Joerg wrote:
When I went to Placerville
last week two dirt bikers came from there. Illegal on the trail
but, oh well. When I got to the 3rd drop-off I saw tire tracks and
slide marks. One of them must have slightly misjudged it or had too
much speed and gotten to within a foot or so from sliding off a
rock face.

I'm sure it was super gnarly.

That section sure is. Had sent many people to the hospital.

Hmm. You're too timid to ride much on the roads, so you ride trails that
have sent many people to the hospital?

I'm not seeing much consistency there.


On trails my safety is under _my_ control. On busy roads my safety is
under the control of drivers in various states of distraction,
inebriation and more recently "stonedness".

Now that was simple, wasn't it?

If safety on trails under the control of the rider and you brag that
you ride on one trail that has sent many people to the hospital then
what are you saying here? That you ride on a trail where many people
can't control themselves? That many MTB riders can't or won't control
themselves?


They take excessive risks. "Doctor, I can swear 110% that this rock
wasn't in the trail last week".


If "they take excessive risks" then why do you claim that the "trail
has sent many people to the hospital"?

Or is it that a little exaggeration makes for a much more exciting
narration?


Looks like you have been away from America for too long to remember
common expressions.


You mean like "The trail has sent many people to the hospital".
Well, yes I must admit that I am not familiar with that phrase.

Perhaps I an a bit forgetful so kindly explain how an inanimate piece
of real estate that is just there "sends people to the hospital"?

Do you mean that it somehow comes to life and rears up and bites
people like a snake? Or Does it some crush them like an elephant
stamped on them? Or maybe pieces of it just break off and fall down
steep hills and bury people?

I have heard of a volcano "erupting" and burying people and even
causing airplanes to nearly fall out of the sky but the term "erupt"
does convey a sense of motion. Perhaps your "trail that sends people
to the hospital" erupts?

Or is this just another example of some clumsy fellow that falls down
and then rather then admit that "Yes, I stumbled", tries to blame it
on an inanimate rock? "See! See! If that rock hadn't been there I'd
never have tripped!"
--
Cheers,

John B.

On 12/6/2017 2:29 AM, John B. wrote:
On Tue, 05 Dec 2017 07:03:03 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

On 2017-12-04 17:29, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 04 Dec 2017 16:41:22 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

On 2017-12-04 16:23, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 04 Dec 2017 12:33:20 -0800, Joerg
wrote:

On 2017-12-04 12:19, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 12/4/2017 1:42 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-12-03 13:48, jbeattie wrote:
On Sunday, December 3, 2017 at 8:03:21 AM UTC-8, Joerg wrote:
When I went to Placerville
last week two dirt bikers came from there. Illegal on the trail
but, oh well. When I got to the 3rd drop-off I saw tire tracks and
slide marks. One of them must have slightly misjudged it or had too
much speed and gotten to within a foot or so from sliding off a
rock face.

I'm sure it was super gnarly.

That section sure is. Had sent many people to the hospital.

Hmm. You're too timid to ride much on the roads, so you ride trails that
have sent many people to the hospital?

I'm not seeing much consistency there.


On trails my safety is under _my_ control. On busy roads my safety is
under the control of drivers in various states of distraction,
inebriation and more recently "stonedness".

Now that was simple, wasn't it?

If safety on trails under the control of the rider and you brag that
you ride on one trail that has sent many people to the hospital then
what are you saying here? That you ride on a trail where many people
can't control themselves? That many MTB riders can't or won't control
themselves?


They take excessive risks. "Doctor, I can swear 110% that this rock
wasn't in the trail last week".


If "they take excessive risks" then why do you claim that the "trail
has sent many people to the hospital"?

Or is it that a little exaggeration makes for a much more exciting
narration?


Looks like you have been away from America for too long to remember
common expressions.


You mean like "The trail has sent many people to the hospital".
Well, yes I must admit that I am not familiar with that phrase.

Perhaps I an a bit forgetful so kindly explain how an inanimate piece
of real estate that is just there "sends people to the hospital"?

Do you mean that it somehow comes to life and rears up and bites
people like a snake? Or Does it some crush them like an elephant
stamped on them? Or maybe pieces of it just break off and fall down
steep hills and bury people?

I have heard of a volcano "erupting" and burying people and even
causing airplanes to nearly fall out of the sky but the term "erupt"
does convey a sense of motion. Perhaps your "trail that sends people
to the hospital" erupts?

Or is this just another example of some clumsy fellow that falls down
and then rather then admit that "Yes, I stumbled", tries to blame it
on an inanimate rock? "See! See! If that rock hadn't been there I'd
never have tripped!"

From what I can tell, mountain biking crashes are much different from a
clumsy guy stumbling. Many, perhaps most, mountain bikers consider
testing their skill to be part of the ride. So they don't take the level
trail; they detour into the side trail that zooms down the ridge. They
bounce along the baby head rocks, they ride the dropoffs and are proud
when they stick the landing. They wheelie or jump over the logs.

If you want a pedestrian equivalent, I suppose it would be parkour:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NX7QNWEGcNI

.... and a guy saying "Being a pedestrian in a city is really dangerous."


--
- Frank Krygowski

On Tuesday, December 5, 2017 at 1:40:47 PM UTC-8, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-12-05 09:42, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Tuesday, December 5, 2017 at 10:06:27 AM UTC-5, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-12-04 18:51, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 12/4/2017 7:41 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-12-04 16:23, John B. wrote:

Damn! You are making the public highways look better and better.


They will never be better unless you remove the motor vehicles from
there. Or add segregated bikes paths like they did he

https://goo.gl/maps/NBzpVUA58tq

That's not a segregated bike path. That's a shoulder on a road. In most
states it's not even considered part of the roadway. I know lots of
cyclists never leave the shoulder, but that can bring its own problems,
since legal protections often exist only for those operating on the
roadway.


Now go look for your glasses, put them on and take a peek again but this
time farther to the right. In case you still don't see it I have zoomed
it in for you here (but then please see an optometrist before operating
any vehicle):

https://goo.gl/maps/nreBX5Qc7eH2

Well, perhaps you should have posted that first, no?


No. Look at the first link. It is clearly visible and I posted it to
show how well the separation between road and bike path is done. Also to
show that this has bike lanes plus bike path, like other roads in Folsom
do. If you didn't see that bike path I suggest to at least not operate a
motor vehicle unless your vision has been checked out.

It's not really that clear. The separate path is in the shadow, and the first thing that the viewer sees is the wide curb lane. BTW, it just ends, right?
And then it turns into an ordinary bike lane on Natoma.

Also, it looks like the major shopping areas are accessible in the usual ways -- on roads. I'm not seeing any separated paths around the central mall-shopping area like the WalMart Supercenter. Riley has a bike lane. Bidwell has nothing. Although I'd have no problem with that nice wide lane.

It looks like most of the physically separated lanes go through residential areas. The Humbug-Willow Creek Trail does appear to drop you next to a Peets, so that's worth something. It's better than Starbucks. But you're going to have to ride on the road if you want to go to Jimboy's Tacos. Egads! If you want a taco, you'll have to risk your life on a road. I hope its a good taco.

-- Jay Beattie.