Progress on Germany's 200 mile long bicyclebahn

On Wed, 06 Jul 2016 07:38:48 -0700, Joerg
wrote:

On 2016-07-06 01:16, John B. wrote:
On Tue, 05 Jul 2016 07:45:20 -0700, Joerg
wrote:

On 2016-07-03 18:55, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 03 Jul 2016 08:06:55 -0700, Joerg
wrote:

On 2016-07-01 17:37, John B. wrote:
On Fri, 01 Jul 2016 12:46:57 -0700, Joerg
wrote:

On 2016-07-01 00:41, John B. wrote:

[...]

Here, in Bangkok, there are no, or at least none I've seen, specially
constructed bike paths, whether MUPs or MUTs. or MICe".


Venture out to the airport maybe?

Yup. and as I said "there are no, or at least none I've seen". And
yes, I am aware that they that they painted the airport perimeter road
green and let bicycles use it, but it was not specifically built for
bicycles. Very much like the so called "bicycle paths" that do exist
in the city. They paint a line down a sidewalk an erect a sign with a
bicycle painted on it.


However the numbers of bicycles I see on my Sunday ride has noticeably
increased over the past years. I did mentioned it at my favorite bike
shop and the sales manager said that, "yes they were selling more
bikes now".

My own guess is that numbers of bicycles and frequency of use is not
specifically related to availability of bike paths, under whatever
name.


Could projects like this have something to do with it?

http://www.ttrweekly.com/site/2014/0...ns-bike-track/

https://saltymom.net/2014/03/25/bang...o-urban-oasis/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/uwebkk...n/photostream/

This one is going to be a tight squeeze:

http://www.newmandala.org/wp-content.../bike-path.jpg

It's not anything like we have in the Sacramento Valley but it's a
start. We saw some new bike shops popping up over the last years and the
only thing that changed (improved) was the cycling infrastructure.


None of those so called bike paths are "projects" nor they built
specifically for bicycles. Exactly as I said. Here is another one:
http://www.bangkok.com/sport-parks--...pini-park.htm#
A major park in the center of Bangkok. The page I reference even has
pictures of a girl riding a bicycle and you can see the painted line
outlining the "bicycle path".


We were talking about MUP, meaning multi-use, not just cycling. Most of
those paths in your area do not provide a commute route but they can
foster bicycle sales, which in turn can foster cycling in other areas.
At least it did here. Bike infrastructure was only built over 10mi away
from us and almost zilch in our town. Yet it helped bicycle sales in our
town.

[...]

But, as I understand it MUP, as used here, means multi user by
bicycles, pedestrians, people walking dogs, etc. As I mentioned, the
airport road is the perimeter road around the airport and certainly
was not built for cyclists and in that is no different than any
privately constructed highway in the country.


But they are multi-use. The dogs even walk themselves without masters or
leashes :-)


Well, good. So "multi-use" and I can ride by go-cart on them and even
my motorcycle?


Pedal-powered Go-Kart yes, motorcycle no.


But when I said, "means multi user by
bicycles, pedestrians, people walking dogs, etc.", you corrected me
saying "But they are multi-use".

I than ask about my go-cart and you say no, so it appears that they
aren't truly "multi-use" but are restricted to a relatively small
group of specific users. Which was my original point that while the
perimeter roads were built for motor vehicle use they allowed bicycles
to use them. Exactly as they build 2,4,6,8 lane highways and let
bicycles use them.




http://www.cyclepeter.com/wp-content...2/IMG_0689.jpg

I'd probably stopp all the time because I like dogs.


The "new" airport has been a very contentious subject since 1973 when
the swamp was purchased by the government and corruption has been
continually suggested from the original purchase right up to today and
it is possible that the "green road" is simply another effort to "make
things look good".


Corruption is unfortunately normal these days, even here in the US. At
least you got something out of it that promotes cycling.

"Even here in the U.S." I have to smile. The first, what might be
termed, corruption in government in the U.S. dates to 1777, which was
technically before the United States actually were :-)

I suspect that what some call corruption (and others call merited)
probably date back to when people lived in caves and the good spots
near the fire went to some folks and the people shivering in the back
of the cave whispered about corruption.


It's usually a word for something more hardcore than that.

Sure, but it is only a matter of prospective. What is just an honest
mistake, or logical opinion, to one may well be corruption to another.

--
cheers,

John B.

Am 06.07.2016 um 18:39 schrieb DATAKOLL MARINE RESEARCH:
On Monday, July 4, 2016 at 7:38:37 PM UTC-4, (PeteCresswell) wrote:
Per Rolf Mantel:
As you might see, in Germany they're not even required to fence them in.

One of the things that struck me first when visiting Germany was the
lack of fences.

By all accounts it is due to a less litigious environment.

Quite pleasant.

what keeps the cattle ? machine gun nests ?

Milk Cattle are mostly kept in stables, less on pasture, with the
exception of the Bavarian mountains (Holstein cows fail to get enough
proteins for their daily milk quantities when eating grass).

Meat cattle and other livestock tend to be restricted to remote areas.

And when a herd of sheep was killed by a train going 150 mph, the
railways sued the farmer rather than the other way round.

On 2016-07-06 19:26, John B. wrote:
On Wed, 06 Jul 2016 07:38:48 -0700, Joerg
wrote:

On 2016-07-06 01:16, John B. wrote:
On Tue, 05 Jul 2016 07:45:20 -0700, Joerg
wrote:

On 2016-07-03 18:55, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 03 Jul 2016 08:06:55 -0700, Joerg
wrote:

On 2016-07-01 17:37, John B. wrote:
On Fri, 01 Jul 2016 12:46:57 -0700, Joerg
wrote:

On 2016-07-01 00:41, John B. wrote:

[...]

Here, in Bangkok, there are no, or at least none I've seen, specially
constructed bike paths, whether MUPs or MUTs. or MICe".


Venture out to the airport maybe?

Yup. and as I said "there are no, or at least none I've seen". And
yes, I am aware that they that they painted the airport perimeter road
green and let bicycles use it, but it was not specifically built for
bicycles. Very much like the so called "bicycle paths" that do exist
in the city. They paint a line down a sidewalk an erect a sign with a
bicycle painted on it.


However the numbers of bicycles I see on my Sunday ride has noticeably
increased over the past years. I did mentioned it at my favorite bike
shop and the sales manager said that, "yes they were selling more
bikes now".

My own guess is that numbers of bicycles and frequency of use is not
specifically related to availability of bike paths, under whatever
name.


Could projects like this have something to do with it?

http://www.ttrweekly.com/site/2014/0...ns-bike-track/

https://saltymom.net/2014/03/25/bang...o-urban-oasis/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/uwebkk...n/photostream/

This one is going to be a tight squeeze:

http://www.newmandala.org/wp-content.../bike-path.jpg

It's not anything like we have in the Sacramento Valley but it's a
start. We saw some new bike shops popping up over the last years and the
only thing that changed (improved) was the cycling infrastructure.


None of those so called bike paths are "projects" nor they built
specifically for bicycles. Exactly as I said. Here is another one:
http://www.bangkok.com/sport-parks--...pini-park.htm#
A major park in the center of Bangkok. The page I reference even has
pictures of a girl riding a bicycle and you can see the painted line
outlining the "bicycle path".


We were talking about MUP, meaning multi-use, not just cycling. Most of
those paths in your area do not provide a commute route but they can
foster bicycle sales, which in turn can foster cycling in other areas.
At least it did here. Bike infrastructure was only built over 10mi away
from us and almost zilch in our town. Yet it helped bicycle sales in our
town.

[...]

But, as I understand it MUP, as used here, means multi user by
bicycles, pedestrians, people walking dogs, etc. As I mentioned, the
airport road is the perimeter road around the airport and certainly
was not built for cyclists and in that is no different than any
privately constructed highway in the country.


But they are multi-use. The dogs even walk themselves without masters or
leashes :-)


Well, good. So "multi-use" and I can ride by go-cart on them and even
my motorcycle?


Pedal-powered Go-Kart yes, motorcycle no.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^



But when I said, "means multi user by
bicycles, pedestrians, people walking dogs, etc.", you corrected me
saying "But they are multi-use".


Because they are. Multi-use means they can also be used by pedestrians,
for example. In our area also by horse riders.


I than ask about my go-cart and you say no,


Read again. I have underlined the salient part.


... so it appears that they
aren't truly "multi-use" but are restricted to a relatively small
group of specific users. Which was my original point that while the
perimeter roads were built for motor vehicle use they allowed bicycles
to use them. Exactly as they build 2,4,6,8 lane highways and let
bicycles use them.


MUP are typically not meant for motor-vehicle use. Some countries allow
power-assisted bicycles on there, others such as the US often do not.


http://www.cyclepeter.com/wp-content...2/IMG_0689.jpg

I'd probably stopp all the time because I like dogs.


The "new" airport has been a very contentious subject since 1973 when
the swamp was purchased by the government and corruption has been
continually suggested from the original purchase right up to today and
it is possible that the "green road" is simply another effort to "make
things look good".


Corruption is unfortunately normal these days, even here in the US. At
least you got something out of it that promotes cycling.

"Even here in the U.S." I have to smile. The first, what might be
termed, corruption in government in the U.S. dates to 1777, which was
technically before the United States actually were :-)

I suspect that what some call corruption (and others call merited)
probably date back to when people lived in caves and the good spots
near the fire went to some folks and the people shivering in the back
of the cave whispered about corruption.


It's usually a word for something more hardcore than that.

Sure, but it is only a matter of prospective. What is just an honest
mistake, or logical opinion, to one may well be corruption to another.


Pay to play is never an honest mistake, it takes full intent.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

Per Rolf Mantel:

And when a herd of sheep was killed by a train going 150 mph, the
railways sued the farmer rather than the other way round.

The story I was told was that if a 4-year-old wanders into a neighbor's
yard and is attacked by the neighbor's dog some really hard questions
are asked... like...

- Where were that child's parents that it was wandering around
unsupervised

- Why wasn't that child taught to not go into other people's yards

Probably false... but it does seem to convey the spirit of things as
they were in the Germany I used to visit.
--
Pete Cresswell

On Thursday, July 7, 2016 at 6:59:53 AM UTC-7, (PeteCresswell) wrote:
Per Rolf Mantel:

And when a herd of sheep was killed by a train going 150 mph, the
railways sued the farmer rather than the other way round.

The story I was told was that if a 4-year-old wanders into a neighbor's
yard and is attacked by the neighbor's dog some really hard questions
are asked... like...

- Where were that child's parents that it was wandering around
unsupervised

- Why wasn't that child taught to not go into other people's yards

Probably false... but it does seem to convey the spirit of things as
they were in the Germany I used to visit.

Under Anglo-American common law, land owners owed limited duties of care to trespassers -- typically they could not lay traps like spring guns and pits with sharp sticks. If somebody trespassed on another's land and injured him or herself, that was his or her tough luck. That has changed over time -- particularly when it comes to dogs and dogs designated as "dangerous."

Wandering livestock have been treated differently depending on the range laws in a particular state. In the West, many states have open range laws, e..g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_range Instead of fencing your animals in, others have to fence them out. The sacred cows of the American West. "On roads in Idaho, an open-range state, livestock have the right of way: if an animal is hit and killed by a vehicle, the driver is liable for the price of the animal and for the repair for the damage to the vehicle."

There are also federal statutes relating to the (non)liability of railroads.. If you live in the US, and a train hits your goat, you have to look at state and federal law to figure out who owes whom. You might end up paying a railroad for the cost of pressure washing its engine.

-- Jay Beattie.

Per jbeattie:
Under Anglo-American common law, land owners owed limited duties of care to trespassers -- typically they could not lay traps like spring guns and pits with sharp sticks. If somebody trespassed on another's land and injured him or herself, that was his or her tough luck. That has changed over time

My favorite sign of all time was next to the footpath around a place in
England called "St. Aldhelm's Head".

The path itself goes along cliffs where there is a straight drop to
rocks hundreds of feet below. In the USA it would be spoiled by
chain-link and barbed wire fences... there, nothing. You fall, you
fall...

I lived in Hawaii for 9 years - and Hale Akela was pretty good - but
this is the most beautiful place I have ever seen, bar none.

But the sign...

Approaching a livestock-fenced field, there was this sign that said
something to the effect of: "Enjoy our beautiful place, but there are
dangerous animals inside this fence and if you get killed or maimed by
one, that's your problem not ours."

Gotta love it....

My second-favorite sign was also on that trail:
https://picasaweb.google.com/1081497...74425787204818
--
Pete Cresswell

On Thu, 07 Jul 2016 06:49:26 -0700, Joerg
wrote:

On 2016-07-06 19:26, John B. wrote:
On Wed, 06 Jul 2016 07:38:48 -0700, Joerg
wrote:

On 2016-07-06 01:16, John B. wrote:
On Tue, 05 Jul 2016 07:45:20 -0700, Joerg
wrote:

On 2016-07-03 18:55, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 03 Jul 2016 08:06:55 -0700, Joerg
wrote:

On 2016-07-01 17:37, John B. wrote:
On Fri, 01 Jul 2016 12:46:57 -0700, Joerg
wrote:

On 2016-07-01 00:41, John B. wrote:

[...]

Here, in Bangkok, there are no, or at least none I've seen, specially
constructed bike paths, whether MUPs or MUTs. or MICe".


Venture out to the airport maybe?

Yup. and as I said "there are no, or at least none I've seen". And
yes, I am aware that they that they painted the airport perimeter road
green and let bicycles use it, but it was not specifically built for
bicycles. Very much like the so called "bicycle paths" that do exist
in the city. They paint a line down a sidewalk an erect a sign with a
bicycle painted on it.


However the numbers of bicycles I see on my Sunday ride has noticeably
increased over the past years. I did mentioned it at my favorite bike
shop and the sales manager said that, "yes they were selling more
bikes now".

My own guess is that numbers of bicycles and frequency of use is not
specifically related to availability of bike paths, under whatever
name.


Could projects like this have something to do with it?

http://www.ttrweekly.com/site/2014/0...ns-bike-track/

https://saltymom.net/2014/03/25/bang...o-urban-oasis/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/uwebkk...n/photostream/

This one is going to be a tight squeeze:

http://www.newmandala.org/wp-content.../bike-path.jpg

It's not anything like we have in the Sacramento Valley but it's a
start. We saw some new bike shops popping up over the last years and the
only thing that changed (improved) was the cycling infrastructure.


None of those so called bike paths are "projects" nor they built
specifically for bicycles. Exactly as I said. Here is another one:
http://www.bangkok.com/sport-parks--...pini-park.htm#
A major park in the center of Bangkok. The page I reference even has
pictures of a girl riding a bicycle and you can see the painted line
outlining the "bicycle path".


We were talking about MUP, meaning multi-use, not just cycling. Most of
those paths in your area do not provide a commute route but they can
foster bicycle sales, which in turn can foster cycling in other areas.
At least it did here. Bike infrastructure was only built over 10mi away
from us and almost zilch in our town. Yet it helped bicycle sales in our
town.

[...]

But, as I understand it MUP, as used here, means multi user by
bicycles, pedestrians, people walking dogs, etc. As I mentioned, the
airport road is the perimeter road around the airport and certainly
was not built for cyclists and in that is no different than any
privately constructed highway in the country.


But they are multi-use. The dogs even walk themselves without masters or
leashes :-)


Well, good. So "multi-use" and I can ride by go-cart on them and even
my motorcycle?


Pedal-powered Go-Kart yes, motorcycle no.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^



But when I said, "means multi user by
bicycles, pedestrians, people walking dogs, etc.", you corrected me
saying "But they are multi-use".


Because they are. Multi-use means they can also be used by pedestrians,
for example. In our area also by horse riders.


I than ask about my go-cart and you say no,


Read again. I have underlined the salient part.


... so it appears that they
aren't truly "multi-use" but are restricted to a relatively small
group of specific users. Which was my original point that while the
perimeter roads were built for motor vehicle use they allowed bicycles
to use them. Exactly as they build 2,4,6,8 lane highways and let
bicycles use them.


MUP are typically not meant for motor-vehicle use. Some countries allow
power-assisted bicycles on there, others such as the US often do not.


http://www.cyclepeter.com/wp-content...2/IMG_0689.jpg

I'd probably stopp all the time because I like dogs.


The "new" airport has been a very contentious subject since 1973 when
the swamp was purchased by the government and corruption has been
continually suggested from the original purchase right up to today and
it is possible that the "green road" is simply another effort to "make
things look good".


Corruption is unfortunately normal these days, even here in the US. At
least you got something out of it that promotes cycling.

"Even here in the U.S." I have to smile. The first, what might be
termed, corruption in government in the U.S. dates to 1777, which was
technically before the United States actually were :-)

I suspect that what some call corruption (and others call merited)
probably date back to when people lived in caves and the good spots
near the fire went to some folks and the people shivering in the back
of the cave whispered about corruption.


It's usually a word for something more hardcore than that.

Sure, but it is only a matter of prospective. What is just an honest
mistake, or logical opinion, to one may well be corruption to another.


Pay to play is never an honest mistake, it takes full intent.

Well of course. And, it has existed, probably, throughout mankind's
history. In fact, in the earliest form of democratic governments it
was common. In a kingdom of course it didn't exist as everything
belonged to the king and he could portion it our amongst his friends
as he wanted to.

Sort of like the weather, everyone talks about it and nobody does
anything about it.

Politicians commonly campaign on the promise "vote got me and I will
give you more money", in fact that I read that Trump is doing exactly
that promising $15 and hour salary and "I will make jobs".

In other words, give me the job and I'll pay you back. In essence what
is the different between that and "give me the contract and I will pay
you back". But one is politics and one is corruption.

--
cheers,

John B.

On 2016-07-07 17:46, John B. wrote:
On Thu, 07 Jul 2016 06:49:26 -0700, Joerg
wrote:

On 2016-07-06 19:26, John B. wrote:
On Wed, 06 Jul 2016 07:38:48 -0700, Joerg
wrote:

On 2016-07-06 01:16, John B. wrote:
On Tue, 05 Jul 2016 07:45:20 -0700, Joerg
wrote:

[...]

http://www.cyclepeter.com/wp-content...2/IMG_0689.jpg

I'd probably stopp all the time because I like dogs.


The "new" airport has been a very contentious subject since 1973 when
the swamp was purchased by the government and corruption has been
continually suggested from the original purchase right up to today and
it is possible that the "green road" is simply another effort to "make
things look good".


Corruption is unfortunately normal these days, even here in the US. At
least you got something out of it that promotes cycling.

"Even here in the U.S." I have to smile. The first, what might be
termed, corruption in government in the U.S. dates to 1777, which was
technically before the United States actually were :-)

I suspect that what some call corruption (and others call merited)
probably date back to when people lived in caves and the good spots
near the fire went to some folks and the people shivering in the back
of the cave whispered about corruption.


It's usually a word for something more hardcore than that.

Sure, but it is only a matter of prospective. What is just an honest
mistake, or logical opinion, to one may well be corruption to another.


Pay to play is never an honest mistake, it takes full intent.

Well of course. And, it has existed, probably, throughout mankind's
history. In fact, in the earliest form of democratic governments it
was common. In a kingdom of course it didn't exist as everything
belonged to the king and he could portion it our amongst his friends
as he wanted to.

Sort of like the weather, everyone talks about it and nobody does
anything about it.

Politicians commonly campaign on the promise "vote got me and I will
give you more money", in fact that I read that Trump is doing exactly
that promising $15 and hour salary and "I will make jobs".

In other words, give me the job and I'll pay you back. In essence what
is the different between that and "give me the contract and I will pay
you back". But one is politics and one is corruption.


The difference is this:

In a democracy politicians get elected and their job is to serve their
population. They are not supposed to serve mostly a select few who
happen to have a lot of money that they are willing to part with for
bribes. That is unlawful. The fact that it was done back when the Romans
ruled does not make it lawful.

If two or more parties sign a contract it spells out the deliverables
and the remuneration only between those parties. The population around
them has no agreement with them and thus there are no obligations except
that all parties must abide by the law (corporate, tax, environmental,
and so on).

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

On 2016-07-07 17:14, (PeteCresswell) wrote:
Per jbeattie:
Under Anglo-American common law, land owners owed limited duties of care to trespassers -- typically they could not lay traps like spring guns and pits with sharp sticks. If somebody trespassed on another's land and injured him or herself, that was his or her tough luck. That has changed over time

My favorite sign of all time was next to the footpath around a place in
England called "St. Aldhelm's Head".

The path itself goes along cliffs where there is a straight drop to
rocks hundreds of feet below. In the USA it would be spoiled by
chain-link and barbed wire fences...


Not quite. This is a trail in my neighborhood, no fence, you fall .. you
fall:

https://ixquick-proxy.com/do/show_pi...6e6e02bed9ca1b

And yes, it has ended fatally :-(

Trails in the US often have next to nothing in terms of protection
against falling off. If you wipe out on this one in Utah they might not
even find your remains for a while:

http://www.mountainbikebill.com/imag...2-Left%203.jpg


... there, nothing. You fall, you fall...

I lived in Hawaii for 9 years - and Hale Akela was pretty good - but
this is the most beautiful place I have ever seen, bar none.

But the sign...

Approaching a livestock-fenced field, there was this sign that said
something to the effect of: "Enjoy our beautiful place, but there are
dangerous animals inside this fence and if you get killed or maimed by
one, that's your problem not ours."

Gotta love it....

My second-favorite sign was also on that trail:
https://picasaweb.google.com/1081497...74425787204818


Nice!

A farmer who was miffed about people crossing a pasture as a short-cut
posted this sign: "Brutus the bull can make it to the other fence in
five seconds - Can you?"

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

On Friday, July 8, 2016 at 2:57:15 PM UTC-7, Joerg wrote:
On 2016-07-07 17:14, (PeteCresswell) wrote:
Per jbeattie:
Under Anglo-American common law, land owners owed limited duties of care to trespassers -- typically they could not lay traps like spring guns and pits with sharp sticks. If somebody trespassed on another's land and injured him or herself, that was his or her tough luck. That has changed over time

My favorite sign of all time was next to the footpath around a place in
England called "St. Aldhelm's Head".

The path itself goes along cliffs where there is a straight drop to
rocks hundreds of feet below. In the USA it would be spoiled by
chain-link and barbed wire fences...


Not quite. This is a trail in my neighborhood, no fence, you fall .. you
fall:

https://ixquick-proxy.com/do/show_pi...6e6e02bed9ca1b

And yes, it has ended fatally :-(

Trails in the US often have next to nothing in terms of protection
against falling off. If you wipe out on this one in Utah they might not
even find your remains for a while:

http://www.mountainbikebill.com/imag...2-Left%203.jpg

http://www.yosemitehikes.com/images/...-peak-700w.jpg I took a whiz off that -- 4,800 feet straight down (Half Dome). You have to look first and make sure no climbers are coming up. I'm terrified of unprotected heights, but I really had to go.

There are plenty of places to kill yourself in parks -- and that's why there are lots of laws immunizing federal and state governments from liability. Even private landowners who allow their property to be used for recreational purposes are usually immune. See e.g. http://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/105..682

-- Jay Beattie.