"It is that the majority of the adult population are not psychologically and physically capable of riding a bike up a hill - and never will be."

Darn you Brian, I am the mistress of the provocative statement. You've beaten me to the punch.

Let us consider Leo Schofield's restaurant review, many years ago now when he wrote, of a certain Sydney restaurant, that the crayfish was dry and poorly cooked - and always will be.

It's the 'always will be' that undid him in the successful defamation action. Personally I think cyclists are bullies and riding two abreast is simply giving us car drivers the fingers. They deserve all they get.

Coincidentally there was a post on The Melbourne Urbanist about the potential of motor scooters only last week:

http://melbourneurbanist.wordpress.com/2010/04/21/will-the-streets-of-melbourne-look-more-like-hanoi-than-melbourne/

I agree Brian

Here are parts of a very useful ABC Online article to support your bikes are dangerous argument http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/12/04/2761546.htm :

"(December 4, 2009) ...Official bike injury statistics are based on police records. But not all bike injuries are reported to police, and the report shows that 98 per cent of cycling injuries are not showing up in official statistics..

"We found that only 2 per cent of all cyclist injuries were on the police data base," he said.

In Melbourne, the head of emergency at Sandringham Hospital says cycling injuries have all the hallmarks of an epidemic.

"I use the word epidemic because there has been a true increase in adult cyclists having injuries. And I think it's caught many of the health authorities unawares," Dr James Taylor said.

"And what we have discovered here at Sandringham Hospital is that it's an increasing number of adult cyclists. The majority of our injured cyclist here are adults, mostly men in their 30s, 40s, 50s. So these are the very productive years.

"[In] these years an injury can cause a month or more of disability, and if the worker is off work for a month or two that is a huge cost to them and a cost to the community...

...Dr Taylor says a simple broken arm can cost $6,000 in medical bills and sick leave, and if a cyclist has internal injuries it can cost tens of thousands of dollars."
---

My Comment - So bikes may be low in carbon emissions and healthy IF a rider never crashes. But when a rider does crash (49 times more often than officially recorded) there is no neatly engineered crumple zone or airbags of the type used to protect car drivers.

A bike rider's only crumple zone is his little helmut or mostly his bones breaking on the road.

Pete

My 2c worth:
Cycling has grown greatly in selected high SES neighbourhoods, a new demographic has been drawn to cycling. Such neighbourhoods are the ones where council and government are looking after cyclists better because the riders are also well-off and well-connected. Off-road and on-road cycling both have had great rates of growth. However, while cheap bikes are available, they lack the durability to offer reliability in the long run, particularly with off-road riding. Often the cheap bike is very heavy in weight making it more onerous to use than the ideal bike, made with frames etc of aluminium or alloys, or even ultralight materials.

As long as inequality continues as it is, and unless the price of an ideal quality bike drops greatly (perhaps a new quality Chinese manufacturer comes on board) there won't be a mass penetration of cycling achieved for commuting purposes because of its lack of affordability. Public transport is also unfriendly to people who wish to carry bikes thereon (needed by many whose journey is too long to undertake wholly by bike). Buses could all have bike-racking mounted outside, as in Canberra. Apartments to have built for each one a mandatory secure storage space downstairs when there is no garage and lift, for example I live in a very low-SES neighbourhood and could not risk leaving anything lying about and expect to find it in the morning.

New changes to the urban landscape need to consider pedestrians and cyclists as stakeholders with equal or greater weight to that of motorists. Its unlikely to ever happen in Australia.

Bicycles are a partial solution for the future.
Government and local government planning has simply projected forward
the number of vehicles on the road from the growth rate over the last
10 years and make the assumption such rate will continue.
It will not !

The cost of fuel will force more people onto public transport.
Oil prices are expected to rise very significantly from 2012 to 2015.
Early in the changeover car pooling will be popular and that will
reduce the number of cars on the road significantly.
It will not be possible to extend railways into the expanding suburbs
and in any case in a no growth economy the funds will not be there.
Fortunately in Sydney the line to the North West is a branch line so
they might just find enough money to finish it if they get stuck in now.

Unfortunately there are no signs that governments are prepared to
acknowledge the elephant in the corner.
As is becoming clear overseas the politicians are aware that we are
staring at a time of fuel shortage and very expensive fuel.
However they seem to be like the rabbit in the car headlights.
Any action that governments could have taken to mitigate the problems
are now too late, and we may not have the resources.

Australia produces 50% of the oil we use, so it is possible we could
use scooters for a considerable time, supplemented by a small amount
of biofuels. Electric bicycles would also be successful for short trips.

Oh dear, a 'well meaning author' dips his toes into the cycling 'debate' drawing the usual gormless comments about cyclists riding two abreast...not long before the 'why don't they pay rego'?' lament goes up too.

Sure, governments at state and national level are paying some attention, mainly lip service, to cycling.

But it's funny how other nations can manage to cycle, and drive vehicles, and co-exist, and not wear helmets, and not have high accident rates.

So, what's happened to the Oz myth of 'fair go'?

Where the ANZAC spirit of 'mateship' on the roads?

The creation of bike lanes should not have to happen at all, but the truth is that vehicles go too fast for their own good, and our insurance costs, health costs, damage to individuals and whole families, so perhaps we could look at a range of issues and not just concentrate on 'being held up' by a pesky cyclist?

The cry for 'more visible clothing' shows just how useless vehicle drivers are. Where the calls for 'no black-grey cars' to prevent these dunce car drivers being crashed into by other dunce car drivers?

Why no call for helmets in cars to help prevent brain damage?

Of course, not every person is going to ride, or want to ride, a bike. But we do know that more would, if the roads were not 'so dangerous'.

The roads are not 'so dangerous', but certainly far too many women think it is, and a swag of men too.

Also, the rising tide of electric assisted bikes is great for those not quite able to cycle as far and as high as they might like to.... see your doctor first of course.

Shame articles like this get a run, with just opinion offered.

I'd start at the Cycle Promotion Fund, then move to the state bike groups, particularly the Victorian one that organises 'ride2work' each October, before going to youtube for some cycling videos from Europe, and for Oz, see the Mike Rubbo youtubes he puts out from Victoria, particularly on electric bikes, and the cycling councillor.

Anyone riding a bicycle on the same road as cars is a hazard to motorists and either an idiot or a very brave person. The nong riding on the white line of the so-called bike lane on a busy highway is a dead man riding. If he does it 5 days a week for 48 weeks of the year, he doesn’t have long to live.

The people responsible for "Cycling. Getting Australia Moving", and anyone else encouraging people to ride bikes on roads could eventually find themselves charged with crimes against humanity as the injuries and deaths mount.

Bike-riders are also a menace to pedestrians when they illegally ride on footpaths or ride along ‘shared’ paths in parks without bells or without the intelligence to use their bells.

Parents on bikes towing tiny tots in pink plastic covered ‘trailers’ should have the children removed from them.

Ideally, to prevent deaths, scares to motorists and removal of children from cyclists with trailers, all bikes should be banned

@Leigh: Anyone riding a bicycle on the same road as cars is a hazard to motorists and either an idiot or a very brave person. The nong riding on the white line of the so-called bike lane on a busy highway is a dead man riding. If he does it 5 days a week for 48 weeks of the year, he doesn’t have long to live.

I have been doing for 5 days a week, for 20 years, around 40 kms per day, in peak hour Brisbane Traffic. It comes as no surprise to learn I am an idiot. But I have never considered myself "lucky", yet apparently I am amazingly lucky.

All joking aside, Holden is probably right when he says riding is a dangerous exercise - if you ride amongst 2 ton chunks of metal travelling at speed being controlled by someone like Leigh who considers you to be both an idiot and a menace to all car drivers. Downhill mountain bike riders are even more likely to seriously injure themselves.

But to equate the danger of those extremes to a normal commute on quiet street is stretching things a fair bit. If you are wearing a helmet, it is pretty hard to do more than loose a bit of bark at 30 km/hr. Considering the health benefits of regular exercise, loosing some skin a few times in your life is a fair exchange.

Being physically able to ride a bike isn't really an excuse either, if you can ride a bike at all. There are all sorts of electronic motors and other gadgets that can change the amount of effort involved pretty uniformly from literally none to normal riding to "lets pretend it is up a steep hill".

So in the end it is often just a case of wanting the benefits enough to put in the effort. And so it is for bike paths in our cities. Are we willing to spend the money to make riding to work a realistic and safe option for most?

An interesting and well written article (though the last couple of paragraphs let it down) that tries to be fair minded and constructive on this momentous issue. Indeed I can't see why the article was about bicyles, and the expense of bikeways--good grief! Surely the elephant in the room is CARS! and the expense of maintaining them and the comforts their narcissistic occupants have become accustomed to. It's cars and their arrogant, impatient and dangerous drivers (I'll bet there are more psychotics in motor cars than mental hospitals!) that are the biggest threat to cyclists, especially at the absurd speeds they're permitted to rocket around suburbs and CBD's!
As the author says, rubbish on the roads is a prime danger (I once hit a house brick and went sprawling), and inexpensive, sturdy, light and all terrain bikes would be optimum. Certainly Scooters too are a great idea, and better, cleaner public transport generally. But the most pressing need, for the planet and public health, is to get people out of cars and cars off the road. Once the (I'd guess) ten percent of crazed motorists come out of therapy, they might even be ready to rejoin the human community.
Cars and buses and scooters and bikes and pedestrians can cohabit on suburban and city roads, once its accepted that they all have equal rights, and the road rules reflect that. Instead of the odd cycleway for bikes, there should be the odd main road for cars trucks and sociopaths! CBD's and suburbs should be civilised COMMUNITIES, but cars ride roughshod over customary rights.
This will excite the petrol heads' indignation, but that's because it's never occurred to them to consider the ethics of their behaviour on the roads. That mindset has to change!

rstuart... I think Leigh is a petrol head troller...barely worth rsvp-ing to.

We meet them every day, hurling abuse, opening car doors as they pass, chucking glass, plastic, food, trying to cut riders off when turning left, crashing into bike lanes when they drive their cars to the right of the 'shoreline' instead of left of the while line where they should be driving, and knowing absolutely nothing at all about leaving a clear space, at least one metre, between the left side of their vehicles and the cyclists they try to kill/maim.

If the roads are dangerous, it's because of the blockheads who are too irresponsible to ever have been given a licence.

While I would not ride 'on' the white line, far too slippery, especially in the wet, Leigh does not seem to understand the Amy Gillet Foundation mantra...'a metre matters'.

Mind you, Leigh is not alone, there's millions just the same.

Here's a WA councillor that might be related to Leigh:
http://btawa.org.au/2010/04/12/bradley-wants-bikes-off-roads/

Of course bikes should have to be registered, to help pay for rhe roads they use. They should also have a mandatory third party property insurance system, with the datails on display.

After all, bikes can do quite a bit of damage to the underside of your car when they get in the way.

From the health point of view they should be kept off the road at peak periods. We don't want to have excessive medical costs because these dills are developing respiratory problems, riding around in all those exhaust emissions.

In fact we should definately not ever give them access to any public health system. If we let the Darwin principle apply, we should be rid of these trouble makers soon enough.

The savings accrued should fund a nice safe Ford V8 for each of us to enjoy.

all cyclists I know treat cycling like the new religion. And worship their bikes as they wd a deity in a temple. To really help get Australia more healthy I would make it mandatory that obese have to attend swimming centre and a gym for set period until girth reduced. Even if some subsidies in place to make it happen. Wd reduce eventual health costs to improve plight of morbidly obese. Many wd be too fat to get on a bicycle yet. And I wd either ban those stupid chocolates/fizzy drinks machines anywhere unless had proportion of fresh frfrut as well

VERY good point- which is often missed.

Firstly I think we need to convert MANY highway-side footpaths into cycleways- because they will NOT be used for anything else! THIS I guarantee!

Secondly, and very importantly is to consider that Australian cities are, in terms of area- FIFTY times larger than even capital cities in Europe. FIFTY.
Amsterdam or Frankfurt one could WALK to the other side in less than an hour.
Sydney or Adeliaide you would well start at dawn and finish at Sunset!
And not everyone has access to transport without driving half the distance to access IT as they would to simply go the whole distance and park.

As soon as cars are actually treated like legitamate transportation (and there ARE already electric cars in Europe), the sooner our roads might have some glimmer of hope of improving.

King Hazza...."As soon as cars are actually treated like legitamate transportation"... you are being 'just a little funny here' are you?

How we all LARFED!

Tell us all what impedes cars in their brutal advance on our environment, please.

What, are speed limits too low?

Not enough roads?

Too many buses getting in your way?

Too many road rules 'holding you back'?

I'm all ears.... where is there any hint that cars are not THE default choice in our community?

Of course, we have far too many long distance trucks on the road, and far too tiny a railway system, and absolutely no coastal shipping which should be taking all sorts of junk around the edges of the nation-state we live in.

But that is because trucks are seen as 'legitimate' and rail is not, plus, far too much of rail is now owned by trucking firms.

Why is it not possible for you to share a very wide road with a slower moving vehicle, a bike?

Are you not 'up to it'?

Should you actually have a licence?

The elephant in the room is the excrement that this article truly is; the solution is a change of attitude, more public transport (buses, trains & trams) more and better bike lanes in and around the city and suburbs and LESS access to motor vehicles.

The benefits are obvious. Idiots in cars (and a few of them are in the forum) are the most obnoxious hazard on the roads today. Whether they're texting and talking on their mobiles and 'accidently' veering into my bike lane, or not paying attention to the road as they 'accidently' veer into a bunch of riders, their attitudes need to change.

In a nutshell cyclists and cycling NEEDS to be promoted and given PRIORITY access to roads and the police need to support this, and only then people will get the hint and change. Cycle, PT or Scoot: Cars are soooo last century.

Glad you asked, Blue, I would love to elaborate.

As of now, Cars ARE the primary transportation choice of most Australians, due to the lack of proximity to viable uses of public transport or cycling for many people to take them where they need to go, and factors, such as lack of physical power to cycle in many, greater size of the cities and public transport being overburdened, disgusting, uncomfortable or simply too slow, to mention a few.

However, an alarmingly large amount of green proposals relating to roads and transport- especially regarding bikes and public transport very readily resort to reducing the accessibility of car users on the road as a quick-fix to offset the lack of infrastructure for the other options- and often treat driving as a negative and to be discouraged (on the assumption that ALL cars are combustion-engine cars). This even plays into urban planning (especially for the CBD).

As for any other gripes- indeed, but it owes more to the horribly poor urban planning over the past century in each city- as opposed to something remedial by new policy, in which parts of a single city connected by city streets here would in fact be two separate towns connected by an expressway in Europe.

But I have noticed a LOT of unused walkways that could double as cycle lanes along many highways- hence my suggestion that there should be widely broadcasted sections of road that advise cyclists to move onto these instead of the road.

I hope you are satisfied with this brief overview.