Home 
Right to the Road Petition
|
Bike League BlogRead the latest news. Join the LeagueGet great benefits. Cycling in Your AreaFind local resources. Social Networking
E-newsletter
|
||
Tell the Senate that bikes have a right to the roadThe draft of the Senate's transportation authorization bill, S. 1813 Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act, includes language that would introduce a mandatory sidepath law on roads in our National Parks and other Federal lands. It requires cyclists on Federal lands to use a path or trail, instead of roads, if the speed limit is over 30 MPH and a trail exists within 100 yards, regardless of its condition or utility of the path. The provision sets a terrible precedent. Passing it would send the wrong message to transportation agencies that these policies are acceptable. Laws like this have been taken off the books in states over the past 30 years. This takes us in the wrong direction. For more information, read Andy Clarke's blog post. The League is working on many other aspects of the transportation reauthorization bill. This petition relates specifically to the mandatory sidepath law, which we felt deserved special attention. Stay tuned for news and action alerts related to this and other aspects of this critical legislation. Please join us in telling the Senate that the mandatory sidepath law is a bad idea - Dear Senators, We ask you to remove the mandatory sidepath language (Section § 203 (d)) from the transportation authorization bill, S. 1813 Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act. The law unfairly and unreasonably restricts cycling at a time when we should be encouraging bicycling for transportation, health, recreation, air quality and a host of other reasons. Signed, |
14408 Signatures “Shouldn't this decision whether to require separation be left up to Park Service Superintendents and National Wildlife Refuge Managers. Some federal sites have extremely low traffic volumes and others very high- plus complicating factors like road geometry and elevation changes. You can't address these design challenges with a blanket policy- it will only make the solutions more expensive and potentially more contentious. Remove this language so we can move forward on this important bill.” “This sounds like the misguided idea of a non-cyclist. I'm not against trails but roads are preferred by most experienced cyclists.” “Bicycles are legal road vehicles and have the same rights and responsibilities to the road as cars. They shouldn't be restricted to pathways, especially in National Parks and on Federal lands.” “National Parks and Federal Lands do not exist in isolation, nor should they. Visitors traveling by bicycle do not travel in isolation, nor should they. Should this law prohibit touring cyclists from visiting our National Parks except on mandated sidepaths, they cannot even reach the bikepaths to begin with. The existing laws governing travel on public roads for all users are adequate for traffic - both cars, bikes, and pedestrians - in our National Parks and lands. Here, our legislators do not need to enact new laws - nor should they.” “Unless there is a provision that the other trail is surfaced and maintained in the exact same way, if not better, than the road we are not to ride upon then it sets an ugly precedent on a national scale.” “PLEASEpPreserve the right of bicycles to share the road. Bicycles are transportation. I pay taxes and I vote. We need more accommodation for bicycles and pedestrians, not less. ” “In a day when the automobile is becoming increasingly impractical and the bicycle increasingly utilized, we get restrictions on the latter. Guess I'll forego my bicycle ride and have some government sanctioned vegetables. Mmm. Little Caesars. ” “Now is the wrong time to discourage non-fossil-fuel transportation alternatives and this legislation would have a huge detrimental impact.” “I bike for errands and for transport whenever I can.” “Since I have positioned myself on the road, as the vehicle codes in the state of Wisconsin state bicycles belong, I ride much safer. More crashes occur entering and exiting paths than on roads. This addition to the bill is pushing a more dangerous and more costly addition to the S 1813 Bill. We need to address education for law enforcement, auto drivers, cyclists, and law makers.” 
|
||
