[Closed] "Cycle use falling in England, Government data suggests"

Its not surprising, a boost from the summer and Olympics, then reality kicks in and shite roads, poor facilities etc and people stop riding.

Only Oxford and Cambridge showed high use, but thats due to them being student towns of a small size where everyone cycles.

Unless there is a massive change in infrastructure it will continue to decline. We really are stuck with a society dominated by cars.

Of course, when the oil runs out...... (we will be cattle-trucked)

This is the same government that tells us that we are feeling the benefits of the economic recovery.

I don't believe anything they tell me. Loads more people cycling to work in Nottingham at the moment, loads more people out on the roads and the trails at weekends and evenings.

What a load of bollocks (at least recreationally).

I live on a "Cheshire Cycleway" and only this weekend I was thinking "There are easily 10x more bikes on this road now than there were 8 years ago when I moved here"

The proof they're all "newbies" as well is not just the shiny new bikes but they wear ALL their gear, even when it was 17ºC on Sunday… that and the fact they're all wobbling round on £3K road bikes like Bambi.

Now I suspect they all bugger off back in their cars on Monday but that was always the case.

But David Cameron said we were a cycling nation!

I love it - the article says its terrible and blames government, local councils and the police for the fall in cycle use - then goes on to say "Data should be used with caution as sample sizes are small and seasonal effects could mask overall changes in cycle use."

🙄

Froome is no Wiggo
Potholes are much bigger
Prices are bollocks, (and then there are wheel sizes)

Cycling levels fall.....

I've only skimmed through the source data and can't see any mention of the exact sample size.

However, https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/local-area-walking-and-cycling-in-england-2012-to-2013 says [i]"Although the change is small, the size of the sample means that we can be confident that this decrease exists in the whole of the English population."[/i] which contradicts the CTC quote above.

marthall, I think you're confusing anecdotes with data. 😉

My cycle use has certainly dropped off this year, January to March I could only go for a ride wearing an aqualung and armbands! 😕

Lets be honest unless you are really enthusiastic about cycling would you want to spend the best part of £500 on a bike to pootle to work/shops on given the state of the roads and motorists attitudes to cyclists?

They can be confident that the the decrease exists nationally in the data - but thats FAR from the data being robust enough to draw causative conclusions as the CTC have gone on to do, despite accepting it could just be seasonal.

[i]Although the APS has a standard sample size of at least 500 persons per local authority, because
the numbers of those cycling are small (only 15% nationally), some of the measures relating to
cycling are based on only a few people per local authority and may not be robust...
... Caution should be taken when interpreting these changes because of factors that include small sample sizes and the inherent uncertainty in doing any statistical test. [/i]

Some of those who bought a bike/took up cycling to commute or went onto a road realised that its more dangerous than underwater caving with a snorkel or base jumping whilst holding a live grenade and gave up?

This is the same government that tells us that we are feeling the benefits of the economic recovery.

I don't believe anything they tell me. Loads more people cycling to work in Nottingham at the moment, loads more people out on the roads and the trails at weekends and evenings.

This.

The whole of Western civilization is now run on numbers / calculations / statistics, to the detriment of society.

Cycling isn't particularly dangerous, I can't believe that all the big hairy men on here are scared of cycling on roads?
I cycle about 7,000 miles a year on London roads, and about another 50% more elsewhere.
[b]IT'S REALLY NOT THAT HARD, OR SCARY, OR DANGEROUS[/b]

I would personally disagree.

The canal paths and greenways have been very, very busy with fully reflectored, freshly stickered bikes atop which are many, many people who haven't had their saddle/helmet/cockpit set up properly.

This is my favourite time of year. Couples in matching Boardman Sport Discs and Pastel jackets enjoying themselves.

**** you government.

Quick Edit: TROLL ^ If you cycle 10.5k a year, how do you pat yourself on the back with such waxen manly arms?

Double edit: I'm a big hairy man and i'm ****ing petrified of idiots in cars.

IT'S REALLY NOT THAT HARD, OR SCARY, OR DANGEROUS

42.7 percent of all statistics are made up on the spot.

apparently

The Telegraph's take on this, giving the sample size as 150 000.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/road-and-rail-transport/10796850/Cycling-popularity-fell-after-Olympics.html

Another Telegraph article.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/road-and-rail-transport/10795238/London-Tube-strike-our-writers-race-to-beat-the-chaos.html

Whatever individual STW forum users anecdotes tell us about road safety, articles like this reinforce the common perception that cycling is dangerous.

more tube strikes! loads of people cycling this morning

the telegraph is pretty woefull in so many ways!

The Sunday Telegraph is mind-bendingly intriguing to me.

Are there people in this country who have it delivered and proceed to flip through and think:

I LOVE ALL OF THIS. Elitism at its worst.

IT'S REALLY NOT THAT HARD, OR SCARY, OR DANGEROUS

Yes it is. The road is full of idiots. Small idiots who at last can bully someone, half-drunk people from the night before, people who need prescription glasses and older people who really are selfish.

hora, you do talk some bollox sometimes.

The road is full of idiots. Small idiots who at last can bully someone, half-drunk people from the night before, people who need prescription glasses and older people who really are selfish.

aP, no need to get so indignant over a misunderstanding. Isn't it obvious that Hora meant people who need prescription glasses, [i]but don't wear them[/i] ?

aP you need a brain transplant so maybe I should add you to that list? ^

A annual prescription/eye exam should be conditional of a driving licence. Not just the visual numberplate test when you take your driving test.

Next time your out and about, for instance just look at the OAP's at the wheel- see how many of the blokes aren't wearing any glasses..as you get older your eyesight deteriorates. Trust me (well trust me once you've had your brain operation).

Although the APS has a standard sample size of at least 500 persons per local authority, because the numbers of those cycling are small (only 15% nationally), some of the measures relating to cycling are based on only a few people per local authority and may not be robust...

It would be interesting to see the figures for Darlington, where I live, as the Council has a pretty good network of cycle counters around the town so they have a pretty good handle on cycling trends.

IT'S REALLY NOT THAT HARD, OR SCARY, OR DANGEROUS

Objectively, cycling isn't particularly more dangerous than walking (in terms of KSI per km).

Subjectively, sharing busy roads with fast, heavy vehicles who don't appear to see cyclists is scary and seems dangerous.

Theres bloody cyclist every where at the minute in Yorkshire. I would says bike use has probably trebled or more in the last year

Got form on here aP? Black pot throwing stones at a kettle and all that.

Does your presence in/out of the premises decide the fate of your workforce on a daily basis?

IT'S REALLY NOT THAT HARD, OR SCARY, OR DANGEROUS

i disagree, a lot.

this morning, [u]several[/u] attempts were made on my life. One of my would-be-killers, stopped, called me a c**t, and drove off, he'll be full of joy again tomorrow morning no doubt. Another was was already giving the 'w***ker' sign out the window as he pulled out in front of me.

if i could afford a car, i'd stop cycle-commuting.

the idea of my wife cycling to work, using Sheffield's dreadful roads, and non-existant cycle-paths, fills me with dread.

Just you wait till the DM and some of the more swivel-eyed, regional rag hacks get on this one, I'm sure links to Gay marriage, immigration policies and single mothers could be dreamt up and spun out for some quality click-bait...

Come on people we're predominantly a nation of overweight oafs in motorized ego chariots, one summer of success for that Bradley Hoy fella isn't going to change our entire culture not unless someone's going to assassinate Clarkson...

I have to admit I've had enough of the aggro on the roads and I'm selling my road bike. It seems that since cycling has got more popular both sides have gotten more aggressive and it's not something I want to get caught up in, not while I've got young kids anyway.

Once the road bike's gone I'm just going to buy another mountain bike and go downhilling!

The decrease was for the number of people who rode a bike once a month. Hardly a level you would call recreational or utility cyclists.
I would be more interested in the figures for those riding once a week or more.

I'm always intrigued intrigued by the number of people on a cycling forum who say they are too scared to ride on the road.

I cover 4-5k miles a year, at least half on the road, most of it commuting. Nottingham isn't London, I've had near misses, been shouted at, been assaulted, but I plan where, when and how I ride and it has never occurred to me to quit.

But I'll happily walk anything harder than a straight downhill fire road on my mtb, so I probably shouldn't judge. 😐

I'm not scared to ride on the road.

I am fearful of idiots in vehicles.

Show me the rock garden, point me down that fireroad. Besides, I only have one bike so if I'm on the road at least it's the mountain bike.

One of my favourite loops in the Peaks takes in:

Hope- Roman Road - Beast - Hagg/lockerbrook farm - Screaming Mile - Fairholmes - WLT- cheeky.. - Winn Hill cheeky - Hope.

In the middle of that is 0.5miles of Snake Pass road. I can honestly say I literally shit myself on this section of my ride and I'm ready to throw myself down the banking as people insist on overtaking into blind corners on solid white lines. None of the rest of ride makes thing 'shit'/worries or scares me. Just that tiny bit of road.

If cyclists were allowed to carry guns/lose' off for a few rounds into the car - you'd see a [s]sharp[/s] MASSIVE drop in idiots in cars.

[quote=miketually]Objectively, cycling isn't particularly more dangerous than walking (in terms of KSI per km).

But bikes go a lot further per hour than walking, so per hour, cycling is 3 times as dangerous as walking.

[quote=miketually]Subjectively, sharing busy roads with fast, heavy vehicles who don't appear to see cyclists is scary and seems dangerous.

It simply is dangerous, and is also a nasty aggressive careless environment to be in a lot of the time.

Of course, when the oil runs out......

edit: back on topic, where do they make up these statistics from? only ever seen one traffic survey, and that was on the A2, which is effectively motorway standard. oh and we did a school class in 1982 counting cars go by.
I guess these stats don't count numbers using Glentress and Dalby?

IT'S REALLY NOT THAT HARD, OR SCARY, OR DANGEROUS

For those claiming it is, your wrong, cycling on some roads can be unpleasant but it is a huge leap from unpleasant to dangerous. From observation a lot of cyclists act in a manner that actually makes it more dangerous for themselves.

Yes there are idiots, but i find the idiots more an issue driving than cycling. From another thread, a "cyclist" complaining they can't overtake on blind bends because there are cyclists on the roads! What does that say about attitudes?

MidlandTrailquestsGraham - Member

marthall, I think you're confusing anecdotes with data

He's using anecdata 8)

miketually » Objectively, cycling isn't particularly more dangerous than walking (in terms of KSI per km).

But bikes go a lot further per hour than walking, so per hour, cycling is 3 times as dangerous as walking.

Walking isn't very dangerous (three times not very is still not very) and my journey to work is 4km regardless of whether I go by bike or on foot...

All the [url= http://www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/SN06224.pdf ]data [/url] (pdf link)shows that cycling is getting safer.

miketually » Subjectively, sharing busy roads with fast, heavy vehicles who don't appear to see cyclists is scary and seems dangerous.

It simply is dangerous, and is also a nasty aggressive careless environment to be in a lot of the time.

It's more dangerous than it needs to be, and it should be made safer. Until this happens, we won't get more people cycling.

The health benefits of cycling far outweigh the dangers so, objectively and in the long-term, it is safer for me to cycle to work than to drive. Unfortunately, that's not how we make decisions.

MTB-Idle - Member

MidlandTrailquestsGraham - Member
marthall, I think you're confusing anecdotes with data

He's using anecdata

Maybe he thinks that the plural of anecdotes is 'data'?

I'm always [s]intrigued[/s] intrigued by the number of people on a [s]cycling[/s] mountain bike forum who say they are too scared to ride on the road.

I'm not, I hate riding on the road.

And having ridden with you I guess you may walk the fire road 😛

edit: I've screwed that up!!!!

 

Just a thought...

If you were born & raised in an Alpine town, you could probably become a WC level Downhiller without ever cycled through a city or on busy roads.

Just as much as you could win the TDF never knowing what pivot to run.

legspin - it's so long since I rode with you took me ages to think who the hell you were! 😳