Mibbe I just missed a previous post, or even an item on the STW News about this, but I've just heard that Sustrans are now called the Walk Wheel Cycle Trust.
Kudos to the folks who, against all current trends, chose a longer name over something short, snappy and obscure - could have done with some punctuation though. I guess the £325,000 that the rebranding exercise cost wouldn't have bought much in the way of actual infrastructure either.
Why do organisations put themselves through this emperor's new clothes rebranding bollocks? It inevitably results in something worse than before, confuses people and costs a shit load of money. Does anybody, other than the consultants who peddle it, ever get anything out of it?
It's awful. I won't be surprised if it gets reversed.
SusTrans - Sustainable Transport. Always thought theirs was a good choice of name. Not sure why change after 40+ years.
Walk Wheel Cycle
Can you imagine how many meetings where held to decide the order those three words should be in!
Are there any cycles that don't have wheels?
Jeepers - I hate that pointless rebranding nonsense. what a waste of money
The "trans" part was causing them problems.
Very few people outside of cycling and Active Travel professionals actually know what Sustrans is and the "trans" part of the name was attracting the wrong sort of attention, people thinking* it's an organisation to support trans people or similar.
* I appreciate that most of the far-right ****s triggered by this sort of thing don't do any thinking or are too stupid to think critically in the first place.
Are there any cycles that don't have wheels?
To be fair, I think they're trying to point out that they're about more than access for bikes, it's also about getting decent routes for walking, wheelchairs, etc
Yeah - reason for change were the negative connotations of using 'sus' (suspect/suspicious etc) 'trans' (trans people).
And, increasingly, the focus of the charity is accessibility alongside sustainability, ie including safe routes for people walking, using wheelchairs etc.
Like with any change, there'll be some initial hot air and indignation, but sure it will all settle down and we'll get used to it ...
More like WOKE Wheel Cycle Trust, amirite?
But cheap jabs aside, it seems awkward and wordy now - but it'll probably just seem normal in a while. As above, I kind of admire their dedication to inclusion over having a snappy name.
The "trans" part was causing them problems.
Oh dear, that makes sense I suppose.
*shakes head at modern world*
Doesn't really roll of the tongue.
The "trans" part was causing them problems.
Very few people outside of cycling and Active Travel professionals actually know what Sustrans is and the "trans" part of the name was attracting the wrong sort of attention, people thinking* it's an organisation to support trans people or similar.
* I appreciate that most of the far-right ****s triggered by this sort of thing don't do any thinking or are too stupid to think critically in the first place.
I've just put the 2+2 together and I've been working with them for a while on a few projects.
Don't think it is a bad idea to say what it is exactly. Not as snappy but to the hard of thinking like me then that's not a bad thing
Yeah - reason for change were the negative connotations of using 'sus' (suspect/suspicious etc) 'trans' (trans people).
And, increasingly, the focus of the charity is accessibility alongside sustainability, ie including safe routes for people walking, using wheelchairs etc.
Like with any change, there'll be some initial hot air and indignation, but sure it will all settle down and we'll get used to it ...
Really? Is it not more problematic that they feel the need to change an established name to accomodate the hard of thinking?
Had anyone actually complained?
They could have at least focus-grouped their way to a catchier acronym 'WWCT' is just a bit meh...
Had anyone actually complained?
I believe they've had occasional emails / calls from people who thought they were a pro/anti trans organisation - I guess that's not going to get any better and answering the phone with "hello, Sustrans" and then receiving a load of transphobic abuse probably isn't a sustainable (see what I did there...?) means of carrying on...
(source: I work with a couple of ex-Sustrans folk and have some occasional dealings with the organisation in day-to-day active travel stuff).
If they really needed a rename because of "sus" and/or "trans" being taken out of context, here's an absolutely crazy rebrand name...
SustainableTransport
😱 🤣
SustainableTransport
But you haven't charged £350,000 for that so it's a rubbish name. (The name did cross my mind as well.)
Afternoon all,
There are a few things behind the rename.
Firstly, I've spent a lot of time over the years explaining who Sustrans are and what we do. Many people don't know, have no idea what sustainable transport is or think that it's just building the National Cycle Network. And that's people within the industry. It's even worse once you get out to the general public.
WWCT is reliant on charity donations for its work. It's really hard to raise that money if people don't know what you do. Spelling it out in really blunt terms, apparently, played well with testers.
Secondly, the scope of the organisation has expanded beyond just cycling. Making it explicit that we make it easier for people to walk, wheel (that's pushchairs, wheelchairs, mobility scooters etc) and cycle helps with advocating for the work we do.
Thirdly, though least importantly, there is the trans thing. A bunch of us do lone working in the community, it can be volatile enough just talking about walking, cycling and wheeling. Adding in transphobia (or thinking we're transphobic) doesn't help. And, yes, it has happened.
I'm not enjoying the new, much longer, email address every time I have to type it in. But, not having to explain what we do in every meeting makes it worth it.
I imagine people thought the same about CTC when they changed to CyclingUK.
Ahh... now explained, if you add in the implied punctation, it makes sense...
Walk, Wheel & Cycle Trust
I honestly was confused as to what a "Walk wheel cycle" was. It was making no sense to me at all.
Walking, Cycling & Wheeling Trust
Would have been even clearer.
Posh boys bureaucracy in love with regulations and management speak.They are about to ban escooters and Chinese ebikes ie discriminate against the poor,old and frail.This to keep in with a load of corrupt and corrupting politicians.
They are about to ban escooters and Chinese ebikes ie discriminate against the poor,old and frail
E-scooters are already banned, they're not legal in public places / roads if not rental, only legal for use on private land (stupid imho but that's the laws).
Wherever they're from, e-bikes are not legal if they don't pass EN15194. If they do, ride on. It's just a bike.
@ShanAndy - Thankyou for the explainer, it helps Assuage most of the whinging from those of us on the side-lines.
I do wish the word 'Sustainable' had been kept, and you have to know that the name will inevitably be abbreviated to it's initials 'WWCT' which just isn't as catchy (IMO).
But being explicit about what the organisation does is important, especially highlighting that the remit goes beyond just cycling (I am certainly guilty of assuming facilitating bicycle use was the primary function of 'SusTrans), If that goal is met then the re-brand has a genuine benefit.
Thankyou.
Posh boys bureaucracy in love with regulations and management speak.They are about to ban escooters and Chinese ebikes ie discriminate against the poor,old and frail.This to keep in with a load of corrupt and corrupting politicians.
WTF are you on about?
As this is about Active Transportation, why didn't they use ACT-Trans instead?
Can I have my £325000 now please?
😃
Sustrav?
I always thought the name was a misnomer. All the projects the projects seem to be about marking routes for bearded touring cycling, and occasionally building dog toilets. Nothing to do with sustainable transport.
All the projects the projects seem to be about marking routes for bearded touring cycling
Not really. The focus changed to more urban activities about a decade ago. That made Sustrans less relevant to me and was about the time I stopped volunteering for them.
I always thought the name was a misnomer. All the projects the projects seem to be about marking routes for bearded touring cycling, and occasionally building dog toilets. Nothing to do with sustainable transport.
By car 10miles
By bike 14miles.
Not really. The focus changed to more urban activities about a decade ago. That made Sustrans less relevant to me and was about the time I stopped volunteering for them.
Funnily enough our offic eis potentially going to move. I'm not that happy about it as its going to increase my commute so i thought about finding a route to do partially by bike. Looking at a map i was surprised to see that much loke the bus routes in edinburgh all the spokes have been built but of you want to go around... You're on your own.
I don't particularly care because i am happy in traffic but it did leave me wandering how its sustainable.
I would be interested to read the research because the new name is bizarre. Just looks like four words thrown together.
Regarding rebrands generally. Once it's been suggested that something is "confusing", "doesn't reflect who we are today", and "problematic" - anybody that even reasonably debates that it's actually just fine, is putting their head above the parapet.
the new name is bizarre. Just looks like four words thrown together.
It's not even clear that it's three verbs and a noun.
Posh boys bureaucracy in love with regulations and management speak.They are about to ban escooters and Chinese ebikes ie discriminate against the poor,old and frail.This to keep in with a load of corrupt and corrupting politicians.
I'm not sure I understand. Any chance you could explain this?
As this is about Active Transportation, why didn't they use ACT-Trans instead?
Can I have my £325000 now please?
😃
Because virtually no one outside places like here knows what active travel is. It's now a reflex to add "that's walking, wheeling and cycling" to "active travel".
Funnily enough our offic eis potentially going to move. I'm not that happy about it as its going to increase my commute so i thought about finding a route to do partially by bike. Looking at a map i was surprised to see that much loke the bus routes in edinburgh all the spokes have been built but of you want to go around... You're on your own.
Bus routes (and to a lesser extent, cycle routes) are by and large built by men, for men, doing men's journeys from their home to the centre of the town/city to do work. They're not designed to do journeys that go round or stop at places like schools, shops, hospitals that are predominantly undertaken by women.
So, I'm not surprised you found this in Edinburgh.
I can, and do, bore people to death about inbuilt gender bias in transport networks.
I imagine people thought the same about CTC when they changed to CyclingUK.
That one made sense and still short and snappy.
The reasons for changing sustrans makes sense, but what it's changed to is cryptic for people.
If I see WWCT I'm going to think it's the wildlife lot initially, and I bet most will too. Spelt out it's just a mash of words.
Also are the horse folk happy with being excluded from that list? They're sustainable transport also and a lot of cycle routes and bridleways depend on us working together.
new, much longer, email address every time I have to type it in
I mean, wwct.org.uk would be shorter?
My effort would be
Pedestrians, pushers and pedals.
Or PePuPe, pronounced "PehPoopy".
I'll send my bank details for the £325k.
Also are the horse folk happy with being excluded from that list? They're sustainable transport also and a lot of cycle routes and bridleways depend on us working together.
I was thinking of them too, especially as the work I do for Scotways always includes taking them into account, but I think this just emphasises that WWCT is mostly focussed on urban environments.
new, much longer, email address every time I have to type it in
I mean, wwct.org.uk would be shorter?
Honestly, that's what I was expecting. But, apparently (I've just checked), wwct.org.uk is registered to some kind of "beat the repressive UK regime cracking down on online casinos" website.
Probably not a fight worth having.
My effort would be
Pedestrians, pushers and pedals.
Or PePuPe, pronounced "PehPoopy".
Not sure that passes the "will we be confused with drug dealers" test...
I'll send my bank details for the £325k.
Cheque's in the post...
hospitals
This is a major annoyance in GM - we have ten hospitals, despite being huge generators of single-occupant car traffic only one of them is properly served by active travel infra (and then only North/South), and most of them don't have decent public transport either...
hospitals
This is a major annoyance in GM - we have ten hospitals, despite being huge generators of single-occupant car traffic only one of them is properly served by active travel infra (and then only North/South), and most of them don't have decent public transport either...
I'm not in Greater Manchester, but I do work at an NHS Trust. Hospitals do attract a massive amount of low-occupancy vehicles.
I'm typing this between meetings bus providers about how we better serve our hospitals and writing a funding bid for better cycle stores. Similarly, I had to respond to an LCWIP asking why none of their routes went to the hospital. Literally none. It was a little exasperating.
Dull Thursday fact: hospitals are not "trip generators", we are "trip attractors" people get ill and seek medical attention regardless of where the nearest hospital is, so those journeys would happen regardless. We do "attract" them to come to our hospital. I got told off for that not long after I started.
Dull Thursday fact: hospitals are not "trip generators", we are "trip attractors" people get ill and seek medical attention regardless of where the nearest hospital is, so those journeys would happen regardless. We do "attract" them to come to our hospital. I got told off for that not long after I started.
I think we're on the same page here, though I don't agree re: "trip attractors" as this overlooks the massive amount of single occupant car journeys generated by staff.
From my POV, Trust CO2 targets will never be met unless staff travel is addressed, and something like 70% of NHS staff do no OOH and/or live within 5 miles. But hospitals are never considered as major employers when planning AT networks...
Ironically while Royal Derby are building a new multi-story car park they are operating a free park-and-ride (or 15 min walk) from some building land near-by.
This works far better than the old car parks right next to the hospital!
No doubt this land will be given back for houses when the multi-story is complete and we'll go back to queuing around the hospital grounds waiting for a space. 🤦♂️
No doubt this land will be given back for houses when the multi-story is complete and we'll go back to queuing around the hospital grounds waiting for a space
Last time I drove to Southmead hospital in Bristol, I got to the hospital grounds 45 mins before my appointment and still nearly missed it, after I got stuck in a traffic jam inside the (miniscule) multistory car park. It's 3 miles as the crow flies. Or a bus into town and another bus out, for which you'd need to allow about 80 minutes each way.
I always thought the name was a misnomer. All the projects the projects seem to be about marking routes for bearded touring cycling, and occasionally building dog toilets. Nothing to do with sustainable transport.
I highly recommend a read of "Potholes and Pavements: A Bumpy Ride on Britain’s National Cycle Network" by Laura Laker, which gives the story of the NCN, its disjointed development, and background of Sustrans.
Though probably has to be edited now to replace every mention of Sustrans with Walk Wheel Cycle Trust 😄
Do Sustrans Walk Wheel Cycle Trust have any sort of maintenance regime for their routes, or is it a case of once built forgotten about? Newly opened route between Wendover & Great Missenden is going to be a shit show for cyclists if they don't clear the fallen leaves once the trees are bare.
Do Sustrans Walk Wheel Cycle Trust have any sort of maintenance regime for their routes, or is it a case of once built forgotten about?
WWCT only own about 2% of the network, most of it is a mix of private landowners, councils, National Highways, Canal & River Trust, National Trust and so on.
What they do is use a mix of volunteers and WWCT staff to help these landowners to maintain, improve and develop their routes using funding raised from their charity status. Their main role alongside coordinating that work is to promote the routes / network and monitor usage.
How effective that lot is I guess depends a bit on where you're riding and how many volunteers they have in that areas as well as how much the relevant landowner cares.
I'm a Sustrans 🤔 volunteer, since the rebrand all existing risk assessments are invalid. Now all work on my section is waiting and waiting for new ones . 🙄I'm being stubborn? Not doing any work until they are redone . If we do anything it's off our own back , no hours credited and more importantly if anything were to happen it's on our heads ( not literally hopefully)
Luckily my section has had a major facelift so it's just general tidying but not burning brash that's a no no .
I imagine people thought the same about CTC when they changed to CyclingUK.
Ahh, thanks for the prompt. They painted themselves orange recently at who know what cost. They started as a club, hijacked it and converted to a charidy. Now they're a pseudo Corporate charidy whatsit, painted orange and paying 'professional charity chief execs' etc who know what to promote more cycling for inner city one legged lesbians. Ho hum.
Luckily my section has had a major facelift so it's just general tidying but not burning brash that's a no no .
This is a new recently opened route and I already unofficially "maintain" a shared use path near us, plus the volume & length of leaf fall on this one is beyond ad-hoc clearance. I'll contact WWCT & council to see if they have any plans a foot.
As for cycling UK, they seem to be a doddery road club round our way & gave zero response when I asked if anyone was interested in helping out with the local cycle path network... But I'm still a member because I don't mind them helping one legged lesbians get into cycling.
I'm a Sustrans
volunteer, since the rebrand all existing risk assessments are invalid.
If the legal entity hasn't changed, only the name, then a past RA would still be valid. Updating the name is just a tidying up job?
Now they're a pseudo Corporate charidy whatsit, painted orange and paying 'professional charity chief execs' etc who know what to promote more cycling for inner city one legged lesbians. Ho hum.
I don’t get this attitude at all. More people cycling makes it better for those of us already cycling, whether that’s in safer infrastructure or normalisation of attitudes towards people on bikes, saves taxpayers’ money by making people healthier, and keeps your LBS in business. There is literally nothing to dislike in outreach campaigns to communities who have historically lower levels of cycling.
It’s well-established that both CUK and WWCT derive most of their funding from central grants for this sort of work.
Also are the horse folk happy with being excluded from that list? They're sustainable transport also and a lot of cycle routes and bridleways depend on us working together.
Horses walk - so they're included - as are hobby horses with their wheels 🙂
I'm a Sustrans
If the legal entity hasn't changed, only the name, then a past RA would still be valid. Updating the name is just a tidying up job?
Invalid according to whom?
Its just a name change - If you look on companies house WWCT's company number - 01797726 - has a filing history goes back to the 1980s so they've been the same legal entity throughout
I'm a Sustrans 🤔 volunteer, since the rebrand all existing risk assessments are invalid.
I worked in a QC lab for a company that changed name and someone asked about the validity of the risk assessments (and the other QC stuff) in the old company name. Turned out as long as we kept actually doing what the risk assessments said they were still valid until someone got round to doing find/replace on the docs. I'd be really surprised if this wasn't the case for you as well.
promote more cycling for inner city one legged lesbians.
I volunteer for CUK helping them get people using adapted cycles. I've never enquired about anyones sexuality there but I personally think that helping people who've lost a limb due to cancer, trauma or whatever get on bikes is a good use of my time and the charity's time.
RA needing updating according to our volunteers coordinator who was told by Sustrans , WWC , I'm trying to clarify the situation with them atm
RA needing updating according to our volunteers coordinator who was told by Sustrans , WWC , I'm trying to clarify the situation with them atm
It might be a good *opportunity* to update the RA so long as there's a coordinated approach based on factors such as when it was last done and any maintenance/improvement work since then as well as if the format or assessment process has changed.
But otherwise you're simply filling in an identical document in the same way with the same info, just with a different name at the top.
Now they're a pseudo Corporate charidy whatsit, painted orange and paying 'professional charity chief execs' etc who know what to promote more cycling for inner city one legged lesbians. Ho hum.
I don’t get this attitude at all. More people cycling makes it better for those of us already cycling, whether that’s in safer infrastructure or normalisation of attitudes towards people on bikes, saves taxpayers’ money by making people healthier, and keeps your LBS in business. There is literally nothing to dislike in outreach campaigns to communities who have historically lower levels of cycling.
It’s well-established that both CUK and WWCT derive most of their funding from central grants for this sort of work.
Well I joined CTC as a cycle tourer (possibly a beardy one at that), I didn't join a professional campaign group. And just because I happen to be a cyclist doesn't automatically make me a campaigner for greater cycling uptake (or whatever tangenital issue is currently de regueur). My area of interest is very specific, I don't really care about the transport policy of Birmingham's inner city (or whatever). As a die hard beardy tourer, I'd quite like to know about that which is barely covered in their non sustainable, printed and posted PAPER magazine.
The issue with the CTC is it was a club of like minded individuals (~80k IIRC) that was taken over then subsumed into a professional campaigning organisation that thinks painting everything a different colour is delivering against its own remit. I know Marketing can be a difficult area to be empirical in, but I'd be interested in the stats of cycling uptake before and after... I suspect I know the answer even if the stats exist and are reliable.
I'm a Sustrans 🤔 volunteer, since the rebrand all existing risk assessments are invalid.
I worked in a QC lab for a company that changed name and someone asked about the validity of the risk assessments (and the other QC stuff) in the old company name. Turned out as long as we kept actually doing what the risk assessments said they were still valid until someone got round to doing find/replace on the docs. I'd be really surprised if this wasn't the case for you as well.
promote more cycling for inner city one legged lesbians.
I volunteer for CUK helping them get people using adapted cycles. I've never enquired about anyones sexuality there but I personally think that helping people who've lost a limb due to cancer, trauma or whatever get on bikes is a good use of my time and the charity's time.
Good for you. The reference is clearly a light hearted description of (maybe) how some see their own remit but make it an issue if you want, I couldn't care less 🙃