Bikes Banned for 2 Years! Need Advocacy Help!

[mimitabby]

I'm not much of an activist, so that's why I didn't respond before now.


Karen

what does this mean exactly? If it's something you care about, how much effort does it take to write a quick email expressing your opinion? I can really see not being interested because it doesn't apply to you; or you live far away, something like that; but to just say "I don't normally DO this because I'm not" you're not what? you're not someone who cares? you're not someone who wants others to know what they care about?

what's next? Banning bikes on other roads because the street washer is coming?

[RolliePollie]

Good grief, leave it to the government to arbitratily decide for us what we can and cannot do safely. How unfair to only ban cyclists! And for 2 years?!?! I hope this does not end up happening. I'm going to check out the links to the senators and voice my opinion as well. This is a ridiculous idea. If cars and motorcycles will still be allowed to pass, there is no reason to ban cyclists. You know they won't be working on it 24/7 anyway. And even if they had delays and are holding traffic here and there, a cyclist could just wait along with all the cars!

[Bike Goddess]

I'd like to know more about exactly what they are referring to when they say no pavement.

I"ve certainly driven this road (used to live in Seattle) and I don't know how safe it would be coming DOWN in conditions of one way traffic etc.

I'm with the lawyers here.

Re 101- what's the story there?????

[Starfish]

I'd like to know more about exactly what they are referring to when they say no pavement.

I"ve certainly driven this road (used to live in Seattle) and I don't know how safe it would be coming DOWN in conditions of one way traffic etc.

I'm with the lawyers here.

Re 101- what's the story there?????

101, the story is lawyers and the feds protecting themselves and deciding they know best for individuals, IMO.

On the ridge road, when paved, I am often going the same speed, if not faster, than the cars. (The speed limit.) Presumably, if the road is torn up, and they have flaggers and cars are going very slowly through one-lane traffic, I don't think it is necessarily a conclusion that a mountain bike, for instance, couldn't handle creeping through a construction zone at 15mph downhill, for instance. Especially if it was hardpack enough for car and motorcycle travel.

I agree we don't need to jump to conclusions about what conditions will be like. But, a two year ban on the road is, IMO, a pre-emptive, fearful, typical move, consistent with this park's evolving attitudes about "protecting" the public (I would themselves) over serving and facilitating access.

I am probably done with this thread, as it raises my blood pressure. Again, I just ask that anyone so inclined write the government and park, if they feel the urge.

[Tuckervill]

Good grief, leave it to the government to arbitratily decide for us what we can and cannot do safely. How unfair to only ban cyclists! And for 2 years?!?! I hope this does not end up happening. I'm going to check out the links to the senators and voice my opinion as well. This is a ridiculous idea. If cars and motorcycles will still be allowed to pass, there is no reason to ban cyclists. You know they won't be working on it 24/7 anyway. And even if they had delays and are holding traffic here and there, a cyclist could just wait along with all the cars!

Alright, following up again with respect to this and mimi's post....I do not know enough about this issue to make a judgment. No one has been able to pin down precisely why the ban is being proposed. Since I'm not sure they don't have reasons we might all feel are valid once we discover them--because no one's discovered them, I'm not quite sure I'm ready to jump on the bandwagon.

Karen

[Starfish]

So, here's a thought. Why impose a 2 year ban? Why not play it by ear, and if there is some series of weeks where a section is particularly torn up, perhaps post a ban for those weeks?

I seriously doubt that the whole 20 miles will be all torn up all at once.

Why not have it "as conditions allow?" Why not leave the door open for them to accomodate use? As opposed to battening down all hatches in advance for a full 2 years?

[Tuckervill]

what does this mean exactly? If it's something you care about, how much effort does it take to write a quick email expressing your opinion? I can really see not being interested because it doesn't apply to you; or you live far away, something like that; but to just say "I don't normally DO this because I'm not" you're not what? you're not someone who cares? you're not someone who wants others to know what they care about?

what's next? Banning bikes on other roads because the street washer is coming?

Frankly, mimi, there are natural limits on my time just like yours, and I have to pick and choose what I spend it on. It was a call to action that I didn't particularly feel called to act upon, when viewed in the context of the rest of my priorities. Not until the OP said she thought it would get more response here did I feel so moved.

I don't see how not writing to senators in a far away state makes me "less" of "whatever" than others. I have my own issues that I care about, of which you are probably not even aware. That doesn't make you "less than" me.

[eta: This sounds snarkier on second reading than I intended. Please do not take offense.]
Karen