In the past five years, the number of people cycling in London has risen by almost 50 per cent. These people are not the mad, bearded loons of popular myth, their coat-tails flapping crazily as they pedal round the Elephant and Castle. The modern cyclist is making an elegant and intelligent response to pollution and traffic congestion.

Can it be true? Is a cycling revolution really beginning in the Old Dart?

It may seem paradoxical that an intermediate technology is now the future. But it would be churlish not to encourage cycling as the cheap, green answer to so many contemporary troubles. May those who cycle be blessed with clean consciences, stronger arteries and safer journeys.

Meanwhile in the Shaky Isles

Scoop reports:

There’s no doubting that cycling is having a renaissance. No longer the exclusive domain of the shiny-lycra-brigade, bikes are being embraced by Kiwis of all shapes and sizes, many of whom would in no way consider themselves ‘greenies’ or fitness fanatics.

What? In New Zealand as well?

Tony Smith, National Sales Manager for Avanti Cycles estimates that demand for its bikes and accessories has increased by around 20 percent this year alone, and growth has been largely in the commuter market.

“Cycling is becoming like the new golf,” he says. “If people aren’t riding to and from work, then they’re out in groups riding together for exercise before work. It’s quite a relaxing, social activity for many.”

And it turns out that it’s Bike Wise Week in New Zealand:

the only nationally coordinated event promoting biking as a valid, fun and healthy means of transport and enjoyment.

The road to recovery for drought-stricken rural Victoria could be along a bike path, with research showing the state’s regional rail trails are becoming big money-spinners.

Cyclists using rail trails — cycle and walking paths built on disused country rail lines — spend an average of $258 a day, according to a study by La Trobe University professor Sue Beeton.

I’d forgotten all about this—I actually filled in this survey while riding the Murray-to-the-Mountains Rail Trail last Easter. And (to my embarrassment) I notice that Rail Trails Australia announced the publication of Professor Beeton’s full report on their site a month ago and I totally missed it.

Anyway, while cautioning against going crazy over averages, Professor Beeton gives the following break down on average expenditure per person:

On the relatively low figure for accommodation, Professor Beeton comments:

Many tourism advisors recommend focusing on smaller numbers of visitors who spend more than the ‘mass’ tourist, providing a greater dollar yield per person…However, often destinations consider their high yield tourist to be the one who stays in the more expensive accommodation, assuming that such expenditure will continue in all areas of their trip. This may not be the case and, as can be seen by the figures above, expenditure on accommodation on the MTM Rail Trail is not high in many cases due to the availability and use of camping grounds and caravan parks. However, these same people are spending significant amounts on food and beverages, and should be considered as a relatively high yield [market] for this trail and region.

[emphasis added]

Regarding employment, Professor Beeton continues:

According to Access Economics, every $99,000 spent by tourists creates one additional job in Victoria…The 8,300 Easter visitors alone contribute some $2,141,400 ($258.00 x 8,300) direct expenditure to the region. This represents 21.6 equivalent full-time jobs being generated by the Easter visitation.

Hmm, even if that number is off by 50% it’s still pretty respectable. Indeed it appears that the possibilities of cycling-oriented tourism have not been lost on the Wangaratta Council:

The Murray to the Mountains Rail Trail project is delivering huge economic and tourism benefits to the region. The Rural City of Wangaratta is positioning itself to take full advantage of these benefits…

Professor Beeton concludes that rail trails:

provide economic opportunities for the local host communities as well as the increased pride ‘showing your place’ to visitors creates.

However they require not only funds to be developed, but significant maintenance support. In addition, local businesses and communities need to proactively develop, manage and promote the Trails to their markets.

In general?

It seems that such a finding is common wherever rail trails are established and popularised:

Rail-trails have economic value as a recreation resource if individuals are willing to pay to use them, either directly, through access fees, or indirectly, through travel expenditures necessary to reach and use the site. Other economic benefits…may include increased visitor spending and sales tax revenues, and business relocations due to enhanced community attractiveness…Somewhat more abstract economic and social benefits include preserving undeveloped space, enhanced community beauty, historic preservation and community pride captured by users’ recreation demand for the rail-trail resource…Alternatively…potential economic and social costs of greenways should not be overlooked. These costs include site development and operation, decreased property tax revenues from putting land on the public roll and opportunity costs associated with using the land for other purposes.

Betz, Bergstrom, and Bowker (2003) “A Contingent Trip Model for Estimating Rail-trail Demand”, in the Journal of Environmental Planning and Management

With all this in mind, I took a quick-and-dirty review of what’s been reported in a few other countries about the economic benefits of rail trails:

New Zealand

The Otago Central Rail Trail is on New Zealand’s South Island and was subject of an economic impact survey in 2005:

According to DOC, usage is growing steadily. In 2004 around 5000 people completed the full 150km challenge, with some 100,000 people movements recorded over various sections. DOC does point out that regular users in communities like Alexandra contribute to this 100,000…So is the OCRT bringing money into the region? For the answer, multiply DOC‘s user counts by the…2005 finding that the average per person expenditure within the Otago Central Rail Trail region was $92.80 per day (including accommodation) with the average length of stay 3.8 days.

The survey report also claims that a considerable amount of new businesses and new employment opportunities arose because of tourist traffic on that Trail.

UK

While Britain is well blessed with many general purpose trails, it seems (and I’m happy to be corrected on this) that there aren’t many rail trails. There is the Camel Trail in Cornwall, which is being touted by the local council (e.g. August 2005, June 2006) as a major contributor to the local economy, without specifying exactly how or to what magnitude.

Sustrans says:

Cycle tourism in the UK is currently valued at £635 million per year. The potential for growth here is huge – the forecast for cycle tourism right across Europe is £14 billion per year within 20 years. With potential economic benefits at this scale it is not surprising that there is keen interest in how to develop routes to attract visitors and tourists, and how to market these effectively.

But of course, they are not only referring to rail trails there.

USA

In the USA, a report from 1995 by the National Bicycle and Pedestrian Clearinghouse summarises a number of older findings about the benefits of rail rails:

There are a variety of businesses that attribute their success to nearby trail: restaurants, convenience stores, bicycle shops, campgrounds and bed-and-breakfast establishments.

And perhaps the most remarkable observation that

Homebuyers have begun to recognize the benefits of bicycle and pedestrian facilities and are showing a preference for properties close to those facilities…The increased salability of listings is considered to be the greatest value that the Northern Central Rail-Trail has brought to trailside properties in Baltimore County, Maryland. According to a 1994 study conducted for the Maryland Department of Natural Resources, “if two identical properties are for sale and one is near the trail and the other is not, the trail is used as a selling point and helps many nearby owners sell their property faster.”

This is reflected in a more recent summary by the Rails-to-Trails Conservancy. They also say that

the evidence supporting the conclusion that trails and greenways improve local economies grows greater by the day. Across the United States, trails and greenways are stimulating tourism and recreation-related spending. Trail and greenway systems have become the central focus of tourist activities in some communities and the impetus for kick-starting a stagnating economy.

An example is The Great Allegheny Passage Rail-Trail which:

attracts 500,000 tourists annually, and brings economic and social benefits to an area that previously supported only heavy industry. The passage provides $15 million in direct benefits annually to communities along the trail.

Specifically:

Five new bed and breakfasts, a bike tour company, a private campground, a bike shuttle service, and a restored opera house-turned-restaurant have opened along the trail.

On track for benefits

While this is hardly a comprehensive review, it appears that Professor Beeton’s findings travel well: there are generally positive economic effects that follow from the development of rail trails. (And that’s not taking into account the health, environmental, and heritage benefits that may also flow.) Naturally, the set-up funding and ongoing maintenance costs can’t be ignored, but my guess is that for most rail trails there is ample return on such investment.

Let’s not get carried away—rail trails aren’t every cyclist’s cup o’ tea and neither are they necessarily a panacea for regional economic woes—but I reckon I’d rather have them than not. And I’m sure plenty of regional communities are glad have them also.

No, honestly. He doesn’t just hate me – Nigel Havers REALLY hates me. He doesn’t know me from a bar of soap, but because I ride a bike he seems to know a lot about my character. And he doesn’t like me at all. Because I’m not a Cambridge undergraduate “languidly journeying through the narrow streets of the town with [my] scarves flapping in the wind” or an old maid, as conjured up by George Orwell, “cycling through the mist on [my] way to Communion”.

On Tuesday he was given an op-ed slot in London’s Daily Mail and he let fly, saying that he’s “heartily sick of the lot” of us cyclists.

And why?

Because we’re aggressive and arrogant:

Brimming with hostility, utterly indifferent to those around them, they appear to think they are above the law.

Oh yeah, and we’re all incurable outlaws who ignore red lights, ride on pavements, and go the wrong way down one-way streets.

Not green, cyan

And we’re all mock-greenies, aren’t we? I mean, take David Cameron as an example:

The emptiness of cycling’s green credentials is beautifully symbolised by Tory leader David Cameron’s habit of going to the Commons on two wheels, while his official limousine follows sedately behind, bearing his shoes and briefing papers.

I wasn’t aware that David Cameron has ever been held up as an example of good green cycling. Quite the reverse, I would have thought – “breathtaking hypocrisy” are hardly words of overwhelming endorsement.

Talk about a straw-man argument.

Pomposity and selfishness

Pomposity and selfishness runs through everything committed cyclists do.

But of course these aren’t traits of the English titled classes, are they The Honorable Mr Havers?

I’ve got nothing against gays cyclists

I am not against cycling per se. In fact, I used to cycle myself and still possess a bicycle.

Gee, I sure I’ve heard this sort of argument before, something like: “I am not against homosexuality per se. In fact, the prefects used to bugger me brainless at school and some of my best friends are gay.”

But I always made sure that I obeyed the rules of the road.

Oh sure, Nige. And you never use a mobile phone while driving either.

Exhumation

Unlike motorists, who individually pay hundreds, even thousands, of pounds a year in road tax and petrol duty, sustaining the upkeep of the network, cyclists get free use of our streets.

I can’t believe he’s exhuming this argument yet again. Once and for all Nigel – road tax, petrol tax, car registration, and license fees DO NOT cover the cost of “upkeep of the network”. I can forgive you once for being ill-informed, but to keep flogging away at this one shows that you are stupid as well as ignorant.

Inciting stuff

Just as aggravating is the way cyclists treat the pavement as an extension of the road. As I have discovered to my personal cost, if you remonstrate with them, you receive is a volley of abuse.

To remonstrate suggests that ol’ Nige may not have been exactly “genteel” himself.

At such moments, I have longed to have a stick to jam between the spokes of their wheels and bring them to a deservedly painful halt.

Oh nice one! Even if his high-pitched carping were justified, inciting violence is not really the answer. What was that again about “Gentility and modesty have been replaced by aggression and arrogance”? (Pot, meet kettle.)

Or how about endorsing the vandalisation of bicycles:

Once, at the National Theatre, I had to share a dressing room with another actor who insisted on bringing in his bicycle.

The space was already cramped enough, and there was a perfectly good cycle rack outside. But this tiresome creature had to wheel in his machine every day, claiming it would not be safe anywhere else. As I struggled to get ready, I often felt like putting a knife through the tyres.

Oh the irony. Sounds like this bloke’s bike was barely safe inside either.

Above the law?

So many of them refuse to put lights on their bikes, again implying that they are above the law

Ah, no. Not above the law – just stupid. And in the end, only threatening their own health and safety.

The good ol’ days

When a cyclist bangs on the roof of my car or scrapes my mirror without even bothering to apolo-gise, I sometimes wish for the good old days of Edwardian England, when young men would be sent to jail for swearing in the streets, causing a danger to the public or cycling without a light.

It was probably a calmer, saner world then, not one when you feared for a broken limb every time a two-wheeled monster came into view.

And while we’re at it, let’s bring back public floggings.

Cycling has-been?

Cyclists have certainly changed in recent years. They think the rest of us are idiots and that they are the gods of the road.

I wonder how long it’s been since bike has-been Nigel has got about on the bicycle that he still owns? Maybe he should reacquaint himself with his two-wheeler before he presumes to unload his bilge again – I, for one, have never ever felt like a “god of the road” when driving in traffic.

And I certainly don’t think all non-cyclists are idiots. But I’ll make a special exception for Nigel.

[via Bike Biz]

And you thought Nigel Havers was such a jolly nice fellow. Well, if you ride a bike he hates you (try not to take it personally though). He sounds just like bloody Sam Newman and he triggered a minor flame war at the online edition of The Independent by complaining about

“Cyclists who jump red lights and ride on pavements because they’re all bastards.”

OK, fair comment about red lights – but we’re all bastards, are we? And apparently he really meant it:

Yesterday, Mr Havers was in no mood to signal a thaw in relations. Speaking from his car on a mobile phone, he said: “I absolutely hate cyclists. If they use the roads for free and they don’t have to pay any tax, they must obey the rules.

[emphasis added]

Blah, blah, blah. It’s a dead argument: cyclists do not use the roads for free – we pay taxes just like everyone else.

(And let’s not mention the law on using a mobile phone while in control of a motor vehicle.)

Nige continues (to maximise the whinge effect, read in his plummy toff accent)…

“The rules are that you stop at a red traffic light. I’m at one now and four cyclists just went through. They go up a one-way street the wrong way. And they’re aggressive if you get in their way. One just smacked the side of my car with his hand. It’s unbelievable behaviour.”

He was probably pulled up in the bike lane.

It’s all the more puzzling when, according to another correspondent, Havers is a cyclist himself. But nice work by someone at the Wikipedia entry about him:

The Honorable Nigel Allan Havers (born 6 November 1949) is a popular British actor, known mainly for his television work and hatred of cyclists.

Fame is such a fickle beast.

The velorution begins

In happier news, the same issue of The Independent carries a leading article that proclaims Revolution! Britain embraces the bicycle:

After a decade of stagnation in the number of bicycle journeys, new figures show there has been a dramatic leap in commuters and leisure cyclists focused on Britain’s cities and the burgeoning network of cycle routes. In London, trips by bike have increased by 50 per cent in five years to 450,000 per day while figures obtained by The Independent show use of the National Cycle Network, covering 10,000 miles of urban and rural pathways, rose last year by 15 per cent to 232 million journeys.

Great news, but if you begin from a low postion, just about any improvement is significant:

Despite the phenomenal growth, Britain remains near the bottom of the European league of cycle use with just 2 per cent of all journeys made by bike – beating only Spain, Greece and Portugal. The Netherlands tops the league with 27 per cent.

But I don’t intend to criticise — that sounds remarkably similar to the percentage of journeys in Australian cities…