[Sosfbay-discuss] Green Bikers

[Tian Harter]

If you go to the SVBC meetings you will find people that like what
we are doing and don't really mind being fellow travelers. Some
of them (at least one I've seen) even wear Green Party T shirts to
the meeting. They see their work as advocacy more than change,
so they won't be running against us soon.

JamBoi wrote:

>Unlike the author of that particular letter, I don't see it as a choice
>of either/or.  In other words, yes we need to improve our transit
>system, and yes we need to improve our cycling system.  The cycling
>part costs a mere pittance compared to the money spent on autos and
>gets a very large 'bang for the buck'.  I still think about how in the
>Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition we were fighting for the state and
>county folks just to fullfill what they'd committed to (required by law
>actually) to build up the cycling path beside 85 and how the squirreled
>out of it as unfortunately happens so frequently.  Damn we would have
>done well to turn to the Green Party to get some political muscle
>behind it.  Still could.  The cycling community and SVBC could be
>another source of Green Party recruits, especially if we can actually
>get some changes effected.
>
>A Million Votes for Peace,
>
>Drew
>
>--- Bob Alavi <baalavi at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>  
>
>>Hi All, This was [not bilke commute friendly ] in Chronicle of Aug 5:
>>   
>>  " 
>>  TED LOEWENBERG  San Francisco 
>>  
>>---------------------------------
>>    Bicycle commuting is a dead horse 
>>  Editor -- Your frequent advocacy for bicycle commuting has made me
>>rethink the idea. An experienced rider can probably maintain 20 mph
>>for a reasonable distance in bike clothing. A commuter, dressed for
>>work, would be hard pressed, especially in traffic and with crowded
>>bike lanes.   When I rode 8 miles to my dental office on a good bike
>>path, on a warm day, it usually required about 25 minutes of riding,
>>and 30 minutes of drip dry, as there was no shower available.
>>Schlepping a change of clothes back and forth is not a viable
>>solution.   For most people, this is ridiculous, and to keep
>>suggesting such a method as reasonable is to continue beating a very
>>dead horse. Get real. Society requires subsidized transit for all in
>>the Bay Area.   "
>>   
>>  I guess the "5 letters" were in response to this.  Since about the
>>beginning of the year, I have been commuting with a bicycle.  I think
>>it has been tremendously helpful in my case.  My commute is about 15
>>miles, one way.  But some of the items noted in the letter as
>>problems of commuting with a bicyle, seem reasonable to me.  I just
>>didn't like the tone of that letter.  To be specific, I think 20 MPH
>>for a bike is way too fast in most city streets.  I feel I'd be going
>>dangerously fast when I go over 12-15 MPH.  But that may be my
>>problem.  Oh yes, sweating is a problem, but if I ride Light Rail for
>>part of that commute, I hardly break a sweat.  Proper clothing is
>>completely a different area by itself.
>>   
>>  We as a society have invested over 100 years to develop "automobile
>>traffic friendly" system and roads.  If we invest a fraction of that
>>into a "bicyle friendly" system, we -- that's all of us, will do a
>>lot better.
>>   
>>  ba
>>   
>>  
>>Fred Duperrault <fredd at freeshell.org> wrote:
>>  Gerry, Tian, Cameron, Drew, Dana and other Green bikers - OR BIKERS
>>TO 
>>BE, There are five "Letters to the Editor," in today's (Aug 12) SF 
>>Chronicle, under "A happy gaggle of bike commuters," that you might
>>be 
>>interested in. Either get it on line or pick up a Chronicle today.
>>The 
>>letters are on the "Opinion" page, Section B, Page 4.
>>    
>>
-- 
Tian
http://tian.greens.org
Latest change: Added Zero One San Jose Pictures!