Comments on: The Persistence of Bike Salmon

By: Pro Cyclist

Pro Cyclist — Fri, 22 Jul 2011 11:53:00 +0000

Cyclist should always be responsible riders. They should always think of their safety especially when they enter the busy roads of the city. There are lots of cars and other vehicles that doesn't mind their existence so its their call to just stay on the lane intended for them. Better safe than sorry. Cyclist should also remember that busy streets is not the right place for their training for cycling.

By: The Salmon

The Salmon — Wed, 26 May 2010 15:12:10 +0000

Here’s my problem, I live on 44th and 8th. I work down on 23rd and 8th. (use Google maps to see the bike lanes before reading on) I ride to work to save time, money and i enjoy it. I just moved in from Brooklyn, where we are just happy to HAVE a bike lane, nobody cares what direction they go in, just that they are their is enough. So my problem is that to ride from home to work in the madness of the morning commute, how should i get there if not to salmon? i can ride all the way to sixth ave for that bike lane, which wastes enough time to make it pointless or i can walk, i’m not going to do either, so don’t suggest that. but here’s my real problem. At night going home i ride properly with traffic, because of the streets i live on , the pedestrians are all over the bike lane and street and if i dont salmon, they NEVER see me coming, and i’ve moved to avoid and been brushed by taxis. hatred? ideas? – Salmon in a Pickle.

By: Catbus

Catbus — Sat, 22 May 2010 00:03:50 +0000

When I see a salmon (great term, BTW) coming toward me, either in a bike lane or in the “doorspace” of an unlaned street, I put on my Mean Face and repeatedly, vigorously jab my pointed finger to the left to indicate the side of the street the moron is SUPPOSED to be on.

Aside from blowing through red lights, salmoning is the single stupidest thing people on bicycles do. (Sorry, someone who does this doesn’t qualify as a “cyclist.” He’s just a danger to himself and everyone around him. Like a drunk operating a forklift, or Donald Rumsfeld.)

By: mrek

mrek — Mon, 17 May 2010 00:12:45 +0000

I have to avoid a salmon almost every morning. Slow, but there (I’m not fast either so avoidance isn’t difficult unless a car is passing by – painted bike lane about 1 1/2 bikes wide on a 40 mph street). Not sure what to say – looks like he comes from a place where they drive on the left. OTOH, when I’m early, I’ve seen him on the other side farther down the street (past a 4-way stop) – could be that he plans to turn into a side street and doesn’t want to make a left turn across 4 lanes. In the dark. Without lights. Wearing all black. Without a helmet. Under the trees where streetlights don’t penetrate well now that the leaves are out.

Tempted to take the light from by daughter’s bike (has reached the age where bicycles are no longer socially relevant) and one of my old helmets, stopping the guy some morning, and offering a little protection and a suggestion about what side to ride on.

By: Martin28

Martin28 — Thu, 13 May 2010 20:15:09 +0000

In Portland, Oregon, they actually encourage people to “salmon” on certain streets.

http://www.newurbannews.com/13.4/jun08biking.html

On a street of that volume and speed, it is probably perfectly safe.

By: beck

beck — Sat, 24 Apr 2010 16:47:21 +0000

The persistence of bike salmon in London and cities around the USA is partly a result of cycling as of yet failing to achieve critical mass.

In cities that stripe in road infrastructure that supports roadway cycling, there is a reduction in sidewalk cycling. This is a big plus for rider safety.

Additionally, i’ve observed in US cities with high ridership and equitable roadscape for bike traffic that wrong way cyclists are the minority. Wrong way riding behavior gets culled out as ridership increases. A cyclist can’t fight the commuter peloton for too long before they discover that yes indeed they might be traveling in the wrong direction! (I can just picture a salmon trying to ride in Copenhagen during rush hour – not going to happen!)

I predict American cyclist counts would show a lessening in the ratio of wrongway:correct direction cyclists as cities build ridership.

salmon are either not there, OR the roads support a multi directional cycling approach (woonerven), in cities with high ridership.

NYC is an odd bird, but even there i suspect to see some greater normalization of bike traffic there as the city builds in more roadway bicycling infrastructure and NYC takes progressive steps to guide non-motorized transportation policy.

Maybe Manhattan needs to become one giant Woonerf????

By: Columbusite

Columbusite — Sat, 24 Apr 2010 01:57:02 +0000

Lack of education is certainly a huge factor and it doesn’t help that we typically use vague signage (“Share the Road”) which doesn’t instruct cyclists to ride properly in the lane, nor does it tell drivers what sharing consists of.

@ Peter Smith – It’s a shame that you value increasing the number of cyclists rather than keeping us safe and alive. Tell the people who lost a loved one because of a door-zone bike lane or because a motorist took a right turn across a bike lane, etc, that that was preferable to them riding properly (i.e. vehicularly) where either situation is entirely (or nearly so) negated by VC. I speak from years of first hand experience. The priority *should* be to enhance current infrastructure for people who are properly biking that set an example (hundreds of people see me doing this every day) and not cater to people who aren’t biking because they don’t really want to. Let them choose to walk, ride the bus, buy a scooter, etc. My safety as a cyclist should not be sacrificed to make people who aren’t riding to *maybe* ride a bike because they *feel* safe enough.

By: Barry Childress

Barry Childress — Fri, 23 Apr 2010 23:00:27 +0000

First and foremost I will assert that it is parents and not schools are the ones that teach the population to ride as rules that existed two generations ago are still being propagated.

School “safety” education focuses too much on helmets and walking your bike across intersections as if emulating pedestrians and their high crash rate improves the safety of cycling.

As adults our society is silent on safe cycling as if it is only for kids, how many states have the question which direction do cyclists have to ride as part of their drivers test? Yet it is these adults that go on to teach their kids.

By: Step-Through

Step-Through — Fri, 23 Apr 2010 01:42:40 +0000

I have to second Mitch, Aaron Bialick, Peter Smith (and others) for some good points. For one, the overzealous one-wayification of our downtowns has made mobility much harder than it needs to be. There’s also a lot of evidence that one-way streets suppress economic development and encourages speeding. If you have narrow streets and short blocks, one way streets can be a necessity because their literally isn’t room to pass (for cars). The next big point is how the cycling cities like Amsterdam handle handle one-ways. Narrow but busy streets have a contraflow lane on them. Quiet narrow streets are one-way but posted with a simple “bicycles exempted” sign. Traffic is slow and infrequent enough that the cars and bikes can just navigate around each other. This is really different from most of the U.S. where traffic is high-speed and careless. Finally, many of the people I talk to genuinely don’t know that traffic laws apply to bicycles. Combined with misconceptions about safety (feeling safer on the sidewalk or facing traffic in contradiction of the facts) you get salmons and sidewalk riders. Better bicycle infrastructure, converting streets back to two-way, cycling (and walking) education as a component of driver’s ed, and maybe distribution of some bicycle mirrors, and we should be okay.

By: Urbanis

Urbanis — Wed, 21 Apr 2010 14:55:29 +0000

Calling Streetfilms! Clarence and Elizabeth, do a segment interviewing “the salmon on the street”–that should answer a lot of our questions.