Manners….or, "the A in PAL is not for A**"….

[KLizotte]

I’ve run into similar behavior at HP. I think it generally underscores the need for a dedicated cycling training facility in the area; someplace where cyclists can train without worrying about cars, peds, dogs, etc. Unfortunately such a facility would require quite a bit of land which is in very short supply around here, esp any place convenient for after work loops.

The NPS could stop a lot of this bad behavior by simply installing speed bumps around HP. I’m not necessarily advocating for that but I could see it happening.

[PotomacCyclist]

It might be useful to send the message directly to local training groups (triathlon clubs, competitive cycling teams) since those are the people who are likely engaging in this behavior. I would do this myself, but I didn’t renew my membership in one of the triathlon clubs, partly because of the unrelenting and blatantly racist posts on social media from a certain active member.

[JustinW]

The hope is that some of those folks participate in this forum and will get the idea. This may also be something for WABA to look at, I think.

[mstone]

I think posting here is preaching to the choir and basically a waste of time.

[jabberwocky]

@JustinW 125976 wrote:

If cyclists truly want to own that space, they should consider applying for a permit allowing exclusive use for a couple of hours at times. I bet the NPS would agree to that in exchange for a decreased amount of poor behavior at other times.

I sincerely doubt they would. Hains is a large, popular park; its highly doubtful the park service would shut the whole thing down for the exclusive use of one group (especially since the argument is “this group is unable to behave like civil human beings around other users, so they should totally get their own exclusive time!”).

I won’t be surprised at all if/when cyclists lose the right to ride there, or find its suitability as a race track severely curtailed.

[jrenaut]

The one time enforcement of cyclist behavior is needed and deserved, NPS is nowhere to be found.

[DaveK]

@jrenaut 125994 wrote:

The one time enforcement of cyclist behavior is needed and deserved, NPS is nowhere to be found.

Really? I’ve gotten a stop sign ticket a Hains and I know many, many people who have as well. They’re out there all the time. They’re just ticketing people for rolling a sign safely instead of the huge pack swamping people on foot or on a casual ride.

[jrenaut]

@DaveK 125998 wrote:

Really? I’ve gotten a stop sign ticket a Hains and I know many, many people who have as well. They’re out there all the time. They’re just ticketing people for rolling a sign safely instead of the huge pack swamping people on foot or on a casual ride.

Right, that’s what I mean. They ticket rolling stops but ignore the packs of aggressive jerks terrorizing other road users.

[bobco85]

@jabberwocky 125992 wrote:

I sincerely doubt they would. Hains is a large, popular park; its highly doubtful the park service would shut the whole thing down for the exclusive use of one group (especially since the argument is “this group is unable to behave like civil human beings around other users, so they should totally get their own exclusive time!”).

I won’t be surprised at all if/when cyclists lose the right to ride there, or find its suitability as a race track severely curtailed.

I don’t think the idea of exclusivity is completely out of the realm of possibility. With paid permits, they could limit access for use by certain groups. It would probably get very expensive (I have no idea what the cost of this sort of thing can be) for something like a weekly permit, but I do know that NPS does close it down for running events (e.g., Cherry Blossom 10 Mile Run). I figure they could even close down the right lane so that others could access the side parking areas.

But will the NPS close it off for free given the argument is a selfish one? Not gonna happen.

[Terpfan]

@bobco85 126002 wrote:

I don’t think the idea of exclusivity is completely out of the realm of possibility. With paid permits, they could limit access for use by certain groups. It would probably get very expensive (I have no idea what the cost of this sort of thing can be) for something like a weekly permit, but I do know that NPS does close it down for running events (e.g., Cherry Blossom 10 Mile Run). I figure they could even close down the right lane so that others could access the side parking areas.

But will the NPS close it off for free given the argument is a selfish one? Not gonna happen.

I don’t know, they close RCP on weekends.

But, yes, people need to act with a modicum of respect toward others around them. It’s why I largely avoid HP except in the dead of winter.

[Powerful Pete]

Or, do frequent it and confuse drivers and other road users by being polite and respectful!

[dasgeh]

@JustinW 125976 wrote:

That’s a great way to p*ss off the general public and feed existing poor stereotypes about lawless cyclists who ignore rules of the road. That’s possibly a great way to push the National Park Service to more aggressively observe and police bikers, and it is conceivable that they could ban cyclists entirely due to poor behavior and a perceived lack of interest in sharing public facilities.

Can we stop accepting that the bad behavior of a few people who happen to ride bikes reflects anything on the rest of us? Anyone with half a brain should realize that there are some jerks everywhere doing everything, and their actions don’t speak for the whole lot of people who happen to do that same thing. There’s serious observation bias from behind a steering wheel, and the way to address it isn’t to try to get every person on a bike to be Mother Teresa, but to point out that there are plenty of jerk drivers and plenty of non-jerk cyclists.

And to the point about exclusivity of Hains Point: Given that it’s the only access for the only public golf course in the city (and other amenities), I doubt they’d close all of the loop outside of a permitted event.

[Raymo853]

@jrenaut 125999 wrote:

Right, that’s what I mean. They ticket rolling stops but ignore the packs of aggressive jerks terrorizing other road users.

I assume it is because rolling stop signs is clearly prohibited in the statutes while be an aggressive jerk is not.

[mstone]

@Raymo853 126027 wrote:

I assume it is because rolling stop signs is clearly prohibited in the statutes while be an aggressive jerk is not.

yes, it’s certainly easier to ticket non-dangerous but illegal behavior than to tackle the real problems–that’s criticism #1 of the way these “safety campaigns” operate.

[baiskeli]

@KLizotte 125980 wrote:

I’ve run into similar behavior at HP. I think it generally underscores the need for a dedicated cycling training facility in the area; someplace where cyclists can train without worrying about cars, peds, dogs, etc.

Perhaps. You’d still have the problem with clashes between cyclist and cyclist though, such as has been documented at Hains Point on this board.

[Author]

Posts