Bike advocates denounce 'road kill' graffiti

Napa County Bicycle Coalition asks if spray-painted message on Silverado Trail is hate crime
2014-01-08T12:04:00Z 2014-01-14T16:23:42Z Bike advocates denounce 'road kill' graffitiANNE WARD ERNST Napa Valley Register
January 08, 2014 12:04 pm  • 

CALISTOGA — The spray-painted words “road kill” that appeared in a bike lane on Silverado Trail over the weekend drew sharp criticism from bicycle advocates who hope to reduce incidents of road rage in the region.

“This is not a joke,” said Mike Costanzo, executive director of Napa County Bicycle Coalition, who posted a photo of the graffiti on the coalition’s Facebook page asking if others thought it was a hate crime.

“I thought long and hard before using the term ‘hate crime,’” he said.

His counterpart at Sonoma County Bicycle Coalition, Gary Helfrich, takes the matter seriously as well. “That’s really out of control. That borders on hate speech,” he said.

The graffiti appears to have been spray-painted using a stencil with the words “road kill” cut out of a rectangle, giving Costanzo and Helfrich the indication that the vandal had intended to replicated the message, but was interrupted in the process.

“Mostly people who do stuff like that are cowards,” Helfrich said.

The tag, which was painted below a bike lane symbol of a person riding a bike, was reported by Costanzo to the Napa County Sheriff’s Office on Monday and officials said they expected to have it removed within 24 hours.

It was located less than a half mile south of Larkmead Lane on the west side of the road. An open area bounded by vineyards is immediately adjacent.

A Sheriff’s Office spokesperson said the spray-painted message is potentially an act of misdemeanor vandalism. The office has no leads and is asking anyone who may have information to contact them at 877-426-4847 or send an email to

Disturbed by the graffiti, Costanzo said he posted it on the Napa County Bicycle Coalition’s Facebook page to draw attention to “the road rage that unfortunately happens sometimes” between motorists and bicyclists.

Brad Suhr, owner of Calistoga Bike Shop, hadn’t seen or heard about the graffiti when The Weekly Calistogan interviewed him, but he said he hoped it was the work of a prankster, not someone with hate in mind.

Motorists yell obscenities, throw things and sometimes open car doors into a rider, Helfrich said. Occasionally the physical harassment by motorists is injurious or fatal.

“The consequences are so grave” for cyclists, Costanzo said.

Helfrich said he was unaware of similar “road kill” tagging on bike trails in Sonoma County, but said there have been other dangerous acts of anti-bike behavior there, including at least two instances where shots were fired at bicyclists.

Suhr suggests people remember that the person on the bicycle could be someone you know and care about.

To get motorists to think about the rider as a person, not an annoyance, he asks, “Would you do that to your mother?”

Copyright 2016 Napa Valley Register. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

(48) Comments

  1. selim_sivad
    Report Abuse
    selim_sivad - January 08, 2014 1:00 pm
    I'm not defending the actual graffiti, but calling it "hate speech" (even by tacking on "borderline" before it) is ridiculous and simply lessens the actual meaning of the phrase...which is overused, anyway. We've gotten to the point where anything slightly negative is said against anybody who is slightly different from the speaker is automatically "hate speech".

    Clearly there's someone out there with a can of spray paint and a stencil that has some serious emotional problems (and a disturbing amount of free time, it appears). But bicyclists need to also realize that this doesn't happen in a vacuum. The spray paint is an overreaction to a bicycling culture where a percentage routinely bend (if not break) traffic laws in their habits. Many bicyclists get huffy (no pun intended) when a car gets too close to them, yet many roads they choose to ride on are ill-equipped for their vehicles.

    In order to get respect you need to give respect. And use your brains.
  2. Really napa
    Report Abuse
    Really napa - January 08, 2014 1:43 pm
    Just like there are some idiotic drivers and people who would write such a thing on a a bike path there are idiotic cyclist who think they own the road and have rights ways. They won't yield, won't move over and think they will do well against a 2 ton vehicle. Educate everyone. And, no... Not a "hate" term
  3. Caribfan
    Report Abuse
    Caribfan - January 08, 2014 1:46 pm
    Clearly someone's idea of a sick joke. I do not think it's a hate crime at all. I think someone has no class and probably no job with nothing better to do. This took some time to make stencil phrase when he/she could have just spray painted it.
  4. abmccaa
    Report Abuse
    abmccaa - January 08, 2014 2:32 pm
    As a cyclist using the word "hate crime" is ridiculous. However, the above comments about cyclist as a whole, disobeying laws is just as ridiculous. I ride 3000 - 5000 miles a year with groups of riders that range from 2 to 200. Seldom do I see anyone disobeying traffic laws.
    Typically those that disobey traffic laws are not cyclist but bicyclist. The difference being, a bicyclist is the occasional rider that doesn't know the basic traffic laws to begin with.

    Additionally, cars have to realize that cyclist have every right to use the road and are no different than a motorcycle. If a cyclist is going too slow for your liking, its not the cyclist that has an issue it you as a motorist that is impatient. The deliberate attacks on cyclist such as dooring them, honking, harassing and running them off the road SHOULD be prosecuted as hate crimes. This would help drivers appreciate the fact that impatience carries stiff consequences. ADDITIONALLY, cyclist that disobey laws should cited also!
  5. toneco
    Report Abuse
    toneco - January 08, 2014 2:43 pm
    I looked at this for a bit and decided that the picture of the bicyclist isn't hateful. The word "road" is not hateful. Kill by and of and of itself is not hateful. So I thought if you read upwards, it says
    "Bicylcists Kill Road. So maybe its hateful to the "road"?
    We are still allowed to express ourselves, right?
  6. toneco
    Report Abuse
    toneco - January 08, 2014 3:17 pm
    NVR, your title of this article says "Bike Advocates.... which I believe is plural? I only see one persons name mentioned that thinks this is hateful
  7. Cadence
    Report Abuse
    Cadence - January 08, 2014 3:47 pm
    The bigger an issue made of this, the more Road Kill stencils will appear I'll bet. And no, I am not PC so I find the stencil under the bicycle stencil a little bit humorous. I actually can't immediately deem the stenciler to be one with serious emotional problems any more than the average tagger.

    And ab, yup, you have every right to use the road. You do not have every right to slow more than five vehicles; that is dangerous and illegal. But you know what I know, these laws only count when an officer spots an infraction. If I were on the 15 pound bicycle, I'd be very cautious around motor vehicles weighing thousands no matter what the law says.
  8. Mouse_Nose
    Report Abuse
    Mouse_Nose - January 08, 2014 4:58 pm
    I wouldn't consider honking at a cyclist to be attacking. I give a short honk to cyclists who are riding 2 or more abreast when they are impeding the flow of traffic, and I shout "Single file please!". They do have every right to the road as a vehicle driver does, but they also must follow the laws of the road, such as keeping as far to the right as possible when faster-moving traffic is approaching from behind. That includes NOT riding 2 abreast and holding up traffic. Just as slower-moving cars must keep right, so must cyclists. It's rude, inconsiderate and illegal of cyclists to act as a rolling road block when they're riding 2 or more abreast. A brief honk and a verbal reminder to get single file for that is not too much, considering. Physical attacks are unacceptable however.

    I will give credit to most cyclists I see, who do follow the rules and who do get single file when they see or hear me coming from a distance. And I hold drivers just as much accountable as cyclists.
  9. Crosscountrykid
    Report Abuse
    Crosscountrykid - January 08, 2014 5:47 pm
    While not hate speech, this stencil can only be perceived as having a chilling effect on cyclists and should be viewed in a threatening context. I don't believe the person(s) who did this stencil had the goal of generating a debate about how well cyclists obey or not the rules of the road. And if meant as a sick joke, it reflects a sickness that can lead to far worse consequences. It's foolish and dangerous to trivialize the message sent by this stencil.
  10. Cadence
    Report Abuse
    Cadence - January 08, 2014 6:11 pm
    " It's foolish and dangerous to trivialize the message sent by this stencil."

    For whom? Just drivers? cyclists? taggers? Unfortunately, speaking aloud when one's thoughts aren't pc is also foolish and dangerous, and I suspect the tagger isn't particularly pc. Or maybe he had one of those close calls that you will have if you drive or bicycle on Napa's winding, rural roads very often.
  11. glenroy
    Report Abuse
    glenroy - January 09, 2014 6:31 am
    They need a new executive director….assuming he’s not the exclusive member.
  12. naparealestate
    Report Abuse
    naparealestate - January 09, 2014 9:20 am
    Perhaps the stencil has another meaning altogether. Maybe it's a practical reminder that bicycling on Silverado Trail is a very dangerous undertaking.
  13. Micah
    Report Abuse
    Micah - January 09, 2014 10:02 am
    Using the phrase "hate crime" to describe this act of ignorant graffiti is WAYYYYY more offensive than the act itself. Congrats, you just even further alienated the thousands of drivers who every single day curse you and wish you would be banned from the roads. Share the road? Then share the costs and requirements too: road bicycles should be licensed and their operators should be required to carry insurance and pass an operator competency test... just like everyone else who operates a vehicle on public roads. Maybe then you would learn that riding 4 abreast on a narrow road is a STUPID idea, or that rolling through every single red light or stop sign on the road is a STUPID idea, or that stopping at the crest of a blind rise and sticking your bicycle out in the road to "teach the cars a lesson" is a STUPID idea. Until then, how about you stop pretending that bicyclists are some kind of special protected class of human that deserves special respect... because you're NOT.
  14. Micah
    Report Abuse
    Micah - January 09, 2014 10:09 am
    You are seeing what you want to see. Watch your group of cyclists navigate an intersection next time you're out with them, really watch. I bet that virtually all of them roll through the intersection without obeying the stop signs, and do so as a group rather than individually while allowing traffic to flow as normal.

    As far as cyclists being "no different than motorcycles" that is just flat out hogwash. When was the last time you paid a registration fee for your bicycle? When did you take a class on riding a bicycle and obeying the laws of the road? When did you last go to the DMV to renew your bicyclists license? When was the last time you checked your road bicycle insurance policy? When was the last time a motorcycle was required to ride single file on the shoulder of the road? NEVER, because those things DON'T EXIST. If you want to be treated like road bicycles are the same as other vehicles then you should pay the same fees and follow the same laws.
  15. AviationMetalSmith
    Report Abuse
    AviationMetalSmith - January 09, 2014 11:23 am
    There's more hate speech in this message board than there was in the darned stencil.
  16. Crosscountrykid
    Report Abuse
    Crosscountrykid - January 09, 2014 12:11 pm
    That's what I'm thinking, too.
  17. umanyar
    Report Abuse
    umanyar - January 09, 2014 12:21 pm
    Reading comments here I see cyclists are actually utilizing a public road with the same expectation of rights as a motorized vehicle. If that is the case cyclists who choose to use public roadways should be subject to similar fees and registration rates as motorcycles
    Cars and other motorized vehicles pay a lot of money to operate their vehicles legally on state roads. It stands to reason a cyclist who has the same expectations to the road as a motorcyclist should pay as well.
  18. umanyar
    Report Abuse
    umanyar - January 09, 2014 12:32 pm
    This whole matter of this being some kind of so called hate speech is typical today. Perfect example of the usage of feigned indignation to get ones point across in our world today...
  19. Micah
    Report Abuse
    Micah - January 09, 2014 1:03 pm
    AviationMetalSmith, that's the thing: When people throw around phrases like "hate speech" and "hate crime" where they absolutely do not belong the result is that the actual victims of those crimes have a much harder time being taken seriously. In case people have forgotten, strongly stated opinions are not "hate speech". Ignorant bicycle-related graffiti is not a "hate crime". Your offensive miscategorization demeans the suffering of people who are actually victimized by those crimes, the same way that Mike Costanzo's use of "hate crime" in reference to a piece of ignorant graffiti does.

    Think carefully before using inflammatory catch phrases in your statements... you may be making things harder for people who are real victims of actual crimes.
  20. Micah
    Report Abuse
    Micah - January 09, 2014 1:11 pm
    umanyar, you're 100% correct. That's why I think the use of the phrase "hate crime" is 100% more offensive than the stupid graffiti. Abusing phrases like "hate crime" and "hate speech" only does one thing in the end: Demean those who actually suffer the effects of the actual crimes. For a bicyclist to equate a piece of ignorant graffiti is the same as being ruthlessly beaten due to one's skin color... it's patently offensive.

    hate crime
    a crime motivated by racial, sexual, or other prejudice, typically one involving violence.

    If someone runs a bicyclist off the road on purpose while screaming "DEATH TO ALL BICYCLISTS!" now that's a hate crime, you'll get no argument from me.

    A piece of ignorant graffiti that's not even that clear in its purpose... to call it a hate crime is demeaning to the actual victims of hate crimes.
  21. Doug Wedel
    Report Abuse
    Doug Wedel - January 09, 2014 1:59 pm
    I think this is accurate. There is no room in bike safety for half measures. Most bike lanes are not wide enough to be safe. In fact, when the bike lane runs between an active car lane and a parking lane, it's actually a mislabeled door zone. We have a lot of those in Toronto. We need separated bike lanes.

    The photo in this post shows a paved shoulder which is marked as a bike lane. When it's like this on a highway, it only provides a false sense of security, as the slightest drift of a car to the outside of the road at speed will "clip" a cyclist. I heard NY State has highway bike lanes as wide as car lanes, which makes sense. The best is separate bike paths with a ditch or a barrier between them and car lanes. The only roads not needing separated bike lanes are the smallest cul-de-sacs and residential lanes where bikes should TAKE THE LANE.

    Wherever possible, separate cars and bikes. When you don't, use lots of education for both drivers and riders.
  22. Napa81
    Report Abuse
    Napa81 - January 09, 2014 3:31 pm
    If you've ever been on a bike and had a vehicle intentionally come within inches of you without cause, you would have a very different perspective on this picture. I see a lot of great cyclists out there on the road, and a handful of entitled idiots...just like I see with car, truck, and motorcycle drivers.

    Unfortunately, and these comments prove the point, drivers believe that cyclists are the ones responsible for any harm them comes to them on the road. The law, however, makes it clear that cyclists have the same rights on the roads as cars, and that drivers will be largely at fault for any harm that comes to a cyclist, just as they would if they hit a pedestrian.

    Is risking another person's life really worth the few seconds it may take to get around a cyclist? Does threatening a cyclist with your multi-thousand pound vehicle really make you feel better or superior? The next time you pass a cyclist, imagine it was your child or grandchild and pass have the advantage.
  23. Napa81
    Report Abuse
    Napa81 - January 09, 2014 3:37 pm
    What you probably are not seeing is that most motorists will yield their turn and wave through a group of cyclists so that they can stay together. This is a courtesy, not cyclists behaving badly.

    And regarding cyclists being the same as motorcycles, in the eyes of the law this is true. That doesn't change just because they don't pay license fees or insurance. And in that vein, cyclists are held to the same laws. But just as any other driver of a vehicle, there are cyclists that break those laws. That doesn't make cyclists as a whole bad.
  24. Steinerair
    Report Abuse
    Steinerair - January 09, 2014 5:46 pm
    How can you trust any man that feels
    comfortable wearing spandex?
  25. Cadence
    Report Abuse
    Cadence - January 09, 2014 8:02 pm
    Given the gazillions of bicycles, especially on weekends, and the limited number of accidents, I'd say generally drivers ARE passing them safely. I've had more near misses while I'm in the middle of my lane from cars veering into my lane while the drivers text or chat or whatever they do when they're not looking at the road. I don't think the veering is intentional and I'm not sure why you think it is? The thing is, I've had enough of them to convince me that I would be unsafe on a bicycle on a Napa highway. Or any other highways, for that matter. My car offers a little more protection than your spandex. Traveling by any means is not risk free.
  26. Bystander 1
    Report Abuse
    Bystander 1 - January 10, 2014 6:00 am
    There is probably nothing more disturbing on these comment boards than the 'proactive attitude' expressed by the anti bike crowed. Hopefully that term is not to strong and I will not be accused of demeaning the bicycling community by being critical of the pseudo haters. Someone here even said kill is not related to hate.

    As for registration,there are a million reasons where your analogy is simply ridiculous. but lets start with the simple cost. If you want every bike rider to start a yearly process of registration get ready for longer lines at the DMV. On wait that says motor vehicles, so I guess we will need a whole new department, a new state bureaucracy, and a new diet of taxes to pay for so such a ridiculous scheme. Not to mention that at least part of the registration fees are related to the weight and value of the vehicle.Instead maybe we should pay the bicyclists for less parking spaces, less traffic, less air pollution and less possibility that they will injure someone
  27. lindalee
    Report Abuse
    lindalee - January 10, 2014 8:12 am
    Why are some of you so hostile? We all share the world and (napa) in particular. We walk we drive cars we ride bicycles we move in wheelchairs and strollers - what's the problem?if anything its the drivers that are such a problem in our transportation system The red light runners the speeders the distracted drivers! AFter all not many bicyclist killed drivers but many drivers kill bicyclists and pedestrians. Can't we just all get along!
  28. Napa81
    Report Abuse
    Napa81 - January 10, 2014 9:28 am
    In one incident, it wasn't a case of the driver veering towards me, it was that he clearly opted not to pass with a safe distance. There were two trucks behind me, one gave a safe distance, the other was less than a foot. A rider can tell when it's intentional and when it's simple carelessness as you describe. Intentional usually comes with a hand gesture or some verbal abuse.

    What amazes me in discussions like this is drivers seem to justify the behavior by the fact that cyclists will not obey traffic laws, as if drivers never talk on their cell, text, roll through stop signs. I honestly do not understand what it is about cyclists that get under drivers' skin so much. If anything, I think it's their own insecurity about their driving skills. What makes a road unsafe for cyclists (and other drivers, for that matter) are other drivers, not the road itself.
  29. umanyar
    Report Abuse
    umanyar - January 10, 2014 10:42 am
    its always interesting to see how pun intended called cyclists get about even mentioning the idea of registration for their cycles that drive for miles and miles on public roads their cycles get a free ride for...
    actually there is already a system in place to register bikes or cycles. For instance there is already a very good law in place that requires a bike to be registered if its used at a public university. A similar law and registration could be required for cycles. The best part would be additional revenues would be created so roads could be modified in high cycle use areas to make roads safer for bikes and would be a win win scenario.
    It seems like cyclists are against this however...why? I agree the stencilist is wrong ...but perhaps cyclist registration would not be such a bad thing...For if cyclists really are against this the stencil should have read FREELOADER instead.
  30. Talktime
    Report Abuse
    Talktime - January 10, 2014 1:34 pm
    Adult bicycles that are ridden on public roads should be registered, just like cars. Adults who ride bicycles on roads for purposes other than local transportation should be required to pass competency training and pay for renewable licenses, just like the drivers of cars. Bicyclists who engage in long-distance riding on public roads should be required to carry minimum insurance to cover the costs of accidents, just like the drivers of cars. Until those three things happen "Share the road" is a one-sided statement with no meaning. Share the road? Then share the expenses and safety requirements too.

  31. Napa81
    Report Abuse
    Napa81 - January 10, 2014 2:29 pm're missing the point entirely. Personally, I would have no issue registering my bike, but Bystander1 raises some great points as to the practicality of it. However, registering bikes, even if the money was used to create safer roadways, does nothing to address the problem at hand, which is the animosity that drivers have with cyclists. And I'm not talking about the cases where cyclists are riding illegally...I'm talking about the unprovoked rage.
  32. umanyar
    Report Abuse
    umanyar - January 10, 2014 3:57 pm
    In such a heavily touristed area as Silverado trail especially I think the idea of registration would not be so difficult to implement.

    I looked at the article again too. It was interesting to read apparently in Sonoma there are reports of cyclists getting fired that's a hate crime! It seems the leader of the Sonoma chapter has a lot more on his hands than some misguided stenciling on the road...Its kind of funny he would chime in on on stenciling on the road one county over. Seems like the Sonoma chapter should be pursuing actual crimes in their own county against its members...
    I mean the article seems to be implying things are much worse in Sonoma...Message in napa seems to be use a stencil and go to jail..let's all reread the article maybe
  33. Bystander 1
    Report Abuse
    Bystander 1 - January 10, 2014 5:36 pm
    unmanyar- Freeloader? Really? I have a car and pay for my reregistration and other taxes, and so do most cyclists. Sp where the heck do you get freeloader out of that? I have seen no real reason why cyclists should pay some extra fees dreamed from the angry car driver crowd, other than some fantasy analogies about what you have decided is fair. Here is my idea on what is fair. Increase the penalties on drivers who hit cyclists that are obeying the rules of the rod when they are hit. We should also increase the fines on cars who hit pedestrians in the crosswalks and the like without penalty. Sure there may not be malice but there is certainly negligence, and let those folks pay the price. I assume you realize tourists like bike friendly towns, so maybe it should be those who wish to work against bike friendly measures who should pay the price
  34. Bystander 1
    Report Abuse
    Bystander 1 - January 10, 2014 5:56 pm
    Talktime- I find your comments, like many others here, a little scary. You seem to imply that you are not willing to share the road unless cyclists meet your demands If you meant to imply something else please clarify. Do you own any stencils?

    Competency test? What would that look like? Insurance? I assume you are referring to something like cyclist liability insurance and that you are not concerned with them insuring for damage bikes. Well insurance is usually based on defined risk of some sort. So to define such a risk we would need to add up all the incidences where cyclists caused harm or injury and roughly divide that amount by the insured bicyclists. My guess is we are likely talking less than a dollar a year

    Napa81- I share the curiosity of where all this vitriol comes from. To some degree It has to be some jealousy and envy. People do not like being stuck in their cars and all the ridiculous amount of cost with it, and bicyclists remind them of those frustrations
  35. commonsense57
    Report Abuse
    commonsense57 - January 10, 2014 6:02 pm
    Has anyone ever rode a bike in Europe? Germany, for example, uses a much safer and sensible system than we see here locally--large, long, paved and wide bike trails detached at least 20 feet from the main road. There's not much chance of becoming road kill under these conditions.

    I love to ride, but Napa is just about the most dangerous town for bikers I have ever seen.
  36. Madison Jay Hamilton
    Report Abuse
    Madison Jay Hamilton - January 11, 2014 7:19 am
    I once had a bicycle stolen, and the loss was covered under my homeowner's insurance policy.

    Build the Vine Trail from Vallejo's ferry building to Calistoga. If built, I'd be willing to pay a registration fee, and I'm willing to have bicycles licensed. (I'm guessing that Micah wants to expand government programs and hire more government employees!) Construction of the Vine Trail will reduce traffic, improve air quality, and spur economic growth in Napa Valley.

    Users of vehicles using internal combustion engines cost more to taxpayers than they ever dream of contributing. Bicyclists help preserve the environment. Motorists hurt the environment.

  37. Madison Jay Hamilton
    Report Abuse
    Madison Jay Hamilton - January 11, 2014 7:25 am
    "Motorists" are subsidized by taxpayers far more than bicyclists.

    Fees and taxes paid by "motorists" don't come close to repaying the damage they do to the environment and the costs associated with the building/maintenance of infrastructure.

    We could build the entire Vine Trail from Vallejo to Calistoga for approximately the same cost as the recently constructed intersection at Trancas/Highway 29.

    If money is your concern, you should be supporting the use of bicycles.
  38. Madison Jay Hamilton
    Report Abuse
    Madison Jay Hamilton - January 11, 2014 7:32 am
    The "shoulders" of many roads used by bicyclists in Napa County are in poor condition. Try riding a bicycle on Solano Avenue north of Trancas toward Yountville sometime. Your teeth will chatter as you dodge pavement cracks, potholes, gravel, shards of broken glass and nails. Improved infrastructure is needed, and many bicyclists would be willing to contribute to new construction and maintenance. How much money has already been raised in support of Vine Trail construction?
  39. Talktime
    Report Abuse
    Talktime - January 13, 2014 3:27 pm
    Bystander1, your assertion that my comments are "scary" combined with your oblique suggestion that I'm the one who did that stupid bit of graffiti mark you clearly as a person with an agenda. And my willingness to share the road is beside the point... I am required to by law, and I do.

    A competency test would look just like one that people take to get motorcycle licenses... remember how bicycles are "just like motorcycles"? So take a test at the DMV on your bicycle showing that you can ride competently, know your signals and know the rules of the road... just like everyone else.

    Insurance is just common sense. Bicyclists who run stop signs, turn without signalling, ride 3 abreast across the road all put my life in danger with their behavior. If I have to swerve into oncoming traffic to avoid a bicyclist who is breaking the law why shouldn't that cyclist be held financially responsible for any damage done to me or my car? You want the benefits of equality with none of the work
  40. Napa81
    Report Abuse
    Napa81 - January 13, 2014 5:28 pm
    Talktime, you have proven the point. Cars should not veer into on-coming traffic to pass. A few quick honks to let them know you are there and wait for them to pull over. It is not illegal to ride 2 or 3 abreast in California.

    Ride to the Right, But Within Limits- When riding slower than the normal speed of traffic, you are required to ride as far right as “practicable” (meaning safe). You are not required to ride as far right as possible, which may not be safe. You are allowed, but not required, to ride on the shoulder. CVC 21202, CVC 21650, CVC 21650.1

    Take the Lane - If a travel lane is too narrow to safely share side by side with a motor vehicle, you can prevent unsafe passing by riding near the center of the lane. On two-lane roads where it’s illegal or unsafe to pass, you must turn off the roadway at a designated or safe location to allow a line of 5 or more vehicles behind you to pass. CVC 21202 (a)(3), CVC 216
  41. Napa81
    Report Abuse
    Napa81 - January 13, 2014 5:30 pm
    The Catch22 is that roads that are most heavily traveled (like Silverado Trail) have the best bike lanes, while the least travelled roads (like Mount Veeder) have little to no bike lanes.
  42. Talktime
    Report Abuse
    Talktime - January 13, 2014 6:01 pm
    Just another reason adult road bicycles should be registered. Your registration fees can go to helping fix the roads. It's a win-win. The only people willing to pay $500/year to register their road bikes are the people who are serious about road bicycling... exactly the same people who will benefit most from having more money around to fix up the roads right? Even bicyclists themselves should be supportive of this idea.
  43. Outlier
    Report Abuse
    Outlier - January 14, 2014 7:40 am
    I will only respond to the insurance question. Insurance is base on real world damages and sharing the risk for such damages. And in general it is based on who, or what set of individuals is causing the damages. So again it would be your responsible to provide evidence that cyclists are causing significant damages as a result of illegal roadway procedures. Do you have any evidence of those costs, or rather do you just have a perception that it could be happening?
  44. Cadence
    Report Abuse
    Cadence - January 14, 2014 10:22 am
    I saw bike shares in Turin, Italy. There were no bike lanes, there were busy sidewalks, cobblestones on many streets and lots of train tracks. But just like the wheelchair users I noted, Italian bicyclists jounced along over whatever surface was available.
  45. Cadence
    Report Abuse
    Cadence - January 14, 2014 10:31 am
    Yes, freeloader. If I played golf, I'd pay a greens fee for my hobby even though I pay water and parks fees through my taxes. My greens fees cover the personnel and work to keep the greens that not everyone uses in order. Golf is a hobby.

    Your bicycle embellishments - new paint stripes, new enforcement of new laws - should be paid by you. A lot of bicycling - especially weekend bicycling, and among those who deliberately pack their bikes onto their cars and drive to Napa for sightseeing, is a hobby.

    Hobbies are luxuries, not necessities, and their costs should be paid by those who enjoy them.
  46. Napa81
    Report Abuse
    Napa81 - January 14, 2014 3:01 pm
    $500 a year? I don't even pay that for my car. Oh, and by the way, vehical registration fees should be plenty to take care of the roads for all modes of transportation.
  47. Loco Yokel
    Report Abuse
    Loco Yokel - January 16, 2014 8:18 pm
    Don't forget your increased administrative costs for your bicycle competency tests.
  48. user interface
    Report Abuse
    user interface - December 03, 2014 8:24 pm
    As a public artist who does a bit of stenciling I think "hate crime" is way off target. When I see "Road Kill" I think of it as a public safety announcement with a bit of dark "be careful or you'll get run over". I don't think painted bike lanes protect bike riders sufficiently, too many cyclists have become road kill. The stencil is actually quite clever and has nothing to do with 'tagging'. I had to laugh when I read the comment that says the stencilist doesn't have a job and has too much free time. Making art that is thought provoking is a full time job and it is usually executed while others are just watching TV. Bikes are difficult to see in shadows or bright sun. The use of a strobe light during the day could save your life. Is breathing smog next to the road really a good way to exercise?
Add Comment
You must Login to comment.

Click here to get an account it's free and quick