Those Dutch. They bike. Even in the rain. They're not made of sugar!

http://www.bakfiets-en-meer.nl/2008/12/04/fresh-cycling-statistics-from-the-netherlands/

There are a couple of numbers in the blog entry:

"That’s approximately 1200 kilometers per resident of all ages, shapes and sizes per year"

and

"Here we see that the Dutch cycle, on average, 909km per year, which translates to 2.48km per head, per day."

Either way, we're talking on the order of a mile and a half to two miles per day. Let us sit and contemplate this figure for a moment. Then let's figure they don't get on a bike every single day, just 2 days out of three, which implies that on days that they ride, they ride 2 or 3 miles. When I moved into my condo on capitol hill, I wanted it to be walking distance to where I worked. I defined "walking distance" as three miles. Let's go see what other people think. Over at WalkScore, here's their algorithm:

"Walk Score uses a patent-pending system to measure the walkability of an address. The Walk Score algorithm awards points based on the distance to the closest amenity in each category. If the closest amenity in a category is within .25 miles (or .4 km), we assign the maximum number of points. The number of points declines as the distance approaches 1 mile (or 1.6 km)—no points are awarded for amenities further than 1 mile."

You know, whenever I read that, I get mad. In fact, I get more mad every single time I revisit WalkScore. I think WalkScore does a truly shitty job of capturing walkability. There are a lot of reasons to suspect I'm completely wrong.

When I contemplate the Dutch cycling numbers, I feel an overwhelming shock. Not one that makes me angry, just complete, gut-level denial that this could possibly be the case. And I've spent a few weeks in the Netherlands, much of it in Amsterdam but not all. I've even bicycled there, a very little. I walked a whole lot more. In fact, whenever I travel, and when I lived on Cap Hill, I walk hella more distance per day than the Dutch bicycle. And I know from personal experience that the amount of effort expended to bicycle a distance (on a reasonable-for-the-purpose bicycle, all other things like load being equal) is a lot less than to walk that distance.

I object to WalkScore, because the requirement to be "walkable" is so insanely demanding that I think it is silly. I am shocked by the Dutch cycling numbers, because I have a hard time imagining bothering getting on a bicycle to walk the super-short distances implied by those numbers. A lot of this is because even the dense neighborhoods I've lived in were crazy spread out compared to Amsterdam. A lot of this is because of the sheer hassle of putting on and off the helmet (never mind any other gear), locking and unlocking the bike, removing the seat, putting it on the backpack pannier, blah, blah, bleeping, blah. And that's assuming I didn't have to track down the lock, key, helmet, pannier, etc. from some unknown location where it has been stored through the winter. (Oh, and I've been in Amsterdam when it snowed enough to cause most people to leave their cycles at home. It doesn't take much snow to stop those people. They might not be made of sugar, but whatever they are made of, it doesn't involve cycling in the snow, much.).

The folk in Portland, OR, and other areas in the northwest and around the country who are attempting to go carless via utility cycling, and the folk in the Netherlands who are their closest role model, don't have much idea of what the other one is dealing with. I mean, sure, there's the whole omg that place is fllaaaaaat thing. But the sheer number of miles you have to lay down to go places by bike -- even in a very bike friendly neighborhood/city/region -- is truly shocking.

Here's my calculation:

to closest grocery store (Roche Bros, a place we actually are willing to shop at): .9 miles each way, 1.8 round trip
to Idylwilde, farm stand, etc. which I _would_ shop at, except the parking lot is always full: 1.6 miles each way, 3.2 round trip
to closest library, Citizens Free (haven't been, very small): 1.0 miles, 2 round trip
to main library (where I actually do go): 1.9 miles each way, 3.8 round trip
to the public preschool (where I actually do go): about a half mile each way, 1 round trip (I've walked this one so far, with a stroller, the two times I've gone; I've bicycled it with T. once)
not your average joe's, a restaurant: .7 miles (we've walked this one and driven it once)
benjarong, a thai restaurant: .4 miles (R. usually walks this, sometimes with a stroller, sometimes with A. in a sling or other soft carrier, when he gets takeout; we have also driven at least once)

main post office: 2.5 miles each way, 5 RT. I biked it with T., but called for a rescue when I realized that one of the packages was way bigger than I could get into a pannier and T. was being kinda hyper.

west acton post office: 1 mile each way, 2 RT I've walked this with A. in the stroller. When I took T., we drove. I forget why; might have been a time constraint, might have been that I didn't have the panniers and locks dug out of storage/moving yet.

To my eyes, these are all embarrassingly easy to bike with a kid, possible to stroller with a kid, and not even worth thinking about walking by myself much less biking by myself. They become problematic with loads -- especially going to the grocery. But I was seriously trying to figure out a way to do groceries on the Bianchi with the panniers when I lived in Brookline, NH. I did, in fact, RT to Lull Farm (between 4 and 5 miles each way, depending on route, with over 200 feet of elevation change on the worst hill and additional smaller hills). Once. Between the distance, the terrain, the load issues and, these days, the kids, it just became impossible to contemplate. I would assert that there is _no place at all_ in the Netherlands as distance from services, and as difficult to bicycle in terms of terrain and road friendliness, as where we lived in Brookline, NH. And that wasn't that awful a place for biking as plenty in the US.

The Netherlands as a country does a lot to encourage cycling. Not just road design, either; there are tax provisions that let you buy up to a certain amount of bike + accessories every 3 years with _pre tax money_. I won't even get into the roads.

It's tough to imagine how we could get from where we are, in terms of transportation culture, to something more supportive of bicycling. Certainly, a lot of progress has been made in terms of product/gear (folding bicycles, to deal with limits on bicycles on public transit, for example). Some progress is being made in terms of changes in the law as it applies to bicyclists, albeit incredibly slowly and simultaneously with negative changes. Here in Acton, there is enough kid-culture (pre-driving age) that riding on the sidewalks is something even adults do on occasion, so drivers seem to expect it and watch out for it. Places with broad, open, empty sidewalks that ticket cyclists for using them just make me want to spit -- and yes, I _do_ understand the importance of getting off the bike and walking it when it's narrow and crowded with pedestrians. But how are we going to compress physical distance?

Because if you believe WalkScore, and you believe those Dutch cycling numbers, that is the _only_ way to become a walking and biking people: live a lot closer to each other.

ETA: When I first visited Amsterdam and walked from Centraal Station to the hostel I stayed at, I overshot and missed a turn (it was dark, I wasn't familiar with where to look for street signs yet) and walked over a half mile out of my way before I realized what I had done. When I backtracked, I overshot _again_ for the second turn (in that case, I got into trouble being on the wrong side of a canal, and found the one person in the city who didn't speak much English. We muddled through with a bit of my Dutch and his slightly-more English and got me to the other side of the street which I didn't realize was the same street on the other side of the canal. Silly me.). It took me 2 or 3 days to get a handle on just _how_ freakishly close everything was, especially in the older part of the city which is mostly where I stayed. Once I did understand what was going on, I went back to the hostel kitchen for most of my meals because no matter what I was doing, it was a short walk back to the kitchen to make a meal, and then return to continue my activity.

commuting distance

There are a lot of people who regularly drive an hour each way most days of the week to go to work. There are a lot more people who take buses or similar an hour each way most days of the week to go to work. When I figured out walking distance for buying my condo, I took that number and turned it into how far I could walk in an hour and got 3 miles. But I'm having a helluva time finding anyone, anywhere, at any time or place, that regularly walked 3 miles each way to go to work.

Any ideas?

Dating Bikes

There are a variety of questionnaires out there intended to help bike shops help a customer find a bike. I have glanced at a few. Some are much worse than others (basically, they let you pick price range, frame size and from an extremely limited frame geometry, and they _might_ let you pick fixed gear). Some of the pages define bike types via pictures and/or text; others don't. Some pages base the frame size off height alone; others want inseam, also. Like bra fittings, everyone who is an expert is convinced that their approach to measurement and fit is The Right Way, and 80% or more of everyone else is Doing It Wrong. Some of them ask you what you are planning on doing with the bike, and then limit your choices to things like speed, terrain, and adjectives like casual vs. competitive. A lot of bike shops are using the _exact_ same bike finder form, which leads me to wonder where, precisely, it came from. BRAIN or some other industry provider? I dunno.

This is not how I would do things.

I think it is probably a good idea to ask what people can afford to spend, altho it might be worthwhile doing a little education on what you can get at various price points before taking that number as a done deal.

I think the next question(s) asked of people should probably be what do you plan to do on this bike, letting people select _as many_ as apply. So don't make them pick between fitness and recreation. And give them options like carting shit around (including their beloved offspring). And doing tricks and stunts! The flip side of long tails are very short bikes that turn amazingly sharply, that you brake by pedaling backwards, etc. Fixie culture isn't being addressed by these questionnaires, either.

There might need to be subquestions -- if they're carrying crap regularly, you'll need to know the range involved. If they're carrying a kid or kids regularly, you'll need to know age/weight/developmental issues.

Then the next thing you need to know is what physical position they want to be in when they are riding (reclined back recumbent, reclined slightly, bolt upright, leaning forward slightly, bent way the fuck over).

You also should ask them whether they want to be able to put their foot and/or feet on the ground without getting up off the seat, and whether that needs to be flat or tippy toe. And you should ask them whether they want a step through configuration, or something they have to swing a leg way up and over. These are separate issues! And both are important. And _do not_ make it a gender thing, or an age thing, or a disability thing.

Then ask them the range of weight they will be carrying total including all people and stuff, the angle/height of any hills they expect to be able to ride up (as opposed to walk the bike up), the maximum speed they are comfortable going on the flat and downhill. You need all that information if you are going to select appropriate gearing and brakes. [ETA: For that matter, to pick an appropriate frame and adequate wheels, you have to know total load.] People who don't collect all of that information together are assuming you're going to be within the narrow envelope the bikes were built for, which means that heavy people will not have a low enough gear to go uphill, nor will people with cargo. AND they won't be able to stop quickly enough. Sucks! [ETA: Also, their frame may flex too much and their wheels may fail.]

There should be questions to get at climate (will you cycle in snow? rain? at night? on hot days?), to address the need for lights, to provide for equipment (locks, obviously, but also to carry stuff needed at the destination. It's sad that there's so much focus on selling clip-in shoes and so little focus on panniers that are easy to carry when not on the bike).

There should be questions about physical appearance of the bike (and I'm the wrong person to define this space, but it is very important).

There should be questions about the customer and the bike's tolerance for abuse -- is this a person who will meticulously keep this thing dry and oiled is part of it, but also are they going to drop it? Stick it on an outside rack on a bus? You don't need to overengineer, but you don't want someone to destroy something they just spent several hundred dollars on, doing what they do unthinkingly all the time with their old bike. Or everything else they own.

Finally, a general question or several specific questions should be asked to determine is this is the kind of person who is interested in and prepared to use and maintain derailleurs, or if they should automatically be directed to internal hubs. Currently, bike shops _assume_ their customers are a good match for derailleurs. I firmly believe that this actually chases a lot of people away from cycling that might otherwise participate.

I don't actually think this is that hard. What I think is that it's not the way bike shops and the people in them tend to do things. Which is a pity.

_Dead and Gone_, Charlaine Harris, a Sookie Stackhouse novel

There's never an end to trouble for Sookie, and this outing is no different. Sookie, like the protagonists of other series I am many books into, is showing refreshing signs of growing up. She actually calls people, asks for help, calls in chits. Etc. It's nice.

Unfortunately for the likelihood of her continuing to do this, people then die. But then, around Sookie, that's kinda what people do. The fairy are at war, over whether or not the fairy will continue to have contact with humans. Unsurprisingly (if the series is to continue), Sookie's relatives (well, most of her relatives) win. Interestingly, once they win, they decide to do what the other side wanted (cease human involvement). Not because of concern for the fae -- out of concern for the humans (and other supernaturals). Which is good, because fairy wars are damn lethal in this universe.

Other excitement includes: the weres Come Out Publicly. Crystal is murdered and crucified. Quinn behaves badly. Bill behaves quite gentlemanly. Eric and Sookie get it on. Lots of fun.

Will I read more? Definitely. Got to find out whether the FBI continue to attempt to recruit Sookie, right?