KKBP's October 2001 Political Survey

NOTE: The survey has now been analyzed.

The number of cyclists taking this poll was 199.

What area do you live in?
28 chose "Please Select."
31 are from the US Mid-West.
25 are from the US Northeast.
23 are from the US Northwest.
21 are from the US South.
12 are from the US Southwest.
4 are from elsewhere in the US.
29 are from Canada.
12 are from the United Kingdom.
5 are from Australia or New Zealand.
7 are from Europe.
1 was from Africa.
1 was from elsewhere in the world.
No one was from the Middle East.
No one was from Asia.
No one was from Latin America.

About 14% of the cyclists failed to choose a region. As I included "elsewhere in the US" and "elsewhere in the world," this failure is strange. All of these failures to select would have been automatically thrown out except for the fact that the web page printed "Please Select" when no choice had been made. The only explanations I can think of their failure to choose are 1) I did not number this question, 2) they wanted me to identify people by countries, or 3) there was some question in their minds about which part of the US in which they lived. None of these explanations seems sufficient to me.

At any rate, looking at the other cyclists, we find the five main regions of the US fairly equally represented except for the Southwest. I would have thought we had more Californians than that, or did they chose "Please Select"? Canadians constituted 15% of the people taking the survey, which is a high percentage considering the population of that country.

Question 1. What is your age?
5 cyclist(s) or 3% were under 16
25 cyclist(s) or 13% are 16-24
33 cyclist(s) or 17% are 25-34
56 cyclist(s) or 28% are 35-44
48 cyclist(s) or 24% are 45-54
26 cyclist(s) or 13% are 55-64
6 cyclist(s) or 3% are over 65

I didn't ask the computer to compute the average age this time, but it must fall within the 35 to 44 range, and since there are more cyclists older than this range than there are younger than this range, the average age must be on the high side of that range, say 40 or possibly 41. Last month's survey included slightly more older cyclists, and the average age was 42.

Question 2. What is your sex?
179 cyclist(s) or 90% are male.
20 cyclist(s) or 10% are female.

Last month, we had 208 males taking the survey and 23 females, so the ratio is about the same.

Question 3. How much bicycling do you do?
1 cyclist(s) or 1% No opinion.
5 cyclist(s) or 3% Just beginning.
2 cyclist(s) or 1% Very little.
6 cyclist(s) or 3% Occasionally.
8 cyclist(s) or 4% About once a week.
14 cyclist(s) or 7% Most weekends.
51 cyclist(s) or 26% Several times a week.
35 cyclist(s) or 18% Four or five times a week.
77 cyclist(s) or 39% Nearly every day.

Here we find that the people taking this poll are frequent cyclists, with nearly 40% riding almost daily, over 80% riding several times a week, and over 90% riding weekly.

Question 4. Where do you live?
7 cyclist(s) or 4% None of the following.
80 cyclist(s) or 40% In the city.
72 cyclist(s) or 36% In the suburbs.
40 cyclist(s) or 20% In the country.

This question was not asked on the last survey, and it should have been, as location may affect traffic behavior. However, we can check below to see if it influences political behavior. On a political question, however, I should have found out also how many lived in large metropolitan areas and how many lived in smaller cities or in towns. Still, it's clear that 3/4ths of the cyclists are urban.

Question 5. How would you describe your income?
5 cyclist(s) or 3% Not willing/able to say.
17 cyclist(s) or 9% Very limited.
10 cyclist(s) or 5% Minimum wages.
17 cyclist(s) or 9% Below average.
91 cyclist(s) or 46% Average income.
58 cyclist(s) or 29% Above average.
1 cyclist(s) or 1% Wealthy.

Here we find a slight slant towards above average income, as 30% were above average and 23% were below. In addition, there's a tendency for people to be modest about their incomes. If I had asked for dollar amounts, we could be more certain, but there's a problem in supplying figures for multiple countries. A currency converter would convert to dollars, but what is a generous wage in one country is barely adequate in another. In fact, the cost of living varies greatly within the US, when I went to school in Pennsylvania in 1997, I discovered the supermarket prices 50% higher and the apartments twice as expensive as in Alabama.

Question 6. Do you own and operate a motor vehicle?
13 cyclist(s) or 7% None of the following.
9 cyclist(s) or 5% I don't own one yet.
65 cyclist(s) or 33% Unfortunately, yes.
45 cyclist(s) or 23% Yes, and I love to drive.
34 cyclist(s) or 17% Yes, but I seldom use it.
19 cyclist(s) or 10% I used to own one, but I quit.
14 cyclist(s) or 7% I have never owned one.

The results of this question show clearly that the cyclists on this survey do not fit the norm for the USA. Most of the people in this country live and die for their motor vehicle, but within this group, only 23% clearly belong in this category with another 5% who intend to own a car someday (evidently the younger cyclists). But a full 50% express displeasure with their motor vehicle ("unfortunately" and "seldom use it"), and another 17% have either given up on automobiles or have never chosen to own one. Still, a full 73% own and operate motor vehicles.

I should have allowed for operating and not owning as an option and perhaps own and not operate.

Question 7. Pick the statement that best describes your family's bicycling:
8 cyclist(s) or 4% None of the following.
33 cyclist(s) or 17% I'm single and live alone.
47 cyclist(s) or 24% No, I'm the only one.
37 cyclist(s) or 19% My spouse rides occasionally.
19 cyclist(s) or 10% My spouse rides frequently.
22 cyclist(s) or 11% My child(ren) ride(s) occasionally.
7 cyclist(s) or 4% My child(ren) ride(s) frequently.
14 cyclist(s) or 7% Most of us ride occasionally.
12 cyclist(s) or 6% Most of us ride frequently.

This was a difficult question to ask as there are so many different kinds of families and relationships. Someone pointed out that I should have said "partner" instead of spouse. A younger rider would prefer mention of his parents and siblings. Surprisingly, only eight cyclists didn't answer, so I guess the rest picked the closest equivalent. There seems to be a tendency for the cyclist to ride alone, as 41% were either single or to be the only one to ride, while 37% report that part of the family rides occasionally, only 20% report that other members of the family ride frequently, and only 6% report that most of the family rides frequently.

Question 8. Which general statement best describes your political outlook?
62 cyclist(s) or 31% None of the following.
97 cyclist(s) or 49% Governments should help the weak but not legislate morality.
10 cyclist(s) or 5% Welfare programs are a mistake, but governments should control vice.
20 cyclist(s) or 10% Governments are best when small and weak.
10 cyclist(s) or 5% Governments should be active in every area of life.

This question has the highest percentage of "None of the following" of any question, and I sympathize with their position. I have read that 80% of people fall into one of four groups, liberal, conservative, libertarian, and progressive, and I defined the groups above, very briefly. However, I find that which group I fall into frequently depends on the specific issue and often on the surrounding events as well. This fifth position would be pragmatic, letting circumstances decide the matter. It seems to me, however, that large numbers of people vote for the candidate and not for the platform.

Nonetheless, looking at the results, we find that nearly 50% fall into the category labeled as "liberal." This doesn't surprise me one bit, as liberal views have been very successful, even among Republicans, although "the 'L' word" has not.

Question 9. How much attention does your local government pay to bicycling?
4 cyclist(s) or 2% No opinion.
22 cyclist(s) or 11% Absolutely none.
21 cyclist(s) or 11% No more than an occasional road sign or brochure.
55 cyclist(s) or 28% A few bike lanes or bike paths but no real promotion.
52 cyclist(s) or 26% Occasional progress.
36 cyclist(s) or 18% Good interest and progress.
9 cyclist(s) or 5% Strong interest with an active education program and/or facility development.
No cyclist(s) or 0% Used to have a good program.

One person wrote to complain about this question because it did not include an option indicating that the local government's actions were misguided, but I feel the next question provides that option. Although "good interest" could be interpreted to mean their interest is beneficial, I think the question is clearly about degree rather than kind. Only two people indicated "no opinion."

According to these results, about half of the cyclists felt their local governments were doing little or nothing to help them. On the other hand, about half felt their governments were making at least occasional progress.

Question 10. What do you think of government involvement in bicycling in your area?
14 cyclist(s) or 7% No opinion.
98 cyclist(s) or 49% It should do a lot more.
59 cyclist(s) or 30% It should do a little more.
25 cyclist(s) or 13% It should do about the same.
0 cyclist(s) or 0% It should do a little less.
3 cyclist(s) or 2% It should do a lot less.

Here, cyclists who were displeased with the efforts of their local governments could express the opinion that it should do less, but only three cyclists made that choice. About half were strongly displeased with the amount of effort, which agrees with the previous question.

Question 11. What is your opinion of police behavior with cyclists in your area?
60 cyclist(s) or 30% No opinion or none of the following.
48 cyclist(s) or 24% They ignore cyclists at all times.
48 cyclist(s) or 24% They are friendly and wave, but that's it.
37 cyclist(s) or 19% They will stop cyclists for traffic violations.
1 cyclist(s) or 1% They will stop cyclists for riding on the main streets.
5 cyclist(s) or 3% They harrass cyclists for no reason.

There are three interpretations for the large number who expressed no opinion on this question: 1) They might not have liked my options, 2) they might have felt they lacked sufficient experience with police, or 3) they might have had mixed feelings. As I could have asked these three questions as well, I messed up on this one. Still, I learn something even from the questions I mess up on. Certainly, a "none of the following" vote is not wasted entirely, as it alerts me to the need to add more options the next time.

We can see both good and bad news in these results. Only 6 cyclists reported faulty behavior but only 37 or 19% reported that they will stop cyclists for traffic infractions. Compare these results with the next question.

Question 12. If a cyclist runs a red light with a police officer watching, should the officer
12 cyclist(s) or 6% No opinion or none of the following.
7 cyclist(s) or 4% Ignore the violation because watching motor vehicles is more important.
0 cyclist(s) or 0% Ignore the violation because bicycles don't need to follow the traffic code.
10 cyclist(s) or 5% Ignore the violation because bicycles can't trip most traffic signals.
55 cyclist(s) or 28% Stop the cyclist but give no ticket.
115 cyclist(s) or 58% Ticket the cyclist the same as if operating a motor vehicle.

Here, most cyclists felt that the cyclist should be ticketed the same as a motorist, and most of the rest thought that the cyclist should at least receive a warning. I should have asked for a distinction between ticketing the cyclist without the infraction going on the driving record and ticketing the cyclist with the infraction going on the driving record. I suspect that most would agree with the first but not the second, but I missed my chance to find out.

Question 13. Do you have a mandatory helmet law in your area?
13 cyclist(s) or 7% Not sure/none of the following.
82 cyclist(s) or 41% No, there is none.
77 cyclist(s) or 39% Yes, but for children only.
8 cyclist(s) or 4% Yes, for adults but not enforced.
12 cyclist(s) or 6% Yes, for adults but weakly enforced.
7 cyclist(s) or 4% Yes, for adults and strongly enforced.

Here we find that very few of the cyclists live in areas with strongly enforced helmet laws for adults.

Question 14. Do you think mandatory helmet laws are a good idea?
42 cyclist(s) or 21% No opinion or none of the following.
14 cyclist(s) or 7% No, because they're not enforced.
18 cyclist(s) or 9% No, because they're not good for bicycling.
49 cyclist(s) or 25% No, because they're not necessary.
6 cyclist(s) or 3% Yes, because they're good for bicycling.
10 cyclist(s) or 5% Yes, because they prevent minor injuries.
60 cyclist(s) or 30% Yes, because they save lives.

I made a major mistake on this question. I was thinking that the middle answer was clearly stating that helmets are not necessary, but that is most certainly not what I said. Some may have felt that helmets are not effective, some may have been thinking that injuries are unlikely, and some may have felt that laws are not necessary because most cyclists have enough common sense to wear a helmet. I should have provided clearer answers. This question also received a high number of "none of the following" indicating the same thing.

At any rate, the number who said "no" to mandatory helmet laws, for whatever reason, is slightly greater than the number who said "yes," 41% vs. 38%. We have to accept this issue as being one one which cyclists are quite divided. See the next question for further information on this topic.

Question 15. Which would do the most towards making bicycling safer in your area:
2 cyclist(s) or 1% No opinion or none of the following.
20 cyclist(s) or 10% Better enforcement of motorist traffic violations.
55 cyclist(s) or 28% Better education for motorists.
25 cyclist(s) or 13% Better roads.
57 cyclist(s) or 29% More bikeways or bikelanes.
29 cyclist(s) or 15% Better education for cyclists.
8 cyclist(s) or 4% Better enforcement of cyclist traffic violations.
0 cyclist(s) or 0% Better helmet laws.
3 cyclist(s) or 2% Better enforcement of current helmet laws.

Someone wrote and said he wished that I had provided an "all the above" option for this and most of the following questions. I have to disagree, because my intent was to force a choice. If most cyclists picked "all the above," we would learn little from the results.

The most popular choices were for bikeways and bike lanes and for better education for motorists. While most cyclists had supported stopping cyclists for traffic violations, only 4% considered that the best method of improving safety. Even if 38% of the cyclists considered helmet laws beneficial, only three saw them as the best way to improve bicycling safety.

Question 16. Which is the closest statement to the truth?
25 cyclist(s) or 13% No opinion or none of the following.
0 cyclist(s) or 0% Motor vehicle taxes should be spend for the benefit of motor vehicles only.
4 cyclist(s) or 2% Cyclists should be taxed to pay for whatever facilities they use.
92 cyclist(s) or 46% Cyclists already pay enough for road use through property and sales tax.
78 cyclist(s) or 39% Because bicycling is beneficial, cyclists should be compensated for cycling instead of driving.

On this question, the overwhelming response was that cyclists should not have to pay additional sums for bicycle faculities. To some extent, this might be the same feeling as that of motorists who feel that they are are already paying too much tax on gasoline already; however, we also see 39% feel that bicycling has strong enough benefits that cyclists should be compensated.

Question 17. After the terrorists attacks on the World Trade Center, do you think
19 cyclist(s) or 10% No opinion or none of the following.
3 cyclist(s) or 2% We should push oil production, abandoning environmental quibbling.
2 cyclist(s) or 1% We should relax environmental concerns until the crisis is over.
16 cyclist(s) or 8% We should maintain our present environmental policies.
13 cyclist(s) or 7% We should be even more concerned about protecting the environment.
146 cyclist(s) or 73% We should push hard for reduced consumption and for alternate energy.

Here the results are overwhelmingly tilted towards taking care of the environment. These results take me back to a telephone conversation more than two years ago in which I was told that cyclists don't care about environmental issues. However, this survey and the previous survey provides quite a different picture of the average cyclist from what I used to read in Bicycling Magazine. There, the typical cyclist was highly interested in speed and in racing bikes but evidently unconcerned with environmental issues or practical cycling. This survey shows a high interest in the environment, and the last showed cyclists who put 3/5ths of their cycling miles into transportational cycling.

Which is the true picture? The jury is still out; however, I have found a simple way to judge the relative popularity of web sites. Google always ranks websites according to link popularity, so if you pick the key words for your topic, the sites will line up according to popularity. This method is so effective and accurate that Google even has an "I feel lucky" button which gets you to the exact page almost all of the time. Well, give Google the key words "bike, bicycle, cyclist, and cycling," and see for yourself which sites are at the very top.

Question 18. Which of the following is the strongest reason for governments to support bicycling?
8 cyclist(s) or 4% No opinion, none of these.
2 cyclist(s) or 1% Bicycling is good recreation.
65 cyclist(s) or 33% Bicycling is a viable form of transportation.
19 cyclist(s) or 10% Bicycling can reduce gasoline consumption.
15 cyclist(s) or 8% Bicycling can reduce congestion.
53 cyclist(s) or 27% Bicycling can make cities more liveable.
23 cyclist(s) or 12% Bicycling can reduce health costs.
14 cyclist(s) or 7% Bicycling is inexpensive transportation.

Questions 18 and 19 ask the same question from two different perspectives, so they're great to compare. Here the most popular reasons for government support of cycling were cycling 1) is viable transportation and 2) can make cities more liveable, which together received 60% of the vote. Of course, most cyclists would support all of these reasons, but these two received the strongest support. Sounds like a bunch of bicycle commuters to me.

Question 19. Which is your strongest reason for bicycling?
4 cyclist(s) or 2% No opinion, none of these.
81 cyclist(s) or 41% It's fun.
9 cyclist(s) or 5% It's convenient.
4 cyclist(s) or 2% It's cheap.
57 cyclist(s) or 29% It's healthy.
5 cyclist(s) or 3% It's sexy.
14 cyclist(s) or 7% It's challenging.
22 cyclist(s) or 11% It's environmentally friendly.
3 cyclist(s) or 2% It's a good way to meet or be with people.

However, when we ask the cyclists for their own reasons for cycling, the answers shift quite a bit from those in question 18. Now we find only a 11% vote for the environment and 70% of the vote supports cycling as 1) fun and 2) healthy.

To interpret these results, I need to only look at my own personal history. I began cycling because I did not want to contribute to the degrading of the environment, but after I began cycling, I found the pleasure of cycling and the beneficial effects it was having upon my health as providing much greater day-to-day motivation.

Question 20. Which of the following would help you the most?
3 cyclist(s) or 2% No opinion, none of these.
10 cyclist(s) or 5% A safer place to park the bike.
21 cyclist(s) or 11% Reduced and enforced speed limits.
97 cyclist(s) or 49% Wider lanes and/or more paved shoulders.
32 cyclist(s) or 16% More bike paths or bike lanes.
18 cyclist(s) or 9% Traffic signals that respond to bicycles.
18 cyclist(s) or 9% A place to clean up at work.

This question is similar to question 15. There, I asked for what would help most to make bicycling safer; that is, what would help everyone. And here, I ask what would help you the most, but not specifically mentioning safety. The options are not exactly the same either. On 15, bikeways and motorist education topped the list, but here, wider lanes and/or paved shoulders were the overwhelming winners, with bike paths and lanes a distant second.

I think, putting the two questions together, that the strongest vote is for improved riding conditions, to which I can only say, "amen."

Analysis of the Sub-Scores

Remember that when looking at the survey that we are not looking at a representative cross-section of society, and the same is even more true when looking at the much smaller sub-groups. Therefore, we can't say that inferences drawn from these smaller sub-groups indicates a real difference between cyclists belonging to the same groups who did not take the survey. About the strongest statement we can make is that the information is suggestive. However, the various sub-groups demonstrate quite a bit of difference, most of which is easy to understand.

In some cases, the cyclists are reporting the conditions in their area rather than their opinions, and there the problem is that we don't know their distribution. They could all come from the same state, for instance.

When reporting information from each group, I will just point out noticeable differences from the normal. Although I will occasional compare two sub-groups, the comparison will usually be between the group and all the cyclists, which means that the differences between the two will appear to be less than what they actually are. To explain, let's suppose I say that 20% of all the 199 cyclists say they use Crest toothpaste but that 100% of the cyclists from the US Northeast use Crest toothpaste. However, to fully indicate the difference, I would have to subtract the 25 NE USA Crest users from the 40 total, leaving 15 out of 174 or 9% rather than the 20% reported. However, the comparisons won't be as extreme, so the results will be less affected. In the above case, if say 40% of the Northeast cyclists used Crest, then I would need to subtract 10 from the 40 total, leaving 30 out of 174 or 17%. Due to the small number of people taking this survey and the lack of any method of insuring that they accurately represent their various groups, I do not think that such differences justify doubling the amount of work I would have to do, but I do want to bring it to your attention.

Keep in mind too that the smaller number of people in the sub-groups means that the difference of a few votes can cause quite a shift; each NE USA contributor has 4% of the vote for that sub-group but only .5% of the vote on the whole survey. Thus, I will ignore all minor percentage differences. Thus I might say, "is more likely to use Crest" but fail to say "less likely to use Colgate" because the difference in the latter case is not as great.

To keep this brief, I will state preferences in as few words as possible, so see the exact wording above for clarification.

Cyclists from the US Mid-West

There were 31 cyclists from the Mid-West. Compared with all the rest, they were somewhat less likely to live in the city (32% vs. 40%), more likely to report an average income (61% vs. 49%), less likely to enjoy driving (42% "unfortunately" and 13% "love" vs. 33 and 23%), more likely to be libertarian (19% vs. 10%), less likely to think the government should do a lot more for cycling (35% vs. 49%), more likely to report no helmet law (81% vs. 41%), less likely to agree to mandatory helmet laws (19% yes vs. 38% yes), less likely to believe that cyclists should be compensated (29% vs. 39%) but more likely to support pushing for reduced consumption and alternate energy (84% vs. 73%), and more likely to prefer a place to clean up at work (19% vs. 9%).

Cyclists from the Northeast USA

There were 25 cyclists from the Northeast. Compared with the other cyclists, they were less likely to ride every day (24% vs. 39%), less likely to live in the city (34% vs. 40%), less likely to have average incomes and more likely to have above average incomes (36 and 40% vs. 46 and 29%), less likely to live alone (4% {one cyclist} vs. 17%), more likely to be conservative (20% vs. 10%), more likely to claim their local government makes occasional progress (40% vs. 24%), more likely to see police as friendly and waving (44% vs. 24%) and less likely to see them stopping cyclists for traffic violations (4% vs. 19%), more likely to prefer stopping an erring cyclist without ticketing (40 and 44% vs. 28 and 58%), more likely to have a helmet law for children only (76% vs. 39%), more likely to say yes to helmet laws (48% to 38%), more likely to see better education for motorists as the best safety solution (44% vs. 28%), and more likely to see enjoyment as the main reason for cycling (56% vs. 41%).

Cyclists from the Northwest USA

There were 23 cyclists from the Northwest. Compared to other cyclists, they were more likely to be 55-64 (30% vs. 13%) and less likely to be 35-44 (13% vs. 28%), more likely to ride several times a week and less likely to ride nearly every day (39 and 26% vs. 26 and 39%), more likely to live in the suburbs rather than the country (48 and 13% vs. 36 and 20%), less likely to be average income and more likely to be above average (35 and 43% vs. 46 and 29%), more likely to be liberal (61% vs. 49%), more likely to report good or strong government interest (35 and 13% vs. 18 and 5%), more likely to feel the government should do about the same (30% vs. 13%), more likely to believe the cyclist should be ticketed (70% vs. 58%), less likely to report no helmet law and more likely to report one for children alone (17 and 52% vs. 41 and 39%), more likely to support helmet laws (56% vs. 38%), less likely to see motorists as being the safety problem (4% enforcement and 9% education vs. 10 and 28%), more likely to believe that cyclists pay enough and less likely to believe that they should be compensated (70 and 22% vs. 46 and 39%), more likely to push for reduced consumption and alternate energy (83% vs. 73%), and somewhat more likely to find challenge a reason for cycling (17% vs. 7%).

Cyclists from the US South

There were 21 cyclists from the South, 20 males and one female. About half bicycled nearly every day, and most of the rest several times a week (48 and 38% vs. 39 and 26%). Compared with the other cyclists, they were slightly more likely to live in the suburbs rather than the country (43 and 14% vs. 36 and 20%), more likely to say "unfortunately yes" and less likely to say "yes but I seldom use it" to owning a car (48 and 10% vs. 33 and 17%), less likely to choose liberalism and much more likely to choose "none of the following" (38 and 48% vs. 49 and 31%), less likely to report good or strong local government interest in cycling (5% {one cyclist} and 0% vs. 18 and 5%), more likely to believe the local government should do a lot more rather than do the same (62 and 5% vs. 49 and 13%), unable to report police stopping cyclists for violations (0% vs. 19%), more likely to report helmet laws for children only (67% vs. 39%), less likely to believe that MHL's save lives (14% vs. 30%), more likely to want better education for motorists (43% vs. 28%) to make roads safer, somewhat more supportive of no-pay rather than cyclist compensation (57 and 33% vs. 46 and 39%), somewhat more likely to see gasoline reduction as important argument for government and the health benefit as not so important (19 and 5% vs. 10 and 12% (however, they equally supported health as a personal benefit), and they were somewhat more likely to select "reduced and enforced speed limits" (19% vs. 11%).

Cyclists from the US Southwest

There were only 12 cyclists in this group, which is a very small group for comparison purposes, and they tended to be younger than the norm (24% 45 and older vs. 40% for all cyclists). They all bicycled "most weekends" or more often. Compared to the other cyclists, they were more likely to live in the city rather than in the suburbs (58 and 25% vs. 40 and 36%), more likely to report above average income (50% vs.29%), more likely to report that they love to drive 33% vs. 23%), almost unable to report children or "most" also riding (8% {one cyclist} vs. 28%), liberal were outnumbered by conservatives and libertarians (17, 25, and 33% vs. 49, 5, and 10%), more likely to say that the local government paid no attention to cycling (25% vs. 11%), less likely to say the goverment should do a lot more but more likely to say it should do a little more (17 and 58% vs. 49 and 30%), more likely to want the cyclist offender ticketed (83% vs. 58%), more likely to have a helmet law for children only (67% vs. 39%), more likely to support better roads (42% vs. 13%) as the way to make cycling safer, more likely to believe cyclists have paid enough than that they should be paid (58 and 25% vs. 46 and 39%), and much more divided over what to do about energy with only 42% (vs. 73%) supporting pushing hard for conservation and alternate energy.

Canadian Cyclists

There were 29 Canadian cyclists in this poll, with only two of them under 35. They were slightly more likely to live in the country (28% vs. 20%) and to love their motor vehicle (31% vs. 23%), more likely to be liberal (62% vs. 49%), more likely to report good interest and progress by the local government (31% vs. 18%), more likely to report police stopping cyclists for traffic infractions (34% vs. 19%), more likely to believe in ticketing the errant cyclist (79% vs. 58%), more likely to have a mandatory helmet law for adults (34% vs. 14%) and more likely to believe the helmet law is a good idea (58% vs. 38%), more likely to support cyclist education as the best safety policy (31% vs. 15%), more likely to favor pushing hard for conservation and alternate energy (83% vs. 73%), more likely to place health above fun for a reason for cycling (41 and 28% vs. 29 and 41%), and finally, Canadians came out even stronger than average for wider lanes (66 vs. 49%) as the most important improvement.

Cyclists from the United Kingdom

There were only 12 cyclists from the United Kingdom, and none of them were women. One third was 16 to 24, and seven were between 35 and 54. One reported riding on most weekends, and the rest several times a day to nearly every day. Only one (8%) lived in the country, one picked "none of the following," and the rest were evenly divided between city and suburbs. Compared to the other cyclists, fewer were above average in wealth (14% vs. 29%), only one loved to drive (8% {one cyclist} vs. 23%), they are more likely to have occasional bicycling company from the rest of the family as opposed to frequent (58 and 8% vs. 37 and 20%), but they were also less likely to have to ride alone (8% vs. 20%). They were more likely to be liberal or progressive (67 and 17% vs. 49 and 5%), more likely to report a few bike lanes or occasional progress (50 and 33% vs. 28 and 26%), and more interested in greater government involvement, with 92% wanting the government to do a lot more (compared with 49%). The UK cyclists were more likely to want the police to warn rather than ticket the erring cyclist (67 and 33% vs. 28 and 58%). They all reported no helmet law, and they were mostly opposed to helmet laws (66 and 8% vs. 41 and 38% for cyclists as a whole). To make cycling safer, they were more likely to want bikeways and traffic enforcement (50 and 25% vs. 29 and 10%) instead of other methods. They were also more likely to be in favor of the compensation of cyclists (83 vs. 39%). Although they almost all wanted to maintain or increase conservation efforts, they were less likely to want to push hard in that direction (58 vs. 73%). They were more likely to see the government favoring cycling to reduce gasoline consumption (25 vs. 10%), and they were more likely to want to bicycle because it is fun (58 vs. 41%). They were more likely to want bike paths and lanes (42% vs. 16%), more likely to want speed reductions (25% vs 11%), and less likely to want wider roads (8% vs. 49%).

Cyclists from Australia and New Zealand

There were only five cyclists from these two countries which took the survey, and I will have to limit comments to very strong differences, as one person makes a difference of 20%. All were male and between 16 and 44. All rode at least four or five times a week. Sixty percent lived in the city and the rest in the suburbs. Sixty percent had limited incomes. All said the errant cyclist should be punished, all reported mandatory helmet laws, and they wanted better education for motorists and better roads. They gave health as the primary reason for the government to support cycling, and their primary reason for cycling was convenience.

Cyclists from Europe

As there were only seven in this group, I will again be brief and limit comparisons. There were five men and two women in this group. All except one bicycled nearly every day. Most had average incomes, the rest less. Only two have owned motor vehicles, which they use little. They were either single or rode just with the spouse. Five reported good government involvement in cycling, the rest occasional progress. Nearly all thought the local government should do more. Three thought the police would stop a cyclist for traffic violations, but three also thought that the police should ignore the errant cyclist (the rest did not). They all reported having no helmet laws, and only two said yes to having them. They favored bikeways and enforcement as the best safety solutions, and were more likely to want bikeways and lanes along with safer places to park the bike for themselves.

Women Cyclists

There were twenty women taking this poll, and their average age was lower than for the men (I did not compute exact ages this time). They were less likely to have average or above average income (35 and 15% vs. 46 and 29%), less likely to love to drive (10% vs. 23%), less likely to own a car (45% vs. 73%), more likely to have a spouse who rides frequently (30% vs. 10%) and less likely to have just children who ride (0% vs. 15%). They were more likely to report "none of the following" on choice of four political types (50% vs. 31%) and less likely to be liberal (35% vs. 49%). They were more likely to see good or strong local progress (25 and 10% vs. 18 and 5%) and wanted the government to do a little more rather than a lot more (55 and 25% vs. 30 and 49%). They were more likely to have no opinion of the policeman's behavior (40 vs. 30%) and were more inclined to let the errant cyclist off with a warning rather than a ticket (40 and 30% vs. 28 and 58%). They were more likely to support helmet use (50 vs. 38%), more certain that cyclists pay enough and less in support of compensation (60% and 30% vs. 46 and 39%), more likely to argue in favor of bicycling as inexpensive transportation (30% vs. 7%), and more likely to prefer bike paths and lanes to wider road widths (30 and 35% vs. 49 and 16%).

Younger Vs. Older Cyclists

In making this comparison, I am leaving out the middle age group and comparing only the cyclists under 35 with only the cyclists 45 and older. There were 63 in the younger group and 80 in the older group. The younger cyclists included twice as many women (17% vs. 8%). The younger cyclists were more likely to live in the city than in the suburbs or country (48, 25, and 19% vs. 29, 43, and 26%), and they were less likely to have above average income (16% vs. 36%) and more likely to be struggling. They were less likely to own a motor vehicle (47% vs. 91%) and more likely to be single (30% vs. 11%). Older cyclists were more likely to think the local government should do a lot more for cycling while younger cyclists were more uncertain (51 and 4% vs. 44 and 10%). Older cyclists tend to see police as unwilling to stop an errant cyclist and are more likely to want to see the cyclist ticketed (30 and 60% vs. 16 and 51%). Older cyclists are more likely to support a mandatory helmet law (47% vs. 32%). Younger cyclists are more likely to favor bikeways and enforcement to improve safety (38 and 10% vs. 25 and 4%) while older cyclists tend to favor education for motorists (31% vs. 22%) and cyclists (16% vs. 11%) and also better roads (18% vs 13%). Younger cyclists were more likely to want to see cyclists compensated (46% vs. 36%). Older cyclists were more likely to want to push hard for reduced consumption and alternate energy (84% vs. 63%). Older cyclists were more likely to see the health benefits of cycling (36% vs. 14%). Older cyclists were more likely to want wider lanes (64% vs. 35%) while younger cyclists were more likely to want a variety of other solutions.

Cyclists Who Ride a Lot Vs. Cyclists Who Ride Less

Those who ride a lot total 163 and those who ride less total 36. To quality for riding a lot, a cyclist had to ride several times a week or more. Cyclists who ride a lot were more likely to live in the city, and cyclists who ride less were more likely to live in the country (43 and 18% vs. 28 and 28%). Cyclists who ride a lot are less likely to love to drive and more likely to seldom drive (20 and 20% vs. 33 and 3%). Those who ride a lot are less likely to be the only one who rides a bike in the family (20% vs.39%). Those who ride much are less uncertain about whether there is a local helmet law (4% vs. 17%) and are less likely to support them (35% vs. 53%). Those who ride less thought governments should favor bikeways (39% vs. 26%) and cyclist education (19% vs. 13%), while those who ride a lot think they should favor motorist education (30% vs. 17% ) and are more interested in better enforcement of motorists' traffic violations (11% vs. 6%). Those who ride less are somewhat more likely to support maintaining our present position rather than pushing hard for conservation and alternate energy (14 and 67% vs. 7 and 75%). Cyclists who ride less were more likely to want wider lanes and shoulders (64% vs. 45%). Otherwise, their attitudes were remarkably similar.

City Cyclists Vs. Country Cyclists

There were 80 city cyclists and 40 from the country. I left out the suburban cyclists, assuming that their cycling conditions would probably be in-between. The country cyclists tend to be older with 54% over 45 vs. 29% of the city cyclists. A good 75% of the country cyclists rode several times a week or more, but 88% of the city cyclists did so. City cyclists were more likely to have above average income (29 and 13%). Country cyclists were less likely to have a seldom-used motor vehicle (20% vs. 8%). City cyclist were more likely to live alone (29% vs. 18%). Country cyclists were more likely to see little or no support for cycling (48% vs. 14%), and they were slightly more likely to want increased involvement (5% shift). Country cyclists also report the police less likely to stop cyclists for violations (15% vs. 26%). City cyclists were more prone to want the police to ignore a violaton (12% vs. 3%). Country cyclists were more likely to report the absence of a mandatory helmet law (48% vs. 36%) and were less likely to consider them necessary (24% vs. 35%). Country cyclists were more likely to favor better roads and education for cyclists (18 and 23% vs. 9 and 13%). Country cyclists were very slightly more likely to favor cyclist compensation and reduced consumption with alternate energy (4 and 5% differences). City cyclists saw the strongest benefit of cycling as making cities more liveable, but country cyclists did not (40% vs. 13%). Country cyclists were more likely to see cycling as fun and challenging (48 and 15% vs. 35 and 6%), while city cyclists were more likely to see it as healthy and convenient (31 and 8% vs. 20 and 0%).

Cyclists with More and Cyclists with Less Money

I chose here only those cyclists reporting more than average income and those reporting less than average. There were 59 in the first group, and 49 in the second. Women constitued 5% of the cyclists with more money and 20% of those with less. Those with more money were more likely to live in the suburbs and less likely to live in the country (51 and 8% vs. 27 and 29%). Those with more money were more likely to have motor vehicles (85% vs. 42%). Those with less money were more likely to live alone or be the only member of the family to ride (24 and 37% vs. 10 and 22%). Those with less money were more likely to reject picking one of the four standard positions and less likely to be liberal (43 and 39% vs. 22 and 54%); however, they were slightly more likely to want the government to do a lot more for cycling (45% vs. 39%). Those with less money were less likely to want to see the errant cyclist ticketed and more likely to want him to get a warning (51 and 33% vs. 25 and 59%). Cyclists with more money were less likely to report that there was no helmet law for adults and more likely to report that there is one for just children (34 and 47% vs. 41 and 39%). Cyclists with more money supported education for motorists first and bikeways and education for cyclists second and third (27, 19, and 19%), while cyclists with less money wanted bikeways first, education for motorists second, and education for cyclists third (39, 24, and 12%). Cyclists with money were less interested in seeing cyclists compensated for bicycling (36% vs. 47%). Those with more money were somewhat more likely to see cycling as viable transportation (34% vs. 27%), making cities more liveable (31% vs. 18%) and reducing health costs (14% vs. 8%) while those with less money were more likely to see reducing gasoline costs (16% vs. 8%) and providing inexpensive transportation (14% vs. 3%). Those with more money were more likely to see health as their strongest reason for cycling (36% vs. 8%. Those with more money more strongly wanted to get wider lanes (56% vs.37%) and less strongly wanted to ge bike lanes (8% vs. 27%) and paths or places to clean up at work (3% vs. 12%).

This ends my analysis of the survey. For the most part, the results were not surprising to me, but I think they may surprise others. I was extremely pleased, however, to see the extremely high support for conservation and alternate energy. While this survey was of a restricted and uncontrolled population and while my selection of answers in several cases should have been better, I think it does provide a clearer picture of what cyclists want and, at the least, should be helpful for someone planning a more comprehensive survey.