Cyclists need to soft-pedal their wants

Daily letters from "insulted," "offended," "shocked" and "outraged" readers are printed in the P-I. A few of those grouchy letters have been mine. Nearly all my complaints dealt with one topic: bicycling.

So, what's my problem?

I have nothing against bikes, bikers, bike clubs or bike trails. But it's not the bikes or everyday cyclists that concern me: It's the in-your-face radical activists and their two-wheel orgies -- characteristically rude and, on occasion, in the nude -- such as coalition rally-rides blocking traffic on downtown streets. Am I alone appalled by such belligerent, anti-social stunts?

In my opinion, most high-profile biking spokes-men come across as demanding not engaging, hostile not cooperative. If only their messages stressed the healthy pleasures of biking instead of peddling ultimatums, I'd be more sympathetic to their constant wheedling for more joy-riding paths, perks and roadway accommodations.

Self-serving biking activists like to piggyback their gimme-gimme-gimme agendas onto more grandiose popular movements, camouflaging clubby events with patriotic slogans about relieving traffic congestion, reducing gas consumption and combating global warming and pollution. What nonsense.

Biking campaigns, too, intimate that joggers, dog walkers, roller skaters, senior strollers and baby-carriage pushers are all enthusiastic supporters of their causes and benefactors of "rails to trails" treasure hunting. In reality, those groups are scorned competitors for the same turf and bikers treat them as such. Just go out there and watch the loveless interaction.

Most irritating is the fact that wheeling, dealing activists are freeloading sponges. They demand the same privileges as their rival motor vehicleists, yet are not obliged to obtain an operator's permit, buy a license and annual tabs for their vehicles or pay for such unique accommodations as racks on public buses or space to park their single-occupancy vehicles at public parking structures. (How many paying passenger seats on Sound Transit are displaced by unoccupied bicycles transported at no expense?)

Not fair.

Despite their intimidating strategies to advance their special-interest, costly proposals, the biking industry and its activist front groups have attained considerable political clout in the city halls of King County and on the city desks of many of its newspapers. Nothing gets faster front-page attention in Seattle newspapers or a more sympathetic ear from local governmental pork barrel barons than a bicycling saga.

Current crusades are: more exclusive bike-only lanes on already biker-pampered city streets; more bike racing fantasy trails; expanded "sharrowing" liberties; priority bicycle lanes between sidewalks and car parking spaces; and ripping off, and ripping up, the Eastside Burlington Railroad line in order to pave yet another ex-rail trail -- this budget breaker running from Renton to Snohomish. (Forget the obvious practical possibilities for genuine mass transit use.)

Futuristic ideas waiting their turn for exploitation call for transforming U.S. streets into European-approved settings where cars are eliminated from thoroughfares altogether in favor of bike-only usage with haughty Spandex-costumed bikers lording over the territory.

Feel as grumpy about all this as I do, readers? Then join me in writing your own cranky "distressed" letter. Let's stir up some opposition to the King Kong biking dynasty in our midst by goading local newspapers to start providing as much ink about our apprehensions as they do for those operatic biker jihads.