Passes & Canyons Blog

Heading up to Brian Head, in Utah.

I hadn’t even heard it was being considered and now I get a note that Oregon has in fact approved lanesplitting, although the governor has not yet signed the bill. Yahoo. Little by little acceptance of this entirely sensible practice continues to spread across the country.

UPDATE–Much to the surprise of many, the governor vetoed this bill. Here’s the story: https://www.opb.org/article/2021/05/26/gov-kate-brown-vetoes-bill-allowing-lane-splitting-by-oregon-motorcyclists/

Of course, each state handles it differently so that will make for some real confusion at some point. California is the most permissive. Here’s a breakdown of what Oregon will be enacting, courtesy of a post on Adventure Rider.

SB574 would legalize lane sharing under limited conditions:
Highways only:
lane-sharing allowed only on roads with a posted speed limit of 50MPH or higher
Traffic on the road:
must be stopped, or moving at 10 miles per hour or less
The rider:
may travel no more than 10 miles per hour faster than traffic
must not impede the normal and reasonable movement of traffic
must safely merge with traffic, if traffic speed exceeds 10 miles per hour
must pass traffic traveling in the same direction
Riders cannot lane share:
between a traffic lane and the curb and bicycle lane (on either side)
between a traffic lane and a row of parked vehicles (on either side)
on the right side of the rightmost lane of traffic, or the left side of the leftmost lane of traffic
in a school zone
Riders should also use common sense when lane sharing, and err on the side of caution: “If you can’t fit, don’t split”.

That looks fairly reasonable to me. Three cheers for Oregon.

Biker Quote for Today

We know you’re a poser if you spend more time shining your bike than riding it.

Waiting for traffic to flow again coming down Vail Pass.

I find it interesting that we motorcyclists are sorely divided on one particular topic: lane-splitting. Most riders in California, the only state where it is legal, swear by it. Many in other states wish they had it but many also consider it insanity. My inclination is with those who are most familiar with it, the Californians, plus the fact that I have seen it in wide-scale operation in Europe. If it seems crazy to you, you don’t have to do it. For those who wish to do it, I believe we should have that option.

But how does all this shake out in regard to lane-filtering? Just to clarify, lane-splitting usually means passing down the middle while traffic is moving, even moving quickly. Lane-filtering generally means slowly slipping past cars that are either stopped or moving very slowly. Utah Okayed filtering a while ago and now Montana has done so as well.

Do riders who oppose lane-splitting feel differently about lane-filtering? I don’t know, and if anyone wants to offer their thoughts or knowledge, please do. But let’s look at it. As a comparison, think about right turn on red. Time was when that was unheard of. Now is there any state that does not allow it? But some people thought it was a crazy idea.

I was riding with a group out in California a number of years ago and while we never did any splitting, we did come to a point one day where it was obviously a filtering opportunity. We were in a city, in traffic, and we came up on a red light. The only car in front of us had stopped a little way back from the intersection, seemingly expecting motorcycles to pull past and in front of them. The three of us in the lead looked at each other, used some hand signals, and nodded in agreement. Then we pulled around in front. Easy as pie, and totally safe. We sped off quickly when the light changed, causing the driver no inconvenience or delay.

Why would that not be OK? Another time, I was headed out on I-70 and coming down Vail Pass traffic was stopped. I was not with anyone but there were a couple other riders right there, too. It was going to be a lengthy stop so we got off and were talking. Someone suggested we ought to pull out onto the shoulder and go past all these cars and see if there was some way we could escape this snarl. We noted that it was not legal but three of us decided to do it.

We pulled out, going past another rider who yelled to us that we were risking a $300 ticket. We went anyway.

Along the way we passed a number of other bikes and some of them joined us. When we finally got to where we clearly could not go any further (the highway was closed due to a vehicle on fire) we stopped. By this time there were about a dozen of us. So we waited until traffic finally was able to move again, slipped in ahead of about two miles of traffic from where we had been, and blasted off. Again, the inconvenience, if any, to the folks in cars was totally minimal. Why should we not have done that?

So I haven’t been to Utah since they legalized filtering, and I certainly haven’t been to Montana since they did, but it will be interesting the next time I am. Realistically speaking, I don’t expect there will be much need or opportunity for filtering but it will be nice to have that as an option if we end up in that sort of situation.

Hooray for common sense.

Biker Quote for Today

Accept no one’s definition of LIFE. Define and design it yourself!

Anyone who has paid attention will recognize this as a much older model of Zero electric motorcycle.

This is not motorcycle-specific but would affect anyone who rides an electric motorcycle.

Under HB21-1205, “Electric Vehicle Road Usage Equalization Fee,” proposed by Rep. Andres Pico, Colorado would charge a fee at time of registration that “is estimated to achieve parity between the aggregate amount of motor vehicle registration fees and motor fuel excise taxes paid per vehicle by owners of plug-in electric motor vehicles and vehicles fueled by gasoline, diesel, or other special fuels and is annually adjusted for inflation.”

This makes total sense because electrics don’t pay fuel taxes but they do use the roads, with all the related wear on those roads. Now, it might hurt if you’re doing the paying because what we now spread out in pennies each time we fill our tanks would presumably be paid all at once. And if this passes there are bound to be cries of unfairness because presumably everyone would pay the same amount when in fact we all pay different amounts on fuel taxes because our mileage differs.

You would also presume that motorcycles would pay less than cars simply because motorcycles use less gas than cars and do less damage to the roads. The bill requires the state departments of revenue and transportation to form a group to study how it would be implemented. That would be the time for us who ride to make sure our voices are heard so as to ensure that we are treated fairly.

Then there are these relevant details in the bill as well. Revenue generated by the fee must be credited to the highway users tax fund (HUTF) and distributed pursuant to the existing “second stream” HUTF allocation formula as follows:

• 60% to the state highway fund;
• 22% to counties; and
• 18% to municipalities; and
• Must be used only for maintenance of existing highways, streets, and roads.

So far, this bill has only been introduced. We have no way of knowing if it will ever be passed. But we’ll keep an eye on it.

Biker Quote for Today

Why motorcycles are better than women: Motorcycles don’t have parents.

The Motorcycle Riders Foundation (MRF) released its legislative agenda for the coming year and it looks much like last year’s agenda. That’s how these things work: You chip away year after year until you finally reach your objective. There are few easy fixes.

The MRF, just to recap, is the national motorcyclist rights organization that works in Washington, DC, with Congress on issues of importance nationally to riders. Meanwhile, all the local and state ABATEs provide the same function on the state levels.

Here’s the MRF agenda. I’ll add a few notes on some of them.

• Profiling: Continue pursuit of the House anti-profiling resolution mirroring the Senate version that passed unanimously. Build momentum for inclusion of anti-profiling language in other legislation. (This is to halt the practice of law enforcement agencies setting up checkpoints solely for motorcyclists; if you want to stop all motorists and check for valid licenses, etc., that’s fine, but not just motorcyclists.)
• Renewable Fuels: Advocate for targeted changes to the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS). (This is aimed at protecting motorcycle engines from the negative effects of too-high ethanol content in gas.)
• Autonomous Vehicles: Advocate and monitor any legislation or regulations related to motorcycles concerning connected and autonomous vehicles. (Make sure autonomous vehicles see and recognize motorcycles.)
• Emission Regulations: Engage the EPA & Congress on any activity related to motorcycle emission regulations.
• Definition of a Motorcycle: Educate policymakers and advocate for change to current definition, that better reflects the current two- and three-wheel motorcycle landscape. (Ensure that regulations affecting motorcycles are based on statistics truly related to motorcycles, i.e., two-wheeled vehicles primarily, and treat three- and four-wheel vehicles as a different class of vehicle.)
• Crash Avoidance: Continue to promote the theme of crash avoidance versus safer crashing urging NHTSA and the DOT to focus on crash prevention and rider education.
• Helmet Laws: Oppose any mandatory federal helmet, apparel or conspicuity standards.
• Black Box: Pursue legislative language that any collected or available vehicle data is the property of the consumer and in which the consumer has the choice to opt-out of having their personal data communicated to interested parties.
• Surface Transportation Reauthorization (Highway Bill): Advocate and pursue legislative efforts that impact motorcyclists in the Highway Bill, now set to expire in 2021.

Seriously, I wouldn’t expect many of these items to be checked off a done a year from now but if the MRF was not there doing its work it is easily imaginable that these situations could get worse. At the very least, preventing backsliding is itself a worthwhile objective.

Biker Quote for Today

So when push comes to shove, get the Harley revved up, the moon can eclipse even the sun. — Lou Reed

Bikes going up Pikes Peak.

As a casualty of the Covid-19 disruption the Colorado legislature was recessed and, now back in session, is killing bills wholesale so as to focus solely on those must-pass bills such as the state budget.

One casualty of this mass slaughter is SB-65, which would have made it illegal for drivers to operate cellphones or other electronic equipment while driving unless they were using a hands-free device. The bill had passed the Senate but did not make it through the House. Maybe next year.

Unfortunately, the bill to extend the MOST program is among those being pushed forward. The bad news and the bad news–there is no good news in this area.

But wait, there’s more. At the national level, the highway bill has had language proposed that would boost states that have mandatory helmet laws for riders under 18. Here is what the Motorcycle Riders Foundation has to say about this.

The Motorcycle Riders Foundation (MRF) was alerted by our contacts in the U.S. Senate regarding a proposed change to the dedicated 405 Motorcycle Safety funds in the National Priority Safety Programs that is authorized through the Highway Bill. The proposed change to this program would add another criteria for states to qualify for motorcycle safety funds. In order to qualify, states have to meet two of the six current criteria. In addition to the current criteria, the additional qualifying area would add a category for states that have a mandatory helmet law for anyone under the age of 18. While meeting the under 18 helmet law is not mandatory to receive these funds, we at the MRF oppose any such change. We cannot allow any amount of erosion of our rights on this issue. The MRF is adamantly opposed to any federal law that would require the use of a helmet, apparel or conspicuity standard.

I guess we’ll see what happens there.

Biker Quote for Today

Top 10 signs that a computer is owned by a Harley rider: 09. System sound effects now play a Harley kicking over when a program starts.

The header for the Congressional Motorcycle Caucus website.

Congress has any number of specific interest caucuses, groups from both parties who have common interests, and they presumably work together to further those interests. So yes, there is a Congressional Motorcycle Caucus, but I have to wonder how much they focus on these issues.

They have a website. It appears to be an adjunct to the website of one of the chairs, Rep. Michael Burgess, a Republican from Texas. The co-chair is Rep. Tim Walberg of Michigan, also a Republican. Here’s a list of the other members:

Don Bacon (R-NE)
Troy Balderson (R-OH)
G.K Butterfield (D-NC)
Michael Conaway (R-TX)
Rick Crawford (R-AR)
Val Demings (D-FL)
Paul Gosar (R-AZ)
Glenn Grothman (R-WI)
Andy Harris (R-MD)
Denny Heck (D-WA)
Doug Lamborn (R-CO)
Sean Patrick Maloney (D-NY)
Paul Mitchell (R-MI)
Rick Nolan (D-MN)
Donald Norcross (D-NJ)
Scott Perry (R-PA)
Collin Peterson (D-MN)
Chris Stewart (R-UT)
Steve Stivers (R-OH)
Glenn “GT” Thompson (R-PA)

You’ll notice that Colorado’s own Doug Lamborn is a member. Good to have someone from here in the group.

Beyond this, however, if the website is any indication, this group does not appear to be particularly active. You go to the Media Center and there is one press release, dated May 9, 2018. Under Resources/Reports and Documents there is one resolution dated May 21, 2008.

Other than that you get some information about each of the co-chairs, a message from Burgess, and the history of the caucus which reads, in full, “The Congressional Motorcycle Caucus was established in 2008 by Reps. Michael Burgess and Gabby Giffords.”

There’s not much else.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not claiming the group is meaningless. Fact is, I have no idea how active they might be, I’m only looking at what they present to the public. And it may well be that there is very little emphasis on keeping current on the website but they do a lot of work together. If anyone can provide me with further information I’d be happy to pass that along.

As for the Senate, that’s even harder to nail down. I found a release from April 4, 2017, that Joni Ernst (R-IA) and Gary Peters (D-MI) launched a Senate motorcycle caucus but beyond the announcement of the formation I find only an April 2018 notice on the AMA site about the group’s first meeting. Plus a few other similar pieces, with nothing even listing who the other members are. Or maybe Ernst and Peters are the only members.

Again, if anyone knows more than this I’d appreciate hearing from you.

Biker Quote for Today

Never ask a biker for directions if you’re in a hurry to get there.