Re: Cyclists ought to be licensed (Letters, Aug. 29)
Marta Ofstie suggests that if cyclists paid a licence fee, there would suddenly be copious amounts of money for creating dedicated bike paths.
I respectfully suggest that if one were to do the math, the amount of money generated (after the no doubt top-heavy administration involved) might be enough to create about 20 feet of bike lane.
Ms. Ofstie also asked: “Who is paying for all these bike paths?”
The answer is: the same individuals who pay for all of the roads in general. All of us do, as funds for roads come out of general revenue to which all taxpayers contribute – cyclists included (who, incidentally, are likely also motorists). They are not funded through fuel tax or licence fees.
Does she also feel that pedestrians should be licensed to help pay for the sidewalks?
Given the near zero wear and tear from cyclists to our roadways, the subsequent health benefits from cycling, and the zero pollution emitted from cycling, it is backwards thinking to come to such punitive and myopic ideas of licensing cyclists.
In addition, a cyclist operating licence is not required for police officers to enforce the existing traffic rules. Cyclists are already regulated by the highway act.