Kranky

I'm glad some of these stories end up with happy endings. Well done everyone involved. I get your frustration but we need cops with integrity, not taking the law into their own hands. Everyone needs to be able to trust the police to do their job honestly. Plus, this kind of behaviour only assists the accused's case and can end up with the government paying over damages for abuse (our tax money).

A great read about the infrastructure, culture, and laws that makes commuting by bicycle so successful in the Netherlands. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-23587916 We can only dream.

Thanks for the update.

I see on the website that this event is taking place over 25 - 27 October this year. Anyone got any more details?

Well,that's what I get for talking about things I've only seen while riding in another direction. Will have to go do a closer inspection inspection next week.

I have some reservations about the first, fourth and last as obligatory rules (I'll keep my rant to last to stay on topic). Bicycles lanes in Cape Town are often poorly designed. I get most annoyed by bicycle lanes that are separated from the main road but cross all the side streets, which can be close together. Even though cyclists have right of way on these lanes, I find motorists rarely consider the users of these lanes, as they are not seen as part of the road. Much like riding on the pavement, every crossing is a hazard. When these lanes are on offer, I feel safer on the road and therefore ignore the lane. Example: the lane along Newlands Avenue. Here I prefer being visible in the road instead of suddenly appearing out of the bushes to cross a side street. I've even seen a runner get hit because the driver didn't see him. Another example of poor design is the Bree Street lane. At the bottom the cycle route has a section where you have to go down or up stairs, fine on a mountain bike but think of the hipsters. Then, you have to get off and push your bike over the bridge Should cyclists be obliged to take these dodgy or inconvenient routes where perfectly safe alternatives on public roads exist? I'm sure you guys can compile an even more extensive list of dodgy lanes.

@shebeen that incident have any connection to this tweet? "Involved in an attempted bike jacking this morning on the @MyCiTiBus route at Woodstock Stn. What is the @CityofCT doing about this ****?"

I've seen a neat looking Cotic X with Ritchey cyclocross tires down here in the Cape. That CX Sundays race looks like a blast.

Sorry to hear your story. My AL129 rims must have been a good set. Still going strong after 10 months hard riding. I have even been down some of the DH trails at Tokai and Jonkers with these rims. Although I must admit, they don't feel like the most solid wheels and I do intend on upgrading them when some cash comes in.

This.

Depending on the error made by the prosecutor, it is possible for the charges to be reinstated. But that would require someone to their job.

Private investment does not get rid of a servitude. Yes, it is nice of people to invest in the land and the route but no one is obliged to maintain a right of way, including the government. You are confusing a servitude with a public road, the two are very different things. A servitude is defined by the fact that it is on private land. You keep ignoring this vital point. Long before the alleged servitude started? Then what are you arguing? The morality of the matter? Are you saying we can just do as we like irrespective of the law?

Furthermore, from one of the authorities quoted in the judgment hillbilly linked above: "The existence of a public servitude can be asserted by proving vestus or immemorial user. In terms of this doctrine there is a rebuttable presumption that where a so-called public servitude has been exercised by members of the public from time immemorial, such servitude arose by virtue of a valid title even though there is no written proof of the validity of the rule" 'public servitudes are not extinguished by non-user or any form of extinctive prescription' My interpretation: If a public servitude can be shown in the distant past, it is presumed to be valid. A public servitude is not removed due to lack of use.

So your argument is ownership trumps all other rights in respect of a piece of land? Even when the applicable law might say otherwise? Unfortunately for the land owners, servitudes are old news in South African law. The only question is to determine whether a servitudal right of way has developed over this particular route. I haven't heard much evidence that it isn't used in this manner. However, I have learnt that there is a long history of the public using the route and that the land owners are trying their hardest to prevent people using it (which would imply that people are indeed attempting to make use of a route that they deem to be public). But I do admit that I am merely an internet critic and there could be much more to this than I am aware. Just going on what is available.

Freedom Challenge Facebook account: https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=538848149508916&id=172756652784736 "PUBLIC ACCESS TO THE LADDER On Wednesday the 26th June 2013 two functionaries of the Freedom Challenge, David Waddilove and Johan Rissik, were “arrested” in the Gamkaskloof for attempting to access the historical route known as The Ladder. The Ladder is an old footpath that links the western section of Gamkaskloof with nearby Vleiland. It was used by people living in the kloof to send their goods to market and by members of the public and government officials visiting the kloof. It has been used for the last ten years by mountain bikers riding from Prince Albert via Gamkaskloof towards Cape Town in the annual Freedom Challenge Race across South Africa, as well as riders touring on the same route. For approximately 5 years the Freedom Challenge has been in a dispute with the landowners at both the bottom and the top of The Ladder about the nature and extent of any right of way. The Freedom Challenge maintains that a public right of way exists. The position of the Freedom Challenge, that this is a public right of way, has been supported by legal opinion. The landowners maintain that it does not, that it is private property and that their permission to traverse is required. Various lawyers’ letters have been exchanged. Attempts at compromise have proved unsuccessful and an impasse has developed. A few days ago, with the first riders in the 2013 Freedom Challenge Race Across South Africa approaching Gamkaskloof, the Freedom Challenge Race office was informed that the landowners at the base of The Ladder had taken the law into their own hands and had unlawfully erected an electrified fence preventing access to The Ladder and had barricaded access up The Ladder with razor wire. The Freedom Challenge obtained advice from Senior Counsel confirming that the actions of the landowners were unlawful and that the Freedom Challenge and riders participating in the event could adopt such measures as would be reasonably necessary to access the public right of way. On Wednesday 26th June 2013, after a meeting with the Prince Albert SAPS, Waddilove and Rissik went through the Kloof ahead of the first riders. They were met at the fence by representatives of the landowner who refused to unlock the gate. They managed to find a route past the fence and then collected their bicycles and passed them under the fence. The two then rode further along the track towards the base of The Ladder. The progress of Waddilove was then impeded by one of the landowner representatives who proported to “arrest “ him for trespassing. In the meantime Rissik proceeded to the base of The Ladder where he encountered razor wire which he cut. He then returned to where Waddilove was and was also “arrested”. After being held against their will for 5 hours, Waddilove and Rissik were summarily informed that they were released and could leave. Rissik returned to Prince Albert while Waddilove continued forward to take on the steep ascent up Ladder before cycling on to Vleiland. The Freedom Challenge wishes to state that we find the most recent developments most unfortunate, however: 1. the route up The Ladder is an historical right of way to which members of the public have access; 2. the landowners’ endeavor to restrict public access by mountain bikers and hikers along this route is unlawful; 3. the landowners’ recent attempt to take the law into their own hands and physically prevent access is highly inappropriate; 4. in the absence of a court order, the Freedom Challenge will continue to assert the public’s right to utilize this route. In doing so we will urge riders to be considerate towards the landowners’ and their privacy; 5. it remains our wish that a sustainable solution be found."

Are any of the riders taking part in the extreme triathlon this year? Can't find any info online.

Just a quick shot of Guy on his single speed:

http://vimeo.com/68766706

Same sighting?

Glad to see I'm not the only one that thinks twice about that damn bridge in the wet

I guess you could get there from the back, up the Constantia Nek road. But not condoned by SANParks. So the below applies: Would be an awesome ride though. Platteklip Gorge down

I've chatted to the Thursday night ride group on my way down, they told me that they meet and leave from Steenberg Village. Can't recall a time though.

Enforcement is not the main reasoning behind the PPAs position. This is: "The Pedal Power Association supports the use of helmets by its members, but we are against making the use of helmets compulsory by law, as it discourages cycling." It is also happens to be impossible to enforce the law, as a penalty has never been legislated.

According to their website, International Traders distribute WTB stuff. They may be able to point you in the right direction. http://www.intltrade...ages/brands.php

True. A bit of false logic on my part. Going out an advocating not wearing is not constructive. What I should have said is that forcing helmet use where it is detrimental to the riding experience is not beneficial. Best example being dense European cities where 35% of people commute on bicycle and the average ride is 2-5km, bikes are low tech, speeds are slow, and infrastructure is bike orientated, instead of motor vehicle focussed. And this is how most cities with large commuting populations actually work. PPA are against mandatory laws in South Africa: "The Pedal Power Association supports the use of helmets by its members, but we are against making the use of helmets compulsory by law, as it discourages cycling. Pedal Power Association regularly hands out helmets to cyclists in poor neighbourhoods. From our experience we can tell you that less than one per cent of poor cyclists use a helmet. In affluent neighbourhoods and amongst sports cyclists the percentage of helmet use is higher. This requirement in law is largely ignored and should be repealed." http://www.pedalpowe...ic-regulations/