You might be surprised to hear that there's an actual, official interstate "highway" system for bicyclists. Although there's a pretty good reason that you're probably not familiar with it: after the first two routes on the U.S. Bicycle Route System were designated in 1982, the whole project has essentially been neglected and ignored by officials.
Until now, that is.
On his blog, U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray Lahood writes: "I'm happy to report that ... the Association of American State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) has approved the first new routes for the system in more than 30 years."
The AASHTO is working with state DOTs to identify good potential routes for interstate biking. The government bodies also work closely with the Adventure Cycling Association, which is an incredible bike advocacy organization that specializes in long-distance bike touring and recreation riding. Few, if any, groups better understand cycling as transportation, and the ACA's input helps ensure that the routes can be as safe and convenient (and fun) as possible. Together, AASHTO and the ACA created this incredible map of what a national interstate bike route system could look like.
Click here for a larger PDF version of that map, which lets you see a lot more details, including which routes are already established, which are priority corridors, and where you can catch ferries and busses. Also, on the ACA's Corridor Plan page, you can click on any state to see its progress on particular routes, plans, and proposals.
So what does an official U.S. Bicycle Route System route actually look like in the real, physical world? It varies. Routes can run on roads, trails, or even highways depending on what the state DOTs suggest and implement.
The two existing routes -- the ones dedicated way back in 1982 -- provide some clues. There's an east-west route, USBR 76, that follows the ACA's TransAmerica Trail through Virginia, Kentucky, and Illinois. The TransAm trail follows mostly small, country roads, like this one, as photographed by a rider a couple years back.
You might be thinking that unique, standalone bike paths would be better than sharing space with roads built for automobiles. In some cases, I'd say that's right -- it's not fun to ride on big multiple lane freeways, nor heavily-trafficked commercial ways lined with strip malls. But I actually rode across the country once back in 2004, and I found that quiet country roads were pretty ideal for covering a lot of ground and having access to amenities like food and water. Buffered, designated bike paths may be ideal, and even feel necessary, in more urban settings, but once you get out of the higher density parts of the country, I feel like cyclists can happily share the road with cars. (The Europeans, of course have this figured out. I've ridden along cycling routes in France, Switzerland, and Italy that follow designated bike paths around cities and towns, but then join up with auto roads for longer stretches through the country.)
There are other pieces already established along a north-south USBR 1 route, that will essentially parallel, and often coincide wit, the famous auto interstate Route 1 that runs from Maine down the East Coast out to the Florida Keys.
So what's next? LaHood noted that the AASHTO approved six new routes:
The new routes include USBR 1 in Maine and New Hampshire, USBR 20 in Michigan, and USBRs 8, 95, 97, and 87 in Alaska. All six routes have been in development for years, and the cycling community is excited to see them approved.
With any luck, and the right amount of government support, within a decade or so you might be able to pedal all the way from Maine to Miami or straight across the country on an official set of interstate cycling routes. The ACA's "Building the U.S. Bicycle Route System" blog is a great way to follow along and see how this two-wheel interstate is coming along.
Hat tip: Andrew Price. Photo of TransAm route by Andy Strang.
