In those past 15 years, there have been ~150 cycle fatalities, so rear-enders are still only 20% of that. It’s also important to appreciate that fewer than 10% of all cycle crashes occur in rural areas but, due to the higher speeds, about half of all cycle fatalities occur there. So rear-end crashes will seem relatively prevalent when considering fatal crashes, but are fairly rare in urban areas (like Christchurch) where most people cycle. The moral of the story: keep an eye on traffic behind you when out in the country, but in town worry about what’s in front of you…

this link will show fatalities in chch city
http://tinyurl.com/jqntfvk
you can get a more detailed report by clicking the link , then opening the search menu and selecting ‘view report’

There are way too many intersections which reduce from two lanes "this side" to to one lane the "other side" and which are only marginally safe for cars on the merging side but a trial in cyclist confidence and resolve, not to mention safety. A two lane approach to an intersection may be two times the car park and effective use of limited road space in a sense and when vehicles are stationary but come the other side when vehicles are mobile and two lanes become its usually a merging problem from hell at peak traffic flows. And that’s just for motorists. Cyclists be damned in the typical estimation as its still as if most cyclists are tacitly instructed to bugger off by the brute force of road design on most busy roads most of the time.

When a lane is designated as straight through as well as turning we as cyclists are advised by the Road Code to "take the lane" straight through but I have to admit that in examples such as the below I have been more timid in doing so than I have wished and put up with motor vehicles passing by far closer than ideal – competitively merging in the do or die race to get to the next red light or compulsory stop 1.38 seconds faster they the other guy or gal.

The merge from QEII Dr to Northcote Rd westward from Main North Rd is one partcularly instructive example too bad already mentioned. Main North Rd. southward past Cranford St another. Grahams Rd northward over Memorial Ave, Grahams Rd northward over Wairakei Rd, Linwood Ave eastward over Hargood St-Keighleys Rd and Ferry Rd westward over Hargood-Radley Sts are others. That’s just off the top of my head. Just to begin…

Traveling "inside" a traffic queue even in a cycle lane with traffic potentially turning left and immediately across one’s path or going for "the gap" in the queue considerately given if coming from the opposite direction are probably the most commonly encountered real and immediate dangers. I’ve found its worth standing up on the pedals for the latter in order to make oneself as visible as possible. As for the former? I cannot but say that failure on the part of a motorist to indicate their intention to turn left is routine – to be automatically expected. The ability of the cyclist (me; you?) to brake dramatically or deftly swerve rightward in such circumstances is a critical life saving skill.

Even when there are barrier poles its not entirely unusual to encounter a car making a sneaky lefty completely blocking the cycle lane if they are able to fit. Design flaw to make these cycle friendly features too wide even if as obviously demarcated "cyclists only" as they can be, methinks. This is not an entirely unusual occurrence at the intersection of Kahu and Straven Rds, for example.

I wonder how many accidents aren’t reported? After 30 some years of cycling with immense confidence I had my first ever "accident" with a motor vehicle recently. I swerved to miss the truck not looking at all which turned right across my path which I did avoid but couldn’t avoid the car looking even less right behind it. They assumed that if it was safe for the vehicle in front it was safe for them… Never assume… Although I nearly flipped completely I only received a graze. I didn’t report the incident, figuring that my going completely off at the motorist (if largely for dramatic effect) did the trick for the most part. At least she was appropriately apologetic.

I am very sceptical about those central city separated cycle paths.They were never designed for me, nor did I want them, and now I’ve seen them at current flows I’m not sure they were designed for anyone. Methinks they are too dangerous to use. I’ve so nearly been taken out by ignorant motorists and pedestrians having no idea what they are every time I’ve used them; and after giving them up to take the lane easily achieved on the roadway at 30kmph – if very lucky to be going 30 at all – seen others all too nearly taken out on the cycleway ostensibly quicker as well. Taking the lane whenever possible and practicable and making it impossible to be invisible (as if) will always be safer than assuming a motorist is going to see "you" when "you" are misguidedly keeping safe by riding out of the way, even in an designated cycle facility with even the most minimal connection with regular roads.

Yeah, thanks Lenny , I guessed that. (-: . A long story best not retold.

Crashes are often coded on the basis of what the attending officer noted at the time of the incident, rather than any follow-up activity. So, for example, if someone is carted away in an ambulance they would usually code it as “serious”, regardless of what their actual injuries were. Likewise, a crash might have been coded as minor if the officer didn’t discern any serious injuries at the time (e.g. adrenalin can mask the pain until later) or it was reported later to the Police station. So it’s an inexact science; what’s probably of more value is that the incident has at least been recorded in “the system”.