Plastic Orcas and Visual Vandalism: Why I've Had Enough of Wirral’s Active Travel Fiasco

Let’s cut through the noise: I’m utterly pissed off.

Wirral Council’s so-called 'Active Travel' initiative has descended into a farcical mess that would be laughable if it weren’t so depressingly predictable.

They go through the motions—consultations, workshops, slick presentations—but it's increasingly obvious they're not actually listening.

A council that can't even lay paving slabs straight is never going to deliver world-class cycling infrastructure. Pretending otherwise insults everyone's intelligence.

The Great "Light Segregation" Lie

"Light segregation" is the fashionable term they've latched onto, designed to reassure us with the idea of subtle, affordable infrastructure that gently guides traffic and protects cyclists. But there’s nothing subtle about rows of cheap, ugly plastic orcas nailed into major roads like Fender Lane, Harrison Drive, and now Duke Street. This isn’t "light segregation"—it’s visual vandalism.

I've cycled extensively in genuinely cycle-friendly cities across Europe: Berlin, Hamburg, Copenhagen, the Netherlands, and even the Czech Republic, whose cycle tourism infrastructure quietly outshines ours by miles. Not once have I encountered plastic orcas cluttering their roads. Why? Because serious cities build proper cycle lanes—clear, intuitive, and safely segregated, often raised, or separated by kerbs, planters, or high quality colour coded asphalt. They understand that "light segregation" shouldn't mean creating trip hazards and visual clutter.

Plastic Orcas: Proven Failures and Safety Risks

Let’s deal in facts:

• Camden Council removed orcas after recording 55 pedestrian falls within a single day.

  
  

• Kent identified orcas as significant pedestrian and cycling hazards.

  
  

• RoSPA warned explicitly about their low visibility, causing trips and falls.

In Dublin, initial installations of orcas sparked immediate controversy—drivers ignored them, and cyclists found them dangerous. Why would Wirral repeat these well-documented mistakes?

Please show me anywhere within London’s modern cycling network—arguably the UK’s benchmark for realistic, achievable cycling infrastructure—where plastic orcas are being used. You won’t find them. Good London boroughs know better, opting instead for genuinely effective segregation such as raised kerbs, clear markings, and planters. These solutions don't just look better—they work better.

Here are several additional documented examples of councils installing—and subsequently removing—plastic orcas due to safety concerns or local outcry:

1. City of London / Camden (2016)

The Motorcycle Action Group (MAG) and British Motorcyclists Federation (BMF) recorded 55 pedestrian trips* within the first 24 hours of installing “Mini‑Orcas” in the City of London. The scheme was pulled almost immediately ([Better Streets][1], [Road Safety GB][2]).

2. Greenwich & Enfield (Greater London)

Greenwich Council removed its orcas just weeks after installation due to safety concerns from local residents ([Nv Legal][3]).

Enfield also saw a petition to Downing Street after multiple incidents of pedestrians tripping over orcas—RoSPA had warned of such hazards ([Nv Legal][3]).

3. Kent / Tonbridge (Nov 2019)

Kent County Council deployed orcas on Shipbourne Road. Local residents reported broken arms and facial injuries, particularly to elderly pedestrians, after tripping over them.

The council faced criticism labeling orcas as “dangerous” and called for careful placement review due to unpredictable pedestrian flows ([Kent Online][4], [Better Streets][1]).

4. Scotland (Glasgow, Jun 2022)

*Two serious injuries were reported on Howard Street in Glasgow: A 61-year-old man fractured his elbow after clipping an orca in drizzle and losing consciousness. Another pedestrian broke their wrist and required surgery. A legal case is underway, with residents branding orcas as “catastrophic hazards” ([The Free Library][5]).

5. Middlesbrough (Feb–Oct 2022)

On Linthorpe Road, low‑lying orcas were blamed for multiple accidents, including a 78‑year‑old woman who broke her wrist. The council committed to replacing half of the rubber markers with **vertical poles** to improve visibility and reduce trip risks ([Macks Solicitors][6]).

6. Solihull (Meriden to Millisons Wood)

Residents launched a petition demanding orca removal due to piling debris and poor visibility in low-light conditions. They highlighted the inability to sweep roads properly and flagged increased risk in winter months ([Newbury Today][7]).

7. West Berkshire (Thatcham, Oct 2020)

Councillors raised concerns that orcas might narrow key carriageways and pose mid‑winter hazards. Poles were uprooted and reflectivity was questioned—calls were made to either enhance safety or remove them entirely ([Newbury Today][7], [Kent News][8]).

8. Kent County (Various towns)

KentNews reported that orcas elevated pedestrian trip risks, especially in darkness—urging councils to consider more visible alternatives like cat’s eyes or raised paint ([Kent News][8]).

9. Bolton (Chorley New Road, Jul 2021)

Wand-style orcas were removed temporarily for the IRONMAN event—not due to safety—but then retained only after public consultation ([Bolton Council][9]).

Summary of Evidence

All these cases confirm the pattern: low-profile orcas, designed to be “light segregation,” frequently turn into real-world trip hazards—causing falls, fractures, legal claims, and widespread backlash. They routinely fail to perform as intended, with councils repeatedly forced into reactive cleanup rather than proactive improvement.

Follow the Money, Follow the Mess

Why does Wirral keep installing orcas despite all evidence pointing against them? Because they’re cheap—not because they're effective. This is the inevitable outcome when a third to half of funding disappears into consultants’ pockets, leaving only scraps for actual infrastructure. When costs are cut, corners inevitably follow. All you have to do is walk through Birkenhead right now and see the disgraceful standard of finish on recent street works—shoddy paving, poor workmanship, no quality control.

The core issue isn’t just poor infrastructure choices—it’s optics. Plastic orcas loudly signal incompetence and a council out of its depth. They’re cheap, ugly, dangerous, and ineffective. They repel people from cycling rather than encouraging it. This isn't Active Travel—it's performative infrastructure at its worst.

Why I'm Done

This fiasco illustrates exactly why I've resigned from Wirral’s Active Travel Forum and why I’m withdrawing any future support for the Core Active Travel Network. The entire initiative is ideologically flawed, politically toxic, and fundamentally misunderstood by those in charge. Decision-makers don't understand the need, the community, or, frankly, even the subject matter itself.

Enough is enough. Plastic orcas everywhere isn't progress; it's pathetic. And I refuse to lend my credibility to something so transparently inadequate. Wirral deserves better—sadly, it won't be getting it anytime soon.

RW