Cycling vs walkers in country parks

Huskydays

Jazee wrote: »

I am both a cyclist and obviously a pedestrian too. Three times today on my dog walk on a shared path, cyclists approached from behind and none rang their bell.

Now my dogs are trained to walk to heel on the paths and not to chase bikes, but others can be startled. Please use your bell, 2 rings is fine!

Never mind the dog, I'm the one that's easily startled :rotfl: I would also appreciate a bell ring or two.
Haven't cycled for many years but do occasionally get some weird passive aggression from some people while I'm walking my dog. I find a smile and a 'good morning' (or whatever) can go a long way for all but the terminally grumpy.

MsLdn

I've been complained at for using my bell, and complained at for not using my bell (either because I haven't used it because I've judged there's enough space to pass slowly, or because they simply haven't heard it). It can be tricky to know what's the most courteous approach to take. I live in London and I've mostly encountered this on the Thames path out towards Kew. Some walkers there just don't like bikes (justifiably enough given the speeds some commuter cyclists race down it) and will be unhappy whatever you do. I've just come back from a week in Devon and on the shared path by the Dart near Totnes walkers seemed to be much more aware of bikes and more friendly towards them. I noticed a real difference. Someone mentioned the path through Hither Green station. It's unclear from the signs whether you can cycle there or not. I walk my bike through because people coming down the stairs from the platforms can't see along the passage way. I've seen people scoot and other people cautiously ride there ... certainly going through at anywhere near normal speed would be pretty dangerous!

yorkie2

Altarf wrote: »

And considerate cyclists would not blat along paths expecting everyone to get out of their way.

We can hope.

You appear to have a dubious agenda; any reasonable person would expect that 4 people walking 4-abreast taking up the entire width of the path would reduce that to at least 2 or 3 abreast, to allow someone else to pass. They should allow others to pass regardless of whether they are on bikes or not.

The fact you are arguing against this says quite a lot about your motives and agenda in this discussion, so I think your views can be taken with a pinch of salt by anyone with a reasonable view.

MsLdn wrote: »

I've been complained at for using my bell, and complained at for not using my bell (either because I haven't used it because I've judged there's enough space to pass slowly, or because they simply haven't heard it). ...

True; the best action where practicable is to use the bell from as far away as possible. This is problematical if the person is hard of hearing or if the wind is strong and against you, but it works for me more often than it doesn't.

Altarf

yorkie2 wrote: »

You appear to have a dubious agenda;

My agenda is I simply dislike cyclists who cycle on pavements and expect pedestrians to get out of the way. Cyclists like this from earlier in the thread.

Retrogamer wrote: »

I'd keep cycling at a slow pace without stopping. If they want to walk into me, that's their choice.

Norman_Castle

Altarf wrote: »

My agenda is I simply dislike cyclists

We had noticed. Not sure why you feel compelled to hover around the cyclists board.

silverwhistle

Norman_Castle wrote: »

Not sure why you feel compelled to hover around the cyclists board.

I have my own theory but don't wish to be modded!

Joking aside, one approach I've used, including on local country roads going past horses is to give a cheery "coming through". The alternative is to have an old bike that goes clunk, clunk, clunk...

Retrogamer

Altarf wrote: »

My agenda is I simply dislike cyclists who cycle on pavements and expect pedestrians to get out of the way. Cyclists like this from earlier in the thread.

I dislike dishonest folks who try and misrepresent what i've said by creating silly Strawman fallacies in a feeble attempt to try and justify their confirmation bias.

I've said twice already, so here's a third time (not that it'll make a bit of difference as it's obvious what you're up to)

I don't cycle on pavements. I cycle on shared pathways.
If it's a shared pathway and pedestrians are taking up 100% of it, walking towards me and refusing to move despite clearly seeing me, then please explain how i am being selfish.

Shall i expect you to vanish from the thread for several days again then waltz back in and ignore all the points made towards you, so you can ignore them and regurgitate the same nonsense and dishonest arguments.?

vacheron

I've never had a bell. On gravel paths i often just lock my back wheel for a fraction of a second from a decent distance away.

The noise is quiet and interesting enough for the pedestrians to look around and they are generally happy that they have spotted me on their own terms and move aside.

If they don't notice i ride behind them for a little while, and if they still don't notice a gentle "excuse me please" always does the trick.

That said I am speaking from the perspective of riding through the almost deserted Northumberland hills and coastlines.
I'm not sure if I'd be doing the same if i was riding long the Thames at rush hour and having to warn people 20 times each kilometer!

warehouse

I regularly ride the 14 miles of canal tow paths to my office, then the same back after work. I have found that by having a bell that sounds more like a kids bell rather than the sterile "ding" type bell gets a better reaction from people. I rarely get any issues on the towpath because I'm a considerate cyclist but it happens from time to time. I'm particularly wary of people with their backs to me with several dogs not on leads, but it's all manageable with the right speed, warning and attitude.

A fellow office worker cycles less than half my route on the canal and seems to get issues every other day. I wonder why?

Altarf

Retrogamer wrote: »

I don't cycle on pavements. I cycle on shared pathways.

You can call them whatever you want but they are pavements.

And just to remind people, pavements on which you stated you would ride into pedestrians who didn't get out of your way.

Retrogamer wrote: »

I'd keep cycling at a slow pace without stopping. If they want to walk into me, that's their choice.