[No Reply]

I use cycle paths where I can, if they are good, take me in the direction I want to go, and are pleasurable.

The issue I find, is that whilst I always ride on the left side, because we drive on the left, hospitals have signs asking people to keep left, and during covid, many pavements had keep left signs. So in my mind it is common sense if we all kept to the left, then there would never be any issues.

So why do so many cyclists, dog walkers and joggers run either all over the path, or insist on keeping on the right side?

It’s the same when I am out walking, I always keep left but quite often come up against another walker or cyclist hell bent on keeping right. If I’m that way out I stick to my guns, and stay on the left, forcing them to move across, well I am a grumpy old man now!

Surely it’s not hard is it? If we all kept to the left, whether riding, walking or jogging, life on the paths would be so much easier.

And what about those who insist on walking 5 abreast, taking up the whole path and ignoring you when you approach, I ring my bell, they see me and many times nobody moves across, until the very last second. I have contemplated ringing my bell then mowing them down to teach them a lesson! Only joking, but it is infuriating.

And don’t get me started on people wandering all over shared paths with headphones stuck on their heads, completely oblivious to everything around them, coccooned in their own little world. Grr!

Topic

[DawlishBrian]

Spot on, ?

Spot on, ?

[mdavidford]

The frustration isn’t really

The frustration isn’t really so much the actions of the pedestrians. It’s the having to use a shared path and deal with those actions. The actions just happen to be the point at which that frustration materialises.

[andystow]

mdavidford wrote:

The frustration isn’t really so much the actions of the pedestrians. It’s the having to use a shared path and deal those actions. The actions just happen to be the point at which that frustration materialises.

Exactly. On a pavement, in a hallway, or in the middle of the park, a person walking can (not) do all those things in perfect safety. But on a shared path, they suddenly need to be vigilant so that a cyclist doesn’t collide with them.

[Rockhopper229]

If you consider the new
If you consider the new Highway code rules the pedestrian is a higher risk group than cyclists so ideally it is up to us to yield for them on shared spaces.

[HoarseMann]

biker phil wrote:

When walking on a road with no pavement. But on a shared path? I think not. 

On a shared path or pavement, if it is alongside a road, then the user nearest the road should face the oncoming traffic. So you can’t just say keep left as a general rule.

[jh2727]

andystow wrote:

I too have been very mildly frustrated by people doing other than what I expect on a shared path.

Things that I don’t expect pedestrians to do on a shared path:

1. Look over their should before changing direction.
2. Walk in a straight line.
3. Anything when I ring my bell.
4. The whole of a group to move in the same direction.
5. To stay on the same side, after moving to one side.
6. Look up from their phone.
7. Keep an eye on their children (or better, a hand).

I don’t see how any of these things can be considered frustrating.

[jh2727]

There’s no rule about what

There’s no rule about what side of a path or a pavement. I tend to keep to the left because this is what people in this country should be familiar with, but also because it means the person facing nearest the traffic (on paths next to traffic) do not have their back to the traffic.

The problem comes when ‘meeting’ other cyclists on a shared path. You’ll be trying to stick to the left and they’ll be trying to stick to the left and the pedestrians and dogs will be all over the place. Which is fine, until they go one step futher and decide because the ‘obstruction’ is on your side you should yield to them, because that’s what you do when your driving… Great.. but passing pedestrians is not the same as passing parked vehicles – if a pedestrian is walking towards me on their righthand side, what does the cyclist (who is approaching the pedestrian from behind) think is going to happen if I yield to that cyclist?

I’ll leave it at that, because I think you all know the answer.

[jh2727]

kil0ran wrote:

Always keep left, but particularly if the path is alongside a road. Perhaps because I commuted in Southampton alongside HGVs but I always hated riding on the edge of the pavement with my back to the traffic flow. Oddly felt more vulnerable than riding on the road. 

There’s nothing odd about it.

As poor as the general standard of motoring is, at least most motorists will give you some amount of space if you are on the road. Virtually none will think of altering their speed or position, if they see a cyclist less than 1.5/2 m away on a shared use path or pavement.

[jh2727]

zideriup wrote:

The principle is the same: If I’m on a shared footpath I will keep right so that I am able to see oncoming traffic (bikes, horses, illegal motorbike riding). This obviously assumes that said traffic keeps left, which it mostly does. 

I’m not sure I get how this works – how does walking on the right hand side of the path allow you to see oncoming traffic better.  Walk on the path that’s on the right hand side of the road, by all means. 

If you are walking on the right handside of the righthandside path, you are forcing people who are walking or cycling towards you on that path – with their back to the traffic – to walk closest to the traffic.  I think people who are facing traffic, should generally give the more protected position to give those who are not facing traffic. 

[zideriup]

The principle is the same: If

The principle is the same: If I’m on a shared footpath I will keep right so that I am able to see oncoming traffic (bikes, horses, illegal motorbike riding). This obviously assumes that said traffic keeps left, which it mostly does. 

In the age of declining driving and riding standards, combined with a court system failing vulnerable road users (which as a vulnerable road user yourself, perhaps should reflect on before bullying pedestrians), I feel safer walking in such a way so that I am able to see hazards and react accordingly, ultimately taking charge of my own safety. 

It’s stood me in good stead so far, though admittedly untested in a court of law, mostly because I haven’t yet had a crank assault me and cause injury over some arbitrary slight I have inadvertently committed as a result of my use of footpaths (or maybe they’ve already tried to but I was able to get out of the way in good time ?)

[ktache]

Not obstruct cyclists…

Not obstruct cyclists…

Really!?!?!

…Avoid unnecessary distractions.  It will never work…

[mdavidford]

zideriup wrote:

Pedestrians are required advised to keep right and walk facing oncoming traffic (HC rule 1 and 2).

That’s on a road, though. Shared space is rule 13, and it’s pretty silent on where you should be, other than that you should ‘take care not to obstruct or endanger [cyclists].’

[No Reply]

When walking on a road with

When walking on a road with no pavement. But on a shared path? I think not. What I’m suggesting is something simple which will benefit all who use the paths 

[zideriup]

Pedestrians are required to

Pedestrians are required to keep right and walk facing oncoming traffic (HC rule 1 and 2).

[kil0ran]

Always keep left, but

Always keep left, but particularly if the path is alongside a road. Perhaps because I commuted in Southampton alongside HGVs but I always hated riding on the edge of the pavement with my back to the traffic flow. Oddly felt more vulnerable than riding on the road. 

[Author]

Replies