Foul-mouthed anti-cyclist rant from farmers' Facebook group goes viral

No, maybe not all of S Scotland. But I really enjoyed heading out into the countryside around Duns with my brother and son. We're planning to do it again.

Been down there on a pootle from Edinburgh recently.  Interesting area, will have to revisit!

lostshrimp wrote:

Any other industry or business wouldn't be allowed to create the level of risk to the public the food production industry gets away with. Driving heavy machinery with spikes on public roads (and demanding vulnerable users get out of their way) , keeping dangerous animals near footpaths, filling the countryside with barbed wire etc. If any other business behaved like that they'd be fined or shut down

I remember a long thread on the Cycling UK / CTC forums, where some bloke had hit a rope that had been strung across a lane between hedges.  Turned out that a farmer was moving livestock between two fields and had strung it up so that the livestock didn't stray the wrong way.  Hadn't felt the need to put up any signage, or have someone stood there warning oncoming traffic, though...

HoarseMann wrote:

What would this tractor driver do if they encountered an oncoming car? Expect them to immediately drive off the road? No. They would slow to a halt and carefully edge their way past, thinking nothing of it.

So why expect an oncoming cyclist to dive out of your way, as you career past without slowing? Tractors ought to come to a complete halt when faced with oncoming vulnerable road users and allow them to negotiate their way past - a cyclist is not going to run over a tractor driver. I really think this should be added to the highway code.

Because bicycles aren't real traffic, as any fule kno... 

'Cycling'jon my arse!

Purpose is not entitlement. If he takes up the whole carriageway or can't give sufficient space,  he should stop until the oncoming traffic has passed safely.

If a cyclist/group stops and he continues safely (noting that they haven't disappeared, they still require consideration), great: everybody has shown some love. But it's not for him to expect. 

No, you need a licence to drive a tractor on the road and its continued posession is conditional on following the rules, Its not my fault if you chose a tractor/trailer that's too big for the road. And while we're on the subject of farmers, when was the last time one of them cleaned up al the mud etc. that they deposit on the road as they are supposed to?

Cyclingjon1959 wrote:

Apart from a slightly passive/aggressive message, I have to agree with the farmer. He is out doing his job and a bloody difficult job it is. We cyclist are for the most part, out on a jolly.

Speak for yourself.

I've had too many encounters with people driving tractors, 4x4s, Land Rovers, combines and forage harvesters on country lanes to know that a lot of them deliberately use the size of their vehicle to intimidate and frighten other road users. Clubmates and friends have had run-ins with aggressive farmers. Last year I reported one to the police for stopping and threatening to deliberately run me off the road when I was riding home from work. So DON'T YOU DARE give me any of your fucking "out on a jolly" bullshit.

If a farmer can't / won't control his vehicle safely around other road users he/she needs to be retrained before they kill someone.

And when so many drivers - of tractors, SUVs, cars and vans - refuse to stop in a passing place or even bother to slow down for oncoming cyclists then you'll have to excuse me for not dismounting to stand in a ditch and doff my cap every single time a vehicle comes the other way.

Fkn right on! 👏

Can I have a go?

As a farmer myself I have to say that people who ride bikes are often just hard working, tax paying, insured, rule abiding citizens with the same worries and stresses as anyone else, just going about their business, looking after their physical and mental well-being whereas we whining, Brexit voting, overall clad yokels are often just using the roads for a giggle.

Sod tractors, let more efficient and vulnerable road users go about their way - really roll the red carpet out. Ogmios style.

In the circumstance of cyclist(s) and tractor meeting head to head on a road not wide enough for both, then surely it is obvious that the safest and probably quickest resolution for both is to stop
and then for the driver of the larger vehicle to allow the smaller, more manouverable one to negotiate a way past.

BTW, 20 tonne load or not, being able to anticipate oncoming traffic and being able to stop safely is a basic driving competence.

I'm afraid that this, as a generalisation, is not workable. I'm surprised it got 12 likes but then we know many cyclists have a somewhat biased view of road etiquette. I ride a lot of my kms on roads through agricultural scenery that are just wide enough for farm vehicles. Where possible, the drivers will slow down and drive off the edge of the road to leave space for me. Where your suggestion fails is when the terrain doesn't allow a cyclist to safely or easily squeeze past a farm vehicle even if it has stopped (e.g. high banks and hedges). I prefer to stop on the edge of the asphalt and lean well out of the way of those giant wheels and spikey implements being towed.

So to be clear, as a cyclist, you feel safer having a huge tractor wheel moving past you so close that you have to physically lean out of the way to avoid being crushed, rather than moving yourself and your bicycle past a stationary tractor wheel?

Furthermore, you think it better that the driver of the large, heavy agricultural machine risks overturning it in a ditch or unstable verge as they attempt to drive off the edge of the road rather than just come to a stop.

Seems extraordinary to me.

I expect a driver to be able to judge for himself how far he can move over without tipping over. If he does tip the tractor over into a ditch on the other side of the road then I don't need to stop to let him past.

Stopping to let a farm vehicle past is no different than stepping back while other vehicles move past such as an artic driving round the corner of a junction. Nothing extraordinary about it at all.

Slightly passive aggressive is an understatement isn't it? More like arrogant, self-serving and rude not to mention the implication by his comments that he is a threatening and dangerous road user.

Exactly this. He isn't threatening anybody. He's just stating that they drive very large, potentially dangerous vehicles and it would be in everyone's best interest to just step aside for a minute while they pass rather than to try and squeeze past just to prove a point. 

Cyclingjon1959 wrote:

He is out doing his job and a bloody difficult job it is. We cyclist are for the most part, out on a jolly.

This 'motorists and utility vehicle drivers are purposeful/cyclists are recreational' is a false dichotomy. Almost the complete majority of the cycling I do is non-recreational and to get from point A to B. I can't help that my chosen mode of transport is so much more enjoyable that it seems like I'm out on a jolly even when I'm not.

Cyclingjon1959 wrote:

The new hierarchy rules are only there to "establish liability" in the event of a collision.

That is a total misrepresentation of the purpose of the hierarchy of road users as set out in the new highway code, it is nothing to do with establishing liability. To quote directly from the code, "those in charge of vehicles that can cause the greatest harm in the event of a collision bear the greatest responsibility to take care and reduce the danger they pose to others." 

It might have been covered elsewhere but his rant seems to be, "I don't want to have to stop and start as it might cause my load to spill so all traffic in front should dive out of the way so I don't have to change my speed"

He also forces ridden horses to move onto un-even ground so someone driving a very loud and intimidating vehicle specifically designed for un-even ground doesn't have to. 

They're always obsessed with lycra too aren't they?

Since when was "Get the hell out of my road or I'll kill you and it will be your own fault" considered polite-ish?