"only people going off the other way over the railings have done so on purpose"
Seen that??
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Infrastructure
Dog Owners and Cycle Paths
(63 posts)-
Posted 14 years ago #
-
Someone on a bike takes up half the space of someone walking with their bike beside them, so as a pedestrian I'd rather cyclists stayed on their bikes, thank you very much...
Codes of conduct are never worth the paper they're written on, because the only people interested in obeying them are the ones who don't cause any problems in the first place, and for those people they often add unnecessary hassle for no gain (example, having to fit bells to bikes so as to give the rediculous "Two Tings" to iPod joggers and stray dogs).
Has anyone actually ever been hurt on the towpath? When you add up the man-hours of exposure it must come to quite a lot nowadays.
Posted 14 years ago # -
@Dave - when I walk with my bike and lean into the railings I turn side on so I am inside the range of tha handle bars, when I cycled across I pulled over and stayed on the bike with a foot on the wall beside the railings, again taking up only the width of the handle bars
You cite having a bell as unnecessary hassle, yes obviously there are those who the tings won't help but there are plenty that they do. I often get someone saying thank you for tinging and when I am walking I make a point of saying thank you to other cyclists who ting (especially coming under a bridge when I have a toddler with me)Posted 14 years ago # -
I don't think two tings are ridiculous. It's just common courtesy to let people know you're coming. I appreciate it especialy as spytfyre says walking with kids under the bridges. The Ting Tings though....can't stand 'em. Only past through Tooting once in a van so can't comment on that.
Posted 14 years ago # -
"@Dave - when I walk with my bike and lean into the railings I turn side on so I am inside the range of tha handle bars, when I cycled across I pulled over and stayed on the bike with a foot on the wall beside the railings, again taking up only the width of the handle bars"
So it is possible to take up the same amount of space if you work at it (although I daresay with a large rucksack, it might be difficult to stay within the bars turning side on?)
However this illustrates my point, whether you ride or cycle across you (personally) don't tip people in. I can't imagine that you prefer walking across to riding (although different people will have a different tolerance to constantly getting on and off their bikes) so as there is no advantage for pedestrians either, the sign is only providing disadvantages.
The inevitable protest is, "what about the cyclists who aren't so considerate!" but of course, not obeying a sign is lower down the spectrum of antisocial behaviour than buzzing pedestrians in the first place, so anyone who currently buzzes pedestrians won't be influenced by the sign anyway - fail!
This I think partly defines what I dislike so much about bells. They offer no advantage to an interaction between two considerate parties, and the inconsiderate ones will not be fussed about bells anyway - no net benefit has been realised, only disbenefit.
(This is not to say that, if I had a bell, I might not use it instead of my voice box when the necessity arises. But that's the point - instead of just speaking civilly when I need to communicate with someone, by the "code" I need to buy a bunch of bells, and ring them repeatedly all the way along the path.)
There's also the question of whether cyclists with bells ride through the tunnels faster (because they feel they've given oncoming users fair warning) than ones like myself (who assume they're going to meet someone who doesn't know they're there).
Posted 14 years ago # -
There's also the question of whether cyclists with bells ride through the tunnels faster (because they feel they've given oncoming users fair warning) than ones like myself (who assume they're going to meet someone who doesn't know they're there).
Or who is aurally impaired (either naturally or by Apple)?
I do use bell at canal bridges though - annoying as it is to some!
Posted 14 years ago # -
Perhaps what we really need (going back to a recent thread) is to embrace it completely, and have some kind of automated bell that rings with every wheel revolution.
That would ensure that everybody on the path knew you were coming, with the added bonus that the frequency of tings would give away your approach speed.
Do you think there'd be a market for such a product?
Posted 14 years ago # -
Dundee St to Cally Crescent underpass is a good place to use a bell - at the corner at the bottom of the ramp.
And I wish that people heading south would keep to the left at the corner; I know it's helpful to stay wide to see what's coming, but slowing down and keeping left would be more helpful overall.Posted 14 years ago # -
ok cycling over start of aquduct but was going to walk over as it was greasy-normally i do both cycle or walk following other cyclist who was cycling.Bike police shouted up and said it was not allowed and the notice said so - anyway is it a by law? is it legally enforceable and in a similar question can you cycle on the pavement going up aurthers seat past the red barrier as the road is narrow - ? police have past me in the car and not stopped.
Posted 7 years ago # -
@mercury1&2 not enforceable. Scottish canals instruction. Also any pavement over road cycling in park will be tolerated by cops for sure. Pedestrians might be less happy?
Posted 7 years ago # -
thanks -i did think that but not arguing with police they were out training bike cops
Posted 7 years ago # -
Ah, when you said bike police, you meant actual police shouting from their bikes I thought you meant the public who police us on our bike. I have been told off by the latter on the aqueduct but never the former.
Best not to argue with polis. Though great footage recently of chap taking on the Met and winning on Highway Code, taking primary speeding etc
Posted 7 years ago # -
Not really a question of whether it's a real law or not (it isn't). If you give them reason to, they can do all sorts of bad things to you. Maybe you gave them suspicion to stop and search you for an interminable period (and it only goes downhill from there).
Posted 7 years ago # -
There is not a law against eating a sandwitch while driving or driving through the Cow gate at night but if someone did they may be charged with careless driving I supose in theory police could charge with careless cycling
Posted 7 years ago # -
My understanding is that there is a law against cycling on the footway where that footway is adjacent to the carriageway, unless said footway has been designated a shared path. So around Arthur's Seat this could bring you into spot fine territory. However there is a ministerial letter from 1999 which says that "responsible cyclists" should not be fined for riding on the pavement. But, it could be argued that this letter applies to particularly dangerous junctions and not the generality of footways.
Posted 7 years ago # -
My feeling about the Cyclists Dismount sign on the aqueduct is that it's an instruction in the same way as 'Buy one get one free' in shop is.
I did write to Scottish Canals about it once, questioning whether the Land Reform Act gave me the right of responsible access by bicycle over the aqueduct and whether in fact the signs had any legal weight. Oddly enough, they never responded although up to that point they had been very quick to reply to my emails.
I suspect that arguing about it with a Police Officer is likely to be fruitless: given all the stuff they have to remember, a detailed understanding of the Land Reform Act as it applies to towpaths is unlikely to be top of their list. Dealing with a knowitall is likely to put anyone on the defensive.
Ultimately it would hinge on a jury's definition of 'responsible access', and I don't think that is likely to end well for the cyclist.
Posted 7 years ago # -
Why would anyone want to cycle across the aqueduct anyway? Way too narrow. Just dismount and push across: if you're really in a rush better take the road instead.
Also what has this got to do with dogs? :-)
Posted 7 years ago # -
@crowriver the thread drift happened about six years ago. Two folk pushing bikes across aqueduct cause more obstruction than one person cycling the other pushing or two people cycling. The dismount sign is really I just think to allow Scottish canals to avoid being sued by those who cycle into the drink.
I cannot recall ever seeing a dog on the aqueduct. Maybe a panda once but not a dog
Posted 7 years ago # -
"Two folk pushing bikes across aqueduct cause more obstruction than one person cycling the other pushing or two people cycling."
Arguably. OTOH cycling over more likely to wobble, skid, collide with person coming the other way due to narrowness of cobbly towpath. At least on foot it is slow, deliberate, one can wait for another to edge past you and then proceed.
In any case you won't catch me riding across it.
"the thread drift happened about six years ago."
Aye, maybe so. Point still stands.
Posted 7 years ago # -
@gembo there was a dog on the aqueduct this evening (could the first one I've ever seen). It was running off leash ahead of the owner which probably wasn't the safest choice
Posted 7 years ago # -
@bill, just shows you, never say never.
@crowriver. I used to always get off and push, and still do in wind or if I feel like it. Not sure if anyone has ever fallen in when pushing their bike across? So the sign gives good advice. Always good to have one's preconceived notions challenged on how wide bikes are if you push or stay on. However I would stay with that argument. You take up more space pushing than if you are sitting on the saddle. I now always lean in to the railings usually at the parapets as you can take up less room at these points. This is if I am heading east. This gives more room for the person on the water side. I never keep cycling if I am the one doing the passing, I always have my foot down on the cobbles which are as you say a bit bumpy though nothing like the almond aqueduct where I always push.
Fortunately what I am describing is fairly frequent or sometimes with one person pushing in one direction. If two pushers meet each other there can be a great deal of faffing. As er, they take up more room. Need to step to the railings etc.
I also believe walkers and runners have precedent on the aqueduct. Lately the behaviour has been good from all parties on my commute.
I had a Mexican standoff with a runner in Holyrood park last night, not sure what he was thinking about? Maybe he felt I should give way, I was going faster than other cyclists as I had electric bike so again maybe I was freaking him out. Just being generous, guy was a total wally, running down the cycle path when there was a perfectly good path for peds and runners a foot to his left which was clear. The lecky bike does take up more of the path, but it is the cycle path. Anyway instead of just stepping to his left he deliberately steps to his right into my on coming bemused expression he then shimmies left and continues merrily on s way. Leaving me, err, bemused. However, the lecky bike is such a joy to ride, massive big sit up and beg position, no effort, so maybe that and my 15 mph maybe led the jogger to thinking I was lording it, rather than, err, using the cycle path.
Back to aqueduct, I am happy that people do what they feel comfortable with. I push sometimes and am happy for myself that I can be flexible that way, as most people are, just a few who are rigid. Just so long as we all behave. The pushers are the best behaved but even there you get a small number who are maybe a little too scared of the aqueduct so will take a position mostly near railing but sometimes on the water side and they sort of stop and you have to work round them. Which would be very tricky if both pushing. The person who pushes you in deliberately whether you dismount or not has not been mentioned for a while. She is going same direction as me so never had that experience.
Posted 7 years ago # -
"I had a Mexican standoff with a runner in Holyrood park last night"
Maybe overly asserting his rights to "share" the path? This is where I find a well timed ring of a bicycle bell can serve as an appropriate comment on the behaviour of the other party. You know, after you have braked and come to a halt in front of the obstruction. Kind of sarcastic if you like.
On the aqueduct, I'm happier pushing, and will tuck in if someone needs to pass. As you say majority well behaved but I have come across the occasional rather impatient bloke on an MTB riding rather too aggressively across the aqueduct in a "take no prisoners" assertive style. That does get my goat a bit. If one is is a hurry, the road is the place to be.
Posted 7 years ago # -
If one is in a hurry, the road is the place to be.
It's not a hurry, its strava KOM chasing
Posted 7 years ago # -
"strava KOM chasing"
Even worse then. Really no excuse.
Posted 7 years ago # -
Nobody is going to go all the way down to the road, that would take forever.
Speaking as someone who commutes roughly parallel to the canal (but not generally on the towpath) you need to be really very fast indeed to be faster on the road.
I don't find bad behaviour to correlate particularly with speed, the worst offenders are the middling speed MAMILs / grannies who think that because they rang their bell, they can go through gaps or under the bridges just like that. I have been on the canal with the twins in running buggy configuration and true fast riders have not been on my agenda really.
Posted 7 years ago # -
All the Strava segments on the canal are "hidden" i.e. they have been flagged as hazardous.
Posted 7 years ago # -
Sensible stuff. Every time I try cycling on the canal I sink. Those in the know use the path next to it. :-)
Posted 7 years ago # -
All the Strava segments on the canal are "hidden" i.e. they have been flagged as hazardous.
Maybe in the city, plenty to chase after outside.
Posted 7 years ago # -
I used to live next to the aquaduct and walked my dog across there regularly. About 3 years ago my dog was hit with the pedal by a cyclist who was trying to cycle across. My dog was sat by my side (on a lead) with our backs to the railing to allow the cyclist past. When I told the cyclist off for cycling on the aquaduct and hitting my dog he gave me a mouthful of abuse and threatened me with physical violence. After that I tried to avoid the aquaduct and use other routes - even before that I definately avoided it at rush hour times due to all the fast cyclists who wouldn't slow down for other users.
Posted 7 years ago # -
All the Strava segments on the canal are "hidden" i.e. they have been flagged as hazardous.
True but that only hides them from people who don't click the link to see them. If there are people trying to bag KOMs they are presumably in that set.
I doubt people are actually chasing the KOM during rush hour. It would be too busy, from a practical point of view you'd be wasting your time, even if you were willing to be unlimitedly rude. I think it's just fashionable to accuse people of it whenever they are going faster than you are :)
Posted 7 years ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
posts
