AIBU to challenge cyclists riding on rural footpaths?

Yes absolutely - I have a duty of care to people, but I'm afraid that does not extend to dogs. The duty is actually on the dog owner not on me.

At what speed do you think a cyclist should be going to prepare for the possibility that a dog appears from undergrowth directly in front of their wheels? Presumably whatever speed it is, it should also be the top speed for cars?

No you don’t. The owner needs to put their dog on a short lead. This isn’t a normal pavement, and it certainly isn’t a public park.

The Highway code says any road user should travel at an appropriate speed able to stop within their range of visibility and to slow down for hazards, etc. People need to anticipate the unexpected rather than expect the way forward to be clear for them.

The only time I have ever nearly ran over a dog on my bike it's precisely because I didn't see them, and they were nowhere near their owner. I had no idea there was a dog in the area, so no way of looking for them suddenly running out across the path as they did. Which is why you keep a dog either on lead or right by you on a shared cycle path.

It’s also trespassing riding a bike on a footpath. It’s only a public right of way for those on foot. Hence be word footpath. But you sound like one of those selfish cyclists that crack on and ignore the law.

As for the landowner saying they’re happy for bikes to ride on their footpath, great - get it changed to a bridle way or cycle route if you feel like that.

We own land with a footpath and the bikes really don’t damage it. The uk is so densely populated and I actually think we need to encourage people out not be chasing them down in fields because they cycled through it. It’s a privilege to own the land and with the privilege comes the responsibility to maintain the footpath.

I've only read page 1, so sorry if another 37 people have pointed this out inthe next 5 pabes but literally in the OP

to get to our path they need to cross either kissing gates or a bridge with v sides to prevent bikes

if there barriers to prevent cyclists accessing the path, it's really not meant for bikes (or horses)

I agree cyclists are not allowed on footpaths. I was commenting on a PP saying that bicycles churn up the ground. That is not really true:

www.americantrails.org/resources/natural-resource-impacts-of-mountain-biking?utm_source=chatgpt.com

Unbelievable arrogance. The faster vehicle/person always has the burden to look after more vulnerable people as they have potential to cause damage and injury. When you see a dog off the lead (or on a long lead) you NEED to slow right down and be prepared to stop.

Yes, people are pretty stupid to let dogs off the lead when other people are around, but two wrongs don't make a right.

yes! exactly - it would be trespassing, as is riding somewhere that’s not a bridleway unless it’s your own land.

There's obviously a right of way over it - for people on foot.

I always wonder why anyone would wear noise-cancelling headphones while cycling - it clearly makes you, and those around you, less safe. Doesn't that worry you?

I'm not a particularly fast cyclist (nor do I do it as a hobby, just for transport, so I'm not wearing lycra or trying to get a PB!) and never cycle anywhere it isn't permitted but, like a PP, I have been told off by pedestrians for the following:

1. Ringing my bell
2. Not having a bell, so they felt I 'shouted at them' when I said 'Excuse me'
3. Saying 'passing on your right', which I think they felt was an instruction to move over (it wasn't)
4. Passing them without saying anything first, because I could see there was lots of room, but which surprised them
5. 'Lurking behind them' when I could see there wasn't going to be space for me to pass without them climbing into bushes, so I just stayed at a slow speed behind

So it is quite hard to get it right in shared spaces! A lot of the pedestrians I encounter are wearing headphones so can't hear me in any case.

then its trespassing

Great. So the poster you are sneering at can come and ride her horse in your garden and laugh at you when you tell her she has no right to be there. Gotcha. It's her fucking field.

We’ve had cyclists actually riding through our crop fields OP. It’s infuriating! Fortunately that’s not a regular problem for us, but was during Covid times.
I put a post up a few weeks ago about nightmare trespassers on our land and the dog poo they keep leaving.

It’s the speed that some cyclists fly past on paths that unnerve me. Sometimes they appear behind you without you realising and just zoom past. I’d far rather they call out first so I know they are coming and can move over for them.

On the basis that many many cyclists are difficult (to use your word), can you acknowledge that morally and politely you should be walking or would you prefer to continue to break the law and run the risk
of hurting someone or something very badly, maybe even killing them?

Lovely like as your little one act play is, I'm not sure the conversation will go quite like that if it ever happens! Also, you might think your position is perfectly logical and reasonable, but you get why the world, and the transport network, isn't set up with each person just making their own rules as seems best to them, right?

I've always assumed cyclists are so stupid they don't understand the no cycling sign means no cycling, as there's not a big cross through it. They just see a pretty picture of a bicycle and think that must be showing where to go, in the same way a person on the toilet door shows them which loo to use. Or maybe they're just revoltingly selfish. People that choose a hobby which massively inconveniences everyone else, from walkers, to drivers, to dogs and children, aren't exactly ever going to be terribly concerned about churning up footpaths! Any cyclist by definition is thoughtless and self-centred, as evidenced by many of the responses here.

im a cyclist and I often wear headphones so I would probably just ignore you or laugh at you tbh

There are 2 separate issues being discussed here really. (Well several, but 2 main ones.)
I don't think there is really any valid argument for anyone using a space that is clearly not intended for them. So footpaths are indeed for walkers, bus lanes are for buses, cycle lanes for bikes and so on. Everyone should literally stay in their own lanes, even if that's inconvenient for them. On a route I regularly ride, I'm on the road, then there's a footpath that connects to a mix used path. I always get off my bike and push it along the 200m or so of footpath even though it's a bit of a nuisance, because it is not my right to ride there.
But shared paths are a different matter. There is no way I am getting off and pushing my bike round every pedestrian like a PP suggested. That would be going for a walk whilst pushing my bike, not riding, and I am entitled to ride there. If there's obviously no way I can pass a walker without them falling down a ravine or standing in a bog etc then I slow down and wait, but often all it actually takes is for the walker/s to keep left so that a cyclist can safely pass - you know, like people are always saying cyclists should do when they're on a road and a car wants to pass. Sometimes you can't of course - potholes, glass, dog and horse shit etc force both cyclists and walkers into the middle of roads/paths sometimes - but where possible, if the slower moving person allows the faster moving one to pass when they can do so, and the faster moving one does so safely then most of the problems go away. It just takes a bit of common sense and courtesy. If I am riding my bike up a steep hill and you're behind me in a car you're going to have to wait sorry, but if there's a gateway at the top I'll pull in and let you pass. Likewise if I'm coming up behind you on a shared path with boggy ground next to it I'll ride behind you but it would be nice if you'd step left when we get to solid ground. But if you're dawdling down the centre of the path with headphoness on, ignoring the world around you including your dog who is roaming around off the lead then too right I'm going to ring my bell, just as I would expect to hear a lot of car horns if I was riding at 15mph in the outside lane of a dual carriageway.

They don't need to get the usage changed. It crosses private land, so the permitted usage (above and beyond pedestrian use, if it's a public footpath) is up to the landowner.

You get some pedestrians on cyclepaths though as well.

Near me there is a cycle path that runs through the village, and often pedestrians walk along it with poorly controlled off lead dogs blocking the entire path having no consideration for other users.

The key is to be considerate. If it is a cyclepath and you are a pedestrian then make sure you leave space for cyclists to get past and don't let your dog roam off lead all over the path. If you a cyclist slow down as you approach pedestrians and don't try to hurtle past as fast as you can.

If a path is too narrow a cyclist really must dismount to safely pass. Similar for blind bends or when forward visibility is restricted.

If everyone tries to be considerate in their use and help everyone elses use then the world is a better place.

Unfortunately too many people are focused on "their rights" rather than allowing everyone to safely make use of the facilities.

I guess that to you, I suppose I am being difficult, since you apparently find it difficult to fathom the possibility that there may exist a cyclist who is not a menace.

Cycling is great, but some of these blokes on thier heavy bikes are a menace. Helping on a local primary school outing and some git left one of the little boys with a badly hurt and bleeding nose - just rode off fast.