To think that cyclists should ring the bell when they coming at you from behind?

[DogCalledRudis]

Dont count how many times i've been nearly hit by a silent cyclist...

I have no issue navigating around dogs. If the dog is in the middle of the path I will slow down or stop and go round it. Nobody ever apologised to me for their dog being in the way.

How entitled do you have to be to believe that cyclists should have to thank dog owners, but not vice versa?

There's the thing though Aga. On the rare occasion a cyclist stops or slows down for me and the dogs I would always say thank you.

I'm not rude.

Most dog walkers I meet are apologetic if their dog is giving them the run around and I have to wait. I always say thanks, both when I'm cycling and someone has caught their dog and when I'm dog walking and a cyclist goes by.

How entitled do you have to be to believe that if someone calls their dog back to them them that a thank you is not needed?

How entitled to you have to be to think that people should thank you for preventing your dog from being a public nuisance!

I'm a cyclist and a dog walker. I try to be considerate of everyone whether cycling or walking. But I recognise that my dog is my problem and certainly don't expect thanks for not letting her harass people. I also give dogs and walkers wide berth when cycling and slow down when passing them. But I'll be damned if I'll thank someone for keeping their dog under control, dogs under control and out of the way should be the default, not some special service to other path users. What's amazing is you expecting thanks for performing your civic duty and getting stroppy and threatening to endanger other path users just because you feel entitled to a thank you!

Equally, however, cyclists on paths have an obligation to make other path users aware of their presence to give them time to react, and also to cycle at a speed that mean they themselves are not endangering other path users. I wouldn't expect anyone to thank me for cycling slowly and considerately, though. I wouldn't expect cyclists to thank me for stopping my dog from knocking them off their bike either.

Some people are cyclists, some people are pedestrians, some people are pedestrians and cyclists. Some people are idiots. Some idiots are cyclists, some idiots are pedestrians etc....

All you can do is stick to the rules yourself, be most excellent to others and not be a dick.

Well you're obviously chattier than most people, TheCatsBollocks.

As a citizen of Glasgow and as a cyclist, I recently responded to a consultation on revised Park Management Rules.

In amongst the various ridiculous proposals were:

• cyclists were to go no faster than 5mph anywhere (even on roads) in the parks

and -dogs were to be on a lead at all times - and that lead was to be no longer than 2m and -no more than 3 dogs to be walked together

Even though I am no a dog person at all owner, I opposed both of them (along with a myriad of other crazy proposals, like no meet-ups to be organised over social media without the prior written approval of the Director of Land Services or no radios in the parks) on the basis that the parks are there for people to use. Anti-social, inconsiderate behaviour should be dealt with for what it is, anti-social, inconsiderate behaviour and not use a sledgehammer to crack a nut and create employment for jobsworths.

Annie my dogs aren't a public nuisance.
They imo deserve to run off lead on paths away from roads, livestock and horses.

Cyclists do not have the upper hand over dogs and their owners. Only maybe in their minds perhaps.

Glad to see my opinion on selfish cyclist is being upheld by certain cyclists on MN.

Not all in my mind at all.

Seriously, TheCatsBollocks? I didn't say your dogs were a public nuisance. I just expressed my puzzlement that you seem to think you are entitled to thanks that they aren't. Let them run off-lead wherever you like, but only if you are 100% sure they will stay at the side of the path allowing me to pass safely and won't run out in front of me on my bike and cause injury to both of us.

I have said repeatedly on here that I also have a dog. She is an absolute public nuisance despite every effort to cure her, and as such is not allowed off her lead. I don't expect anyone to thank me for preventing her from chasing cars up the road!

Why do you think that some of us wondering why you want thanking means that we think cyclists should have the upper hand? We haven't said that everyone should part like the Red Sea before us as we plough down shared pathways at 30 mph. We've just said that everyone should be courteous and avoid getting in each other's way without expecting to be thanked for behaving like a decent human being.

I fail to see how that's "selfish" or "entitled".

If you came across a group of people on your cycling route that had to move out of your way to prevent you stopping or breaking would you thank them or not?

Just because it's a dog that's in your way doesn't mean the owners are any less deserving of a thank you.

You have no more right than I have to be on the path. You just think you do.

Braking even!

I'm puzzled by the cycle lanes are for 12 year olds, from upthread.

Sustrans certainly don't say so nor does the uk gov website
www.gov.uk/rules-for-cyclists-59-to-82/overview-59-to-71

61

Cycle Routes and Other Facilities. Use cycle routes, advanced stop lines, cycle boxes and toucan crossings unless at the time it is unsafe to do so. Use of these facilities is not compulsory and will depend on your experience and skills, but they can make your journey safer.

62 and 63 say the same about cycle tracks and shared pavements. For commuters, leisure cyclist etc. I get the bit about the lycra brigade using the roads...

You can't win Annie - people complain if we ring our bells, people complain if we don't, people complain if we go too fast on cycle paths (although every cyclist on here has talked about slowing down around pedestrians and dogs), people complain if the cyclist chooses to go on the road rather than on the cycle path.

Ds can go at 29mph (with a tail wind ) on the road. Where else is he supposed to train? It's one of the reasons why he does most of his training on (quiet) open roads as there are too many people and dogs around for him to train safely in the parks.

He does still cycle (carefully) through the parks on the way to a cycle track (an old running track that has been converted) to practice things like standing starts and says that finds the parents the worse at "blaming" him (even though he slows practically to a track stand around young children) as at least most of the dog walkers make an attempt to call their dogs to them. The dog walkers he doesn't like are the ones who use the extra long extending leads and leave the dog running free on the other side of the path

It was my understanding that to ride on a canal tow path your bike has to have a bell, is this true??? Or is it just a local by law for where I live?

I don't mind bells or shouts from cyclists, I don't see either as being rude - so long as the shouting is not actually rude in the first place.

I've had a couple of run in's however with some cyclists - on roads with no pavements usually, in the country whilst I've been out walking.

One guy got off his bike to shout in my face because my dog, on a short lead, had the temerity to move his head to the side as he went past! Stupid man nearly shat himself later on when he turned up at the pub where I was - along with my husband, brothers and other assorted friends and family - I've never seen a cyclist move so fast on 2 legs!

The design speed for cycle paths is something like 10-12mph - which even I, as an unfit, overweight, over 50 year old can now average more than easily. It's one of the reasons why I find the majority of Sustrans routes not much use as they A&E designed for leisure/tourist cycling and not for commuting or for training. That's why the majority if my cycling is on roads, with only small sections on shared use paths (and yes, I show consideration to both pedestrians and dogs, giving both a wide berth).

Unfortunately, with the animosity that some drivers show cyclists it is obvious that they don't understand this - as also evidenced by the number of threads on MN on this very topic

prettybird, I used to cycle everywhere, not now, far too rural. And I would never expect to cycle that fast on a cycle path. But I would also never have popped down onto the road, especially in rush hour traffic. I'd rather get there than get squished.

According to the government publication Cyclecraft 'If you can cycle competently on he road, you should avoid the inherently less safe environment of the shared-use footway'

also

'It is a mistake to think that cycle facilities are inherently safer than using the road.'

'There is evidence that some facilities are both hazardous in themselves and lead to unsafe cycling practices.'

With regard to cycle tracks they are for 'low-speed leisure riding'

Also 'The consequences of two cyclists, each riding at 15mph, colliding head-on are not much different from a single cyclist colliding with a car. The fatalities which have occurred on cycle tracks illustrate this.'

Yes, I take that on board Aga but I bet the person who wrote that doesn't have a young relative who was knocked down and run over while cycling to school by road. Yes, she survived and was well compensated (totally the driver's fault). I doubt she would have got a broken back from a colision with another bike!

Crikey - that is in direct conflict with the gov site I linked to.

But I suppose joined up thinking isn't something we can expect.

But I did like the last bit... I think I'd rather take my chances with another cyclist than a car

And before I get a toasting, I am a perfectly safe and competent cyclist and am perfectly able to cycle on the roads. Sadly the roads I could currently cycle on are not safe and the city I used to cycle through was not cycle friendly, given its age etc. The cycle paths were immeasurably safer.

(She was stationery at traffic lights when the car failed to stop in time and ran her over from behind).

I do try and avoid busy roads - which is why I will use bits of cycle paths and ameliorate my speed if there are people around. I try to take quiet back streets where I can. I'll take a slightly longer but quieter route rather than joust with the cars.

But just as when I am driving a car, I always cycle within braking distance visibility. This applies just as much on a cycle path with dogs and people as it does in a car on a rural road. You never know what is around the corner.

I have to cross one (shared use) pedestrian bridge over a motorway that serves a secondary school (it is part of a Sustrans route). Years ago, some of the school pupils could be very rude and deliberately obstructive - to the extent that I seriously considered contacting the school and complaining. The new headmaster must have made a difference as they now all move aside when I say "excuse me", or remind each other to move over if they see me coming ( not fast) and apologise for having taken up the whole path.

It doesn't seem to matter if I ding or call, people either ignore me or jump and act all startled. Which given that they are walking down the middle of a country lane open to all traffic is a bit rich.

TheCatsBollocks - you obviously have some bug up your arse about cyclists, who, I can assure you, don't think they have any more right to the path than you, and you are projecting.

If there are people on a shared path, with or without dogs, then I will have to brake in order to pass safely whether they move or not. They are causing me inconvenience, but I accept this is just part of using a shared pathway. If they move out of the way, then I will thank them, as I am causing them an inconvenience. However, I will bet my bottom dollar that it would not occur to a single one of them to thank me for slowing down in the first place. They (and I) just accept that my behaviour is right and necessary for everyone's safety.

In my opinion, the same applies to dogs - an uncontrolled dog is as much as danger as a speeding cyclist, and calling your dog back under control is right and necessary for everyone's safety, not a special courtesy deserving thanks.

How about we all just accept that we are all inconveniencing each other, thank each other or just accept a smile and nod as we go by, without anyone getting all upset about perceived slights or feelings of entitlement?

I nearly got run over today on a quiet road when a car overtook me and turn left, right across my path. I hope my scream is still ringing in his ears! .

It would have slowed him down a whole, oooh, two seconds, to wait behind me and turn once I was past the junction.

( UniS - ds is in that photo that I posed further down the thread :) )