To think cyclists should use cycle lanes

[Krispybake]

Today, a massive line of traffic was held up by a cyclist who was using a long main road when a cycle path (tarmacked the same as the road) ran parallel for the entire length of the road. Due to the volume of traffic coming in the opposite direction, it was impossible to overtake the cyclist and leave the safe distance so creating a huge tail back involving service buses, funeral cortege and multiple cars.
Genuine question, why do cyclists do this? If the cycle track has the same surface as the road, why will they not use it? Very annoying!

Cycle lanes are often in very poor condition with debris, glass, potholes etc

The cyclist has a right to the space on the road.

The cycle lanes here are generally filled with broken glass, car crash debris, rubbish and other dangerous things as they’re essentially the gutter of the road. I wouldn’t fancy cycling in that. They should have stopped to let traffic flow of it was unsafe to cycle in the lane though.

I don’t want to brag, but I definitely cycle faster than a funeral cortège.

Why should they have stopped? They have every right to enon the road and have that space.

So, some people were delayed by a few minutes...so what? That would happen with any obstruction such as road works, broken down cars etc

At least he was on the road and not on the pavement. I hate trying to navigate around them on the pavement with the kids.
He should of pulled over to let them pass.
Agree will PP some cycling lanes are not fit for purpose.

The one today wasn't. It hasn't long been created, is generously wide and is in excellent condition. I do understand why cyclists may not use those in poor or unsafe condition, but today, I can think of no reason why using the road was necessary.

In general when I used to cycle for commuting, bike lanes could be annoying because they were often shared with pedestrians. Also, sometimes they stop and start, so you have to get on the road, then off, then back on, etc. Also some were part of the pavement, so you had to stop at every road that was joining the main road to look both ways and cross, but of course if you had been on the main road you could just keep going because that road had right of way.

Sometimes even if the cycle path is good, the entrance and exit have not been well designed making it less safe or convenient to use than the road. I also used to live near one that required cyclists to give way to traffic on multiple side streets, which wouldn't have been the case cycling on the road. So there are two possible reasons.

Did you not carefully explain to them that you are more important and have more rights than they do? That might have helped.

Good to know that the funeral cortege wasn't what was holding the traffic up, had the cyclist not been there then clearly they wouldn't have slowed down the cars behind them.

Cycle lanes often have dangerous crossings that cars etc cross without looking.

It's very likely that it had hazards or inconveniences that you wouldn't spot as a non cyclist.

Because they're entitled to be on the road...just as you are in your car. They can make the choice.

Why should be have pulled over?

Because cyclists can do whatever they like, including claiming pavements are a "shared path" when really it's a pavement for pedestrians only.

(This isn't all of them, of course it isn't, but there's a handful of arseholes who regularly cycle on the pavement when I'm walking my dog and they piss me off 😂. The vast majority of cyclists are perfectly nice and considerate.)

Because when there is a white painted line between the bike and the cars, some drivers seem to think they don't need to pull over to overtake.
Because some car drivers try and turn left through you when it is your right of way.

As others have said - although not in this case from your posts - the cycle lamest often aren't fit for purpose.

It doesn’t have to be ‘necessary’ for a cyclist to be on a road. Do you think only car drivers pay for road maintenance?

I agree that if the cycle lane is in decent condition, that’s the most logical place to cycle so everyone can share the road.

As a PP said, the worst is when cyclists come towards you on the pavement. We live in a walkable city neighborhood and this happens all the time…even though there’s a wide road with a good cycle lane (recently resurfaced, streets are swept weekly). I don’t understand it as the paving slabs are far more bumpy than the cycle lane!

Yes they have the right to be on the road but my question was, if the cycle path is simply an extension of the road i.e. same surface, why not use it? Surely it is safer for them? I just don't get their thinking. Would drivers and cyclists feel the same way about pedestrians who insisted on walking along a busy main road rather than use the pavements?

There could be a few reasons I can think of. I have done the same as this cyclist on a couple of occasions, never intentionally though.
Once was because I didn't see the path there! I only realised when someone when alongside me on what I thought was the pavement, that there was a cycle lane even there.
The other time, it was a cycle path with a kerb in-between. So I couldn't easily get onto it if I had missed the official entry into it, which I had done. So again, I was cycling alongside it for ages.
The other reason I can think of is if they need to turn right at some point - it's not always easy to do this from a cycle lane.

have you ridden a bike on this particular cycle lane? if you do it might be very obvious why they chose the road instead.

If they were on the road it was progress compared to around here - we have a wide road - cycle lanes clearly marked (and not blocked with parked cars or stuff) on both sides - but they still just fly full pelt down the narrow pavement and get really fucking abusive if you dare to be using it to walk along.

Further down it's a wide split pavement with a cycle lane marked out on it - but it's clearly signed where that starts and ends (it crosses county borders and they've both approached it differently) and down here it's deadly trying to walk on the pavement at times of day with the speed they come flying down.

Courtesy - same as tractors will pull over if they’re aware that there is a big queue of traffic behind them.

Yes, @ThisNameIsNotAvailable . I used to cycle regularly and did this all the time-for my own sake as much as others’. It’s horrible having a massive queue of traffic behind you.

Op if you haven't cycled on that cycle path, it's likely that there will be reasons you won't have realised.

Near me there is a cycle path that is also an extension of the road, separated only by a white line. It's quite a fast road (40mph limit) At a glance, it looks wide enough.

When you try cycling in it, it's apparent that there's quite a steep camber towards the gutter which makes positioning difficult, and it's narrower than you think... but drivers assume they don't need to give space to overtake, just that they can't cross the dividing line, meaning lots of very scary & dangerous passes.

No one uses it and instead they cycle in the road. Yes it holds the traffic up. Doing so is safer for the cyclist.

We have a joint user cycle path never use it it’s full of off lead dogs mums with prams walking 3 a side u have to stop
uncontrolled children running all over it straight into on coming bikes

@LordEmsworth

"Did you not carefully explain to them that you are more important and have more rights than they do? That might have helped."

Where did I say that I am far more important and have far more rights? What a sarcastic and very rude response to what was a genuine question. I can only assume you are one such cyclist who believes you are far too important to use perfectly good and serviceable cycle lanes (not shared by pedestrians, an extension of the road they insisted on cycling on, EXACTLY the same surface covering and no inroads to have to stop and start). Perhaps if today's cyclist had to display a reg plate (you know, in case he caused an accident), pay insurance and road tax, then he might have thought differently. 🤷
I am not anti cyclists and I do appreciate that there are numerous occasions when they must use a road but today, I don't understand his reasoning.