AIBU to challenge cyclists riding on rural footpaths?

[Policeanyone101]

If you’re on a bike stay off footpaths!

I live very rurally and in the last few years we’ve had an increase in cyclists on the footpath through part of our fields, occasionally I do challenge these cyclists as I can see them from our house and they always have very arrogant entitled retorts as why they should be there (to get to our path they need to cross either kissing gates or a bridge with v sides to prevent bikes).

I have a horse and ride and by reason of the entitled cyclists I should use footpaths too but I don’t because I have common courtesy and use only permitted places to ride. My DH thinks I’m mad for challenging people but my argument is if we all ignore the rules there will be anarchy? I only ask because DH thinks I traumatised a poor lone cyclist this evening.

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.

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?

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

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.

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

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)

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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?

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.

Maybe there just needs to be more signage, we have footpaths around our village and never crossed my mind that cyclists couldn’t use them

OP does understand this. Bridleways don't have kissing gates or V bridges. These are footpaths, that are not to be used by horseriders or cyclists.

Quite.
I'm just back from a ride and in 20 miles I had 2 dog incidents. The first one ran out of a garden through an open gate practically under my wheels. Fortunately I was going uphill fairly slowly so I was able to stop without hitting it but the house is on a national speed limit road. Had I been in my car I expect the dog would be dead. Do we expect car drivers to slow down to walking pace every time they pass a house, or maybe people should shut their gates and control their animals?
The other one was a bloke exercising his dog off the lead on a back road. It's a quiet road, but a road all the same and not a park. He definitely saw me coming some distance away. I wear bright stuff and he looked and stared straight at me, then continued throwing the ball for his dog. I had to slow right down and unclip and he didn't call his dog til I was a few metres away. And then glared and swore at me as I passed.
But yeah, I'm the irresponsible one.

I ring my bell sometimes but more
just to let people know that I’m there so they don’t suddenly step to the side out in front of me, a bit like car engine noises are quite useful to pedestrians as warn them there
is a car nearby

I agree with OP. I live at the end of a track which becomes a public footpath along the edge of farmland and

There’s a group of middle-aged men around here who love to ride mountain bikes on the public footpath through the woods when it’s especially muddy, making deep ruts in the path. There’s a byway at the end which has been surfaced since the farm was sold, that used to be deep mud and we used to encounter youngsters on dirt bikes, or green-laners with 4x4s deliberately getting one of the vehicles stuck, for the fun of getting it out!

As horse riders we were informed by a resident that we were leaving hoofprints on the (rough-mown) village green . Walking ponies actually did less damage than the weekly football matches. The green is legally common land and villagers have the right to graze horses, goats and geese on the green, though nobody has done so for years, and that resident has lived here long enough to remember!

Exactly! Your dog, your problem! They’re not people, they’re animals!

Cyclists are a plague where I live.

I’ve heard threats to ‘squash’ my dogs on a path where there is pedestrian priority.

The longer term problem is that footpaths are not maintained for bikes. And the landowners have to fix the additional damage done or be hatangued and fined for not maintaining a public right of way

Yes, I know, you are only 1 person...

So let’s run them over, why don’t we?

My dogs are better behaved than 78% of the cyclists we encounter.

"the right to responsible access". Now that encompasses human powered access - so foot, bikes, ski, canoe, paddleboard etc. And the 'responsible' bit is now proven in law. But what it means in practice for cyclists is there is no restriction on where - we do not have footpaths and bridleways, we have 'ways'. We do have some RUPPS and BOATS where vehicles and horses are welcome, and horses can with landowner permission even use 'paths'. It all works pretty smoothly.
The thing is you did not say the cyclists were unfriendly or speeding closely to other people. You just did not like cyclists being there.
As I said, it is a huge advantage to live in Scotland as a walker, runner, cyclist and canoeist.

How do you know they are arrogant?

Tell me about this 'additional damage'?
What research evidence have you got that bikes do more damage than feet?
(I am off to go dig out my dissertation on this subject, albeit from 1999, so you have some time to consider)