Footpaths

Chunkers1980

Riding on footpaths is wrong in this country as people do not expect it - so are zoned out to it.

I've recently been to Thailand and they have motorbikes riding on the pavements and down very tight allys but this never caused a problem as you were very aware it could happen.

Saying that the whole traffic system is scary, but it seems to work.....

cee

bails87 wrote:

cee wrote:

mwahahahahah!

that is all

:evil:

Eranu

I generally avoid them but there are two that I use regularly as part of my ride.

One is the end of a climb where a non-classified single track path joins it and basically is only a few 100 yards to then join the South Downs Way, never seen anyone one other than me and my mates.

The other is a really nice, for round here, single track decent again I've never encountered any walkers on it they seem to use the wider fireroads in the woods.

I know its wrong btw but both make my ride much more enjoyable and as walkers seem intent on walking on all the 'proper' mountain bike trails near me then I shall use the footpaths they don't.

whyamihere

There's a dirt track (with a couple of small paved/tarmac sections) running parallel to the A460 between Hednesford and Slitting Mill Road which I use when going onto the Chase on my mountain bike. The A460's scary enough on my road bike at 30mph, pootling along on a mountain bike with knobblies is even worse. I *think* it's technically designated as a footpath, but I'm not actually sure of its status. Never had any problems though.

psymon

hell its all fair game.
i always ride footpaths, often lifting bike over styes (sp?)

when people stop thier dogs shitting on the trail, parking on double yellows, with hazards on (coz that makes it ok apparantly) outside my house, littering, spitting, claiming benefits, driving up my arse, being any way a chav and genrally just being knobs I'll stop riding on foot paths.. :evil:

this country has alot more to worry about than us lot doing something healthy and fun alone on a path in the woods.

when i get the abuse of walkers I ask would they rather i partake of the national passtime of getting pissed and fighting.

i find a cheeky skid when approaching from behind has comical results, people leaping out of the way with gay abandon.

Oxygen Thief

psymon wrote:

hell its all fair game.
i always ride footpaths, often lifting bike over styes (sp?)

when people stop thier dogs ******** on the trail, parking on double yellows, with hazards on (coz that makes it ok apparantly) outside my house, littering, spitting, claiming benefits, driving up my ars*, being any way a chav and genrally just being knobs I'll stop riding on foot paths.. :evil:

this country has alot more to worry about than us lot doing something healthy and fun alone on a path in the woods.

when i get the abuse of walkers I ask would they rather i partake of the national passtime of getting pissed and fighting.

i find a cheeky skid when approaching from behind has comical results, people leaping out of the way with gay abandon.

Spot on!

NormalD

I always find a cheery hallo, good morning/afternoon, thanks is good enough.
I only use footpaths when the lack of bridalway means a good ride spoiled but to be honest I find more walkers on the bridalpaths.(as is their right)
I agree with 95% of the link, law or no law.

alfablue

psymon wrote:

when people stop thier dogs ******** on the trail, parking on double yellows, with hazards on (coz that makes it ok apparantly) outside my house, littering, spitting, claiming benefits, driving up my ars*, being any way a chav and genrally just being knobs I'll stop riding on foot paths.. :evil:

so you think (or wish to pretend) that these are your typical footpath users then . . . :? My my, we are dealing with an intelligent one here!

What you seem to be saying is that there are some people in society that behave like selfish s*its, so therefore it is entirely justifiable for me (i.e. you) to behave like a selfish s*it. Seems to me you are part of the problem.

captainfly

I use them all the time locally because there aren't any bridleways, most of them should have been classified as restricted byways but the council are muppets, the famers, horse riders and walkers around here don't seem to bother so long as you aren't on a motocross.
Though to be fair the only legal issue is tresspass and that only means a landowner can use minimal force to remove you if you don't go when they ask, even then there is case law that says you can push a bicycle on a footpath, so no worries there.

Anonymous

psymon wrote:

doing something healthy and fun alone on a path in the woods.

Isn't that called dogging? Or at the very least, "indecent exposure"?

Quirrel

Chunkers1980 wrote:

Riding on footpaths is wrong in this country as people do not expect it - so are zoned out to it.

I've recently been to Thailand and they have motorbikes riding on the pavements and down very tight allys but this never caused a problem as you were very aware it could happen.

Saying that the whole traffic system is scary, but it seems to work.....

Utter tosh.

I lived there for 7 years and the traffic system is a mess , it works to some extent, but the daily white chalklines of the dead build up on the roads.

Motorbikes shouldn't be on the pavements, or even riding anywhere other than the far left of the road (as per the law). Nobody obeys the law though.

If the UK decided to adopt the Thai way of driving, or even the Inonesian, Korean, Malaysian, Lao, Burmese way of driving I will be buying the largest car/4x4 I can to keep myself safe

asdfhjkl

Chunkers1980 wrote:

Riding on footpaths is wrong in this country as people do not expect it - so are zoned out to it.

I don't buy that... it's fine here in Scotland. Surely a responsible rider would make others aware of their presence, rather than leave it up to others to be aware of them.

chedabob

asdfhjkl wrote:

Chunkers1980 wrote:

Riding on footpaths is wrong in this country as people do not expect it - so are zoned out to it.

I don't buy that... it's fine here in Scotland. Surely a responsible rider would make others aware of their presence, rather than leave it up to others to be aware of them.

I had a woman nearly dive in a hedge when I rang my bell the other day on a bridlepath :P

stubs

chedabob wrote:

I had a woman nearly dive in a hedge when I rang my bell the other day on a bridlepath :P

Last week on a cyclepath I rang my bell and got a moan because my loud bell apparently nearly gave the walkers a heart attack. 200 hundreds yards on and there was another bunch of Peds strewn across the cycletrack so remembering the moans I didnt use the bell but said in a loud but polite tone of voice Excuse me can I come through. I got a dirty look and a moan wheres your bell you nearly gave me a heart attack. :roll:

As for riding on footpaths yes I do it though I will always give way to Peds even get off the bike and let them go through if only they gave me the same consideration when its a cyclepath/bridleway

fletch8928

I guess I am quiet lucky to have hours of bridleways just a short ride from my house.
That said I have often been tempted to use some footpaths that are clearly not used, the ones that you cant see a clear way through them, yet have that footpath sign.
I may yet throw on some nettleproof trousers and take something to beat, chop and cut the undergrowth down. Watch them for a bit and if they still have no use maybe try them out. I am talking about the ones that I could use to get off the roads and onto the moors/common land.

The classification of alot of bridleways up here have been changed recently. I have 2 that although short (a couple of miles), that are now BOATs. I have toyed with approaching the council about upgrading the unused paths.

There is however one footpath that I will ride on, its on open moorland, seriously fast and flowing. I cross it on a bridleway and there are no signs saying no cycling or even footpath. I have only ever met 2 walkers in the area. The path only links to bridleways, There are obvious signs of horse use on it too, so hey why not.

I would also urge all of us that have trails local to use them as signs can go up about them being re-graded. 1 tyre print is enough to prove that its in active use and shouldn't be closed or down graded. The same could be said of unused paths that we may want to be bridlewayed (new word).

tsenior

"The closer the cheeky trails are to civilisation the more acceptable it is to ride them "

i find the opposite.

Yeehah, i think, has the measure of the situation, at least in NW:

Obviously you'd be a fool to try and ride fast on trails where theres loads of hikers/scout troups/families/drunk kids meandering around but when your out in the hills on seldom used old minerals railways and the like you will meet:

A. No one.
B. Folk (on bikes or foot) who are there to get away from the proverbial maddening crowd, if they recognise you as a like-minded person, and your nice with it: ddim problem.

the bigger issue is finding footpaths where you dont have to hump over a style every 100m obviously i ride footpaths all the time, i just choose the suitable ones for riding on 8)

bamba

Just had my first run in with a right cock head,who after nearly running us down in his car,spoke to us in a right bang out of order way.Id say at least 50% of folk would have hit him first the way he spoke to us,after calming him down a little and telling him that he has not spoke to me before about it and noting the doberman in his car,it would appear the road we had turned in to ( only the 2nd time ive ridden it this way) is marked private, the other end about 1 mile away starts as a single track road then to a gravel path which is marked as a foot path,including the part past his house,according to the map the in the last few hundred yards the foot path cuts through a feild some where,never seen the sign for it in a year or so of passing through.At no point when coming from the other direction is it shown that it becomes a private road,he also told us that we could not walk our bikes for the entire length of said foot path.He went of on one a bit much for the sake of a few hundred yards that does even go past his house,I no i should ride the foot path, but its wide as a car,I'l continue to ride this path, if any one tell me i shouldnt, i will get off an push,il do my best to look for the off shoot to avoid the private section that leads back to the main road.
Why cant folk just be a bit cival about these things,there more important things to worry about,i did point out the right to roam stuff ,and with out that he prob wouldnt be able to walk his dog across the area.

paul.skibum

I tend to only ride footpaths when I am lost but I rode one the other week and it was a beaut. Tire width in places, loads of roots and small drops, twisting through trees on a long side hill decent. Pity it led to literally the worst dual carriageway style bridleway with gates every five yards I have every had the misfortune of riding.

captainfly

I was chatting to a farmer who was a local councillor a while back and he told me that locally all the footpaths that used to be roads used as public footpaths were not classified as restricted byways to stop horse ridders and greenlaners churning them up and on the footpaths on his land he has signs saying no horses or motorcycles, no mention of bicycles. Most of the other farmers aren't bothered about cyclist on footpaths, if they don't want anyone on their land it is a case of uniterupted fences and private signs at access points, which is pretty much what the laws concerning trespass require.

The problems seems to be that bicycles are lumped together with horses as far as footpaths (as in right of way) are concerned. why not allow human powered lightweight vehicles to use them with a speed limit of 12 or 15mph?

ilovedirt

I ride my local footpaths all the time. Well i say that, i think they're mostly bridleways, either way i couldn't give a toss, we all have the same right to enjoy the countryside. It's not as if i ride around shredding them up anyway.

fletch8928

I went to ask my lbs lads about an old railway line today. I just fancied something different to take me to the moors. Turns out that the landowners have nothing better to do than race over in their 4x4, tell you to stop ruining their land and get off before they sue for trespass. Lots of feedback to the lbs about it, so there must be something in it.

Decided to give it a miss and go explore some new (to me) trails. Ended up in a farmyard, farmer didn't say a word except to point me where I should have been and siad its probably a better ride than coming this way. No "get orf maa land". I like them sort of people

alfablue

I think you are talking about 4 or 5 different things here:

Footways, those beside roads, we usually refer to as pavements, you are not allowed to ride on them and you can be prosected.

Footpaths, as in "Public Footpaths" usually in the countryside and indicated with yellow arrows - you are not allowed to ride on them without permission, and if you do this could be trespass, the landowner could sue you for damages caused by your trespass but it is a civil rather than criminal matter so you can't be prosecuted.

Shared paths: Often beside roads but indicated with signs as shared paths. These also include some NCN traffic free routes.

Bridleways: For walkers, horses, cyclists, I think the first two have priority (i.e. you take care and defer to them).

"Other" paths - not designated as public footpaths (there is probably a proper name for them) but paths like those through my local park. You can ride on them unless there are local bylaws prohibiting this.

I wouldn't ride on pavements (footways) or public footpaths personally. I think there are some places where walkers do not expect to see cyclists and I think it is unnerving when one zooms round the corner at you when you have no reason to expect this. Its a courtesy thing rather than a rules thing IMHO.

tilt

I generally try and avoid them, but not too bothered if I 'accidentally' end up on one...

bails87

alfablue wrote:

I think it is unnerving when one zooms round the corner at you when you have no reason to expect this. Its a courtesy thing rather than a rules thing IMHO.

But if you ride like a d1ck on a bridleway, where there may well be walkers how is it any idfferent to riding like a d1ck on a footpath?

Which was the point of the thread really, we can't treat everything like a MTB only trail centre and fly around blind corners expecting there to be nobody there, but riding sensibly and considerately, we should be able to use footpaths just as safely as we currently use bridleways.

alfablue

bails87 wrote:

alfablue wrote:

I think it is unnerving when one zooms round the corner at you when you have no reason to expect this. Its a courtesy thing rather than a rules thing IMHO.

But if you ride like a d1ck on a bridleway, where there may well be walkers how is it any idfferent to riding like a d1ck on a footpath?

Which was the point of the thread really, we can't treat everything like a MTB only trail centre and fly around blind corners expecting there to be nobody there, but riding sensibly and considerately, we should be able to use footpaths just as safely as we currently use bridleways.

Don't ride like a dick anywhere that is shared use. Don't ride where bikes are prohibited. Simple.

Point is, if you are a walker on a bridleway you can expect to have horses and bikes coming your way,

not rocket science

bails87

alfablue wrote:

bails87 wrote:

alfablue wrote:

I think it is unnerving when one zooms round the corner at you when you have no reason to expect this. Its a courtesy thing rather than a rules thing IMHO.

But if you ride like a d1ck on a bridleway, where there may well be walkers how is it any idfferent to riding like a d1ck on a footpath?

Which was the point of the thread really, we can't treat everything like a MTB only trail centre and fly around blind corners expecting there to be nobody there, but riding sensibly and considerately, we should be able to use footpaths just as safely as we currently use bridleways.

Don't ride like a dick anywhere that is shared use. Don't ride where bikes are prohibited. Simple.

Point is, if you are a walker on a bridleway you can expect to have horses and bikes coming your way,

not rocket science

Point 1 I completely agree with, just like I wouldn't go for a run and go sprinting down the packed high street. I don't ride on pavements either unless it's along a dual carriageway or something. But do you not agree that the ban on bikes on footpaths is a bit excessive?

alfablue

No I don't really think its excessive. There's plenty for us to ride on, and why shouldn't walkers have some places to walk without any worries? I know we would all be responsible, but the majority would not - imagine if it was a free-for-all, it would be a nightmare for walkers, especially the elderly, frail or those with young kids. In addition, many footpaths run through delicate landscapes, erosion is a big problem, and also, a large amount of public footpaths would be far too dangerous to negotiate on a bike. - death and injury would ensue.

I know walkers are a pretty low priority to members on here, but I think a little empathy would go along way - try and see it from the walker's point of view.

Radioactiveman

A lot to be said for night riding ................

Anonymous

alfablue wrote:

No I don't really think its excessive. There's plenty for us to ride on, and why shouldn't walkers have some places to walk without any worries? I know we would all be responsible, but the majority would not - imagine if it was a free-for-all, it would be a nightmare for walkers, especially the elderly, frail or those with young kids. In addition, many footpaths run through delicate landscapes, erosion is a big problem, and also, a large amount of public footpaths would be far too dangerous to negotiate on a bike. - death and injury would ensue.

I know walkers are a pretty low priority to members on here, but I think a little empathy would go along way - try and see it from the walker's point of view.

Sorry, but this seems full of nonsense assumptions.
An argument which basically states "it's fine for me, but not for everyone else" is usually flawed.
As for death resulting from riding footpaths? Do you not realise that a lot of us ride completely untracked terrain, with very high cliff-edges and enormous rocks to risk?
Why would anyone expect to have their hands held on a footpath?

alfablue

yeehaamcgee wrote:

alfablue wrote:

No I don't really think its excessive. There's plenty for us to ride on, and why shouldn't walkers have some places to walk without any worries? I know we would all be responsible, but the majority would not - imagine if it was a free-for-all, it would be a nightmare for walkers, especially the elderly, frail or those with young kids. In addition, many footpaths run through delicate landscapes, erosion is a big problem, and also, a large amount of public footpaths would be far too dangerous to negotiate on a bike. - death and injury would ensue.

I know walkers are a pretty low priority to members on here, but I think a little empathy would go along way - try and see it from the walker's point of view.

Sorry, but this seems full of nonsense assumptions.
An argument which basically states "it's fine for me, but not for everyone else" is usually flawed.
As for death resulting from riding footpaths? Do you not realise that a lot of us ride completely untracked terrain, with very high cliff-edges and enormous rocks to risk?
Why would anyone expect to have their hands held on a footpath?

I'm not saying "it's fine for me, not anyone else!" I am (perhaps over-optimistically) flattering the readers of this forum with the assumption that they wouldn't ride like loons on shared paths, and yes, I agree, maybe that is a nonsense assumption (I don't even believe the assumption myself).

An assumption I do believe is that a large number of "people on bikes" would be likely to show little or no care or respect to walkers on footpaths if it were a free for all.

As for the dangerous footpaths, how do you fancy cycling Crib Goch? I expect you've done it frequently! Look, you brilliant riders may be fine on cliff edge paths, A LOT of people would not be. When "footpath" becomes "I can ride here" in the mind of the unskilled "person on a bike" problems will ensue. What happens when said unskilled person on a bike hurtles down the cliff side path and collides with the walkers?

What nonsense assumptions were there in my previous post?