irate dog owner

cskasofia

Was cycling on a coastal path, when I noticed a man coming towards me with his dog off the lead. Approaching the dog, I slowed down and passed carefully. The man then confronted me saying I shouldn't be cycling on the path. His reason was that he had passed a sign earlier, saying no cycling.

I continued on, and came to the sign he was talking about. The path lead onto a national cycling route, and the sign had a white bicycle symbol on a blue background, and the message END OF ROUTE. My interpretation of the sign was that it was advising you that you were no longer on a national cycling route, but it was not saying you couldn't continue to cycle on the connecting path.

Have to stress the path was nowhere near a road or pavement, but simply a muddy trail.

Should I have being cycling on the path/trail?

t4tomo

cskasofia wrote:

Was cycling on a coastal path, when I noticed a man coming towards me with his dog off the lead. Approaching the dog, I slowed down and passed carefully. The man then confronted me saying I shouldn't be cycling on the path. His reason was that he had passed a sign earlier, saying no cycling.

I continued on, and came to the sign he was talking about. The path lead onto a national cycling route, and the sign had a white bicycle symbol on a blue background, and the message END OF ROUTE. My interpretation of the sign was that it was advising you that you were no longer on a national cycling route, but it was not saying you couldn't continue to cycle on the connecting path.

Have to stress the path was nowhere near a road or pavement, but simply a muddy trail.

Should I have being cycling on the path/trail?

the sign for a footpath has an outline of a man, nowhere does it feature a dog.

You slowed down you were courteous, there is room for everyone in the countryside

Mikey23

Plus one...

I got told by an irate group of dog owners on the tarka trail a while ago that there was a sign saying that I must carry a bell... Needless to say there was no such sign

vimfuego

Dog owners have no right to let their mutts cr@p all over the place and not clean it up either - doesn't seem to stop them though. My daughter is also petrified of dogs since an Alsation jumped out at her whilst we were walking to nursery one day when she was 2, still, "he's only saying hello" so that's alright then.......

Mikey23

Put it in a little bag and hang it in a tree like a Christmas decoration.... Grrrr

linzi

It is better to take other if there is than understanding that sign.

notnot

Years ago a dog nipped my foot as I went by (didn't get through the shoe, thankfully). The owner was more worried about the dog's teeth!

Mikey23

Booked it in for an anti rabies jab? ;-)

Initialised

Check the path on the OS map for the area, if it is Bridleway or Cycleway then yes you are fine if it is Footpath then no.

AFAIK "End of Route" does not mean "No Cycling"

markhewitt1978

It's complex because I don't believe there is any specific signage to say you can or cannot cycle on off road paths, you can on Bridleways of course, but many cycle routes don't even have bridleway status; it's a bit of a mess really.

bompington

Oh good, another opportunity to be smug about Scottish law, which allows you to ride pretty much where you please.

Lord_V

The sign you mention is Traffic Signs Regulations and Directions (TSRGD) diagram number 965. There are no regulations behind this sign. (ie - it is for information only), The guidance in the Traffic Signs Manual chapter 3 is that: "The end of a cycle track or shared route may be indicated by the sign to diagram 965, although this is not essential. The sign might be helpful where cyclists rejoin the main carriageway of a road at the end of a shared footway. It should not be used at an intermittent break in a cycle track or shared route, such as at a road crossing."

So basically - tell the grumpy git to STFU. He is very wrong. You are quite within your rights to continue cycling on the track.

The ones that would prohibit cycling are Diag. 617 (Red outlined blank circle), or Diag. 951 (red outlined circle with cycle symbol)<< (not exhaustive list, but prohibition signs are all red rimmed circles...)

(some times the day job pays off..... )

markhewitt1978

And yet; you could be cycling along a bridleway or cycle path to where a footpath joins, with no signage of any sort. Of course cycling isn't permitted on the footpath - but there's nothing to say that.

Lord_V

Should point out that there is a difference between 'footway' and 'footpath' in legal terms.

From DoT LTN 2/04: "1.1.5 Footways and footpaths have a legal definition see Annex B‚ but, in essence, a footway is a
pedestrian right of way within the boundary of an all-purpose highway (road) usually called the pavement‚ and a footpath is one outside it."

http://www.ukroads.org/webfiles/LTN%202 ... clists.pdf

Lord_V

"10.2.2 Cycling on the footway in England and Wales is an offence under Section 72 of the Highways Act
1835 as amended by Section 851‚ of the Local Government Act 1888. Riding on footpaths, although
unlawful, is not an offence unless specifically prohibited by a Traffic Regulation Order under section 1 or
6 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984, or by a local bylaw. Remedies may be available through the
civil courts. It should be noted that neither section 72 of the Highways Act 1835 as amended by section
851‚ of the Local Government Act 1888‚ nor the fixed penalty notice system is applicable to cycling on
footpaths"

markhewitt1978

Lord_V wrote:

Should point out that there is a difference between 'footway' and 'footpath' in legal terms.

I did indeed mean footpath and not footway.

Lord_V

markhewitt1978 wrote:

Lord_V wrote:

Should point out that there is a difference between 'footway' and 'footpath' in legal terms.

I did indeed mean footpath and not footway.

Fair enough

If it is an offense to ride on a footpath (instead of merely unlawful) then there will be signs telling you that cycling is prohibited.

BigJimmyB

Let's face it, he's a just a grumpy old cnut and irrespecive of signage should just share the path.

Access all areas

The Rookie

Lord_V wrote:

If it is an offense to ride on a footpath (instead of merely unlawful) then there will be signs telling you that cycling is prohibited.

You what? If it's unlawful it is an offence, no offence and it's not unlawful! For example cycling may not be permitted by an owner on private land and he could sue, but it is not unlawful.

Footpaths for which they wish to prevent cycling require an order (usually a local byelaw) and a sign which should be the cycle in a red circle. I have one near me with the sign at one end (not the other) and no order making the sign as relevant as graffiti.

Lord_V

Honestly.. that's never made much sense to me either - however it's definitely what government guidance on the issue says (see above). If you can shed light on it feel free!

Local authorities love trying to take short cuts....

The Rookie

I think you'll find the definition just after 'codswallop' in the dictionary!

Interesting website as the parent URL doesn't have a homepage implying the site is defunct but not been stripped of content, however dictionaries have the following 2 definitions (which wouldn't be mine)
1. not conforming to legality, moral law, or social convention
3. not morally right or permissible
Which could be argued I guess, but to me unlawful means contrary to a law, but then apparently some dictionaries now state that literally doesn't actually mean literally anymore either.......so 'I literlly jumped out of my skin' is now correct even though you are still wearing your skin!

Lord_V

Interestingly the more up-to-date version of ltn 2 no longer covers legal issues.... that seems to be now covered in ltn1/12.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/shared-use

Ltn are local traffic notes, and are guidance provided to local authorities on the design and operation of public spaces.

Which no longer says the same thing... I guess the answer is buried in the highways act/cycle tracks regulations somewhere. Maybe cycles have no rights of way on a footpath but they have permissive rights of use? << wild stab in dark there....

Mikey23

Don't want any wild stabbing in the dark... That would surely be antisocial...

Lord_V

But I'm not wearing a hood... so I think it's fine?

Mikey23

Must be a bye law ... But probably ok then