Illegal 'Cyclists Dismount' signs?

User avatar
gaz
Posts: 14649
Joined: 9 Mar 2007, 12:09pm
Location: Kent

Re: Illegal 'Cyclists Dismount' signs?

Post by gaz »

If you think of the risk of "falling rocks" sign as risk of "fallen rocks" on the road ahead it's purpose is perhaps a little clearer.
High on a cocktail of flossy teacakes and marmalade
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Illegal 'Cyclists Dismount' signs?

Post by thirdcrank »

gaz wrote:If you think of the risk of "falling rocks" sign as risk of "fallen rocks" on the road ahead it's purpose is perhaps a little clearer.


I don't know, but the image on the sign is definitely a representation of a mini avalanche rather than a heap of rocks. Without going to look at an actual sign, IIRC the accompanying plate refers to falling rocks.
reohn2
Posts: 45158
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Illegal 'Cyclists Dismount' signs?

Post by reohn2 »

A heap of rocks on the road ahead could be misread as a dollop of horse manure,in which case a busket and shovel would be in order perhaps,especially for a driving gardener :shock:

The sign Cattle Grid to a motorists just translates as 'you'll hear a thrumming sound for a couple of seconds' but to a motorcyclist or cyclist can mean a different thing entirely,given that a motorcyclist is trained and licenced so should be aware of the possible dangers,especially when wet.
Is it reasonable for councils to presume that whilst cyclists aren't all trained or licenced may be unaware of the possible dangers involved?
Which begs the question should cattle grids be made saver by proper maintainence and nonslip coating,or for cyclist be expected to use the gate provided for pedestrians and equestrians?
Last edited by reohn2 on 10 Sep 2017, 2:46pm, edited 1 time in total.
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
Annoying Twit
Posts: 962
Joined: 1 Feb 2016, 8:19am
Location: Leicester

Re: Illegal 'Cyclists Dismount' signs?

Post by Annoying Twit »

thirdcrank wrote:On the point of having a sign warning of a cattle grid, there is one already.

There are numerous other warning signs - arguably too often used - of dangers which could not realistically be removed, Z bend being a common example. The one that baffles me is the sign warning of the risk of falling rocks. I can see that there will be some places where this risk cannot be completely removed but what use does the warning serve, in the sense that what action can a road user take in response to the sign to avoid the risk? If it's a matter of "you proceed at your own risk" then there should be signs at junctions on the approaches - as there are with low bridges - warning people what's ahead while choosing another route is still feasible. (Q Would a helmet help with falling rocks? :wink: )


Like Gaz and others, I interpret falling rocks as being a warning that there may be rocks on the road. And horse signs as being a warning of horse poop which could be quite dangerous due to slip risk.

Talking about compulsory signs: Yesterday I completely ignored several 'Reduce Speed Now' signs which were on a red background. As I was only puttering along in any case, I saw no need to reduce my speed.
User avatar
mjr
Posts: 20308
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Illegal 'Cyclists Dismount' signs?

Post by mjr »

reohn2 wrote:Whilst I agree that motorists should drive responsibly on any road,not just rural ones,but it would inconvenience more people including cyclists to have gates.
I don't see your point,with a gate a cyclist has to dismount,with a grid a cyclist has the choice to either heed the warning sign or not as it's only advisory.

With a gate that swings both ways (fnarr), most cyclists don't have to dismount either. They're also far easier for mobility-scooter users.

I do ride over cattle grids but I view them as archaic and unnecessary, with even gates preferable because at least they slow down motorists. What's really bad for cycling is when old-style bolster-shape speed bumps are put either side of a cattle grid to deter motorists in their modern heavier vehicles driving over it fast enough to damage it.
reohn2 wrote:Pedestrians and equestrians are provided for by gates by the side of cattle grids,if a cyclist doesn't feel confident riding over a CG they can use the gate.

Not all cattle grids have gates alongside - some have flat rails for people to walk along, balance beam style. There aren't many left because I guess they're pretty unusable by people who walk with sticks and so on.

The gates alongside some cattle grids have no tarmac to them or are too small to fit a bike through (old kissing gates and so on).
reohn2 wrote:One other point,on gated roads disabled drivers would be inconvenienced far more than anyone.

That's a fair point and IMO one of the few valid arguments against gating. Anyone know if it means existing gates are being removed slowly as a result? We've a few gates on commons around here but change is slow in most such places.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
Bmblbzzz
Posts: 6261
Joined: 18 May 2012, 7:56pm
Location: From here to there.

Re: Illegal 'Cyclists Dismount' signs?

Post by Bmblbzzz »

Most commons have a fair amount of traffic. I suspect that many drivers would not close gates if they could see another vehicle less than a minute behind them or could reasonably expect another in the next thirty seconds or so, with the result that eventually, cattle (or horses or whatever animals are being kept in by the gates) would escape. The gates could be made self-closing but then they would end up inevitably swinging into following vehicles at some point.
Bmblbzzz
Posts: 6261
Joined: 18 May 2012, 7:56pm
Location: From here to there.

Re: Illegal 'Cyclists Dismount' signs?

Post by Bmblbzzz »

Cattle grids are not really a problem even in wet as long as you can take them at a reasonable speed. What that is will depend on your bike to an extent; I reckon 10-20mph is good but fat tyres will enable lower speeds.
User avatar
meic
Posts: 19355
Joined: 1 Feb 2007, 9:37pm
Location: Caerfyrddin (Carmarthen)

Re: Illegal 'Cyclists Dismount' signs?

Post by meic »

One thing: Are blue 'no swimming' signs on rivers and lakes only advisory?

I have seen signs in places (Swansea city's River Tawe for example) which specifically state it is illegal to swim there.
Yma o Hyd
bikepacker
Posts: 2273
Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 7:08pm
Location: Worcestershire
Contact:

Re: Illegal 'Cyclists Dismount' signs?

Post by bikepacker »

Bmblbzzz wrote:Cattle grids are not really a problem even in wet as long as you can take them at a reasonable speed. What that is will depend on your bike to an extent; I reckon 10-20mph is good but fat tyres will enable lower speeds.


The evidence we collected over the two years prior to the public enquiry suggested they are a problem. One of the objectors had collected a large dossier of accidents with some deaths at them.
There is your way. There is my way. But there is no "the way".
User avatar
Paulatic
Posts: 7804
Joined: 2 Feb 2014, 1:03pm
Location: 24 Hours from Lands End

Re: Illegal 'Cyclists Dismount' signs?

Post by Paulatic »

Jumping them is often my preferred way if I've enough speed.
Bzzz has mentioned one of the main reasons cattle grids are there and some of you, by your comments, seem to have lost sight of their purpose.
I lived for 30 yrs behind 4 grids. That could have been a lot of gate opening every day if not in place.
One cottage was behind 3 and sometimes 4 gates. The aggravation I used to get from escaping stock was unreal. I once lost two whole days gathering in ten minutes. As the postman said, I was only 10 minutes! So much agro over those gates being left open the cottager stopped getting post delivered and often met visitors at the gate.
Whatever I am, wherever I am, this is me. This is my life

https://stcleve.wordpress.com/category/lejog/
E2E info
reohn2
Posts: 45158
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Illegal 'Cyclists Dismount' signs?

Post by reohn2 »

mjr wrote:With a gate that swings both ways (fnarr), most cyclists don't have to dismount either. They're also far easier for mobility-scooter users.

In a word,recumbent :wink:

I do ride over cattle grids but I view them as archaic and unnecessary, with even gates preferable because at least they slow down motorists. What's really bad for cycling is when old-style bolster-shape speed bumps are put either side of a cattle grid to deter motorists in their modern heavier vehicles driving over it fast enough to damage it.

I've don't understand why cattle grids are archaic,they control livestock and allow traffic flow,though as I mentioned up thread the rails/bars could be coated with a non slip section in the middle so car wheels wouldn't wear it off,such coating would also help motorcyclists too.
I haven't experienced the bolster type speed humps you mention but agree with you.

The gates alongside some cattle grids have no tarmac to them or are too small to fit a bike through (old kissing gates and so on)

What about equestrians?

reohn2 wrote:That's a fair point and IMO one of the few valid arguments against gating. Anyone know if it means existing gates are being removed slowly as a result? We've a few gates on commons around here but change is slow in most such places.

I only know of one or two gated roads,and the first thing I thought of was what if a disabled driver came along :?
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
reohn2
Posts: 45158
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Illegal 'Cyclists Dismount' signs?

Post by reohn2 »

bikepacker wrote:
Bmblbzzz wrote:Cattle grids are not really a problem even in wet as long as you can take them at a reasonable speed. What that is will depend on your bike to an extent; I reckon 10-20mph is good but fat tyres will enable lower speeds.


The evidence we collected over the two years prior to the public enquiry suggested they are a problem. One of the objectors had collected a large dossier of accidents with some deaths at them.

Do you mean dangerous just for cyclists or were there deaths and injuries to other road users?
If so would a centre 1m non slip coated section solve the problem?
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
Phil Fouracre
Posts: 919
Joined: 12 Jan 2013, 12:16pm
Location: Deepest Somerset

Re: Illegal 'Cyclists Dismount' signs?

Post by Phil Fouracre »

Mmmm! I'd be interested in these stats! How many deaths caused by cattle grids? Seems a little strange, never found them a problem, wet or dry :-)
Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity
User avatar
mjr
Posts: 20308
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Illegal 'Cyclists Dismount' signs?

Post by mjr »

reohn2 wrote:I've don't understand why cattle grids are archaic,they control livestock and allow traffic flow,though as I mentioned up thread the rails/bars could be coated with a non slip section in the middle so car wheels wouldn't wear it off,such coating would also help motorcyclists too.

It's archaic because controlling cattle by digging holes in the ground seems so backwards, even since we have fences.

The coating sounds like a good idea but I've never seen it.

reohn2 wrote:
The gates alongside some cattle grids have no tarmac to them or are too small to fit a bike through (old kissing gates and so on)

What about equestrians?

I've no idea. Possibly they could jump the fences but I've never seen them at the gateless ones whose locations I'm sure of. On the OS map, that road is white, so it might not even be a right of way on horse.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
Bmblbzzz
Posts: 6261
Joined: 18 May 2012, 7:56pm
Location: From here to there.

Re: Illegal 'Cyclists Dismount' signs?

Post by Bmblbzzz »

I think you're missing the idea of common land, mjr.
Post Reply