Shared paths etiquette

[Oldjohnw]

The reality is that we all, whatever the genre of our mode of travel - foot, bike, ebike, motorbike or car (and many of use more than one of these depending on the circumstances of the moment) - more or less share the same space.


Each group has its share of idiots at worst or merely unaware at best. Some pedestrians zig zag along attached to earphones. Some motorists turn left straight in front of us. Some cyclists jump lights or pedestrian crossings. Some do these things deliberating out of a feeling of entitlement or even malice. Others unthinkingly. Probably all of us make errors of judgement from time to time.

Ranting, shouting and screaming and swearing or using rude gestures or thumping on cars will actually achieve nothing apart from entrenching prejudice.

[mjr]

Well imho mixed use paths are very useful things but they are what they are. That is a path used by multiple types of users each with different needs, behaviours etiquette and attitude to speed or distance between users.

Imho that means all cyclists should go slow. All pedestrians, joggers and dog walkers should be aware of what's around them and approaching from all possible directions. You cannot simply ride on them as fast as you might like. Similarly you cannot simply jog along oblivious to other users with headphones and music on.

The above is true of all highways IMO.

If your dog is loose you can reach it to hold it back unless it is patently clear your dog is the sort to stop away from the other user's path even then prefer holding them.

I feel that's bad advice. Dogs should be on leads on all highways. Highway code rule 56. There are places you can let dogs run free and highways aren't one.

I see cyclists go too quick when I'm a ped. I see joggers ignore me when I'm on my bike. And many other situations as the varied types of path users. I'm a cyclist, jogger, pedestrian and dog walker so know all the problems from all main POVs. Not been a disability scooter user though so as one path user your with its own HC sections I admit to not having experience of.

I've done a similar mix, plus hobbling along with a walking stick, but only a cyclist and pedestrian regularly (don't jog much, don't own a dog but have walked them). Strangely enough, the only times I remember being close-passed have been as a cyclist, most recently on Tuesday with the stereotypical commuter-on-beater-MTB passing close on my left side around a bend that I took wider because my wheelbase is longer than his. When walking, I've had cyclists shout at me for wandering onto the cycleway side of a split path but even then they didn't close-pass me.

[casoja]

A perspective from a runners point of view-
Runners should never wear headphones when using shared paths, country lanes or busy pavements.
Runners should stick to one side of a shared path where possible, and check behind frequently.
Runners should give way to walkers, not expect walkers to move out of their way.
Runners should maintain a steady path, not zig zag around
Runners should check behind before spitting (as should cyclists)!

Here are the controversial ones!
Runners should adopt the primary line when the path is too narrow for cyclists to pass from behind.
Runners should expect cyclists to give priority, and not be expected to get of the way
Runners should however let cyclists pass through as a matter of good manners and expediancy.

Some requests for cyclists from an experienced runner-
If you are riding 2 or more abreast and see a runner coming towards you, please revert to single file
If you are approaching a runner from behind, give him/her a shout or signal
If you see a running coming towards you and he/she is to one side of the path, please please please move to the other side rather than ride straight at me!!!

Finally, I would ask that you treat runners in the same way you rightly expect motorists to treat you when on the road - with respect, with caution and with the attitude that in this instance you are the vehicle and they are the vulnerable user!

Thank you.

[Tangled Metal]

I agree if footways adjacent to roads but mixed is paths away from road traffic (footpaths, bridleways, former rail lines, etc), are perfectly ok for dogs off a lead. Btw that rule 56 is advisory only, not a legally actionable rule with statutes backing them. The following explains it better.

Although owners are responsible for keeping their dogs under control, this does not mean they are obliged to keep them on a short lead in public. Neither does it mean they would be categorically liable for accidents if their dog acted out of character.

https://www.slatergordon.co.uk/media-centre/blog/2015/06/cycling-accidents-involving-animals-what-is-the-law/

Btw there is a difference with civil liability and legal requirement. Btw it would be determined by a civil liability case in a court. There's precedents both ways but generally I understand first three loose dog needs to cause injury or harm, the person needs to go to court and prove negligence and liability. That's not certain just because a loose dog was involved. That's not the criteria affecting any liability payments.

However I do have third party liability for my dog IF I'm ever liable for my loose dog. The chances of needing that is not very high because I know my dog, it knows me and expected behaviour. If any risks it's held.

[Tangled Metal]

Good post.

Especially about conceding way to the cyclist behind. Imho all slower users should concede to those coming past from behind.

Head to head is common sense. Afterall you've both got to pass each other.

It's not hard everyone! A little common sense and consideration for others goes a long way

[Vorpal]

But whatever we are doing on a path, running, cycling, dog walking, or taking a toddler on tour, we should expect the unexpected. Cyclists might swerve to miss a bump or pot hole, runners might go round a puddle, dogs probably have a lead attached (and it might be all but invisible!), dogs and humans alike might wander aimlessly.

I don't see any reason that a runner shouldn't wear headphones, if they want to, though it's a good idea to remain aware of their surroundings.

IMO, it is the faster users who need to take care around the slower (and smaller), not that the slower should give way to the faster.

[mjr]

I realise the highway code rule is advisory, as I wrote should not must. I disagree that loose dogs are OK on motor-free highways. If anything, they are an injury hazard to a greater proportion and possibly number of users there, so it's even more antisocial than on or by a carriageway.

[Tangled Metal]

So are kids, peds in their own world and other users. Let's face it mixed path use is a collection of different users headed for contact. Manage that moment well there's no issue, fail to manage it there's issues.

How much of an issue depends on injury first but also how much of an issue people want to make of it if there's no injury.

In guess we'll never agree wrt the dogs off the lead. I have no problems with responsible leadless dog walking. It's not prohibited despite council attempts in places. It causes no harm or issues the majority of instances. Certainly no more than loose kids, runners, peds, etc. However dogs instill the same hysterical anti arguments on cycling sites at times that cyclists get on mixed use paths among a few paper comment sections. The minority tars the majority in some people's eyes.

[mattsccm]

Can't agree on head phone use. It is a distraction. Bloody dangerous as well. The only runners who I have incidents with have had their hearing blocked so they ignore my polite hellos. I assume that all PEDs should face oncoming traffic be that wheeled or foot. So on your right always.

[Cyril Haearn]

Left or right? Depends how fast
Using headphones is obviously stupid

[mjr]

Can't agree on head phone use. It is a distraction. Bloody dangerous as well. The only runners who I have incidents with have had their hearing blocked so they ignore my polite hellos. I assume that all PEDs should face oncoming traffic be that wheeled or foot. So on your right always.

I don't care whether they use headphones as long as they don't block their hearing.

Performance Enhancing Drugs rarely use paths unaccompanied!

[Cyril Haearn]

Headphones inevitably block hearing

[mjr]

Headphones inevitably block hearing

It's easy to avoid, either by design (including bone conductors) or usage (not forming a plug or using high volume with in-ear ones).

[brooksby]

I realise the highway code rule is advisory, as I wrote should not must. I disagree that loose dogs are OK on motor-free highways. If anything, they are an injury hazard to a greater proportion and possibly number of users there, so it's even more antisocial than on or by a carriageway.

I'd forgotten how many people on my local off-road shared-use path see no need for a torch or reflectors or to keep their (invariably, it seems) black dog close and on a lead once the sun has set and it's pitch black (no streetlights along there). Going down the hill cautiously, despite my front light being as bright as it'll go (Cateye Volt 400 on max)... And I just know that if I hit their dog, it'd be my fault. Almost wants me to just stick to the road...

[ChrisButch]

Walking along a local towpath in the dark I was puzzled by an approaching array of flashing white and red light, apparently moving erratically. It was only when they were a few yards from me, at which point I was beginning to get the heebie-jeebies, that I realised it was two black labradors, each begirt with three flashing LEDS. One white pointing front, two red pointing back - except when they turned round - which, being labs, was every few seconds.