Lockdown crowds!

[TrevA]

I’m sticking firmly to roads, after an incident on a riverside path in the first lockdown. Trying to avoid pedestrians on the busy path, I strayed into the long grass and hit a hidden tree root and came off, landing heavily on my shoulder!

[Marcus Aurelius]

I’m sticking firmly to roads, after an incident on a riverside path in the first lockdown. Trying to avoid pedestrians on the busy path, I strayed into the long grass and hit a hidden tree root and came off, landing heavily on my shoulder!

I managed something similar, but in a park, avoiding a dog. It’s actually been far safer to use the main roads, as they have been less busy than they usually are.

[markjohnobrien]

I’m sticking firmly to roads, after an incident on a riverside path in the first lockdown. Trying to avoid pedestrians on the busy path, I strayed into the long grass and hit a hidden tree root and came off, landing heavily on my shoulder!

I managed something similar, but in a park, avoiding a dog. It’s actually been far safer to use the main roads, as they have been less busy than they usually are.

While I like dogs, a lot of their owners are a menace in letting them run around, across, and along shared cycle paths in lockdown.

The owners are oblivious to anything and look shocked when I pass by - oblivious to the fact that it is clearly a cycle path with signs denoting it’s on the NCN and oblivious to my ringing bell...

[peetee]

We did a walk along the south west coast path yesterday. While stopping for a cuppa we were passed by a group of 28 people of varying ages. They were all chatting so it wasn’t just a traffic jam of several groups.

[mjr]

We did a walk along the south west coast path yesterday. While stopping for a cuppa we were passed by a group of 28 people of varying ages. They were all chatting so it wasn’t just a traffic jam of several groups.

I am sure I saw a local walking group post online that they are now allowed up to 30 by agreement between their national governing body and DCMS if they have sufficient marshals (which that one does not so they are limiting it to 12).

I assume this is similar to how Brutish Cycling and CUK are allowed 15 while cycling groups that don't pay any government poodle are limited to 6.

[Marcus Aurelius]

We did a walk along the south west coast path yesterday. While stopping for a cuppa we were passed by a group of 28 people of varying ages. They were all chatting so it wasn’t just a traffic jam of several groups.

while cycling groups that don't pay any government poodle are limited to 6.

Like that’s been stopping them going out in much larger groups.

[mjr]

while cycling groups that don't pay any government poodle are limited to 6.

Like that’s been stopping them going out in much larger groups.

Well, yes, there's so little enforcement that all these restrictions only trouble the law-abiding. Hopefully, there is some reason to them and we're rewarded with less chance of catching the damn bug.

[eileithyia]

We did a walk along the south west coast path yesterday. While stopping for a cuppa we were passed by a group of 28 people of varying ages. They were all chatting so it wasn’t just a traffic jam of several groups.

I am sure I saw a local walking group post online that they are now allowed up to 30 by agreement between their national governing body and DCMS if they have sufficient marshals (which that one does not so they are limiting it to 12).

I assume this is similar to how Brutish Cycling and CUK are allowed 15 while cycling groups that don't pay any government poodle are limited to 6.

We saw a large group of walkers back in August in the New Forest when we were still restricted to cycling in groups of 6, further investigation showed they could have groups of up 30 on a ramble, which did seem contrary to everything we were doing...

[rogerzilla]

Bells are fairly pointless because walkers either have headphones on or are wilfully ignorant.

[mjr]

Bells are fairly pointless because walkers either have headphones on or are wilfully ignorant.

And walkers that are neither should be punished because of the other ones, right?

[rogerzilla]

If you call not ringing a bell punishment, I suppose. The peds have right of way so they can be as obstructive as they like, even on the "bike side", I'm afraid, and don't have to make room for bikes. If you want to make rapid progress, cyclepaths are not the solution.

[mjr]

If you call not ringing a bell punishment, I suppose. The peds have right of way so they can be as obstructive as they like, even on the "bike side", I'm afraid, and don't have to make room for bikes. If you want to make rapid progress, cyclepaths are not the solution.

Well, enough walkers complain about silent passing cyclists that I think it is regarded as punitive.

I agree walkers have priority but I disagree about cycleways not being for rapid progress. They are the only way to avoid motorist-inflicted slowdowns like potholes and traffic lights.