Cyclists have called for a “mindset shift” when riding on shared-use paths, after a dog’s leg was amputated following a collision involving a bike rider near Bangor in North Wales.

Yesterday we reported (link is external) that Buddy, an 11-year-old springer spaniel, lost a leg after he was struck by a cyclist in Gwynedd. The dog suffered a badly crushed ankle in the incident, which occurred while being walked off-lead on the Ogwen Trail, part of the National Cycle Network's Route 82.

Bob Hutchinson said a cyclist “zoomed past” before hitting his dog, and questioned the “arrogant” attitude of some cyclists, who he says have made walking on the path “a frightening experience”

The unfortunate incident has prompted some serious debate in the comments and on social media, as the cycling community attempts to answer the question: how can shared-use paths be made safer for everyone?

Readers were particularly divided over who was responsible for the incident on the Ogwen Trail.

“Dogs should be on leads on a shared path like that for their own protection and that of others, no question,” said Rendel Harris.

“However, looking on Strava I find there is a segment for that section of path, ‘Glasinfryn to Port Penrhym’, in which the KOM is 44km/h, the top eight are all 40 km/h plus, and the top 280 are all 30 km/h plus, so clearly a considerable number of cyclists are indeed being utter tools and ‘using it as a racetrack’.”

On the other hand, Rich_cb said: “Dog owners have a responsibility to other path users. The dog must be completely under control. If it is not and someone is injured as a consequence, then they are liable.”

Last month, a district council in Devon introduced a controversial new public space protection order which requires dog walkers to use leads shorter than a metre near cycle paths and highways, with the safety of cyclists cited as one of the reasons behind the rule.

However, Simon E argued that “it is the cyclist's responsibility to avoid the collision regardless of the supposed behaviour of the dog and its owner.

“The whole route is a shared facility, but walkers are there to relax and many won't expect something that moves considerably faster than other walkers and is almost silent.

“Regardless of what the Highway Code says, if you cycle along there and you assume people will move out of your way or anticipate your approach and immediately bring their dog under control then you are going to get a nasty surprise.”

Replying to Simon’s comment, TriTaxMan said: “So what you seem to be suggesting is that in a shared-use space that the users of the space who pose the most risk have the responsibility to avoid a collision regardless of the supposed behaviour of the more vulnerable user…

“So the next time I'm out cycling on the road I don't need to care what I do on the road because it’s the motorist’s responsibility to avoid a collision with me regardless of what I should be doing on the road.

“Last time I checked sharing is about all groups taking responsibility for their own safety and actions as opposed to thinking the other group will do it for them.”

> Cyclists' safety highlighted as dog walkers face fines for using long leads near cycle paths

Carior, a cyclist and dog walker, argued that no one has “any privileged right to use a shared path to the detriment of other path users”, and called on cyclists to remember that, on a shared-use path, “we are the high speed potentially dangerous users”.

They then advocated the following “simple rules” for cyclists and dog walkers to adhere to on shared paths:

“If you want to cycle on a shared use path/bridleway, you have to be responsible and be prepared to stop immediately if there's something unexpected around the corner, whether a trap, a downed tree, a family or a dog.

“It is your responsibility to be in control of your speed. Ultimately, I think you have to expect that people won't hear you and you may have to pass at quasi-walking speeds. If you are trying to "train" or "go hard" then you need to consider whether your route is appropriate for that and to be frank, I don't think a shared-use path is.

They continued: “If you are a dog walker on a path that you know is frequented by cyclists, then you have to be particularly aware of that. You need to be vigilant and responsible so that you notice when there is a bike coming and can appropriately instruct your dog, whether getting them to stay or calling them back as the situation calls for.”

Many readers said that cyclists should treat pedestrians on shared-use paths in the same way that they hope to be treated by motorists on the road.

“If I’m out on the road on one of my bikes, I hope that every artic, bus, car or motorbike would rather go into a hedge then wipe me out. I ride that way when around pedestrians, dogs and horses,” says Jimwill.

Sriracha commented: “If I as a cyclist badly injured a dog, or a child, I'd feel like shit. Placing the blame would not assuage my feelings.

“Therefore, on a shared use path, where there are dogs, and children, running about, I ride cautiously. So far it has worked. I would not be one militating for dogs and children to be kept under ‘close control’ just so that I could be freed of the imperative to ride cautiously around them.”

On Twitter, Patrick wrote: “The very simple reality is that if cyclists refuse to acknowledge other path users by failing to slow down, they are demonstrating the same obtuse and arrogant behaviour of car drivers they moan about with whom they share the roads. Consider others.”

Mike Harrison went further and said that: “Cyclists need a mindset shift when on shared-use paths. We're used to being the vulnerable users on roads and having to fight for our space. On paths however, we need to be ultra-cautious around walkers/dogs. Doesn't matter if they're in the ‘wrong’, we need to not harm them.”

> "Everybody has to take greater care": Cyclists react to ban on long dog leads near cycle paths

Others focused on the design of active travel infrastructure in the UK, with Matt Smith claiming that “shared-used paths create too much conflict”.

He continued: “Give cycling dedicated space segregated from walking..

“In the meantime, respect the guidelines for shared use paths. Put your dog on a short lead. Cycle slowly around people and dogs, use a bell and always be prepared to stop.”

Chrisonatrike also called for a complete overhaul of both shared paths and active travel infrastructure in general: “Immediate action for the UK would be making [shared paths] in towns/cities at least twice as wide – or as wide as possible. Most UK ones are barely the minimum for bikes never mind bikes and pedestrians. Then very clearly mark separate cycling and pedestrian areas.

“Initially this will of course be ignored by most people but will get them used to the next change which is: Taking space back from motor traffic/parking so we don't need shared-use paths.

“[Shared-use paths] are always conflicted because often there are very few/no traffic-free options for journeys by foot or bike, for pleasant walking, for taking your dog out, where you're not worried about the kids running in front of a bus.”

Seventyone was a touch blunter in their appraisal: “Shared-use paths are a bit rubbish. What a revelation!”

https://road.cc/content/news/give-cycling-dedicated-space-reaction-291115

On 16/03/2022 02:43 pm, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
> Cyclists have called for a “mindset shift” when riding on shared-use paths, after a dog’s leg was amputated following a collision involving a bike rider near Bangor in North Wales.
>
> Yesterday we reported (link is external) that Buddy, an 11-year-old springer spaniel, lost a leg after he was struck by a cyclist in Gwynedd. The dog suffered a badly crushed ankle in the incident, which occurred while being walked off-lead on the Ogwen Trail, part of the National Cycle Network's Route 82.
>
> Bob Hutchinson said a cyclist “zoomed past” before hitting his dog, and questioned the “arrogant” attitude of some cyclists, who he says have made walking on the path “a frightening experience”
>
> The unfortunate incident has prompted some serious debate in the comments and on social media, as the cycling community attempts to answer the question: how can shared-use paths be made safer for everyone?
>
> Readers were particularly divided over who was responsible for the incident on the Ogwen Trail.
>
> “Dogs should be on leads on a shared path like that for their own protection and that of others, no question,” said Rendel Harris.
>
> “However, looking on Strava I find there is a segment for that section of path, ‘Glasinfryn to Port Penrhym’, in which the KOM is 44km/h, the top eight are all 40 km/h plus, and the top 280 are all 30 km/h plus, so clearly a considerable number of cyclists are indeed being utter tools and ‘using it as a racetrack’.”
>
> On the other hand, Rich_cb said: “Dog owners have a responsibility to other path users. The dog must be completely under control. If it is not and someone is injured as a consequence, then they are liable.”
>
> Last month, a district council in Devon introduced a controversial new public space protection order which requires dog walkers to use leads shorter than a metre near cycle paths and highways, with the safety of cyclists cited as one of the reasons behind the rule.
>
> However, Simon E argued that “it is the cyclist's responsibility to avoid the collision regardless of the supposed behaviour of the dog and its owner.
>
> “The whole route is a shared facility, but walkers are there to relax and many won't expect something that moves considerably faster than other walkers and is almost silent.
>
> “Regardless of what the Highway Code says, if you cycle along there and you assume people will move out of your way or anticipate your approach and immediately bring their dog under control then you are going to get a nasty surprise.”
>
> Replying to Simon’s comment, TriTaxMan said: “So what you seem to be suggesting is that in a shared-use space that the users of the space who pose the most risk have the responsibility to avoid a collision regardless of the supposed behaviour of the more vulnerable user…
>
> “So the next time I'm out cycling on the road I don't need to care what I do on the road because it’s the motorist’s responsibility to avoid a collision with me regardless of what I should be doing on the road.
>
> “Last time I checked sharing is about all groups taking responsibility for their own safety and actions as opposed to thinking the other group will do it for them.”
>
>> Cyclists' safety highlighted as dog walkers face fines for using long leads near cycle paths
>
> Carior, a cyclist and dog walker, argued that no one has “any privileged right to use a shared path to the detriment of other path users”, and called on cyclists to remember that, on a shared-use path, “we are the high speed potentially dangerous users”.
>
> They then advocated the following “simple rules” for cyclists and dog walkers to adhere to on shared paths:
>
> “If you want to cycle on a shared use path/bridleway, you have to be responsible and be prepared to stop immediately if there's something unexpected around the corner, whether a trap, a downed tree, a family or a dog.
>
> “It is your responsibility to be in control of your speed. Ultimately, I think you have to expect that people won't hear you and you may have to pass at quasi-walking speeds. If you are trying to "train" or "go hard" then you need to consider whether your route is appropriate for that and to be frank, I don't think a shared-use path is.
>
> They continued: “If you are a dog walker on a path that you know is frequented by cyclists, then you have to be particularly aware of that. You need to be vigilant and responsible so that you notice when there is a bike coming and can appropriately instruct your dog, whether getting them to stay or calling them back as the situation calls for.”
>
> Many readers said that cyclists should treat pedestrians on shared-use paths in the same way that they hope to be treated by motorists on the road.
>
> “If I’m out on the road on one of my bikes, I hope that every artic, bus, car or motorbike would rather go into a hedge then wipe me out. I ride that way when around pedestrians, dogs and horses,” says Jimwill.
>
> Sriracha commented: “If I as a cyclist badly injured a dog, or a child, I'd feel like shit. Placing the blame would not assuage my feelings.
>
> “Therefore, on a shared use path, where there are dogs, and children, running about, I ride cautiously. So far it has worked. I would not be one militating for dogs and children to be kept under ‘close control’ just so that I could be freed of the imperative to ride cautiously around them.”
>
> On Twitter, Patrick wrote: “The very simple reality is that if cyclists refuse to acknowledge other path users by failing to slow down, they are demonstrating the same obtuse and arrogant behaviour of car drivers they moan about with whom they share the roads. Consider others.”
>
> Mike Harrison went further and said that: “Cyclists need a mindset shift when on shared-use paths. We're used to being the vulnerable users on roads and having to fight for our space. On paths however, we need to be ultra-cautious around walkers/dogs. Doesn't matter if they're in the ‘wrong’, we need to not harm them.”
>
>> "Everybody has to take greater care": Cyclists react to ban on long dog leads near cycle paths
>
> Others focused on the design of active travel infrastructure in the UK, with Matt Smith claiming that “shared-used paths create too much conflict”.
>
> He continued: “Give cycling dedicated space segregated from walking.
>
> “In the meantime, respect the guidelines for shared use paths. Put your dog on a short lead. Cycle slowly around people and dogs, use a bell and always be prepared to stop.”
>
> Chrisonatrike also called for a complete overhaul of both shared paths and active travel infrastructure in general: “Immediate action for the UK would be making [shared paths] in towns/cities at least twice as wide – or as wide as possible. Most UK ones are barely the minimum for bikes never mind bikes and pedestrians. Then very clearly mark separate cycling and pedestrian areas.
>
> “Initially this will of course be ignored by most people but will get them used to the next change which is: Taking space back from motor traffic/parking so we don't need shared-use paths.
>
> “[Shared-use paths] are always conflicted because often there are very few/no traffic-free options for journeys by foot or bike, for pleasant walking, for taking your dog out, where you're not worried about the kids running in front of a bus.”
>
> Seventyone was a touch blunter in their appraisal: “Shared-use paths are a bit rubbish. What a revelation!”
>
> https://road.cc/content/news/give-cycling-dedicated-space-reaction-291115

Give, give, give, give... to fairy-cyclists.

Others will pay.
>

On 16/03/2022 14:43, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:

> Cyclists have called for a “mindset shift” when riding on shared-use paths, after a dog’s leg was amputated following a collision involving a bike rider near Bangor in North Wales.

> However, Simon E argued that “it is the cyclist's responsibility to avoid the collision regardless of the supposed behaviour of the dog and its owner.

Quite.

> Replying to Simon’s comment, TriTaxMan said: “Last time I checked sharing is about all groups taking responsibility for their own safety and actions as opposed to thinking the other group will do it for them.”

Not quite got the hang of this Highway Code hierarchy or the 'victim
mentality' of cyclists, has he?

> Carior, a cyclist and dog walker, argued that no one has “any privileged right to use a shared path to the detriment of other path users”, and called on cyclists to remember that, on a shared-use path, “we are the high speed potentially dangerous users”.

Quite.

> “If you want to cycle on a shared use path/bridleway, you have to be responsible and be prepared to stop immediately if there's something unexpected around the corner, whether a trap, a downed tree, a family or a dog.

> “It is your responsibility to be in control of your speed. Ultimately, I think you have to expect that people won't hear you and you may have to pass at quasi-walking speeds. If you are trying to "train" or "go hard" then you need to consider whether your route is appropriate for that and to be frank, I don't think a shared-use path is.

Well said.

> Many readers said that cyclists should treat pedestrians on shared-use paths in the same way that they hope to be treated by motorists on the road.

Exactly!

> On Twitter, Patrick wrote: “The very simple reality is that if cyclists refuse to acknowledge other path users by failing to slow down, they are demonstrating the same obtuse and arrogant behaviour of car drivers they moan about with whom they share the roads. Consider others.”

Spot on.

> Mike Harrison went further and said that: “Cyclists need a mindset shift when on shared-use paths. We're used to being the vulnerable users on roads and having to fight for our space. On paths however, we need to be ultra-cautious around walkers/dogs. Doesn't matter if they're in the ‘wrong’, we need to not harm them.”

Good thinking.

> Others focused on the design of active travel infrastructure in the UK, with Matt Smith claiming that “shared-used paths create too much conflict”.

Clearly.

> <https://road.cc/content/news/give-cycling-dedicated-space-reaction-291115>

--
Spike

On Wednesday, March 16, 2022 at 2:43:20 PM UTC, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:

PRSboy | 1153 posts | 1 hour ago
0 likes

Are Road CC going to write an article with reactions to the article on reactions to the article on the share use path collision?

reply quote

Avatar
chrisonatrike replied to PRSboy | 1855 posts | 1 hour ago
0 likes

PRSboy wrote:

Are Road CC going to write an article with reactions to the article on reactions to the article on the share use path collision?

Let's take it to the forum...

reply quote

Avatar
peted76 replied to chrisonatrike | 2081 posts | 15 min ago
0 likes

chrisonatrike wrote:

PRSboy wrote:

Are Road CC going to write an article with reactions to the article on reactions to the article on the share use path collision?

Let's take it to the forum...

Lets see if there's an article written about reactions to the article on reactions to the article in this weeks newsletter, I bet there is.. if we're lucky, it might get some more reaction.. and might then see an article written about reactions to the article on reactions to the article from the newsletters article in a round up of the years best articles!

reply quote

Avatar
don simon fbpe replied to PRSboy | 3181 posts | 11 min ago
0 likes

I think article is excellent, I can't be arsed wading through all the comments on the original article and Ryan appears to have picked on some of the more intelligent reactions and comments.

reply quote

Avatar
whtefram | 3 posts | 2 hours ago
1 like

I never gave bikes on shared use paths a second thought as a problem.

Then I walked my 4 month old daughter in a pram down a local towpath and found after a few polite yet enthusiastic riders passed us at speed I found myself unable to relax.

I've decided a towpath is not a place i'll be taking the pushchair anymore.

reply quote

Avatar
hawkinspeter replied to whtefram | 8395 posts | 2 hours ago
1 like

Just got back from a short holiday in Brecon Beacons. Mrs Hawkinspeter and I walked the towpath from Pencelli to Talybont-on-Usk and back again a couple of times and also from Pencelli to Brecon (it was lovely weather too). We encountered a mere handful of cyclists and whenever we heard a cycle bell, we stepped off the path (it's really narrow most of the way) to let them go past (they all responded with a thank you). We encountered quite a few dog-owners and some were on leads (their dogs that is) and some weren't, but the ones not on a lead were controlled and held for when we walked past (presumably to stop an enthusiastic dog with muddy paws jumping up at us). We did stop to pet one tiny terrier on a lead that turned out to be a bit bitey, but in a playful, non-hurting fashion, but then we're both fans of dogs so are keen to stop and say hello.

It's just a case of being sensible. If you're cycling on a shared path, then you're going to have to slow down and be very careful around dogs and children. If you're walking a dog, then you need to be responsible for whatever it may suddenly decide to do.

reply quote

Avatar
Grahamd replied to hawkinspeter | 1209 posts | 1 hour ago
1 like

hawkinspeter wrote:

Just got back from a short holiday in Brecon Beacons.

Disgraceful, the Brecon Beacons are far too nice for a short holiday.