Should pedestrians be permitted on bike paths?

[argggh]

This whole argument of whether electric bikes should be permitted on bike paths seems like a huge fake out to me.

Basically, the argument goes that electric bikes are a danger to pedestrians. Other non electric cyclists on the path are never included as someone electric bikes can be a danger to...

So it seems the argument against electric bikes is coming from a very pedestrian-centric point of view...basically a walkers vs. e-bikes spat, although some pedestrians have been known to even object to non electric bicycle on "their" path..

This all makes me conclude the question is being posed backwards...and unfairly backwards.

The question shouldn't be "Should electric bikes be banned from bicycle paths?" The question should be "Should pedestrians be banned from bike paths?"

It's a ...bike ....path...Why are you on a bike path if you are walking???

Do you walk in the middle of a highway? No, you use the sidewalk.

In effect, what you're saying by wanting to ban electric bikes from, again, ...bike .... paths...is that they can neither go on bicycle paths nor sidewalks...of which you, as a pedestrian, can go on both...electric bikes, in your estimation, should be relegated to the risks and dangers of car roads...something you yourself won't have yourself subjected to...

Cars have roads. Bicycles have bike paths. Pedestrians have sidewalks. Simple. Stay on your sidewalk. You don't demand that cars be banned from the roads.

You don't walk in a car lane because you know cars are trying to get somewhere faster than walking.

Actually, I can't believe we've debated this for so long when the pedestrian view is so obviously a greedy one where they get two places to walk in safety and electric cyclists get none. If you think pedestrians are going to stop at electric bikes on bike paths, I can show you a few encounters with cyclists on YouTube.

It's clearly overreaching for control by pedestrians of something they shouldn't even be on in the first place. How pedestrians were allowed to not only claim access but expect preferential control over what is by name a Bike Path, when they already have sidewalks, has to be the biggest fake out I've ever seen.

Forget the bills controlling electric bikes on bike paths. The bills should be for banning pedestrians on bicycle paths.

I see it now. It finally clicked.

If I have no business on a sidewalk, then, as a pedestrian, you should have no business on a bike path. You certainly don't have any business walking down the middle of a car lane, as if you were a car.

 

[gogo]

Its difficult to put your post in perspective without knowing which part of the planet you are referencing.

[EDIT] I see you have USA listed in your profile.

I can't think of any bicycle-only paths near me, only bicycle-only lanes at the edge of the pavement. In my city, pedestrians are required to use sidewalks, and if none are adjacent to the roadway, are required face traffic at the left edge (which puts them in the bicycle lane).

The paths around me are designated as multi-use.

 

[argggh]

I'm in central New Jersey, where soccer mom's with baby carriages reign supreme.

I am saying the multi-use paths are the problem. Walkers and cyclists don't go together. Especially, since pedestrians have other places to walk.

 

[dogman dan]

Yes they should be permitted.

The peds endanger the bikes just as much as bikes endanger peds. It's that 1% that refuse to behave nice on the path that wreck it for everybody. Bike riders hauling ass in a tuck not looking, and the ped that never looks before making an abrupt change in their path.

When I commuted a multi use path daily, I went through the usual noob deal. Zooming the path at 30 mph. Then trying to use a horn, that just made it more unpredictable which way the startled ped would jump. Then finally realizing that I was too fast and slowing down. Along with slowing down, I stopped and had a chat with all the regulars on the route. 99%, when asked to walk to the right, and I'll pass you on the left got it immediately, and we got along fine. 1% told me to F off. One group made it a point of honor to walk three abreast in the center from then on. Whatever, I made it a point to wait till right on their asses, and honk that annoying and startling horn. Fortunately when winter came, they did not use the path at my commute time, so I only saw the three bitches for three months a year.

More recently, signage has been put up explaining the obvious. Bear right, pass on the left. Since I'm not there anymore explaining it anymore, 90% now walk and jog the center again. It's clearly an ongoing process to explain obvious road rules to walkers.

 

[Punx0r]

Cars have roads. Bicycles have bike paths. Pedestrians have sidewalks. Simple. Stay on your sidewalk. You don't demand that cars be banned from the roads.

You don't walk in a car lane because you know cars are trying to get somewhere faster than walking.

The same argument could be made in favour of banning bicycles (electric or otherwise) from roads.

Also, if you ban pedestrians from a cycle path you would be breaking the law if you suffered a breakdown and had to push your bike.

Electric bikes below the legal power/speed restrictions should be classified as bicycles and used in the same places. Above the legal limits they are motorcycles and should be on the road.

Rather than banning everything I would seek a situation where all roads/paths are shared in a responsible manner by all parties. The faster and heavier your mode of transport, the more responsibility you have to those more vulnerable. Lemming-like pedistrians on cycle paths* are annoying, just do your best.

* In the UK a cycle path is a pavement (sidewalk/path) where cyclists are permitted as well as pedestrians. The next one up is a bridleway (possibly unpaved) where horses are permitted in addition. Walking in the road is allowed except for on motorways (freeways) where it would be suicidal.

 

[argggh]

Yes they should be permitted.

The peds endanger the bikes just as much as bikes endanger peds. It's that 1% that refuse to behave nice on the path that wreck it for everybody. Bike riders hauling ass in a tuck not looking, and the ped that never looks before making an abrupt change in their path.

When I commuted a multi use path daily, I went through the usual noob deal. Zooming the path at 30 mph. Then trying to use a horn, that just made it more unpredictable which way the startled ped would jump. Then finally realizing that I was too fast and slowing down. Along with slowing down, I stopped and had a chat with all the regulars on the route. 99%, when asked to walk to the right, and I'll pass you on the left got it immediately, and we got along fine. 1% told me to F off. One group made it a point of honor to walk three abreast in the center from then on. Whatever, I made it a point to wait till right on their asses, and honk that annoying and startling horn. Fortunately when winter came, they did not use the path at my commute time, so I only saw the three bitches for three months a year.

More recently, signage has been put up explaining the obvious. Bear right, pass on the left. Since I'm not there anymore explaining it anymore, 90% now walk and jog the center again. It's clearly an ongoing process to explain obvious road rules to walkers.

LOL. I like how you started off with a "share and share alike" attitude while the longer you talked about pedestrians the darker the cloud got in your head. LMAO.

Just admit it, you would prefer pedestrians were not allowed on bike paths.

And they shouldn't be there. They have sidewalks. And if they are allowed on the same paths as bikes they shouldn't complain about it or expect control of the path to be subservient to their demands or presence. To me, since they have other protected places to walk, and choose not to walk there, they are nothing more than guests. Cyclists sometimes go on car roads but they don't have any expectations of taking over the roads and having cars banned from them.

 

[argggh]

The same argument could be made in favour of banning bicycles (electric or otherwise) from roads.

.[/quote]

Really the same argument can't be made because cyclist have no demand or expectation of banning cars from roads.

But you know pedestrians are going to use every little mishap on a trail between a cyclist and walker to advance an agenda that will restrict access by electric bikes to multi-use paths. We know that''s going to happen.

So yea, the problem isn't so much pedestrians being there as much as their continued presence will feed an agenda of banning electric bikes from multi-use trails. There will be more mishaps and the calls for banning electric bikes will become stronger.

That's why I say draw the line now and prohibit pedestrians from the multi-use paths and just leave them as bicycle paths.

Otherwise pedestrians will have multiple safe places to be while electric bike will have no safe places to travel.
I think that is very greedy of pedestrians when they already have the aforementioned places to travel all to themselves, like sidewalks, tracks and hiking trails.

 

[dogman dan]

You didn't ask if I liked sharing the path. :wink:

Fortunately, the paths here are typically pretty empty. Nobody walks or rides bikes really. But early summer mornings get crowded. All who do jog or ride have to take their exercise before the shoes start melting on the black asphalt path.

Ebike riders don't care how hot it is, hot summer days are great on the paths. All to myself. 30 mph again.

The safety issue is just a way of making them one use paths, for the lady and the buggy.

 

[molybdenum]

I can see we're talking about two different types of bike paths here.

The first is the multi-use path you see in parks and beachfront areas. Best to ride nice and slow here because kids and dogs are constantly veering onto the path and generally doing random things. I think pedestrians should definitely be allowed on these.

The second type of bike path are desgnated bike lanes, often placed between a busy road and the sidewalk - these are for hauling ass. These paths tend to be narrow and pedestrians here would be forcing cyclists into traffic. I don't see why pedestrians would ever need to use this type of path, as the sidewalk is just to the right and it is far safer.

If I'm using a multi-use park type bike path, I ride nice and slow. If I'm using a roadside bike lane, I'm going to cruise. I've only had one close call:

I was commuting from work on a local designated bike lane on a non-electric hybrid after dark in torrential rain. This bike lane was to the right of a busy street and had a huge grassy area just to the right; there was no sidewalk on this side of the road and it was poorly lit with no overhead street lights. I've commuted this stretch of road hundreds of time and never saw a pedestrian walking in the bike lane.

So here I was crusising along with water pouring down my eyes and I heard a dog bark. I saw the dog standing in the park, a bright orange irish setter and just in time I noticed reflection from the adidas symbol on the shoe of a nordic walker - dressed all in black - standing in the center of the designated bike lane. I swerved and our clothes actually rubbed as I brushed past him at 35-40kph.

I'd say pedestrians definitely should not be using these designated roadside bike lanes.

Edit: A pic is worth a thousand words; I was riding home from work today and took this in the exact spot I almost mowed down the nordic walker last winter.

 

[cal3thousand]

I don't have a problem with peds using a bike path if they are courteous and attentive to the main users of the path... bikes. What they shouldn't do is expect that they have the all mighty "right" to use it as they please and be reckless while bikers have to mitigate pedestrian stupidity.

I am referring to those that walk 3 wide, covering up all of one lane and half of the opposite, Those that leave their dogs to wander and stretch their retractable leashes to create clotheslines, Those that meander aimlessly with headphones back and forth across lanes, etc.

And what gets me the worst is when peds insist on using the bike path when there is CLEARLY a parallel pedestrian path 3 feet away.

 

[Eskimo]

Here in Finland the situation for all cyclists is ackward as far as laws are considered.
Almost all our paths are basically so-called MUT"s. Mixed paths. Then our law says that pedestrians have the right of way on MUT"s.
They can walk anywhere they want to. So cyclists are not equal with pedesterians on MUT"s. If something happens, law says it"s always cyclist to blame.
THEN our law says that it is illegal to ride on the road with a bicycle, if there is a MUT available. Usually there is.
So, cyclists basically do not have equal status anywhere with others. MUT"s are meant for bicycles, but bicycles are not equal there with pedesterians according to law. Our laws still dates back on times when we were very car-based country.
Problem is our MUT-network, which is a shared lane technically. Swedish have done this so much better, they don"t basically have MUT"s. On their network cycle paths are separated on the road. Bicycle path is part of the road there, cyclists race with cars, not with pedesterians. That"s a good network for E-bikes, no pedestrians complaining about too fast cyclists, car drivers are only happier when cyclists are faster.
It"s funny how they always claim that "cycling is a sport", but then say that we ride too fast.
Cycle lanes should be part of the road, like in Sweden. Problem solved.

The Stockholm way:

http://www.kaupunkifillari.fi/blog/2014/04/05/kuvia-tukholmasta-reunakiveton-pyoratien-jatke/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Kaupunkifillari%2FgsTC+%28Kaupunkifillari+Helsinki%29

 

[Sunder]

We do have bike only paths here (Sydney, Australia). But I've been told to "get off the footpath" by an old woman literally standing on top a bike symbol.

It doesn't matter if pedestrians are permitted on bike paths or not. They'll use them. The only reassurance I have is that I'm unlikely to be hit up with a multi-million dollar law suit, if I do accidentally hit one. Even that's no reassurance if I get tested for 201 watts on the bike either, as then it becomes a motorcyclist riding on a bike path, and it's up for the judge to determine who committed more wrong - the pedestrian walking where they should not have been, or the "motorcyclist" riding on a bike path.

 

[tomjasz]

Bike paths here are multi use. They would not exist were it not for walkers. Roadways with sections painted out for bicycles have no pedestrians, but often run along side grassy boulevards between the roadway and sidewalks. Riding bicycles is allowed on sidewalks. So far E bikes are still bicycles and have all the rules and privileges of their class. Personally the last thing I'd do is make noise and complain over the shared access. I just slow down and relax. Especially on a recreational path. They will never be maintained as well as a single use pathway. At least not here in small city MN.

 

[dogman dan]

Re the bike lane comments. I ride 6 miles of bike lane every day I ride. Have to, to get anywhere further.

There is no sidewalk. So the peds walking the many miles between where poor people live and where the bus service starts pretty much have to walk in the bike lane.

I learned the hard way, to improve my lights to ride at night. One morning, this guy was walking in my bike lane wearing all black. I doubt I could have seen him in time with car lights. I hit him at 27 mph. All he did was get spun around as I brushed him. I flipped end over end several times. I was already crashing due to the extreme lunge trying to miss him. I could take a car lane, but only if nobody is coming. The AM commute is of course when the road lane is packed. And they are not exactly wide awake either. Or even looking out the window.

Now I won't ride till the dawn breaks, and I can see a guy in black. In daylight, I have lots of time to avoid these guys, and if I have to stop to let a car pass, so be it. No big deal.

But those bitches that make a point of walking the middle on the MUT, grrr. Those three just decided to f with me.

My worst case, I nearly got in a fistfight with 50 agro males insisting bikes were not allowed. Talk about hogging a trail, 50 roid munchers all jogging 5 abreast refusing to yield. I told them bring it, the cops will love 50 young dudes beating up an old man with white hair. I told them I had a cam going, even though I didn't.

Most of the peds simply never thought about it. Do you read signage while walking? Of course not. Now days people constantly walk into light posts while staring at the phone. You can't expect them to read the sign they just walked right into.

 

[SouthWindDuck]

Why yes! They mostly are bigger then me any way....

 

[Ykick]

People just suck. Either by stupidity, ignorance and/or moral indifference. East coast is much, much different compared to paths and similar in western open space(s).

There are many places along east coast that don't have sidewalks - bridge paths for example. Gotta share and gotta be vigilant.

Here's a couple quick videos of recent pedestrian behavior:

I just stopped and waited for 'em to pick a side.
[youtube]sl25N1hJ3KE[/youtube]
And this chick is/was totally clueless...
[youtube]5r-FcwofPOI[/youtube]
Here's one that demonstrates it doesn't need to be a path - these folks (possibly LE cadets?) didn't seem to mind they were not paying much attention in the middle of the frocking street...
[youtube]ihsxdkdaPTg[/youtube]

Luckily, with assistance I just watch my speed around these idiots and leave myself plenty of buffer to react to whatever bullshit they may decide to pull. And they will decide to do whatever they wanna do. Can't change it but we can be prepared and handle ourselves in a manner so that nobody gets physically harmed and/or tarnish OUR image as eBikers.

Bottom line - It's still better dealing with idiot pedestrians than Oscar Grope's 2 tons of hurtling machinery....

 

[MadRhino]

Imagine when it is a single track mountain trail, and you get out of a downhill corner at 40 Mph, with a dog walker right in the middle of the trail 15 ft ahead.
You are left with only 2 possibilities:
Riding off the trail, break your bike and risk your life or...
Aiming to the dog and pray for the best

The second solution is giving you the best chances by far
and has the merit of scaring the sh*it out of them

 

[kriskros]

they make good slalom markers :lol:

 

[alsmith]

I use part of the (UK) National Route 1 cycleway. The route is currently 1, 695 miles long, and is part of the 3,750 mile North Sea Cycle Route going though eight different countries, so I can tell you about the 10 miles of it I use :lol:

It's usually quiet, busiest in the morning with more dog walkers, then walkers, then bikes- except for one day a year when there's some kind of bike ride event (time to use the roads. Everyone you see is fine apart from the Blyth riverside stretch where there are:
- 2 kids who tear along the path on one of them stripped motorbikes without looking and I'm pretty sure no brakes- or maybe they just don't use them,
- 1 very grumpy bad tempered old an with 2 or 3 dogs running loose. It doesn't matter how polite or carefully you approach him- slowly, sound a horn, talk or shout out a warning he's always the same bad tempered old git.

 

[USAEBIKECO]

I have been riding ebikes for 5 years now. Not once have I ever been stopped by police. I ride wherever I want, accept for highways.

Pedestrians can go wherever they wish, to include bike lanes.

 

[aroundqube]

I'm in central New Jersey, where soccer mom's with baby carriages reign supreme.

I am saying the multi-use paths are the problem. Walkers and cyclists don't go together. Especially, since pedestrians have other places to walk.

Nope! Riders on horseback reign supreme. It's the law. But, they are not required to clean up the trail hazards left behind. Dog owners have to scoop da poop! Cyclist yields to pedestrian. Cyclist and pedestrian both yield to horse rider. Also see NJMV law regarding sharing the road. MV operator has to yield to the horse rider, but the bicycle is a "vehicle". Rules of "vehicle" operation apply to both MV and bicycle.

 

[The fingers]

Nope, a blind person with a white cane has the right of way. :wink:

 

[argggh]

I'm in central New Jersey, where soccer mom's with baby carriages reign supreme.

I am saying the multi-use paths are the problem. Walkers and cyclists don't go together. Especially, since pedestrians have other places to walk.

Nope! Riders on horseback reign supreme. It's the law. But, they are not required to clean up the trail hazards left behind. Dog owners have to scoop da poop! Cyclist yields to pedestrian. Cyclist and pedestrian both yield to horse rider. Also see NJMV law regarding sharing the road. MV operator has to yield to the horse rider, but the bicycle is a "vehicle". Rules of "vehicle" operation apply to both MV and bicycle.

Maybe but how often do you see a horse rider? Even in an equestrian town where I am right now, I rarely see a horse and rider on the road.

 

[zener]

Back on topic.
A city of my dreams would have highways only for lightwight + narrow electrik or human powered vehicle. With a speedlimit of 60km/h and it have to be build as a 2nd infrastructure away from the heavy traffic.
The oncoming traffic would be walled that no head on crashes with 2x 60km/h would be possible.
Than the pedestrian problem and many other problems would disapear.

I like the Netherlands cycle road standard but thats even for my dreams not enough

 

[dogman dan]

A few curmudgeons aside, I have to agree we have it pretty nice here out west. I had to learn to share the path during some peak use hours in the hot summer, and rarely have any problems sharing the bike path that is used as a sidewalk. I just had to learn to bring a better light, slow down, or just ride in the road in the dark. Now not working, no need to ride in the dark. So that helps.

The 50 body builders was quite a fluke. I have no idea what they were thinking, but they were definitely not townies. Mostly the paths are pretty empty. Nobody really rides. And now they build new ones along all new major arterial roads as we sprawl. The existing paths make a loop around town 30 miles long, and it's a really great ride in summer, when they are deserted after 8:00 am.

Nevertheless, it does make you grind teeth when you come to the baby buggy lady, oblivious in her phone. Dead center every time.