Have we done this yet?

The Canal River Trust are doing a survey on the use of towpaths

https://canalrivertrust.citizenspace.com/better-towpaths-for-everyone/running-and-cycling-on-towpaths/

Some of the questions do feel slightly biased, but we should probably up the number of responses from cyclists

Completed

Done.

No questions relating to dog mess, poor surfaces, excess litter, eroded canal banks. Is disappointed.

A lot of passive aggressive bollocks in the question wording there.

My response to Q7:

If you could make them like they are round here I’m sure you’d have fewer problems. Quagmire in the winter, deep ruts, slimy top coating in summer if it has rained in the last week, A frame barriers that don’t allow 90% of bikes through, much less trikes, wheelchairs or prams. Then if anyone does brave it, run the gauntlet of fishermen with long carbon poles laid over the path, or pulled back into your way unexpectedly. I guess we’re supposed to lucky to be part of the National Cycling Network at all.

Hi

done

I thought it was potentially biased survey that could lead to ‘bad’ figures.

Collected a lot of information where the options included ‘cycling’ as the problem. No way of recording other ime common canal problems
– dogs(crap and lack of control)
– unsharing walkers
– enforced carbon pole hop competitions

OP thanks for the heads up. Done.

Yes it’s a bit “anti” cyclists but I would guess the vast majority of complaints are about cyclists riding too fast.

I gave up halfway through, it’s ridiculously worded and it’s nothing to do with “usage,” it’s aimed at runners and cyclists allegedly going too fast.

For instance, how am I supposed to differentiate between commuting / sports / leisure cyclists? Do they think I stop and ask everyone where they’re going?

done.

canal path riding is a daily thing for me.
very good round west Yorkshire too.

Done. Seems to be biased towards urban/sanitised towpaths. The idea of a speed bump on most of the towpaths round here is laughable, it’s barely possible to walk on them at peak-mud times of the year. Also nothing about fishing people who are one of the main problems locally with a rod across the towpath every 100m.

Done but didn’t answer the questions about which users go to fast etc.
I genuinely didn’t know that pedestrians had right of way on towpaths.

Done.

I get the feeling this is purely something to beat us with.

There was a piece in The Times about it last week.
Came across as very anti cycling.

Cougar just submit pro cycling answers “no there is never a problem” etc. Sadly these surveys are a bit of a joke as you can submit them multiple times.

I genuinely didn’t know that pedestrians had right of way on towpaths.

I treat pedestrians as having the right of way everywhere.

There was a piece in The Times about it last week.
Came across as very anti cycling.

I am not surprised, wide flat towpath with a hardpack gravel surface or even tarmaced. I think we all know there will be a subset of riders who will tank along there expecting walkers to step aside and dogs to be on a lead or “under control”

It was The Telegraph.
link.

Everyone uses the towpaths round here – much safer than the road.
Get the odd idiot riding too fast, usually kids or middle aged blokes on ‘proper’ mtb’s.
I assume they’re just people who haven’t used the towpath much and have no idea how busy it can get.

On summer weekends many stretches are absolutely packed. Best to walk with your bike and enjoy the view or use the road.

Pretty dire survey that. I’ve never seen a conflict between users about speed on my canal.

Dogs off leads jumping under the wheels of cyclists, or, more importantly, into the canal full of water voles, despite all the signs telling dog owners not to let their dogs do this, are the biggest problem on our canal.

It’s easy to see what responses they are after. Just play the game and answer the other way 🙂

What scottroutes says …

BTW this is how opinion polls work, slant the questions a certain way and then do post survey “adjustment analysis” (ie making doubly sure you get the answer the person paying for the poll wants)

I live near the canal so use the towpath a lot. I have honestly never seen any problem regarding speed so I have said this.

I also consider myself a user of the towpath, whether I run, walk, take my child, cycle etc is not relevant and I don’t think putting people into these boxes does much good.

Nothing about fishing and this is the only group who I have ever had problems with. Receiving abuse for riding a bike and just generally (including walking) having problems getting past if there are lots of them as they block the path.

Put all this in the comments section at the end as the questions don’t really address this.

Yeah, I did the same, just ticked the boxes to say never had a problem with speeding users then used the comments section to criticise them for their choice of questions!

The bias is pretty easy to identify.
FWIW, Manchester have spent a lot of money doing up some sections of towpath withihn the city and branding them as “cycleways” which seems to involve lots of mini speed humps and a forest of signage on metal poles saying dismount, give way, slow down, take care and other such useful stuff.

Biggest problem I encounter on towpaths is some dog walkers. Some of them have no concept of what to do when a cyclist is in the vicinity, and the twenty yards either side of every bridge is more poo than towpath.

I get the odd speed demon on a bike, but it’s rare.

Done.

Same as everyone else, put in loads of comments about wayward dogs – on and off leads – and the fishermen blocking the path etc. Definitely biased away from cyclists, especially the speed questions.

This question assumes that “people cycling too fast” is actually a problem – and not just a generic whinge by a self-selecting group of old miseries who will be dead soon.

This was my response to the last question…

Done, also pointed out that they need to gather data on whether people are really moving too fast – or if it’s a perception which may not be accurate.

And told them about the time a drunk fisherman shouted at me after I nicely asked him to move his rods from the path.

Wish I’d thought to mention the menace of retractable dog leads which you can’t see – maybe someone else could pop that in?

Now I’m off for a gongoozle.

Don’t tell the wife.

Submitted.

My 2 issues tend to be;
1. Dog Walkers- dogs off leads, chasing me or not having any awareness of me being nearby.
2. Fisherman- long rods and kit completely blocking the footpath, then getting in a hump when you want to get past.

Fishermen with their rods are worse, although I did get my wheel bitten by a dog once. That was probably karma for riding over one of said fishermans poles when I was young.

Glad to see the ‘I usually jump over them’ option for the speedbump question. 😀

walkers – groups of them full width across the path, so nothing can pass

fishermen – with carbon rods right across the path, and they get annoyed when I jump over them

joggers – that despite calling to them/ringing bell etc, cant hear a word as they have their noise cancelling headphones on. They then get surprised when I cycle past them !!

fishermen – with carbon rods right across the path, and they get annoyed when I jump over them

I refer the honorable Cozz to the post above. It’s worse when you DON’T jump over them. 😀 😳

Ahh we’ve done this 🙂

It’s a poorly worded, badly edited, biased study. However, it is still worth replying to all the way through even if you get angry at it.

It will still process if you don’t fill in all the answers – you can then leave comments. Or in my case, a small essay.

Twitter gets a response:

@CanalRiverTrust survey seems anti-cycling and running – little mention of other issues and opportunities ttps://goo.gl/NiWgwc

— Matt Robinson (@mattoutandabout) December 13, 2016

poor surfaces

That’s what makes them fun

doing up some sections of towpath withihn the city and branding them as “cycleways” which seems to involve lots of mini speed humps and a forest of signage on metal poles saying dismount, give way, slow down

That’s the problem with ‘marketing’ them as commuting routes. It either doesn’t work, so they stay quiet enough to work for the few people who do use them. Or the marketing does work and then the towpath doesn’t work because it’s narrow, and right next to a canal, so they have to add signs, barriers, bumps etc to slow people down, making them less useful.

That’s not really/solely the CRT’s fault though, it’s down to local councils that try to push people towards towpaths in place of providing proper infrastructure.

Also done my response. Again, pretty rubbish survey. My perspective is also shaped from living on the canal for 5 years, as well as being a cyclist on it. It’s fairly typical of CRT’s very biased approach to certain groups that are inconvenient to them. The main point I commented on was that their ‘…drop the pace’ campaign is predicated on subjective judgements by other users which is impossible to judge, therefore ineffective at stopping conflict, and gifting a soundbite stick with which to beat a certain user group with. I’m lucky that most of the local canal is rural Kennet and Avon, so relatively quiet and not well surfaced (which is a good thing). I just can’t believe that fishing and dog walking/fouling gets no mention, as it’s what I encounter most. The regular dog bathing spots erode the canal and make breaches more likely.

Now I’m off for a gongoozle.

yeah, it lost me at gongoozle.

Though perhaps this category includes key user groups who otherwise seem to be omitted: the cheery drug misuse community, hanging around in the darker corners, as well as and the alfresco drinkers, with their louder presence, and the solitary music fans, headphones on and wandering randomly…

I’ve been verbally abused by several people, most of whom seem to believe that cyclists are not allowed on towpaths. There are a number of pedestrians who walk four abreast, ignore my bell to alert them to my presence then decide to lecture me about sharing space and riding too fast as I creep past them.
Most cyclists know that pedestrians have right of way on towpaths, pedestrians have right of way pretty much everywhere except motorways. Cyclists are usually more aware of these rules than pedestrians, as access rules for cycles in England are complex, where as pedestrian access rules are not. Also, walkers are never asked to justify themselves, whereas cyclist have to regularly, like in this not-so-subtle survey.
Since all the “Pedestrian Priority” signs went up, I have experienced an increase in hostility from pedestrians on towpaths. I believe that the signs have inflamed the negative, anti-cyclist and entitled views of a particular group of towpath users, who now seem to have decided that a cycle overtaking them at 5mph after a courteous ringing of my bell is too fast.
Don’t even get me started on people not cleaning up after their dogs.
People who wish to ride their bikes or run at a dangerous speed will do so whatever you attempt to do. A good deal of current attempts at speed calming are
barriers to access for many groups (A frames, Chicanes), but provide little deterrent for those who wish to behave in an antisocial manner.
As usual, you appear to be pandering to the same group of negative, anti cyclist walkers whose sense of entitlement wants us off the towpaths and causes
exaggeration of the danger cyclists pose.
I think you should be putting up signs that simply promote the sharing of the space, that make clear the responsibility of all user groups to be considerate of
others, as, for too long, the actions of the very few (in my experience) have been used as a stick with which to beat cyclists.

Got a bit ranty… 😳

Bravo fin25!

😆

I love that you could win a Wiggle voucher…..

Really can’t belive that people dishing got no mention. Well it did from me…

The survey is at https://canalrivertrust.citizenspace.com, which means it’s controlled by citizenspace.com. It has a CRT logo on the page, but it’s hosted at citizenspace.com.

I can find no mention of it on https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/
In fact, https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/national-consultations says there are no national consultations taking place.

It’s very likely that citizenspace are genuinely running it on behalf of CRT, but not impossible that they’ve been hired by somebody else. Anyone asking for data should introduce the survey on their own site, with a https url, so that you know it’s genuine, and give a link to the survey host.

Fishermen with their rods are worse

I don’t see a problem. They’re hard to see and not much a barrier. (-:

Bravo fin25!

Indeed, well said.

It’s very likely that citizenspace are genuinely running it on behalf of CRT, but not impossible that they’ve been hired by somebody else.

Absolutely, twas my first thought when I saw the URL.

I can find no mention of it on https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/
In fact, https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/national-consultations says there are no national consultations taking place.

Might be worth alerting them that someone is running a ‘survey’ in their name that they’ve no knowledge of…