There are a couple of Cyclists Dismount signs on my local loop bookending a short stretch of windy path beside a river. I ignore them if it’s clear (and manoeuvre through the weird gate thing) or slow up for walkers and ride through when it’s clear again. THere’s also an ‘Unsuitable for cyclists’ sign that i also ignore as the path is approx 4ft wide with rivers either side. It’s more than suitable 😀 When it’s busy most folk i meet along this path are courteous and friendly but last week one older chappie (with dog off a lead) muttered as i slowed to pass “and that’s why cycling is banned on this path’. I almost bit but replied …if you can’t be happy on a glorious day like this, then there’s no hope for you… and cycled off. Of course i made the sounds you make when calling a dog over and his pooch followed me up the path a few hundred yards (with him chasing/calling after it). Grumpy cock!

My general rule is, if it’s at a road crossing I’ll ride, if there is no-one walking on a shared path behind one of these signs, I’ll ride (slowly)and if it’s busy, I’ll generally walk (except on Sunday when I rode and paid the price).

I like this sign:

The same sign but without the red stripe means “no cycling”, adding the red stripe means it’s banning something, so it means “no no cycling”, or “cycling mandatory”.

Walking is illogical though, when the alternative is to ride at walking pace (which is an acceptable alternative for me when it is busy). Nobody gains from you being twice the width by walking your bike.

Walking is illogical though, when the alternative is to ride at walking pace (which is an acceptable alternative for me when it is busy). Nobody gains from you being twice the width by walking your bike.

Same reason I drive at 60 past schools. If I’m only there half the time there’s 50% less chance of a kid running out infront of me. 50% less traffic on the road too.

Thanks for that completely irrelevant analogy

Maybe you could explain what the advantage is of pushing a bike at walking pace compared to riding a bike at walking pace?

I’m surprised the OP saw one at all. I thought our local council (Stafford BC) had bought them all.

And we have a bridge with a cyclepath identical to the one philjunior is describing here too.

Maybe you could explain what the advantage is of pushing a bike at walking pace compared to riding a bike at walking pace?

Control, remember your talking about the general public on £100 bikes, not the average uberskilled forum whore.

My general rule is, if it’s at a road crossing I’ll ride, if there is no-one walking on a shared path behind one of these signs, I’ll ride (slowly)and if it’s busy, I’ll generally walk (except on Sunday when I rode and paid the price).

+1

I do believe the signs should say “please” and “during peak times/busy periods”

We were talking about tenfoot, and then about me (and by extension everybody else on here) – I don’t suppose the people you’re referring to will ever read my comments. It’s not even particularly difficult to ride a bike at walking pace.

Agree, I would just ride at walking pace.

We were talking about tenfoot, and then about me (and by extension everybody else on here) – I don’t suppose the people you’re referring to will ever read my comments. It’s not even particularly difficult to ride a bike at walking pace.

Are we not into people with skillz and good cars not having to comply with speed limits territory here? Digital ‘rules’ are easier to explain and enforce. Society must walk at the pace of the slowest member of the community and all that.

There is a definite angst in this counrty about people cycling ‘where they shouldn’t’. I was walking along a path which has a non-legally enforceable no cycling sign (long story). Bloke was cyling ahead of me at walking pace behind other pedestrians. BSO but under perfect control. Sure enough some old codger mouths off about no cycling to him. You think think to yourself why? As aracer says he is going at the same speed as everyone else, he’s under perfect control & he is taking up less space than if he pushes. What exactly is the problem? FWIW I don’t cycle where I shouldn’t so the issue doesn’t affect me personally, it just seems that people get upset at the very thought that the rules aren’t beimg followed.

tinas already tried (and failed with) that analogy.

We’re discussing whether or not to obey a sign which isn’t obligatory when not obeying it causes nobody any harm. As suggested by the OP, when we have signs telling drivers to get out of their cars I’ll take these signs more seriously.

larrydavid – Member
Anyway, these signs… what is there status? Should they be ignored?

Create a Strava segment for it, shout “coming through” and ignore to your heart’s content …

We’re discussing whether or not to obey a sign which isn’t obligatory when not obeying it causes nobody any harm. As suggested by the OP, when we have signs telling drivers to get out of their cars I’ll take these signs more seriously.

Sigh.

OK. I’ll go with should those of us with skillz and who generally go about looking like cyclists not set an example and not ride through, even a walking pace, because to the knuckle draggers, the unskilled and kids it sets an example of it’s ok to do so when they are not armed with the sophistication to understand why it was ok for us to do it and what we did to make it ok?

I’m a complete hypocrite btw as I frequently ignore such signs and ride respectfully slowly where I should not ride at all. In fact I’m off into town in a minute on a route with 200m of footpath. Bite me.

The underpasses near Bitterne precinct have those blue “cyclist dismount” signs at both ends, all that is required is riding at a speed and a manner depending upon who else is using the underpass at the time i.e. if there are pedestrians, pootle along and either ring your bell or turn the volume knob on your freewheel to 11 so they are aware you are there.

Northam Bridge had a fairly major bit of maintenance done to it in the last few years, where the contractors managed to lay fresh tarmac over a vast majority of the blue shared pavement signs embedded on the surface. It’s been a shared use pavement for years, at least 10+.
Yet since this balls up by the contractors, I’ve had one twonk almost walk into me while busy on his mobile and another twonk tell me he is sick of cyclists riding on pavements where they should not be (both while I was riding with due care and attention for the situation in hand). I had to put them both straight and tell them it is an official shared path and that is the reason the path on both sides is in excess of 2m.

If only the blue shared path signs could be made visible again, I could then tell other twonks that the signs are not warning them of bikes falling from the sky, or beware of bikes above while walking along the river bed… 😉

In the OP’s situation, I’d certainly go-slow while riding upon seeing that advisory sign the first time, in case there is a hazard on the shared path. Unless things appeared to change, I’d then only go-slow on future rides if there were other users on the shared path, while being ready to brake.

No – because the signs are still stupid, and the only possible analogy with driving cars is that drivers aren’t expected to do anything optional which would inconvenience them, however much it would improve the life of other road users. I already set an example by not riding like a twonk.

OK. I’ll go with should those of us with skillz and who generally go about looking like cyclists not set an example and not ride through, even a walking pace, because to the knuckle draggers, the unskilled and kids it sets an example of it’s ok to do so when they are not armed with the sophistication to understand why it was ok for us to do it and what we did to make it ok?

I’d go with no, cos as above, my 5yo on her second ride could negotiate one of such “hazards” without bother. And she’d be scared enough by anything she couldn’t ride to get off and push.

Hold on a minute

Yeah, cos there weren’t enough pictures on page 1! 😆

Presumably not of the specific sign the OP saw. Not that it really makes much difference as neither are legally enforceable, but I find it interesting if that is exactly what the OP saw that it’s different to the normal blue fixed sign – I’m tempted to argue even less important to obey as it’s got no official status at all, presumably just put out by the developers and possibly not even legal to put out.

it’s got no official status at all, presumably just put out by the developers and possibly not even legal to put out.

But who, at the Council, does one complain to? If it’s one of those gert big, road works kind-of signs?

You don’t, you just ignore it. Simples.

I saw a great sign when I was out earlier, a red circled ’20’ limit sign and an additional rectangular “SUGGESTED SPEED LIMIT” below, it took me a moment or two to process what the sign was actually saying.

Of course for the average tin boxer they’ll just see the number and maybe slow to ~25ish. The intent and the detail of the message are often subtly different…

Self negating signage is the absolute best…

Basically unless there’s a European directive, act of parliament, statutory instrument, code of practice and enforcing authority stood there with their warrant card having prenotified in the local rag 6 weeks in advance. **** it and **** anyone that gets in your way. Cos, singletrack.

Aracer, generally I agree with your logic, which is why I came a cropper on Sunday, as I was too far over to one side, fixated on people walking the other way and didn’t notice a tree stump, which I hit with my bars.

There is a bridge section I walk across if it’s busy, that is so narrow, I have to wheel the bike across on it’s back wheel and push from behind, to get the bars up over the height of the bridge parapet. In this case it would be very difficult to pass people coming the other way if I wheeled the bike in the traditional manner, and if I chose to ride it.

To clarify, it was a red temporary works type sign, as at the top of page 2 in this thread, which read ‘cyclists dismount’.

Exciting update: It was all gone when I rode there this evening. Rode through with impunity.