Forum menu
I think this post has swung tack dramatically from "(should) Ramblers (be) on forestry trails?" to "should we ride without due care and attention on forestry trails?"
For what's it's worth, my answers are both no.
I think if there was a rash of honesty running through here most people would have to admit that they are unwilling, rather than unable, to slow down or stop.
On dedicated mtb trail or otherwise this is certainly a source of friction between mountain bikers and other people at large in the countryside. A rider keeping some or all of their speed because they are in their zone/keeping their flow/whatever appears to the more vulnerable party (anyone on foot) to be out of control/inconsiderate/dangerous. For this reason of difference in perception I have found that if I am really really obvious with my body language, and literally slow down to walking pace, then things get smoothed over a lot better.
Couldn't be bothered reading the whole thread.
So in answer to the question. We came across 2 elderley walkers who had missed the marker post for the footpath and instead started to climb the rather steep and narrow ( 2nd to last) descent at Penmachno.
Luckily someone shouted up from below (I'm always at the back) so I had some warning that maybe something/someone was on the trail. This was 3 years ago.
They were told that it really was quite dangerous, due to that part of the trail being narrow and steep sided. More so we were concerned for any trail users safety.
I don't know if Dalby is FC. but have come across mtbers riding the wrong way along the trails. This of course is a different issue.
Forgot to add that the couple didn't seem to be bothered that they were on the wrong trail and as far as we know they carried on walking upwards.
Dalby is FC - lots of locals ride things the wrong way, but usually in the evenings 😉
Saw a lone feller on zig-zags on sunday. he was going against the flow and I saw him early on before it gets too quick so that was lucky. He stepped aside and said hello so no probs there. The apologetic look on his face said that he knew it was an MTB trail, though.
Edit; sorry this is at Afan on the Wall trail.
I like to re ride sections in Dalby as I see fit - I guess it's trailbuilders prerogative as it helps us to understand what needs to be improved and sorted out later on. Yes, I walk up against the flow of traffic, but as a rider I'm fully aware of where I am and where riders are going to be should I meet one. The majority of the time, I'm able to walk up as riders go past me at a fair clip.
To be honest though, I wouldn't intentionally go out to ride Dalby in reverse, and we do pick late evenings to ride opposite sections of trail, fully in the knowledge that we shouldn't meet too many riders.
As for walkers on the trail, I believe that they shouldn't be there, and if they get knocked they shouldn't have any reason to complain as the trails are fully waymarked indicating that there is a risk of cyclists coming along at a high speed. We build trails to be fun and engaging, with the odd drop and jump - try stopping when you leave a 5 foot drop only to see a walker come around the corner lower down and walk up towards you! It's happened to me and I would have been riding with care and attention over the drop and into the landing, so then try and work out who is at fault on that one.
This happened on the Black DOA downhill descent in Dalby which has been built with a specific riding style in mind. And it's signposted as such as well. I suppose a walker can be absolved of blame if the choose to ignore a no entry sign at the bottom of the descent.
I have never had a near-miss with a walker on a purpose built trail.
Coming down one of the paths towards Coldharbour on Surrey Hills recently however I nearly ploughed into a bike that a gnarly MBUK child had left in the middle of the trail. Two corners further down his little free-sticker-encrusted friend had left another bike in the middle of the trail. I told them they were daft, which was a point they appeared to absorb.
Riding fast on the xc loop at Cwm Carn a few weeks ago I came around a corner to find a group of riders standing in the trail having a cluster-faff. I braked sharply, they scattered and looked a bit sheepish. A bit later in the afternoon I rounded another corner and just about avoided the guy riding in front of me, who had had a crash and was scrambling off the trail. We were both mildly alarmed but no harm was done.
I honestly don't think this is much of an issue. 🙂
Met a family on the last part of the Marin trail earlier this year but they got out of the way and I carried on past. Have gone past a few other groups over the years. If I'm on a bridleway or other right of way then I slow down a lot to go past. But if I'm on a marked MTB trail then I go past at a speed safe for me with in most cases is faster than the walkers think I should go at.
Off topic slightly, met a guy running up ditchling during this years London to Brighton, made me chuckle, climb was jam packed with riders pushing or riding, he was 60 odd and over-taking everyone including me!
I was at Coed-y-Brenin yesterday and got held up on one of the trails by a group of lads who looked like they were doing a basic introduction to orienteering.
It was no drama, as we were going pretty slow, but it would have been a different matter if they'd have been orienteering up one of the descents.
What was worrying was that they looked like they were part of an organised adventure training group, who obviously hadn't been adequately briefed about the dangers of wandering along clearly marked MTB trails.
The only close one I have had was a group of morons walking their bikes up one of the main lines on the cwmcarn DH. Needless to say my feelings were eventually made plain with a large number of 4 letter words.
I was informed at the next run that if I could have identified them they would have recieved a life ban on the uplift.
Complete morons and damn luckyI was just..... able to stop
This is a regular problem at Queen Elizabeth County Park (near Portsmouth/Petersfield) in Hants.
The signage is generally good and on the orange "expert" trail it's relatively hard to stray onto it without seeing the cycle signs. Having said that some "No Pedestrians" signs with appropriate safety warnings wouldn't go amiss if nothing else to protect the cyclists' rights in the event of a collision. Bearing in mind bikes are banned from ALL the other trails in the park, then I find it very frustrating that people still think its fair game to walk on the bike trails, the same people who would write to the Daily Mail if we pushed our bike down a footpath!
I don't blame the park management at all (keep up the good work on revising the orange route if you're reading this it's a big improvement).
I've stopped to speak to people (often families with loose dogs) and explained they are cycle only and they're putting themselves and others at risk and you generally get one of two responses:
1) sorry - didn't realise do you know a nice way we could go OR (sadly and more commonly)
2) a selection of F'ing and Jeffing about mountain bikers!
I met a family walking up the trail at Carbisdale near the end (Fairy trail I think) where it is rocky and painted arrows for direction on it. As it is open, they stood off the side of the track to let me past but they would have had to walk past a big sign with map of trail and bike code etc on it and a couple of waymarking posts to get there.
Think they just didn't expect to meet anyone as the car park was empty bar mine and theirs when I got back.
Whilst it would be great to have freedom to bomb down our tracks, keeping people off is always going to be hard and I guess you have to compromise, go faster than on bridleways etc but not flat out like if you are racing on a marshalled course.
I suspect more of us use cheeky trails regularly than walkers use our waymarked bike trails.
Doesn't mean we shouldn't have more access like discussed in ST51
Walkers on the Marin a couple of years back - given they looked like they were just brew / view / loo people rather than rascally ramblers I suspect they were just following a path and one path is the same as the next and they were having a bit of an explore.
I'd be interested to see what the liablility was if a group of walkers or horse riders deliberately takes a mountain biking route as they fundamentally believe paths (even bike routes) are for all.
I'd be interested to see what the liablility was if a group of walkers or horse riders deliberately takes a mountain biking route as they fundamentally believe paths (even bike routes) are for all.
I've been heavily involved with the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007, and I'm of the opinion that the organisation responsible for the trails could be prosecuted under that act if someone was killed on the trails. The act states:
1 The offence (1) An organisation to which this section applies is guilty of an offence if the way in which its activities are managed or organised—
(a) causes a person’s death, and
(b) amounts to a gross breach of a relevant duty of care owed by the organisation to the deceased.
and
Meaning of “relevant duty of care” (1) A “relevant duty of care”, in relation to an organisation, means any of the following duties owed by it under the law of negligence—
(a) a duty owed to its employees or to other persons working for the organisation or performing services for it;
(b) a duty owed as occupier of premises;
(c) a duty owed in connection with—
(i) the supply by the organisation of goods or services (whether for consideration or not),
(ii) the carrying on by the organisation of any construction or maintenance operations,
(iii) the carrying on by the organisation of any other activity on a commercial basis, or
(iv) the use or keeping by the organisation of any plant, vehicle or other thing;
On purpose built trails like the Marin trail, the organisation responsible is in serious danger by failing to provide adequate signage advising all trail users of the hazards involved.
While they may not be able to stop people walking up a trail, failing to point out the inherent dangers of doing so and on the flipside, failing to warn cyclists of the likelihood of meeting other trail users, is a serious flaw that should be addressed.
Great! You've come up with a reason for the FC to close all forests to cyclists because the stupid dicks can't control their bikes safely and are going to get the FC done for corporate mansalughter! Give yourself a gold star! 😀
Except that I think one would argue:
- Firstly, that a crash between a rider and a walker does not fall within the way that the organisation's activities are managed or organised, or that the way the activites are managed or organised does not cause the death because the acts that directly result in the crash intervene as the primary cause, and
- Secondly, that the FC does not owe a duty (as occupier of the premises or otherwise) to users of its land to warn them of the hazards posed by other such users' carelessness.
BoardinBob - what you state there would only make sense if the assumption for use of a bike trail was that the rider could proceed without some degree of caution. In other words, if the FC (or whoever) provided mountain bikers with a facility designed to be ridden flat-out without regard to anyone else and also failed to keep other users off said facility then yes, there would be negligence.
But that isn't the case. The missing piece in the logic is the (wrong) assumption that mountain bike trails are for racing on and that there is any kind of assurance that they will be clear of other users/hazards.
The "flaw" that should be addressed exists only in the mind of a minority - ie the wrong assumption that mountain bike trails are for flat-out riding.
In March of this year I went to Thetford Forest.I was on my second time round the black route and going like a ferkin train when I looked up to see a gold plated 100% knob coming the other way.....on a bike.
I also encountered several red socks and a couple without lids on bikes I personally wouldnt mount never mind ride.In all cases none of them were the slightest bit concerned. Guess whos not going back to Thetford in a hurry??
stercus acidit
I think BoardinBob has a point, but exaggerates its potential effects. The FC are specifically named in the Act as a body to which it applies, but the question is what constitutes "gross negligence" and how that fits in with the common law point of view that people should use a bit of common sense when undertaking potentially dangerous activities.
The "gross breach" test in the act refers to the seriousness of the breach and the risk of death that resulted. While user conflict is a serious problem, it's not the same thing as people physically getting hurt or killed, which is much much rarer.
GlenP, who said anything about racing?
In simplistic terms here's my approach.
On a shared trail that wasn't built for bikes, if I see non cyclists on the trail, I'll stop and pull to the side until they pass or move off the trail.
On a bike specific trail, if I see non cyclists on the trail, I won't stop but I'll warn them of my approach and ask them to move off the trail.
Simples.
er thanks for that everyone especially those who understood what I was asking and attempted to answer the actual questions I asked.
Its like rambler herding - posts never go in the direction you want them to for to long.
Anyway back to the tangent -
Seriously, the land owner is liable even if the walker in question willfully ignores the notice? ie - reads undertands, perhaps even comments on and then passes.
a dog running towards me on while I was going off the ladder at the Cwm Carn freeride section sticks in my mind!