----- Original Message ----- From: "Adrian Stott" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, July 31, 2009 5:17 PM Subject: [canals-list] Re: Cycling on towpaths
> [email protected] wrote: > >>http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/ethicallivingblog/2009/jul/31/bike-blog-canal Where did bjg write that - was it on a newsgroup or on here? I can't see the original message you are quoting from. > > May I again suggest a proposed traffic rule for towpaths? It is: > > "Bicyclists keep to the non-water side of pedestrians they pass or > overtake". > > The key pedestrian activities on a towath is all on the water side. > Mooring, getting on and off boats, towing, angling. The only one that > isn't is walking unrelated to the waterway (except to look at it). And isn't cycling in the same category as "walking unrelated......." ? > > OTOH, bicyclists definitely prefer to keep away from the water, in > case they lose control and fall in. That seems to me a good reason for cyclists to use the water side - it might make them slow down a bit! > At the moment there is no rule for which side of a pedestrian a > bicyclist should pass. As a result, there is frequently confusion, > which can be quite dangerous. And, when a bicycle is overtaking a > pedestrian, it's not uncommon for the pedestrian to wander into his > way. There would be no problem if the cyclist stopped and gave priority to all other towpath users - and used a bell. > > The rule would solve most of this. Who is going to pay for all the signage and enfore the rules? > Of course, bicyclists would still keep left when passing each other, > and overtake other bicyclists on the right. ROFL. Do you really expect cyclists to take any notice of that? I think one of your market clearing rate solutions night work better ;-))) How much per mile should they pay? Phil
