General Cycling Discussion - Are Bike Paths Really This Stupid?

<rant>

I've had my road bike about a week, ridden about 100 miles on the local bike path. I've never seen so many acts of brazen stupidity in all my life.

The bike paths around here are really nice, they're smooth and have a center divider line painted on the surface just like a road. In fact, they even have arrows painted that indicate the direction that traffic flows.

But the bike paths are congested with fat women walking 6 abreast, blocking all traffic, families enjoying picnics in the middle of the path, bikes laying all over the lanes as overweight middle aged rubes from the suburbs struggle to repair their toy bikes.

Two days ago I came sailing around a gentle curve at 25 mph and nearly hit a woman who was changing her baby's diapers in the middle of the bike path!

These rubes seem completely oblivious to the fact that others are using the bike path as they wobble to and fro, often swerving and darting into oncoming traffic. Peddling along at 25 RPM, they often make 180 degree turns without so much as a glance behind them.

In a way I admire them, peddling along blissfully unaware of their surroundings, foolish grins on their faces as they wobble and weave all over the bike path.

I've always wondered why real bicyclists seemed to prefer riding in the street instead of the bike paths. Now I now, bike paths are stupid!

Thanks for letting me vent.

</rant>

Do you still have your old bike for a beater??----in a loud booming voice announce your presence----do this while riding your old bike-----if they don't pay attention run them over-------you would be amazed how orderly our trails are here.

Brutal yes----but effective.

You should see about getting a sign posted to warn people not to do stupid S**T on this friggin bike path. Or you could make your own signs and post them your self.

The sign should say something like this (this should solve the problems)...

BIKE PATH RULES
1. Leave room for other people to enjoy this path.
2. Don't picnic in the middle of the path you friggin idiots!
3. If you weigh over 300 pounds, you are not allowed on this path.
4. Users of this bike path who do not follow these rules are subject to beatens with a 2x4.

There's a reason they're called road bikes, not path bikes. I avoid paths as much as possible, especially on weekends. When they totally outlaw anyone but cyclists on bike paths, I refuse to use them unless absolutely necessary. I'm tired avoiding the abovementioned rubes, rollerbladers, pedestrians, etc. A couple of weeks ago, while on one path, I got stuck behind two rollerbladed bimbos pushing one of those baby carts up a slope. Yeah, so much for your kids' safety. What is it with these stupid women who push their kids' strollers on the bike path or across the bike path without so much as even looking around them? And when you warn them off, they curse at you. Fine, I'll run into you and your kid- obviously they believe that if a cyclist rather than a car runs into them it won't hurt at all! So yep, I'll stick to the road- a few potholes may be tough but it's better than going 5 mph behind some moron on rollerblades.

Often people use bike paths cause they don't know how to ride in traffic. Riding at 25 mph on a busy bike path is not wise either. It's better to generate good will and help educate others of the rules of the road.

Many of these trails are multiple use and others do enjoy them. Without the walkers and joggers and rollerbladers and etc... there would be little or no money for the paths. If you want to ride hard, then ride hard, but be responsible and find a safe place to do it.

Wells

To me its not that bike paths are stupid, it is that no one takes them seriously. They are not much more than exaggerated sidewalks that are never swept clean of debris by the action of passing vehicles (which roads are); are never properly banked on sharper turns (like most roads are); are never properly paved and bedded to avoid frost heaves (like many roads are); they are counterproductive, since they convince people that bikes are somehow weird vehicles that are not entitled to their share of the road (which they are entitled to); and they waste space and energy, since they require new asphalt and an expanded right of way by the roadside (when a shoulder would do the same thing with little additional cost). They are just the result of of those who want to do SOMETHING, ANYTHING to appeal to a basic self-interested lobby. While I agree they have a very limited role in heavily traveled urban areas or over bridges/etc with restricted spans, in general they are a waste of time and money.

roughstuff

Most "bike paths" are really multi-use paths, either by use or by law. Many of them are posted with 15mph speed limits. Taking a walk with your dog or your kids, going skating or 'boarding or jogging, are all legitimate recreational uses of multi-use paths, which are not really designed to be thoroughfares.

And whether a MUP is designated as such or is simply used that way by the citizens, it's not an appropriate venue for road riding.

On a MUP, a bike is the top of the food chain. They have to yield to everybody. Bikes that fail to yield, that yell at peds to get out of their way, that brush past people at high speeds and scare them, are obnoxious, IMO.

Ride your road bike on the road if you want to ride at vehicular speeds. If you have to use a path, be prepared to yield.

RichC

in kansass, the nw corner to be exact, our bike paths are also multi use paths, but are not concrete. They are little more than cowpaths dug into the riverside. It is very rare that I encounter someone on the path, but when i do, i go off the path, or stop to let them by. It is simple courtesy to do this. Has anyone driven in Texas lately? I wondered why most of the natives pulled over into the emergency lane(which is a full lane wide) to let you by. I asked a hi-po why this was done, and he told me that it was a state wide effort to encourage people to spend $$ in TX, if they were treated better by the natives. You know what, it worked, I made a concious effort to spend more $$ per town than I normally do, just to keep this courtesy thing going. East coast drivers need to learn a thing or two from the southern boys.

OK, judging by some of the responses, Bike paths are not really intended for bikes, and if riding on a bike path, one should yeald to all other traffic.

My original comment was bike paths are stupid. Telling me that the stupid people rule and If I don't like it I should ride in the street doesn't disprove my comment.

Some of the replies said I was "unwise" to ride my bike on a bike path, another reply insinuated that I was "scaring" others by riding my bike on the bike path, still another reply mentioned a new phrase for me, "Vehicular Speeds"...I'm gonna have to look that one up.

Anyway, one thing we all agree on, a bike path is no place for a bike. Next time there's a proposition to construct or extend a so called bike path, I will vote no as bike paths are designed to exclude bicyclists.

Party on!

Originally posted by Richard_Rides
Next time there's a proposition to construct or extend a so called bike path, I will vote no as bike paths are designed to exclude bicyclists.

There's a need for recreational multi-use paths, but I would vote agains segregating bikes from other vehicles as well.

Paths contribute little to helping make bikes more usable as alternative transportation, if only because they usually don't go where most people need to go. Yet they create the false impression that a cycling infrastructure exists, and contreibute to the bias among drivers that bikes don't belong on the road.

Better to spend the money on widening roads, creating ridable shoulders or extra-wide right lanes, and posting share-the-road signs to make it clear that bikes belong.

RichC

My problem is rather simple, folks.

I grew up motoring. So now I expect all "bicycle facilities" to compare to the roads.

They don't come close.

When they come up with a "bicycle facility" that has all the advantages of a superhighway, I will think about using it.

By the way, last time I saw people walking their dogs on the freeway, well, it was quite a while back...

Out here on a several mile stretch of A1A, we have a multi-use path AND a bike lane which is really treated like a bike lane. You won't catch me riding on the multi use path and you won't catch peds and skaters on the bike lane unless they want to get creamed.

Kathy

Up here, the pedestrian are givien the right of way, and, I think if your using a bike your only allowed a speed of 20KPH, so there no need to cry, we should be sharing the Bike path or designated trails with people the same way when we use the road we expect the motorised to share the road with us

I've ridden the roads for more years than I care to count, but if it weren't for
the multiuse trail right outside my door; I wouldn't be riding my bike. I'm on
the Gulf side of FL. You've just never seen drivers like we got here!

'Bout 6 months ago an elderly lady driver killed another driver. She openly
admitted that she couldn't see! She would pull up to an intersection,
stop, pray, then pull out. This time she pulled out into another car. And she
is not alone!

I'm thankful for my trail.

Folks - you just can't generalize this way. It depends upon the purpose for riding, the biker, the bike paths and other stuff.

Yesterday, my wife and I rode on a bike lane going along the coast from Oceanside, CA to Leucadia. All bikers (and there were a lot) used the bike lane, it was well maintained (it even has its own traffic sensors for bikes) and it was obvious that motorists were used to bikers and we were treated with the utmost respect by the motorists. This bike lane is regularly used by folks to commute between San Diego and the North Coast, follows a gorgeous route, and is an appropriate way to travel.

Where I live in Colorado, there is an interconnecting network of separate bike paths that are heavily used for both commuting and recreation. They go on more direct and faster routes than the highways, and on weekday commutes, you rarely see a pedestrian. Almost all intersections with roads are underpasses for the bikes,, It works great. On weekends, there are more peds, so you just have ro be more careful.

I thoroughly enjoy going out my door, getting on the bike path in back of my home, and going for a quiet, peaceful 20 mile ride with few, if any, disruptions or other traffic.

On the other hand, the bike paths in Flagstaff are prettty poor.

It all depends. Each situation is different.

Several years back, some family friends & relatives were vacationing in FLA. They were riding a bike path that was fenced off from the road. None the less, an elderly person plowed through the fence hitting several of the vacationing family, injuring several, sending a couple into the canal and killing one. Wrong place, wrong time.

Originally posted by Stor Mand
Several years back, some family friends & relatives were vacationing in FLA. They were riding a bike path that was fenced off from the road. None the less, an elderly person plowed through the fence hitting several of the vacationing family, injuring several, sending a couple into the canal and killing one. Wrong place, wrong time.

They could just as easily have been on the road and gotten creamed. Your story proves nothing, either way.

It wasn't meant to prove anything :confused: . Just relating a story that paths are really no safer.
Oh, by the way dopant, your compasion is overwhelming. :mad:

Originally posted by Stor Mand
It wasn't meant to prove anything :confused: . Just relating a story that paths are really no safer.
Oh, by the way dopant, your compasion is overwhelming. :mad:

One story about an accident in no way proves that bike paths are more, or less, safer than roads or anything else. You should learn a little about statistics.

Dopant??

Incidentally, compassion has two s's.

To attack me because I express no "compassion" for folks about whom I know nothing, in a time frame unknown, is the lowest of low in discussions.

There are deaths all around me (and everyone else) at all times. Unless I know the folks or have some connection to them, "compassion" is really impossible.

If you knew these folks, I express my regrets to you. But, this ad hominem attack on me is really discussion at a most childish level, as was your example in trying to prove a point (which you did not) with one isolated example.

Generally, statistics and studies are the best way to "prove" a point, not just an isolated example.

It's not the path that's stupid (except mayb for the location it's placed in, maybe), it's the people using it that are!
Luckily, I have a very loud, booming bass voice, and I can scare the cr@p out of people as I ride on my local multi-use path. I'll yell at anybody blocking the road, wobbling along, riding on the wrong side, etc. I'm especially obnoxious about it early in the season, because you have to train the idiots early in the year. If you don't, they'll be causing mayhem on the path all summer long!!:p

Originally posted by D*Alex
It's not the path that's stupid (except mayb for the location it's placed in, maybe), it's the people using it that are!
Luckily, I have a very loud, booming bass voice, and I can scare the cr@p out of people as I ride on my local multi-use path. I'll yell at anybody blocking the road, wobbling along, riding on the wrong side, etc. I'm especially obnoxious about it early in the season, because you have to train the idiots early in the year. If you don't, they'll be causing mayhem on the path all summer long!!:p

My little bell also trains them. There are regulars on this path and they get to know me - and also they smile and say "hello!"

Originally posted by D*Alex
It's not the path that's stupid (except mayb for the location it's placed in, maybe), it's the people using it that are!
Thank you for saying what had to be said.

What else do you call people who stop in the middle of the path fpr a conversation, mothers who push their prams across the path without checking for oncoming traffic, rollerblading couples who use the path for lock-lipped pirouetting foreplay, dog walkers with tiny mongrel mutts scampering to and fro at the end of an invisible flexi-leash, or no leash ata ll, gangs of kids on X-Mart pseudoMTBs who have no conception of what a "lane" is?

Not all, or even most people who use bike paths are stupid, but a large minority are. The problem is that they think that, because there are no cars on the path, they don't have to be careful or responsible. The think "hey, it's a path, I can now turn my brain off."

I simply chose not to use the paths, wherever possible. besides, the speed limit is usually 20 km/h, which is a speed I usually only see on my way to or from a full stop. I'll use the paths to get around bad traffic, early in the day, or in bad weather, when they are largely unpopulated. But most of the time, I'd rather take my chances with the cars, trucks and busses.

Originally posted by DnvrFox


One story about an accident in no way proves that bike paths are more, or less, safer than roads or anything else. You should learn a little about statistics.

Dopant??

Incidentally, compassion has two s's.

If you knew these folks, I express my regrets to you. But, this ad hominem attack on me is really discussion at a most childish level, as was your example in trying to prove a point (which you did not) with one isolated example.

Generally, statistics and studies are the best way to "prove" a point, not just an isolated example.

Did you read? The story was not meant to prove anything. Let me type that again - The story was not meant to prove anything.
It was not to show any statistic on safety or danger on a bike path - it was a story just as Beowoulfe related a story. Is that okay with you? I hope so because I really need your approval.

Sorry for my typo. I'll tri 2 b more bedder wid mi tiping. wee cant all b az purfect.

:beer:

Well, if it's called a bike path, then it should be just for BIKES! No one else should be on the path unless they are riding a bike. That makes sense.

Did you read? The story was not meant to prove anything. Let me type that again - The story was not meant to prove anything.

How about you start a new thread, then??

"Stories without any purpose or meaning."

Then everyone could join in the fun.

Originally posted by DnvrFox
Folks - you just can't generalize this way. It depends upon the purpose for riding, the biker, the bike paths and other stuff.


That's why I was careful to specify multi-use paths, paths that are MUPs either by design or by general usage. While true bike paths can be a wonderful thing, they're rare in most locations, and when people say "bike path" that mean "MUP."

And I thi8nk you can make pretty accurate generalized observations about MUPs.

RichC

In Washinton we have over a hundred miles of paved trails around the Seattle/Tacoma area. My girlfriend and I frequently ride our tandem on these trails, it's a nice relaxing ride. We regularly exceed 30mph on some of the more remote trails. Fat slow and lazy people rarely get more than a mile or so from their cars :rolleyes:
I guess the point is that if you plan a ride early in the morning or during the work week these trails seem to work fine. Just don't expect to ride into your local trail head(at the park or picnic area at noon on sun) and blast onto the path at 20+mph, attacking the peds is not a good idea and will eventually create some hard feelings from the local residents. Next time you hit the trail it may have a 10mph speed limit with officer friendly waiting at the first road crossing. Yea, I know... it sucks rolling up on a whole tribe of umpa lumpas grazing in the middle of the trail but try to promote a positive image and smile, wave, throw em a twinkie and be happy with the fact that they will surely die before age 45. Cheers :beer:

Originally posted by DnvrFox
How about you start a new thread, then??
"Stories without any purpose or meaning."
Then everyone could join in the fun.

Woohoo ... oh boy, that was a good one ... yah ... hmmm ...

Anyway, in central Mass, bike paths are rare. At least in the city. We have to hit the streets which are generally not in good repair after the winter. Bike paths or MUP's are probably a better bet for parents with small children, so they can ride together without being in the street.

I bet some riders here may have started as slow, fat, lazy people.

:beer:

Originally posted by DnvrFox
Yesterday, my wife and I rode on a bike lane going along the coast from Oceanside, CA to Leucadia.

Welcome to my turf, DF! I had to work yesterday (second day on a new job).

MUPs are great if there are few or no pedestrians or 'bladers around. Roads are great if there are few or no cars around. The biggest problem with MUPs is that the average pedestrian is even more clueless (less clueful?) than the average cyclist on issues of traffic flow, right-of-way, safety, alertness, etc.

Originally posted by John E
biggest problem with MUPs is that the average pedestrian is even more clueless (less clueful?) than the average cyclist on issues of traffic flow, right-of-way, safety, alertness, etc.

And why shouldn't they be, really? In the final analysis, peds always have the right of way and it's never OK to hit one.

I've always felt that one reason cyclists get no respect -- and frequent downright hostility -- is that they so often treat pedestrians with none. And we forget that after the peds leave the park or the path or the downtown sidewalk, they usually get behind the wheel and become drivers, who haven't forgotten how rude and obnoxious cyclists can be.

RichC

When you treat others the way you would want to be treated there is so much more to be gained. Cyclists that don't ride this way help ruin it for all.
Wells

I think there is something to the points made by Velocipedio and others, that people don't take bike paths seriously, because they don't take bikes seriously. Bikes are, for most people, recreational vehicles that you pedal around on weekends and only people like Jan Ullrich are going to go fast. It never occurs to most people that anyone outside elite cyclists wants to go more than 5 mph. I can understand that there are people on bikes who aren't going to go as fast as I do, but there is also no excuse for being plain STUPID, like dawdling along in the middle of the path holding hands with your sweetheart, wobbling along on rollerblades on the wrong side, walking your dog while blabbind on the cell, etc. I don't see bike paths as part of the infrastructure for cyclists- however, they do keep the morons and rollerbladers off the road and sidewalks, which is fine and dandy with me. There are certain spots where I have to take the path, or sometimes I do so out of choice during times of heavy traffic, but that's about it. Otherwise, it's the road for me.

I guess it all comes down to do ya wanna be a big fish in a small pond or a small fish in a big pond? :D

I supose that if more cyclist used the trails (like an LA freeway) then I supose the pedestrians would go elsewhere, but then we would complain that they were too crowded.

Originally posted by wellshorton
When you treat others the way you would want to be treated there is so much more to be gained. Cyclists that don't ride this way help ruin it for all.
Wells

Ditto. :D
I don't really look down on anyone riding slow and/or in the way on a path or in the street. You really don't know what's going on in that persons head or with there body, and some just don't know that there are some basic riding rules. Of course there are those that don't care also but for most part I don't think that most are doing anything to irritate more experienced riders intentionally. Someone will complain, no matter how good the system is.
:beer:

Originally posted by Rich Clark
In the final analysis, peds always have the right of way and it's never OK to hit one.

I've always felt that one reason cyclists get no respect -- and frequent downright hostility -- is that they so often treat pedestrians with none.

A multiuse trail will not work properly without the full cooperation of all users. Respect works both ways -- cyclists should definitely not be buzzing or threatening pedestrians, but the pedestrians should not be meandering or walking in path-hogging clumps, either. Too many pedestrians transfer their normal freeform sidewalk behaviour to multiuse paths, which require a bit more discipline and structure.

I ride the Lachine canal bike path on the way to work - well paved, minimal traffic and very few intersections to slow down at.
In the evening there is a bit more traffic including roller bladers and peds. They dont see you coming up behind them, so you call out before you pass, as you would for a bike. They then pull over to let you pass.

Sunday afternoons is another matter, children with no traffic sense, and adults with their minds in neutral. Children shouldn't be trained in riding skills on bike paths, but on roads in low traffic areas. The instructor should ride behind them, calling directions, correcting bad riding, telling them what to watch out for, and giving encouragement.

John E. intelligently wrote:


Welcome to my turf, DF! I had to work yesterday (second day on a new job).

It may be your turf now, but I was raised in these here parts!! We used to camp every summer for several weeks right on the beach between Carlsbad and Leucadia, right near where Noah's Ark used to be (this was in the early 50's - late 40's - before anyone thought of putting a state park here). I spent summers with my grandpa in Cardiff.

Anyway, thanks for the welcome.

Today, my wife and I discovered a most unusual bike path - a bike path to nowhere!! We are staying at the Days Inn at Oceanside Harbor. On the inner road going south about 1/2 mile on the curve, you can see a well built bike path (asphalt) that heads off south of the slough, under I-5 and the Coast Highway and east adjacent to state highway 76. Anyway, this path appears to follow an old railroad grade and ends up at Palomar Airport. BUT, on the Oceanside end, it simply dead ends in a field near the current RR tracks??

This seems pretty strange - a LOT of money went into this trail to nowhere. Can you enlighten me? We traveled about 3.5 miles each way on the trail.

One of my favourite bike paths is along the beach. The area is well frequented by beach goers, walkers, joggers, bike riders, roller bladers, dog walkers, families etc. Fortunately someone had the foresight to build two paths - one for cyclists & bladers and another for the walking variety. The paths are separated by a reasonable distance. Works quite well except for the occasional stray so you still have to keep your wits about you. I avoid the roads as I don't trust drivers and the paths allows me to relax, enjoy the ride and the scenary.

Originally posted by John E

Respect works both ways -- cyclists should definitely not be buzzing or threatening pedestrians, but the pedestrians should not be meandering or walking in path-hogging clumps, either.

Maybe not, but we don't get to punish them if they do. Remember that pedestrians are pretty much everybody who doesn't happen to be in a car at the moment.

Besides, in my experience most MUPs have a posted speed limit. 10, 12, at most 15mph. The cyclists who are rude and frustrated are almost always the ones trying to exceed it. Clumping pedestrians are less of a problem for cyclists who are just taking their time, which is the type of riding MUPs are really only suited for.

RichC

Statistically, bike paths are the most DANGEROUS places to ride by far.

Ride the road
Pat

Originally posted by pat5319
Statistically, bike paths are the most DANGEROUS places to ride by far.

Ride the road
Pat

Your source, please?

Around here (Denver) we have had a number of bike deaths last year. All have been on the road, or in bike lanes on the road.

I've noticed this in the media too. The focus on death. If you aren't killed doing something you just don't count. I suppose I should be happy that I haven't been killed in any of the dangerous situations I've encountered on bike paths. I'd hate to be another statistic.

I'm not saying the road isn't a dangerous place to ride too. I'm just wondering why something that is built for cyclists can be so hazardous.

Prime example: who in their right mind would build a bicycle path that requres a 45 degree turn on a wooden boardwalk? I made the mistake of trying that turn in the rain and found myself flat on my butt with mountain bike tires no less.

Unfortunatelty you have to be killed with a helmet for anyone to take notice of anything anymore. If you aren't wearing a helmet, the engineers run and hide behind the "shoulda' wore a helmet" line.

Actually, it's true, there are parts of the Lachine Bike path where there is also a parallel pedestrian path. However, that doesn't apply to a good part of the route. The worst part is the st-henri area just before verdun, congestion galore.

Originally posted by pat5319
Statistically, bike paths are the most DANGEROUS places to ride by far.


If seen those stats as well -- mostly from Europe and other parts of the world where bike paths for commuters are much better integrated into the urban infrastructure -- and the caveat is that one must define "danger" when evaluating them.

US statistics tend to focus on fatalities when counting non- automotive deaths. Auto accident statistics of course also come from the insurance industry, which tends not to count bikes and pedestrians.

Those European statistics attempted to count all accidents on the MUP that resulted in injury or damage. Most of them, not being fatal, wouldn't even show up in US statistics, unless the victim were processed by a hospital, in which case the accident still probably wouldn't be counted as happening on a Multi Use Path.

Anyway, the studies as I recall them did support the view that many more minor collisions and accidents -- between cyclists, cyclists and other path users, or cyclists alone (crashing into trees, I suppose, or going down on gravel) -- involving cyclists were much more frequent on paths than on roads. But much less severe.

Unsurprising, in my view. It's like riding on the sidewalk. There will always be problems when you mix huge speed differentials in the same space, and when you reduce reaction time.

The speed differential between a walking pedestrian and a full-tilt road rider is probably 10:1. You *never* get such high ratios between bikes and cars on the road, unless the bike is riding against traffic. 2:1 - 3:1 would be much more typical.

RichC

Why don't you just get out on the real roads and dice it up with the big guys...Pound the pavements with the MACKS and CHEVYS, let the kids and strollers have the paths.

MY source? - Effective Cycling

Ride Just ride
Pat

Why don't you just get out on the real roads and dice it up with the big guys...Pound the pavements with the MACKS and CHEVYS, let the kids and strollers have the paths.

Damn straight!
:beer:

Never has a semi-truck screamed out his window or fingered me. Nor has one ever eradically changed lanes, pulled spontanious u-turns, cut me off, failed to signal, suddenly slammed on the brakes for no apparant reason in front of me, the list goes on and on. The big trucks drive straight and generally know where they're going and how to get there. Best of all, when a semi passes at 110 Kph, the draft it produces is a god send.

I'll admit, the semi-trucks are scary at first but I personally feel much more comfy on the road among those beasts than with any automobile.

I did not read the whole 4 pages but since you got a road bike, ride it on the road!

I think bike paths are only for beginners and those who are too afraid. Danger is a part of this sport definitely. A cyclist has to see him/herself as one of the vehicles, and nothing inferior, on the road. Only when you respect yourself will others respect you. So join us and be a part of the traffic:)

Yesterday was my first experience on a multi-use trail: Silver Comet (http://silvercomet.tripod.com) . Generally people got out of the way when signaled by voice or bell. The only point where I had trouble was another friendly cyclist dropped into the group to begin a conversation - we entered a tunnel riding abreast - he hit the wall and wrecked everyone in the tunnel. Nobody was seriously hurt and as compansation he offered juice and cola upon arrival at his destination. He was a nice guy (and if he's in here, thanks again - you saved my friend from bonking out). All things considered, it was nice to have a LONG ride with no cars, trucks and buses and nothing but scenery.

Rarely I have a problem on the bike path around here. The speed limit on the Little Miami Bike Trail is 20mph. It goes about 62 miles and is primarily a bike trail. I tend to look ahead at what is coming and a good loud "ON YOUR LEFT" seems to do the trick. Many times I get a wave and thank you for that. I look forward to the day when the trail reaches down to the city. To actually make it usefull. (I admit that right now it is purely recreational).

It also helps to go early in the morning.