Best method to avoid hitting pedestrians?
 

So, I was riding home yesterday evening on the dedicated bike/pedestrian trail (the Santa Ana river trail). As always, many if not most of the pedestrians/joggers use the right side of the trail requiring cyclists to pass across the center line in the left lane. My current custom is to yell "behind you" as I'm about 50 ft or more behind a pedestrian/jogger. I used to yell "on your left" until I noticed many people would immediately move left in response. Yesterday, there was a jogger up ahead about halfway between any entrance/exit to the trail. I was moving pretty fast and just as I'm about to yell "behind you" the guy suddenly turns left in front of me . . . which prompts "Hey! Whoa! Look out!" . . . and more indescriminate yelling. The guy committed to moving left and accelerated so that I could pass him on the right. My heart rate still went up a few beats.

I started thinking that if pedestrians would walk facing bicycle traffic (like I was taught when I was a wee lad with respect to vehicle traffic on streets) then much of the problem of bike-pedestrian passing would probably be avoided. Cyclists and pedestrians would see eachother and commit to avoiding contact. Do signs posting such a requirement work?

Hmmm . . . . maybe a ringing bell would immediately cause a pedestrian to think "bike behind me." I suppose the safest alternative is to just assume that every pedestrian is going to try to take me out and ride accordingly.

I felt bad enough when a squirrel ran out and bounced off the left side of my front wheel . . . rolled under my bottom bracket . . . . and bounced off the inside of my right foot . . . before running off the right side of the trail. I don't think hitting a human would go so well.

Any thoughts, recommendations, or helpful experience? Thanks!

Ride very slowly on multi-use paths (MUPs) shared with pedestrians, if you ride on them at all.
There are no rules on MUPs.

I find I get the best results by riding up behind them real quiet and then pushing them off the trail.
Just kidding of course. I say "behind you" if I can tell they aren't regulars on the path, but most days I'm lucky and see the same folks who kind of know the etiquette. I used to say the on your left thing, but I got the same results. They'd move left. Bells just seem to annoy people around here. Hmm, maybe I should get one of those compressed air bike horn thingies. That might do it. :eek:

Pedestrians on MUPs are like squirrels, except that they are larger, dumber, and less durable. I find that passing them on the grass adjacent to the trail is the safest approach.

A bell is a non-threatening way to call attention to yourself. Our area requires one on the MUPs.

Paul

On the MUP I take to work every day the pedestrians are supposed to be on the right. I find that it doesn't much matter to me what side they're on, as long as they're consistent. I don't see so many this time of year, but when I do it can get annoying. I got a large horn like this for christmas:

http://www.cartelbikeseurope.com/pro...m/HORN-200.jpg

I can't wait to use it!

Sweet!

I always slow way down when approaching peds from behind. When I am close enough I yell as clearly as I can "I'm going to pass on your left." As stated above, "On your left." is apparently unclear to the uninitiated.

Bells don't work. Get an airhorn.

Yeah, the same. I travel a couple hundred feet on a path during my commute and go real slow, yell "Passing Left".

The bike path here is about 6 feet wide and has no line down the middle. Often times women who walk together will walk 3-4 side by side taking up the entire path. I usually say "behind you" and it works most of the time.

Another problem is people who walk dogs, the dogs leash will let it go far enough to get right in my path. Also the dogs will sometimes crap right on the path and its annoying to have to dodge dog crap on a path that is specificaly called a "bike path".

I find notifying peds about my presence a little ineffective and maybe rude too, so I usually pass at a safe distance (especially when the trail is wide enough for two directions, which I will take the left lane) without sounding anything. That way they won't be too surprised and oncoming pedestrians will have lots of time to spot me. If the path is too narrow, then I'd either get close to them for a while at walking speed (they'll notice and yield) or pass them on grass.

If kids are around I'll pass at walking pace even with lots of room on the left. You never know where they are going :O

Hmmm . . . I'm installing my siren and flashing blue lights tonight!! ;)

its really only the people who never really use the path that get in the way.

seasoned path users know how to keep to one side usually (probably for numerous close calls).

for the idiots i just yell. loud and often i fugure if they think a crazed lunatic is behind them they'll be more likely to move ;)

one group of walker/runners i like are the ones that see you coming the opposite way and play chicken with you as they seem to be saying "this is MY path YOU go around me..." or the people who feel compelled to pick up their dogs everytime someone passes.

this time of year the high school kids are just starting to run cross country outside. nothing like passing pack after pack of loud annoying kids who don't pay attention.

and they still are not as bad as the rollerbladers, DONT GET ME STARTED; thank god those idiots only come out when it get really nice and warm....

and now for the joke: whats the hardest part about rollerblading? admitting to your parents that your gay.

Was just walking on one of these Sunday... and I know "on your left." Problem was as the cyclist came by and said it... it made me react and want to turn left. I had to force myself to hold my line or veer right. It was strange they way one automatically reacts.

Something about hearing something just behind and to the left of you makes you want to go that way.

I think it works for cycling as we tend to hold a line anyway, by the time you might veer on a cycle, you have been passed... you cannot turn as fast as a ped.

I think giving a notice further back and waiting for the reaction may work better... JMHO.

I have a bell that I ring when I'm 50 or 75 feet from the pedestrian. It is a pretty loud bell and it gives them time to figure out what is going on on before I am passing them. I've had people comment to me how nice it is to hear a bell well before they get passed. As annoying as they can be, pedestrians are on a MUP and I can understand that they don't like to be startled by some knucklehead practicing his new TT position on a busy afternoon.

People naturally go in the direction they're looking towards. So the instinctive reaction is as you move forward and someone shouts on your left is to look towards and move towards the left. Generally I give people a wide-berth with no verbal warning or slow down and shout out 'excuse me' with plenty of warning if there's not enough room. It works most of the time - the people who use the paths here are generally polite to cyclists and vice versa.

Hey Rainman! Whenever I'm on the Jeff Davis path I just go into the grass and go around. I've had too many people cop an atitude with me if I even HINT that they might want to be aware of my presence. (Usually by just saying 'excuse me!" as I get near) I've had rude looks and thug-types "stunting" on me that I don't even bother if I can go around. "Stunting" as in getting in my way just to see if I'm intimidated by them. I see that a LOT in traffic - slowing down in the crosswalk when the lights turn green - just so cars will honk and they can look tough to their friends. uhg. Kids today!


Vincent

No stupid "on your left", no dinky bell, just this and a lot of speed:
http://www.dalefield.com/nzfmm/magaz..._Catcherbw.JPG

Have you guys ever smoked a pedestrian? I did once. I was riding downtown at night, and this middle aged guy just bolts into the road a couple of feet in front of me, without looking for traffic. I mean, literally, one second he is standing with his back to traffic, and the next he's in a full sprint across the road. I was really moving, and I didn't have much time to react, and there was no way I could stop. I just turned away from him, hoping that he would stop short. He didn't. I caught him with my shoulder, and because he was maybe a little more than half my mass, he got laid flat out in the road. I ended up riccocheting off him, but didn't bite it. I stopped, and before I had a chance to get over to him and see if he was OK, he got up and ran the rest of the way across the road. Had I been driving a car, he would be dead for sure. It was kind of a surreal experience.

Friend of mine did... we were swooping down a big hill and this teenager started jogging across... half run half walk... and there was no way to stop... so my buddy tried to go behind, but just then the kid stopped and was right in the way. He got knocked down, and I think he was ok, but there was no way to stop and go back without finishing the hill. This was broad daylight... and in the middle of the block. The kid should not have been there.

At 17mph that gives the person 2 SECONDS to react. Way to little time. Again folks, if you are going to use a multiple use trail, get a bell or use the road. Especially to the roadies that only pay attention to their cyclometers.

In my state of Rhode Island there is a BIKE path, that was built before the surrounding MUP's multi use paths.

The rules are:

The pedestrians are to walk facing traffic on the left.
Bikes have the right of way on the bike path and pedestrians are to give way to bikes.
Only 6 foot long leashes are allowed for dogs.

and a few other good rules. BUT..

1) most people have no idea, they walk on the right as you would in the other states that have MUP's
or they have no clue (it is confusing)
or they read the POSTED SIGNS that say walk on the left. They do not know that bikes have the right
of way so they take the entire lane forcing the bikes into the other lane to pass.
2) everyone thinks they have the right of way especially peds. They almost never get out of the way.
3) no one knows about the leash rule.
4) some day the neighboring states MUP's will connect then what is the rule ??

In short, NO it does not work. Nothing really does. In the rare case that someone follows the rule, yes it works great. That would be me on a walk. :rolleyes:

The wildest one is: the ped is in the correct place coming right at me in my lane. They are supposed to get off on the grass. Instead the step to their right (my left) when they see me without looking back. They step in front of a speeding bike in that lane that is blasting along because they can't hear it. :rolleyes: causing a near accident.

You just have to slow way down. I just yell "passing" and give them time to do what they do, sometimes they dance all over the place, give em time. Excellent question though, for a long time I thought it could be made to work. The best answer is to ride your bike on the street and learn how to do it as safe as possible. You can maintain a higher pace, safer, for longer, in more places.

Thanks, I was really curious if rules like that existed somewhere. I ride all over (street, MUP, dirt . . California, Colorado, Germany, Holland, France, . . ) and have been for many years. I like the MUP for commuting because I get to avoid all the cars, exhaust, and stress. I train on the street. My commutes are mostly "recovery rides" (hr in zone 2). I don't even have a speedometer on my commuter bike. As amusing as the "dance" can be sometimes I try to avoid those situations . . . . thus my question.

If any of us hits a pedestrian I guess it could come down to whether our conduct was reasonable under all the circumstances (or how a jury will answer that question . . . In California I worry about that . . I just read in the paper this morning how a railroad company settled with an engineer who sustained a mild concussion that he claimed transformed his "controlled alcoholism" into a debilitating form of that disease. He was paid $8.5 Million.)

I appreciate everyone's responses. Thanks for all the input.

This works unless, like most peds these days, they have Nirvana playing on the MP3 in their ears (could be rockn' to NPR also). Then you need a PA system similar to the one the Grateful Dead ( ahhh! ) used at Candlestick Park for them to hear the message. When they put on the headphones, its every man woman and child for themselves. :eek:

I just use the 'sprint and weave method'. I almost had 3 close calls with peds today, sprinting through Harvard Sq, an bombing through a crosswalk. No doubt filled with yuppie Harvard hipster students. One girl was talking on her cell, dirinking a starbucks coffee, just skimmed her by 1 foot. A sharp yelp got her on her toes quickly. If I want attention, sometimes I whip out a track skid powerslide dealie. People moeve quickly when they see me skidding towards them, and yelling.

I encountered an unusual close encounter on the MUP tonight. As I was cruising along with my flamethrower belching out watts of blue light I barely saw a figure clad in black shuffle out of the bushes on the right side of the trail. I let out every "hey, whoa, look out, watch it, ... . " I could squeeze into the few seconds before I passed by and heard a muffled grumble from the dark figure.

Otherwise, I must say that the flamethrower seems to provide very effective notice to pedestrians and joggers at night. They either hug the side of the trail or step off it completely when the blue light comes from behind.

We have the American River Bike Trail in the Sacramento area which is now over 35 miles long. There are lots of peds on that trail. When I ride on it which is infrequent, I usually call out "passing on your left". I say it slow and deliberate and pretty loud. I was taught this by a number of the local cyclists for passing another bicycle and it works effectively with peds too. Since the first word is "passing" they are alerted that someone or something is about to overtake them.
Regarding MUP trails perhaps consider getting involved in a local advocacy group...you might be able to influence the rules of the trail and end up getting it signed for peds walking facing traffic. After all that is the recommendation for most streets too isn't it...walking facing traffic?

Here's an example of a court case (long post, but I've edited out most of the legalese), decided last week by an appeals court in Chicago against a cyclist suing for serious injuries. It involved an oncoming bike/multiple pedestrian accident on a denominated bike path that is also used by pedestrians, rollerbladers, joggers, etc. It is pretty clear that the pedestrians took up the entire paved portion by walking in one line across the path. In short, though the testimony was conflicting as to what happened (I personally don't believe the pedestrians claim that the biker did not look at them), the court found as a matter of law that the pedestrians had no duty to the bike rider. Note the mention of the rider having to move her head (poor fitting helmet?), listening to a walkman, and failure of anybody--despite awareness of each other--to call out:

In their depositions, Rogers and the five defendants agreed Saturday, June 19, 1999, was clear and sunny. The path on which Rogers was riding was straight, and there was nothing to block the vision of any of the parties. The path was about seven feet wide and paved with a gravel shoulder on either side. There were no lines demarcating lanes on the path. The path was used by bicyclists, rollerbladers, and pedestrians. The defendants were walking north on the path...

The defendants agreed they were walking in a straight line across the path... According to Rogers, she was on her way back from a 20-mile bicycle ride from South Evanston to Highland Park. She saw the defendants when she was about a block and a half away. They were walking in a straight line on the paved part of the path. [Note: IIRC, the “shoulders” are probably each less than a foot wide here.] They were not doing anything that made her feel nervous or concerned. She was listening to the radio on her walkman with the volume set at a low level so she could hear noises around her. She wore a bicycle helmet fitted over her brow bone, requiring her to look up and down at times.

Rogers looked down briefly then looked up again at the defendants. Two of the defendants were walking on the right side of the path where she was riding. She tried to read their body language in order to decide whether to get off her bike or go around them. She did not recall whether she gave any verbal warning of her approach, although all the defendants said Rogers did not say anything before the collision, nor did they speak to her.

As Rogers got closer to the defendants, they appeared to be absorbed in their conversation. She did not make eye contact with them. She decided to go around the defendants by swerving onto the gravel shoulder on her right. She testified that there was plenty of room to go around them. As she turned, she slowed her bicycle from about 6 to 8 miles an hour to about 4 to 6 miles an hour. She then collided with Reagan on the west side of the path when she hit him with her arm. She had no recollection of how she fell off her bicycle and no memory of what happened directly afterward. When she came to, she was somewhere on the bike path, and Patterson was holding her hand. A young man was telling her he was sorry... her right arm [ ] bone was shattered. She also had a hairline fracture of her pelvis.

Kravitt testified there were a lot of bicyclists, walkers, and rollerbladers on the path that day. ... He saw Rogers as she came onto the path about two to three blocks away from them. She was moving quite quickly, faster than 15 to 20 miles an hour. Her head was down, and her helmet was loosely fitted and covering her eyes. She was hunched over and looked very tired. Kravitt said Rogers did not notice them until her handle bar hit Reagan's shoulder and she fell off her bike. Rogers did not swerve onto the shoulder before the collision. There was plenty of room for her to pass them on the path. If the path were divided into five lanes, "lane one" and part of "lane two" on the west side of the path were completely empty. After the collision, Rogers' helmet and walkman were on the ground, and Kravitt could hear music from the headphones. ...

Cline testified that Rogers was biking about 15 to 20 miles an hour. He never saw her slow down. Her head was down with her hands on the handlebars. When he first saw her, she was between "lane one" and the shoulder. Cline said there was access for people to pass on both sides of the path. Rogers veered to her right when she was about a foot away. Reagan's shoulder hit the handlebar, and Rogers flew off the bike and hit her head on the concrete path. Right before she got in the ambulance, Rogers apologized and said it was her fault.

Reagan testified he saw Rogers when she was far away down the trail. The next time he saw her was a second before impact. ... He never saw her on the gravel. He doubted Rogers even saw him because her head was down, and she made no move to avoid him. In the second before impact, she was leaning over the handlebar with her head facing down. Her left shoulder hit his left shoulder, and he swung around.

...Reagan told her he was sorry. He said it because she was in pain. After the incident, he gave a statement to the police that he heard Rogers say she "didn't see them coming and her headphones were on loud." ...

Rogers contends the court erred in finding no duty of care existed between the defendants and Rogers as a user of the bicycle path. ...

"A duty of care arises when the parties stand in such a relationship to one another that the law imposes upon defendant an obligation of reasonable conduct for the benefit of plaintiff." ... Whether defendant owes plaintiff a duty of care is a question of law to be determined by the court. ... Relevant factors include: the foreseeability of injury, the likelihood of injury, the magnitude of the burden of guarding against the injury, the consequences of placing that burden on the defendant, and the possible seriousness of the injury.

Rogers contends defendants' joint conduct blocked her path of travel and her attempt to avoid collision, causing her to collide with Reagan and fall from her bicycle. She says a trier of fact should decide whether their conduct was negligent.

In their responses, defendants contend they had no duty to Rogers because the foreseeability of injury to a third person merely from walking down a bike path was so slight as to be nonexistent. The evidence showed other users of the path were able to pass the defendants without incident. Furthermore, imposing a duty on users of the bike path to act as a caretaker for other users would be impractical and burdensome.

The evidence indicates neither defendants nor Rogers said anything to each other as Rogers approached. Rogers decided to turn her bicycle onto the gravel shoulder in order to pass the defendants. In doing so, she came into contact with Reagan and fell off her bicycle. Rogers admitted she thought she had enough room to go around and did not think the defendants had a malicious intent to make any purposeful contact with her.

We cannot say the circumstances in this case establish a duty of care owed the plaintiff by any of these four defendants. Arguably, it was foreseeable that an oncoming bicyclist would have to go around five people who were blocking the path. But that is not the same as saying they should have reasonably foreseen the plaintiff's injury. The evidence shows both the plaintiff and the defendants thought the plaintiff had room to go around, and neither of the parties verbally signaled the other. There were no signs of danger. ... Although there are differences in the parties' accounts of the incident, we find none of these inconsistencies is so material as to preclude summary judgment.

This whole thread shows just how crap MUPs are unless you're a leisure rider who wants to pootle along enjoying the view. How to avoid hitting peds? Ride on the damn road.

That court case sounds like EVERYONE was being stupid. Yes, the peds have the right of way, but if someone on a bicycle is bearing down on you at the alleged 15-20 mph it seems kind of stupid not to get out of the way.

To expand on my earlier post and agree with andygates, if you want to go fast get on the road. Most MUPs I have seen have posted speedlimits of as low as 8 mph. I ride on one for the last couple of miles of my commute home. It has no posted speed right now though it used to be 15 mph. They have redone the path and have not put the signs back up I suppose. The path is straight, and I can see well into the distance. If there is no one walking I go as fast as I want to. On nice days when there are peds I noodle. Yes, it can be aggrevating when 3-4 peds take up the whole path. If they don't respond to my call I will go off the path to go around. If the path had a gravel shoulder as the one in the court case did, I would, frankly, get off my bike and walk around the peds. I would not endanger them or myself by trying to squeeze by. Nor would I say anything to them. People like that are either oblivious, stupid, or jerks. Nothing you can say will have any effect other than to make them more determined not to get out of the way of the next cyclist that comes along.

Besides, I'm enjoying myself. They're enjoying themselves. Why be a buzzkill? It's part of my basic cycling philosophy "If I was in a hurry I wouldn't be riding a bike."