s/o Cyclists in Rock Creek Park vs Pedestrians

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What are the rules about pedestrians and cyclists in Rock Creek Park. I like to take my 3 year old on walks on the paved trails in Rock Creek park (by the Old Saw Mill), but have given it up due to us being almost run over by speeding cyclists coming around sharp turns or speeding up behind us. The final straw was a bike with an attached kid extension bike that grazed me when it flew around a bridge onto the curving sidewalk. My husband (who is a cyclist and runner) thinks that I should be hyper vigilant about constantly policing my 3 year old to make sure he walks a straight line and moves constantly out of the way for any runners. I am not sure why people can't safely go around us. We don't even try to walk on the closed weekend roads in Rock Creek because of the bikers who go so fast around pedestrians.

Your husband is right, but cyclists as a group need to do a much better job of calling out passes and exercising due caution around other trail users. I say this as a cyclist who regularly commutes on local shared trails (though it's been a few years since I rode in RCP); failure to call passes and pass with care is a major pet peeve of mine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm a bicyclist, but I'm sick of spandex-clad lawyers speeding like they're in the friggin' Tour de France.

*sigh*

And so it begins...

[Anonymous]

Ultimately I think you opt for what is safest for the kids which might not be using this trail. This does not mean that cyclists should be flying through there without regard to pedestrians, however. They have a responsibility to use the trail safely. I got hit by one that did not signal they were passing. I was also partly to blame because I turned to go in the opposite direction without looking. Both of us could have been seriously injured.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ultimately I think you opt for what is safest for the kids which might not be using this trail. This does not mean that cyclists should be flying through there without regard to pedestrians, however. They have a responsibility to use the trail safely. I got hit by one that did not signal they were passing. I was also partly to blame because I turned to go in the opposite direction without looking. Both of us could have been seriously injured.

+1. I jog and bike after work in Rock Creek Park between Woodley Park and Georgetown. There are always spacey runners and walkers with no self awareness (headphones are usually the culprit) who will stop in the middle of the path or veer over with no regard to who might be closing in behind them. No signaling is also a pet peeve of mine. I'm willing to slow down as needed and make concessions, but I also think it's irresponsible for parents to let groups of kids weave all over on their little bikes on a busy path or let them ride out of sight..

I have no idea what the hell the cyclists with earbuds are thinking. At least half can't be bothered with a helmet either. No situational awareness (doesn't matter if you're on a closed road/path or busy street)+no signal when passing+runner or walker listening to loud music= ugly accident or senseless death waiting to happen if someone hits their head the wrong way.

Keep in mind that road bikes with skinny tires can't exactly dive into grass or into dirt gracefully or safety if the rider has to swerve off a paved trail at the last minute.

[Anonymous]

You and your child should be able to use the trail, but if it isn't safe, you need to give it up. That's unfortunate, but it's better than having a child killed or injured by a self-absorbed bicycle rider.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You and your child should be able to use the trail, but if it isn't safe, you need to give it up. That's unfortunate, but it's better than having a child killed or injured by a self-absorbed bicycle rider.

eh. I should be able to jog safely in a straightish line on that path without unpredictable toddlers veering left and tripping me.


This really happened in 1997, near Taft bridge. Kid suddenly bolted left -exactly- as I was passing in a 100% not-self-absorbed fashion. I was super alert, saw them from way back, and I had given them wide berth, too, but it wasn't enough. I fell to the ground, and I collided with that little kid hard, too.

Let's ask ourselves whether a very heavily used, multi-use trail is really the best place for unpredictable babies and toddlers to toddle.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

eh. I should be able to jog safely in a straightish line on that path without unpredictable toddlers veering left and tripping me.


This really happened in 1997, near Taft bridge. Kid suddenly bolted left -exactly- as I was passing in a 100% not-self-absorbed fashion. I was super alert, saw them from way back, and I had given them wide berth, too, but it wasn't enough. I fell to the ground, and I collided with that little kid hard, too.

Let's ask ourselves whether a very heavily used, multi-use trail is really the best place for unpredictable babies and toddlers to toddle.

No, on a multi-use trail you need to be able to stop before you injure a child, an old person, or someone who is suddenly taken ill. If you need to run or ride so fast that you can't stop you need to find a dedicated track.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My great aunt was killed last month by a cyclist who struck her while she walked on a mixed use path. Very sad.

Link? Such incidents are extraordinarily rare - I think in the last 10 years there have been 2 such incidents in the DC Metro area and one incident was the fault of the pedestrian so if this is true there is likely a news report about it so rather than trolling please provide some evidence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

eh. I should be able to jog safely in a straightish line on that path without unpredictable toddlers veering left and tripping me.


This really happened in 1997, near Taft bridge. Kid suddenly bolted left -exactly- as I was passing in a 100% not-self-absorbed fashion. I was super alert, saw them from way back, and I had given them wide berth, too, but it wasn't enough. I fell to the ground, and I collided with that little kid hard, too.

Let's ask ourselves whether a very heavily used, multi-use trail is really the best place for unpredictable babies and toddlers to toddle.

No, on a multi-use trail you need to be able to stop before you injure a child, an old person, or someone who is suddenly taken ill. If you need to run or ride so fast that you can't stop you need to find a dedicated track.

No, on a multi-use trail the child's parent needs to be able to keep the child in arm's reach, ready to pull her back, during heavy use times, even when all other trail users are creeping along doing 15-minute miles.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My great aunt was killed last month by a cyclist who struck her while she walked on a mixed use path. Very sad.

Link? Such incidents are extraordinarily rare - I think in the last 10 years there have been 2 such incidents in the DC Metro area and one incident was the fault of the pedestrian so if this is true there is likely a news report about it so rather than trolling please provide some evidence.

Maybe it wasn't DC metro. I believe pp.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Your husband is right, but cyclists as a group need to do a much better job of calling out passes and exercising due caution around other trail users. I say this as a cyclist who regularly commutes on local shared trails (though it's been a few years since I rode in RCP); failure to call passes and pass with care is a major pet peeve of mine.

I wish everybody had a bell on their bike, and used it. "On your left" makes perfect sense to me when I'm on a bike saying it, but when I'm walking, "On your left" makes me look left, and then I move left, which is exactly the direction I shouldn't go.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Your husband is right, but cyclists as a group need to do a much better job of calling out passes and exercising due caution around other trail users. I say this as a cyclist who regularly commutes on local shared trails (though it's been a few years since I rode in RCP); failure to call passes and pass with care is a major pet peeve of mine.

I wish everybody had a bell on their bike, and used it. "On your left" makes perfect sense to me when I'm on a bike saying it, but when I'm walking, "On your left" makes me look left, and then I move left, which is exactly the direction I shouldn't go.

+1 "On your left" is something that never works. There must be something better.

[Anonymous]

I am a cyclist, and also a walker.

1. All people should stay on the right side of any trail while moving, unless they are passing. Darting across the trail is dangerous - and users who cannot be trusted not to should not be on the trail. Walking on grass is probably the best option in that case.

2. That said, there is no obligation on the part of pedestrians (or slow cyclists) to stay to the far right - when I am passing someone, it is MY obligation to cross to the left side of the trail to pass (just like passing a bike, when I am driving) If there is no room to do so because of oncoming trail users, or if a blind curve makes that dangerous, it is my obligation to not pass. Even if that means I must slow to walking speed. If you are a cyclist and cannot deal with slowing to walking speed on such occasions, you need to avoid such locations. That, BTW, is one reason riding on streets is and must be legal even where there are parallel trails.


3. I call "on your left" at cyclists and runners. Pedestrians I assume may not know what it means, so I usually ring my bell, or call "passing on your left" or "bike passing" or, if I am riding slowly, "excuse me" just as I would if I were walking and passing them. I try to say thank you after passing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

eh. I should be able to jog safely in a straightish line on that path without unpredictable toddlers veering left and tripping me.


This really happened in 1997, near Taft bridge. Kid suddenly bolted left -exactly- as I was passing in a 100% not-self-absorbed fashion. I was super alert, saw them from way back, and I had given them wide berth, too, but it wasn't enough. I fell to the ground, and I collided with that little kid hard, too.

Let's ask ourselves whether a very heavily used, multi-use trail is really the best place for unpredictable babies and toddlers to toddle.

No, on a multi-use trail you need to be able to stop before you injure a child, an old person, or someone who is suddenly taken ill. If you need to run or ride so fast that you can't stop you need to find a dedicated track.

If I am riding at 15MPH (the posted limit) and an old person is walking in front of me, I will be moving to the left side of the trail to pass - if they suddenly stop or collapse or whatever, I will not hit them. I never rely on them maintaining speed. The issue here is not someone suddenly stopping, but suddenly moving off to the wrong side of the trail. At 15MPH, I can brake hard enough to not do much damage to them, maybe even to avoid contact with them, but I will probably be hurt myself.

Given that there are no dedicated tracks that will take me between home and work, whereas there are lots and lots of grassy areas and sidewalks and unpaved trails where a toddler can walk, it seems reasonable that in this instance the parent find another place to take their toddler.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ultimately I think you opt for what is safest for the kids which might not be using this trail. This does not mean that cyclists should be flying through there without regard to pedestrians, however. They have a responsibility to use the trail safely. I got hit by one that did not signal they were passing. I was also partly to blame because I turned to go in the opposite direction without looking. Both of us could have been seriously injured.

+1. I jog and bike after work in Rock Creek Park between Woodley Park and Georgetown. There are always spacey runners and walkers with no self awareness (headphones are usually the culprit) who will stop in the middle of the path or veer over with no regard to who might be closing in behind them. No signaling is also a pet peeve of mine. I'm willing to slow down as needed and make concessions, but I also think it's irresponsible for parents to let groups of kids weave all over on their little bikes on a busy path or let them ride out of sight..

I have no idea what the hell the cyclists with earbuds are thinking. At least half can't be bothered with a helmet either. No situational awareness (doesn't matter if you're on a closed road/path or busy street)+no signal when passing+runner or walker listening to loud music= ugly accident or senseless death waiting to happen if someone hits their head the wrong way.

Keep in mind that road bikes with skinny tires can't exactly dive into grass or into dirt gracefully or safety if the rider has to swerve off a paved trail at the last minute.

Excellent post

1. Note, I call passes even if the jogger is wearing headphones - they might be able to hear me. And its a good habit.

2. I also hate that cyclists wear headphones. If people want to complain about reckless cyclists, they should complain about that.

3. One reason I am glad I chose a hybrid, is that I CAN bail to the grass or dirt when necessary. Though there are some places on some trails where there is no safe place to bail.