Jump to content

Two Tings


Jo

Featured Posts

Just been reading with interest the new Code of Conduct for cyclists on the towpaths in London.

Have a read see what you think http://www.waterscape.com/Regent's_Can...uction/extra.65

 

I would like it through out the country

How are the cyclists going to be told about this and who is going to police it?

 

I know we need something like this where we are, now that the towpath is a new cycleway. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My bikes dont have bells, i have voice for that....

 

- Im all for cycalists being considerate of other users, and i would certainly say that i am. However i fail to see how these absured and unenforcable "codes of conduct" are actaully going help? If people are incosiderate idoits, theres incosiderate idiots, code or no code.

 

And i dont see why "pedestrians" have priority over cyclists. Equally priority, yes, but more? I dont think so.

 

 

Daniel

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My bikes dont have bells, i have voice for that....

 

- Im all for cycalists being considerate of other users, and i would certainly say that i am. However i fail to see how these absured and unenforcable "codes of conduct" are actaully going help? If people are incosiderate idoits, theres incosiderate idiots, code or no code.

 

And i dont see why "pedestrians" have priority over cyclists. Equally priority, yes, but more? I dont think so.

 

 

Daniel

 

Because cyclists are being allowed to use a path over which there is a right of way or permissive use for pedestrians.

 

The pedestrians had use first, and cyclists can only be allowed access on the basis that they don't impinge on the existing users.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Daniel,

 

Have you seen what some of the cyclists are like in Camden? Charging you at bridge holes. It's not much fun walking the towpath there, it's quite easy to get involved in an accident.

 

It's not so bad on the River Lee, I know most of the cycle commuters now as I'm out with the dog same time as they are, most are friendly and courteous, you do get the odd lycra clad 'boy racer' though. I was talking to a 'ccer whilst our dogs were playing last week and one of these 'towpath racers' nearly took us all out!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And i dont see why "pedestrians" have priority over cyclists. Equally priority, yes, but more? I dont think so.

Daniel

 

In urban areas cyclists should stick to the roads or especially prepared cycle paths. By which I mean that pedestrains don't walk on the road (often!) and could be rightfully moaned at for walking on a cycle path. As much as I understand why cyclists would want to do the towpath, they really aren't suitable and it would be nice for us on shanks' pony to have somewhere to walk where we're not having to keep an eye out.

 

Same goes for joggers - why should I have to 'break' my strole just because someone thinks they have the 'right of way' as they are running? Why can't they slow down?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was reasonably tolerant about cyclists until last week. In a busy part of Bristol a cyclist was cruising slowly along in front of a long line of traffic, hands off the bars, and using his mobile phone. I s'pose the ban on the use of mobile phones while driving doesn't apply to them, just like the prohibition on riding along the pavement doesn't seem to apply these days. (That one is a particular hobby horse of mine because it is the only time I was ever 'apprehended' by the fuzz. Apprehended meaning held by the ear and led home to confront my parents with the misdemeanour.) :lol: nostalgia ain't wot it used to be. ............

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was reasonably tolerant about cyclists until last week. In a busy part of Bristol a cyclist was cruising slowly along in front of a long line of traffic, hands off the bars, and using his mobile phone. I s'pose the ban on the use of mobile phones while driving doesn't apply to them, just like the prohibition on riding along the pavement doesn't seem to apply these days. (That one is a particular hobby horse of mine because it is the only time I was ever 'apprehended' by the fuzz. Apprehended meaning held by the ear and led home to confront my parents with the misdemeanour.) :lol: nostalgia ain't wot it used to be. ............

 

I think the same laws apply to cyclists and car drivers, only they cant be enforced properly: since you dont have to carry ID and have no licence plate...

 

I would never dream of trying to evade the cops when driving a motorised vehicle. But somehow, when I used to rollerskate in city centres, it seemed fair game, a good bit of fun even!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In urban areas cyclists should stick to the roads or especially prepared cycle paths. By which I mean that pedestrains don't walk on the road (often!) and could be rightfully moaned at for walking on a cycle path. As much as I understand why cyclists would want to do the towpath, they really aren't suitable and it would be nice for us on shanks' pony to have somewhere to walk where we're not having to keep an eye out.

 

Same goes for joggers - why should I have to 'break' my strole just because someone thinks they have the 'right of way' as they are running? Why can't they slow down?

Whilst I sympathise with people who are harassed by inconsiderate cyclists on pavements I have to disagree.

 

My reasoning is simple: I would rather be hit by a cyclist whilst walking on a pavement than hit a cyclist on a road whilst in my car.

 

As far as towpaths are concerned, a licence should be required and it should be a reasonable sum. I'd happily fit turnstiles to charge pedestrians access too and raise the fishing licence to an amount commensurate with the fact that his swim takes up about 60'(18.29m) of bank and canal for the day. I don't get too much hassle from cyclists (or walkers and anglers) but I subsidise them far more than licence dodgers or bridge hoppers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My reasoning is simple: I would rather be hit by a cyclist whilst walking on a pavement than hit a cyclist on a road whilst in my car.

 

True.

As far as towpaths are concerned, a licence should be required and it should be a reasonable sum. I'd happily fit turnstiles to charge pedestrians access too and raise the fishing licence to an amount commensurate with the fact that his swim takes up about 60'(18.29m) of bank and canal for the day. I don't get too much hassle from cyclists (or walkers and anglers) but I subsidise them far more than licence dodgers or bridge hoppers.

 

Not sure about charging pedestrians, but I agree with the general point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

True.

Not sure about charging pedestrians, but I agree with the general point.

Why not? They're trying to turn it into a linear theme park and a day at Alton Towers can cost a fortune (and provide less entertainment). As a boat owner with a currently broken engine, someone who walks the canals regularly is using the system, its towpaths and facilities far more than me.

 

You could even argue that a boat which doesn't cruise shouldn't pay a cruising tax. A ccing boat doesn't pay a mooring tax.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why not? They're trying to turn it into a linear theme park and a day at Alton Towers can cost a fortune (and provide less entertainment). As a boat owner with a currently broken engine, someone who walks the canals regularly is using the system, its towpaths and facilities far more than me.

 

I take your point. Just don't really agree with it. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems to me that the new code of conduct for cyclists & pedestrians is perfectly reasonable and makes sense.

 

Pedestrians have priority over cyclists otherwise cyclists could charge at full speed down the towpath forcing pedestrians into the water! There cannot be "equal priority" firstly because this is a misuse of the English language, and secondly because if such a notion did exist then nobody would have priority (like trying to have a road junction with "equal priority" - nobody would know who had right of way & you'd end up with chaos!) Somebody always has to give way to someone else.

 

On the subject of enforcement: A code of conduct is not a law, so it cannot be enforced legally. It is put in place only to encourage a certain type of behaviour amongst those involved. However, the liability in any accident arising from a breach of the code of conduct would lay with non-observers.

 

The issue in the original post of how BW can best publicise the code of conduct to cyclists and pedestrians certainly needs some thought.

Edited by blackrose
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"You could even argue that a boat which doesn't cruise shouldn't pay a cruising tax. A ccing boat doesn't pay a mooring tax."

 

 

Park your car and let the grass grow up around it and you still pay road tax! And as soon as white diesel comes in we will all pay road tax to cruise the canal in boats! Good man Gordon - the muppet nation just keep taking it - the French would be rioting in the streets by now!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whilst I sympathise with people who are harassed by inconsiderate cyclists on pavements I have to disagree.

 

My reasoning is simple: I would rather be hit by a cyclist whilst walking on a pavement than hit a cyclist on a road whilst in my car.

 

As far as towpaths are concerned, a licence should be required and it should be a reasonable sum. I'd happily fit turnstiles to charge pedestrians access too and raise the fishing licence to an amount commensurate with the fact that his swim takes up about 60'(18.29m) of bank and canal for the day. I don't get too much hassle from cyclists (or walkers and anglers) but I subsidise them far more than licence dodgers or bridge hoppers.

Agreed on the angling front!

 

As to pedestrians, we do need to keep in mind that a major argument for BW continuing to receive grant-in-aid from HMG is to pay for the use made of waterways by those who are not charged at point of use.

 

Any scheme to charge pedestrians would raise little money, and would give Gordon an excuse to cut BW's grant even more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any scheme to charge pedestrians would raise little money, and would give Gordon an excuse to cut BW's grant even more.

 

Unless, of course, Gordon decides to introduce a pavement tax ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"You could even argue that a boat which doesn't cruise shouldn't pay a cruising tax. A ccing boat doesn't pay a mooring tax."

Park your car and let the grass grow up around it and you still pay road tax! And as soon as white diesel comes in we will all pay road tax to cruise the canal in boats! Good man Gordon - the muppet nation just keep taking it - the French would be rioting in the streets by now!

Then why do we pay a mooring tax when moored online? I don't pay to park my car on the road but I choose to pay to park my sorned vehicles in a garage (and not pay road tax). Whichever way you look at it the system is flawed and always weighted against the boater.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cyclists are saving the planet maaan! Two tings for the racers to bear in mind: be considerate it's free. expect trouble if you aren't - 'canals are wet' in the words of a famous lapel badge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

im fed up of our "private" nation. so much is private and must be paid for its untrue.

i think walking along side a canal, cycling alongside it or skipping.. or however you like to move yourself around these days should be entirely free. it may be a man made thing this canal system but its still carved into a free world.

the very idea that we should pay or be licenced to walk or self propel ourselves anywhere is completely absurd.

 

so many places are private in this country its hard to find anywhere that's public. common ground is so rare these days and everyone just accepts paying for everything. such as Vat added to fuel which is already more than half tax... so taxes on top of taxes on top of taxes etc. Paying for water, Paying more at "busy times" to use public transport.

i think commonsense guidlines on how to use a shared public space is the way to go. not toll booths as some people have suggested on the tow paths... those who suggested that need to have a sit down and have a word with themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We are moored to the towpath at present and there is a very good towpath surface about 2m wide, which appeals to cyclists.

Everytime you try to walk long the towpath to get anywhere, all you seem to get is ting-ting - coming through.

You have to stand back, stop walking and let the bike pass. Another 10 yards walked, ting-ting, same again.

It takes ages to get anywhere. It is the same with anybody just walking along the towpath. Pedestrians might have right of way, but as the bikes go faster, it is the walkers who have to keep stopping.

 

Weekends are awful as the bike stream appears non-stop.

 

So far, the cyclists have been polite and used either their bell or voices as a warning of impending arrival and they have virtually all said thanks as they pass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How are the cyclists going to be told about this and who is going to police it?

Cyclists will consult the waterscrape website every time they leave home, in pretty much the same way that motorists phone Heathrow Airport before setting off to the shops. In other words, they won't be told, and nobody weill police it. It's total nonsense, designed to make BW's complete failure to deal with the problem look like an imaginative new solution.

 

(I feel as if I should be adding some kind of smiley to this, but I can't find the right one. If I could, it would be the "trying to see the funny side of all this pointless bureaucratic nonsense" one)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i cycled along the river lee a few times and i noticed a small notice on apost saying all cyclists should have a permit...

 

i have no idea how that was supposed to be enforced, but no one ever questioned me. i dont know where a permit was supposedly available from either.

 

its a bit like having a highway code.. i think a lot of people dont know their highway code for using the highways..

such as what is the single and double dotted white line for at junctions? one line is to signify you must give way to pedestrians and the other ( when theres a double) is to say you must give way to traffic from your right.

theres lots of rules we should know but dont, two tings will be a rule that only those who will obey it know.. those who should know it and have it enforced will continue to ride around fast and not bother too much about pedestrians.

 

I believe in self policing in systems like that.. for example i saw a fisherman catapulting stones from the towpath at a family of coots on the opposite side of the canal. I was just getting the BB gun or water pistol out to shoot him with as he packed up and left. if he had stayed just a few moments longer he would have had a dose of his own medicine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

im fed up of our "private" nation. so much is private and must be paid for its untrue.

i think walking along side a canal, cycling alongside it or skipping.. or however you like to move yourself around these days should be entirely free. it may be a man made thing this canal system but its still carved into a free world.

the very idea that we should pay or be licenced to walk or self propel ourselves anywhere is completely absurd.

 

All very sweet, but how do you imagine that the costs of maintaining the canal are to be found?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All very sweet, but how do you imagine that the costs of maintaining the canal are to be found?

 

through its use as a canal.. not as a walking/cycling path. it should also be government maintained, in the same way as the roads.

and funded by tax. (licence money)

it would also be good to see all motorised boats or water vehicles being put onto the dvla system, give them a number plate, make them traceable and this way its easier when you want to buy and sell them.

if people needed an extra category added to their driving licences and a basic competence test then even better.

although it wouldnt be so good for hire boat holiday type companies... thats bit of a flaw in the arguement for licences.

 

I suppose im not sure really, but charging walkers and cyclists isnt a way to improve funding.

how about we spend a few less BILLIONS on the sodding pointless wars and military and maybe use some money for the good of the population. health, education and recreation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.