TexasCHLforum.com

mr.72,

This'll be my last post on this subject. (probably to the great relief of those reading this thread...)

If you refuse to abide by the rules when on the trail on your bicycle - that's your call.

Riding fast on the trails in state parks is verboten. Period.

If you do it, you're in the wrong.

You call others rude for not getting out of your way, when you're in the wrong, is quite the paradox and makes getting the message across a challenge. Your attitude is rather one of those instances of: "Don't confuse me with the facts, when my mind is made up" and would be comical if it didn't put others at risk.

Hurt someone with your bicycle while hurtling down the trail and your liability will be dreadful.

mr. 72,

I'll take the responsibility of not being clear.

When on the trail - common courtesy dictates. I couldn't agree more. People hiking should not block the trail.

That said, my point, as I mentioned before, is hikers shouldn't have to have their heads on a swivel for fast moving cyclists. They shouldn't have to be ready to jump out of the way of fast moving cyclists. Trails, especially those in state parks, aren't there as fast exercise lanes.

Now, if I'm still not clear, please take the time to verify what I'm saying with any of the LEO state park folks. They'll be happy to inform you as to who has the greater (if you will) right of way - fast moving cyclists or slow moving hikers when both are on the trail.

KD5NRH and subsonic,

I agree with both of you.

When on the trail, by all means give others room to pass safely and I do.

aardwolf,

One of my outdoor pet peeves are those cyclists on the trail who are going warp speed and assume hikers must quickly scoot out of their way.

They have their presumptions backward. On the trail cyclists must yield to pedestrians at all times. Period. Them's the rules.

To fully enjoy park trails a lack of urgency is what people expect and is supported by park rules. They shouldn't be expected to have their head on a swivel in order not to get run down by someone on a bicycle. Slow moving nature lovers can be expected stopped with binoculars to eyes or someone explaining to little ones about the particulars flora and fauna.

Hikers and bikers can both enjoy the trail, but the trails aren't there as fast exercise lanes. Quite the opposite.

mr.72,

"3. casual walkers who don't yield trail to faster-moving trail users"

By "faster-moving trail users" are you referring to bicycles?

If so, be advised, in state parks and most other parks, hikers/pedestrians have the right-of-way and those on bicycles have to yield to them.

Pedestrians aren't obligated to move out of the way. Bicycles are also required to travel at speeds not much faster than those afoot in these same parks.

If the pedestrians aren't yielding fast enough for you, you just may have to get off the bike and walk it until the pedestrians thin out.

I say this as a fellow cyclist.

I put in about two hundred miles plus a week on my bike(s), so I'm a relatively serious cyclist and got to know the particulars about bikes in parks as a State Park Volunteer for eight years.

Loose, large, dangerous dogs.

Their owners however are worse.

With an angry face, they'll argue their dog has a perfect right to roam free and chase people, old or young, big or small, and further, these pesky people have no right to protest or defend themselves from imminent attack.

My conclusion: These owners really do know better, but consider acting irrationally to be their only effective response in the face of their obvious irresponsibility.

I don't the law regarding this issue, but there should be some form of quick justice from this type dog owner. Perhaps, a fine for a first offense and a larger for a second and confiscation of the dog for a third, who'll then be put in a shelter and have an opportunity to be adopted or ...?

You might say "Poor dog, it's not his fault" and you'd be right. But, who and what's more important? The dog or the innocent, at risk person who can't use the streets without being in danger of dog attack because of an unreliable dog owner?