Horse riders on public footpaths

[alchresearch]

There are some really arrogant cyclists on the Lune coastal path into Lancaster.

 

The sign clearly states that cyclists must give way. But that doesn't stop cyclists shouting "BIKE, MOVE" as they approach pedestrians.

[Isabelle]

Public footpath means something specific in this case though.

 

So horses should use roads and bridleways and private land (with permission). Not public footpaths.

 

Dogs can use any of them (and aren't specifically mentioned).

 

---------- Post added 16-08-2016 at 09:24 ----------

 

 

Shouting causes pedestrians to do strange things. If a cyclists shouted and your wife sidestepped then they'd have a collision, instead of safely passing with a foot to spare.

 

I've called out 'on your right' before (this was to another cyclist with a child trailer), and he then moved to the right

I've had families spot me, and try to move out of the way, only for one straggler to stop like a rabbit caught in the headlights, in the middle of the path.

 

---------- Post added 16-08-2016 at 12:38 ----------

 

There are some really arrogant cyclists on the Lune coastal path into Lancaster.

 

The sign clearly states that cyclists must give way. But that doesn't stop cyclists shouting "BIKE, MOVE" as they approach pedestrians.

 

Because bikes tend to move faster than walkers, it makes sense for walkers to let cyclists pass rather than the cyclist riding at 2 or 3mph behind the walkers for miles and miles

But we should all be polite and considerate to each other, manners cost nothing

[InigoMontoya]

Here we go again, road tax doesn't exist, it's vehicle excise duty that you pay. The Roads are paid for from general taxation which everybody pays.

 

I think that's why this contributor used the emoticon?

[samssong]

You do realise that many roads in Sheffield and into the countryside were laid out before cars were even invented. They were built for pedestrians, carts and animals.

A path near us has a sign walkers only , but it does not stop the cyclists and horse riders who think they have the right of way.

 

---------- Post added 16-08-2016 at 16:04 ----------

 

Rule 54

You MUST NOT take a horse onto a footpath or pavement, and you should not take a horse onto a cycle track. Use a bridleway where possible.

 

I think the rule must be like parking on the pavement for vehicle, could a horse go anywhere without a horse being on a footpath? The Highway Code needs serious revision.

 

The question for the OP comes back to where they were, was there a sign saying public footpath?

The councils are very short of money these days, and dont want to be bothered by triviality.

A sign on a public footpath near to us saying walkers only has been erected in the last year.

It is ignored by horse riders.

[willman]

IF current signage has been applied it is possible that it is has replaced a bridleway or a public right of way (at the landowners discretion) these aren't prohibited to horses.

If the footpath has been in use by horses for 14 years + then the order for walkers only could be amended although the signage doesn't have to be.

 

Cyclists should always give way t pedestrians according to the Countryside code - they don't and they have no excuse for not doing so, that isn't selfish.

[samssong]

IF current signage has been applied it is possible that it is has replaced a bridleway or a public right of way (at the landowners discretion) these aren't prohibited to horses.

If the footpath has been in use by horses for 14 years + then the order for walkers only could be amended although the signage doesn't have to be.

 

Cyclists should always give way t pedestrians according to the Countryside code - they don't and they have no excuse for not doing so, that isn't selfish.

The sign also has a notice saying Horses, cyclists and motor cyclist are not allowed.

[Cyclone]

A path near us has a sign walkers only , but it does not stop the cyclists and horse riders who think they have the right of way.

 

---------- Post added 16-08-2016 at 16:04 ----------

 

A sign on a public footpath near to us saying walkers only has been erected in the last year.

It is ignored by horse riders.

 

Is the sign a legal one, or just wishful thinking by someone. It doesn't sound like a sign with any legal weight, so I'd ignore it as well.

[Guest sibon]

Is the sign a legal one, or just wishful thinking by someone. It doesn't sound like a sign with any legal weight, so I'd ignore it as well.

 

The council are putting up green "Walkers only"signs up in many places. On footpaths and on byways.

It is a shame that you are anti-social enough, or arrogant enough to ignore them.

[Cyclone]

You've confused me with someone riding a horse I think.

 

My point however was that putting up a sign doesn't make it legal. Bridleways are for pedestrians, horses and cycles.

[Guest sibon]

No. I clearly identified you as the person who said he would ignore a walkers only sign.

 

You must be the confused one. Tis all up there ^^ in black and white.