Narrowly missed an accident on the path...

Not a ride goes by where I don't worry about dog darting.  And half the time the dog owners don't even look apologetic when it does happen.  I can sympathize if I come up behind you and your dog on the path, and I scare the dog.  But stopping them from darting across the path is not too much to ask, imho.

And I realize I could be riding on the road.  But these particular paths do not have speed limits and are built for riding.  I would feel entirely different if I were trying to do this around Lake Calhoun, for instance.

This group was larger than normal, but I do often see groups of 4 or 5.  Yeah, doesn't seem like a good workout and also unnecessarily risky.  Although I suppose it's hard to manage a group that size on the road, where you shouldn't be riding more than 2 abreast.  Hard to understand those roadies

I have something of an advantage since I work overnights and can get out on the trails late morning/early afternoon when there are fewer users, but I call this CRUS aka. Clueless Recreational User Syndrome. 

This syndrome is characterized by a general lack of awareness of one's surroundings stemming from said person not having a specific purpose for being on the trail.  The trail is an end in itself (just being outside) for these people, unlike a lot of us here where the trail is a means to an end (fitness, training, though fare). 

Specific symptoms include:
Erratic actions: not holding a line, sudden stops, starts and left turns
Inability to control animals on leashes
Inability to control kids (not on leashes) esp. kids on bikes out of reach and weaving all over the place
Lack of attention
Inability to hear "on the left" due to headphones, cell phones, or selective hearing
Inability to predict the actions of other users on the path and allow other users space
Inability to comprehend that others may be trying to accomplish something out there related to time, distance or other goals

This is syndrome can be confused with DATUS or Drunk Trail User Syndrome, however those afflicted with DATUS will show more stumbling, vomiting and aggressive behavior than the more common CRUS sufferer.

The saddest part of both of these is that those afflicted rarely understand they have a problem and therefore do not seek help, they simply blame others for their situation. This is comparable to a similar condition found in pool users called PESTY or Phelps Emulator Slow To Yield

They have no reason not to engage in these behaviors because they aren't driven by a time, plan or goal and so don't realize that others might be trying to do something more than going out for a walk.  If a bike nearly mows them down they blame the biker and not their own unpredictable behavior.

They also have the gall to be startled when passed as they are tooling along with the headphones or the cell.  Not my fault that they can't hear me coming up when they put stuff in their ears and crank up the volume.

Oh well

We are rec users too but we don't tend to be as clueless.  Trails are multi-user and funded by everyone too. I get that there shouldn't be a limit  to who can use them. On the other hand, the only reason we don't get in a car accident every time we get behind the wheel is that most people have an understanding of a set of rules of conduct on the street and an awareness that if you choose to ignore them that problems will occur.  There are user rules posted for most trails, but since we don't need a license for our feet no one reads really them. Anyway here are a couple of links for bikes in the media in the last few days: 

http://www.startribune.com/local/51532117.html
http://kstp.com/news/stories/S1105837.shtml?cat=206

Beth - that's awesome!  Very astute.

I like this from the Star Tribune article.  Pretty much sums up my problem:

Even so, drivers seem more likely to stop for bicyclists than they used to be, Springer said. But that causes confusion about who's in the right.   "If we're already developing a culture of deferring to the cyclist, let's codify that," he said. "Where the practice differs from the laws, it's dangerous."

Edit:  Just had to pull myself away from the comments on the strib article.  Very interesting...

Your assessment is pretty accurate = dillweed.  The group was taking up pretty much their whole half of the path (as they have the right to) and this guy wasn't even passing someone.  He just veered right into their lane...

this is exactly why "bike paths" are now the last place on earth where I'll ride my bike...easy for me to say living out in cow country...but even when I travel - no way in frickin' heck...I even get nervous running on bike paths when I'm forced to train while on biz travel

I am always thinking of things I would write, if I could trail a billboard or something on my bike.  Things like:

1. See MN Stat 169.222 - Bikes are allowed on the road.
2. Where's your helmet, idiot?
3. Take out the earphones and pay attention
4. If you're passing me, let me know

What else? 

Good to hear you are all right Emily.  I DO NOT ride on bike paths unless I have to.  Rode on my first path today after canoeing and darn near got in a crash.  My last 2 crashes were also on this path, The Cannon Trail.  I'm coming up on a group of three and yell a little warning "On your left"  What do they do?  Two of them dart off to the left into my passing lane.  I had slowed enough and was able to swerve into the grass to avoid the.  I will not ride on paths again.

It bugs me that the solution is that I should avoid the path.  This particular path (Cedar Lake Trail, leads to Greenway) is like a bicycle highway.  This is not your everyday lake path, for instance, meant more for scenery than anything.  This is a route that connects me to where I need to go.  I assumed that was the point of it and there is no posted speed limit, like there is around lake paths.

There have been a lot of articles about the surge of popularity in biking, one that struck me was in my current issue of Dwell Magazine (or all weird places).  They were talking about design and that bicycle companies was busily working on ways to mass produce cheaper, better bikes.  But the author of the article suggests that if we want to make biking more "accessible" (presumably why this product design is going on) the work needs to go into the infrastructure to make biking easier/safer and not just creating different bike designs.   For instance, I live about 14 biking miles from my work place.  The first 10 could be on this path, but the last four are riding on city streets and I am not crazy about these particular streets so I've avoided riding to work.  If someone built a safe path to ride on Snelling Ave, I would ride to work. 

But, if your argument is that the paths are recreational...

When I'm biking on these paths, I am doing it mostly for the sheer joy of it.  Yes, I'm on a bike where I ride aero.  Yes, I can comfortably be going 20+ a lot of the time, since it's a very flat path.   I am putting in the miles and having a good time.  Why should I temper my use of the path? 

I think in one article link posted above I read a statement about how if we behaved as wackily on the road in cars, as we do on paths, it would be mayhem and accidents all day long (this is paraphrased of course).   So I'm a Porsche/Tribike and you're a Yugo/cruiser.  That's cool, we can both be there.  But how about some respect and a desire to play well together?  All we'd need to do is get serious about training and spreading the word about rules, just like we do before we put people behind the steering wheel in a car.

(Bryan - stay the heck off that Cannon trail!!!!)