Article written for the Friars Cliff residents association.

Want an argument? Get on your bike.
At a recent SAMRA meeting I was taken to task regarding my concern about cyclists who consider that it is in their right to cycle at speed on designated footpaths. The footpaths I was referring to are those across country or along sea shore usually about a metre wide and designated not as bridleways or pavements just simply footpaths for ramblers, walkers or any other humanoid on two legs wanting to take air and exercise in a peaceful and pedestrian way knowing that whatever or whoever they meet, the pedestrian and all that that means, has priority. The cyclists I was referring to was those Lycra clad trialists risking all to ride as fast as possible over impossible terrain.
I was taken to task because clearly I failed to acknowledge that cyclists as a lobby group see themselves as an integral part of the whole program apparently designed to save the planet and use this to promote cycling wherever they want whenever they want and at whatever speed they want. In other words the pedestrian just has to get out of their way. This presumption ignores the law as it stands and has in fact stood since the Highways Act of 1835 (section 72) and as amended in 1888 by section 85 (1) of the Local Government Act.
So I am not surprised that at my surgeries and in my residents meetings the vexed question of why cyclists are allowed to use pavements and footpaths is constantly at the top of the list.
Even our erstwhile government had a go at ensuring pedestrian priority as in 1999 they introduced new legislation to allow fixed penalty notices (FPN) to be served on anyone who is guilty of cycling on a footway. The Home Office, presumably after considerable lobbying issued a statement shortly afterwards to the effect that the policy was only designed to be applied to cyclists who were riding in a manner that may endanger others. It went on to further confuse those who are supposed to enforce legislation by indicating that the fixed penalty (FPN) was not aimed at cyclists who sometime feel obliged to use pavements out of fear of traffic and who show consideration to other pavement users.
Identical Home Office advice was given as to the actions that can be taken by Police Community Support Officers whose responsibility for applying this legislation is also clearly provided in the Anti Social Behaviour Bill. However the caveat applies that Police discretion is called for when dealing with children cycling on pavements and those who show consideration to other users. And that no child under 16 should be issued with a FPN. (John Crozier the Home Office Feb 2004)
So where does this leave us? Well clearly the answer from Dorset County Council is the provision of green cycle highways at vast expense to the taxpayer where the cyclist has the opportunity of risking the perils of the highways. Sustainable transport schemes abound and the general thrust is to encourage quite rightly, the healthy, bracing, earth saving and socially acceptable pedal pushing as a means of getting around whilst eating five portions of fruit and vegetables a day. This providing the cyclist is sufficiently protected with Knee, elbow and head protection designed to prevent self injury should he or she see fit to run into the odd pedestrian who was foolish enough to think that he or she had priority on the footpath and pavements.
I am not surprised given the above that application of the legislation regarding cycling on footpaths and pavements is difficult leading to impossible to enforce, nor am I surprised that it is being ignored locally and as far as I can see nationally by, shall we say, the less considerate cyclist.
I am in no doubt that cycling is a safe and healthy past time and should be encouraged, I am also in no doubt that there are places where this past time can be deemed as a danger to both cyclist and pedestrian and that is on footpaths and pavements.
I am further mindful that whatever the cyclists think, however much they lobby, when they are on two wheels they are in control of a vehicle and in the case that they happen upon the odd pedestrian, it is the pedestrian and not they that has priority.
As in all activities that cross boundaries like this a reasonable and measured response in respect of legislation is required but so does a great deal of consideration for others especially by those in control of machines that can if misused cause great fear and in some cases injury to those less able or those who are simply out to enjoy the joys of the wonderful footpaths in this glorious Borough and County.
So instead of an argument, get off your bike!!