With warmer weather (hopefully) returning soon the trails in and around DC will soon be crowded with walkers, bikers, joggers and others. This leads to greater chances for mishap as indeed happened last Tuesday, according to these first hand accounts from a passerby and the "victim" herself. I put the quotes around the word victim because it's not clear from the account what actually happened, only this much is clear:
A pregnant woman had an encounter with a cyclist that knocked her off her feet and resulted in a nasty head wound, broken ribs and multiple bruises. Nasty stuff, but she (and baby) are okay. Apparently she was wearing and listening to an Ipod while on the trail.
Other than that, we don't know what happened. The cyclist that struck her says he gave an audible warning. We don't know whether she moved in his way, he veered into her or what happened.
But if she were listening to Itunes, failed to move to the right after (not) hearing an audible warning, then she is possibly just as much to blame as the cyclist.
Cyclists get a lot of complaints from peds. But as someone who is on the Rock Creek Bike Trail every day and the Capitol Cresent Trail I can say this:
Most bikers I see are wearing helmets, are not listening to Ipods, ride single file and give audible warnings before overtaking and passing another cyclist or ped. What's more, they are always riding on the right side of the trail.
Not so most peds - they tend to walk two or three abreast, almost all single walkers or joggers are listening to an Ipod, and, when I give a warning I'm passing -- even if the walker is alone and in the middle of the path -- they won't budge an inch. And, worst of all, some walk on the wrong side facing traffic, a move that invites a collision on a blind curve which are plentiful in Rock Creek.
While cyclists do need to slow down especially on crowded trails, peds have just as much responsiblity to ensure safety as we cyclists. That means get your butt on your side of the trail, listening out and being alert.
3 comments:
I think that you have a few good points about general courtesy on the multi-user path. Although, in the original article, he reports that a witness said that the cyclist gave an audible warning. I was a little disappointed that the pedestrian's prescriptions for better safety failed to include any notion that the cyclist, roller-blader, and walker share responsibilities for a safe path.
Thanks for the discussion, Scott. Linked you at my site on the same subject. You're far kinder to the pedestrian than I feel like being . . .
I was reticent to go too far in criticizing her because we don't really know what happened. The Ipod could have everything or nothing to do with the accident.
However, her response -- and that of her husband in the comment section -- shows her to be selfish in her use of the trail. She would regulate all other users, but finds it "unfair" to impose on regulation on her that would force her to use the trail in a way that doesn't suit her (i.e., w/out an Ipod)
You make the point that there are many peds who think the they own the trail -- and I agree. The woman and her husband argue for a designated "bike only" trail...but you and I both know that cyclists would soon be confronting pedestrians on it, especially on nice weekends and other peek times.
The argument for imposing a speed limit on cyclists is absurd and unenforceable (have you actually seen anyone drive 65 mph on the Beltway?). Even the posted speed can be dangerous in crowded conditions. My overriding point is that we need to safely share the trail which means everyone needs to do their part.
Unfortnately the woman in this case wants everyone to tailor their use of the trail to her needs. And sadly, I do see that as typical of most peds.
I'll get off my soapbox now.
Post a Comment