I find that a minority, when hearing that, instinctively take a step left before realizing that they need to move to the right.
A few thoughts; lack of infrastructure for pedestrians and cyclists is what crowds us together and forces close passes, try to remember this and be patient and kind.
The individual being passed has the right of way, they have no obligation to make way. The individual passing is responsible for doing so in a safe manner, no passing on turns or where view is obscured, sometimes need to slow down and wait before passing. Always wait for opposing traffic to clear before passing, don’t dart out in front of opposing traffic making them slow or take evasive action.
A bell is the most effective and least startling method of alerting others to your presence. People seem to instinctively move right when hearing a bell. As mentioned by OP, calling out on your left sometimes makes people move left. (Not true on group rides with experienced riders, on your left is the correct method there)
Source, decades of cycle commuting and pleasure riding.
Edit: directionally challenged
Only when you’re passing them on the left imo.
If you’re cycling and passing a pedestrian? I ding the bell with enough time to let them step to one side, and then I go through the gap they create. The gap can be on whatever side they want.
Not everyone respects the ding.
It’s a request, not an order
Well, if they don’t, you’ll just have to wait until you both get somewhere where you can pass? The other option is running them over, which, whilst them blocking you is a dick move, running someone over is more unethical.
I’ve seen this only once or twice, so I think it’s exceptionally rare. My hypothesis is that it relates to which leg they happen to standing on, at the time that they hear your call: if they’re on their left, making their next step farther to the right is perfectly natural and fluid. But if they’re already on their right leg, the startle response might lead them to undo their step, meaning they now step to the left.
But in any case, the distance that you call out to another trail user should be enough so that even if they make a mistake, there is sufficient time to avoid a close shave. If this means riding slower as you approach, then that’s what is necessary.
Around me, the trails are marked according to the state guidelines for pedestrians, which is to walk on the left, against traffic, so they can see oncoming cyclists. But even when they choose not to, that doesn’t excuse a lack of caution when riding nearby pedestrians. In the end, everyone just wants to get where they’re going, without externalized risks, safely. If a single mistake would jeopardize someone’s bodily safety, that’s a problem.
Your trails have you walk on the left? That is crazy.
Yep! Though other jurisdictions in California might have everyone on the right. It’s not consistent at all, but basically every trail will have pavement markings or signs at the entrances to announce what the policy is.
The idea with walking on left is to give pedestrians a fighting chance, when all other traffic is right-hand traffic. If a pedestrian is walking on right and is struck from behind, they stand no chance whatsoever to avoid serious injury. This advice only applies to pedestrians because humans only walk at 5 km/h.
And to be abundant clear, it’s never a pedestrian’s job to dodge negligent traffic. But if the worse comes to be, it’s a final opportunity to save their own skin, when every other procedural safety layer has failed them. It’s a safety net, not a support beam.
Pavement markings
WTH kind of “trails” do you have over there? I thought we were talking about like trails in the woods/mountains, maybe a gravel road at best…?
I did say “pavement markings or signs”, and this was meant to cover both types: here in California, a “trail” can refer to anything from a minimally-improved dirt route through the forest no wider than a person, to an asphalt-paved multi-use facility with smaller versions of the familiar traffic control signs.
In the context of OP’s question, I didn’t specifically discuss narrow, single-track trails because there’s no possibility of a bicyclist squeezing past a pedestrian without it being a very obvious negotiation of space.
But there are plenty of regional trails which reuse the alignment of an old fire road or railroad. So the prospect of riding a bicycle on dirt in a 3-meter wide dirt corridor is not unheard of. So to come across a pedestrian is also not abnormal. If the weather is good, all walks [no pun intended] of life will make their way to enjoy the outdoors here.
Regional recreation areas will post their trail rules at the trailhead, and periodically along the trails. Some rules are obvious, like not littering. Others are not: horses sometimes get priority over both cyclists and pedestrians, because in areas with lots of horse riding, the horses could get spooked and bolt.
This appears to be a cultural/language thing (I’m not from the Anglosphere), I just didn’t have any concept of a “paved trail”, it immediately seemed like an oxymoron to me.
I’ve come across trails with priority markings, but in my country most trails don’t really have any kind of marked “trail head” at all (apart from the ones very near major cities) like you commonly have in the US.
Ah, I see. American English seems to use trail for almost any path that isn’t meant for vehicular traffic. Note that some historic routes through the West were inconsistently named in the 1800s, so the Oregon Trail was indeed through unpaved wilderness, but the Mormon Road was also unimproved.
To defend the comment, I’m including paved trails designed for non-car traffic. So there is a 3+ m wide paved trail for large parts.
This appears to be a cultural/language thing (I’m not from the Anglosphere), I just didn’t have any concept of a “paved trail”, it immediately seemed like an oxymoron to me.
What would you call a paved surface that is dedicated to non-car traffic?
Pavement? Path? Footpath? Biking path?
In my language we use the literal translation of “road” also for paved surfaces not meant for cars. We use “walking-road” to emphasise the fact when it’s in a place where it might be confused for a car-road. We also have “bike-roads” that are paved/marked like a road but dedicated for bikes only.
I think I just immediately associated “trail” with “hiking trail” or “bike trail” which I associate with more rugged terrain and not paved paths.
