Wouldn’t that also have a high likelihood of spilling the rider, too, by knocking his steering out of line? Doesn’t sound like a good thing for anyone at all!
Is this part of it?
http://www.strava.com/segments/6834725
Radar guns would have a field day, there 
Looks a nice route.
When I was a child in the mid-1950s, we were taught in school how to lawfully behave on foot and on a bicycle on a street. Apparently, that’s not taught any more. Bicycles go on the right side, just like cars. If there are no sidewalks, pedestrians go on the left, facing traffic, the better to see the hazards.
When I’m cycling, I use both my bell and say “on your left” when overtaking pedestrians or slower bikes, and warn oncoming bikers of potentially hazardous conditions I just encountered. There is usually plenty of room for all of us. I also thank pedestrians if they move aside, and they often thank me for using the bell. If the pedestrians don’t hear me – ears stuffed full of earbuds – my tires are sturdy enough that I can and will and do go around them on the grass. I also praise well-behaved dogs to their owners, and really, most dogs are very well behaved, and don’t go all crazy around bicycles.
Around here, the pedestrians and pleasure cyclists are pretty nice. The hardcore speedy cyclists are on the road, not trails, and deal with cars. The paved trail people who are less nice are the skaters, and they also take up the most room. However, considering the balance issues with skates, I understand their tendency to take up a lot of room and their reluctance to yield to anyone.
When I’m a pedestrian, I always get out of the way. It is much easier for me to step aside, if there is a space issue, than it is for a lot of bicycles. Especially the ones with skinny tires.
Not typically. I’ve been hit a glancing blow by a handlebar end once or twice without the cyclist slowing down or even wobbling. Bikes are pretty stable. On a multi-use path, pedestrians should be predictable and polite to cyclists passing in a safe way. “Safe” in this context means either yielding a couple of feet of room or slowing down to no more than 5MPH or so. If I can feel the wind of your passage, you’re going too fast or too close.
I wonder how this in enforceable since bikes don’t come with OEM speedometers? Even if you have a bike computer, many people don’t know how to set them correctly. some people use once computer head among different bikes (with different sized wheels); if you didn’t switch it to your current wheel size, you could be speeding while you think you’re legal. Even if you have a properly set computer, because of their limited display size & large # of pieces of info, you might not even have speed on your screen.
Is there a buffer like they do with cars, meaning you won’t get pulled over for doing < 30 or < 35 in a 25mph zone?
I understand your point on slowing down; however, 5mph is 12 minute miles, I run significantly faster than that (& I’m not that fast).
All the similar bike paths around here have rules that all traffic stays to the right. I find that is much better for traffic flow with bikers, walkers, runners, roller bladers, dog walkers, etc. I’ve also been in places where pedestrians walk opposite bikers and IMO it’s much less safe for everyone.
What does “facing oncoming bicycle traffic” mean? No walking backwards?
In the UK if a sidewalk/pavement isn’t marked as dual use then it’s for pedestrians only. The dual use trails usually have a line dividing the walking side from the cycling side. In the countryside there are several different trail designations. Footpaths are only open to walkers. Bridleways are open to horses, bikes, and walkers. A RUPP (route used as a public path) and BOAT (byway open to all traffic) are similar to each other and open to anything that can get down them. This applies to England and Wales, Scotland does it differently.
On the etiquette side, everything gives way to horses, then walkers, then bikes. Bells on bikes are seen as a polite way to announce yourself, and all new bikes are required to be sold with a bell. They are quite cheap little bells that you can take off in less than a minute.
It means bikers keep to the right side of the right lane and walkers keep to the left side of the left lane. They ride/walk opposing each other so the walkers can see and react to the bikers. It’s the same as walking on the street when there’s no sidewalk; you keep to the left and walk near the shoulder of the road facing oncoming traffic instead of keeping as far right with the cars coming up behind you.
Thanks for explaining. Well then it depends on how wide the path is.
I ride the Minuteman most days. I wonder if I’ve ever passed you.
I used to commute on the Minuteman, but now I have to drive to work 
I’ve got a situation like that a couple miles from my house. There’s a narrow bikepath in between a wide boardwalk and a one-way street. If I’m bicycling through there in the wrong direction to go on the road, the bikepath is my only legal choice.
But the pedestrians use the bikepath and the boardwalk pretty much interchangeably, so I often give up and ride the wrong way on the one-way street, which goes against every nerve in my body, but it beats having to stop every five seconds for pedestrians. Fortunately the street sees only light traffic.
But wouldn’t this mean the walkers are on the right with bikers traveling in the same direction they are (opposite of oncoming bikers in their own right lane)? Or is this a situation where there’s one-way traffic? Most bike trails I’ve been on have two-way traffic.
My suggestion would be for people with earbuds to keep the volume low enough to hear a bike bell or an “on your left”. I’ve passed plenty of people with ear buds who couldn’t hear me alerting them I was passing.
It’s not a complicated system and it has really been explained enough already.
Pedestrians walk in whichever lane means they’re facing the oncoming traffic that has the potential to collide with them. If you ride in the right lane, that means pedestrians walk in the left lane.
I understand the system and think it works fine on a road. But on a bike path, when the speeds differential between walkers and bikers are lower and it’s far more common to travel 2 or 3 abreast, I don’t think it’s safer. I can bike slowly behind walkers when it’s not safe to pass - there’s not much I can do when they’re walking towards me except stop or pass dangerously. Add to the mix rollerbladers, runners, and kids and I think you are much safer when all traffic stays to the right.
Most bikepaths I have ridden or walked use “all traffic stay right” rules. Can anyone find any studies that show accident rates?
I wonder too. Perhaps from now on you can always call out “On your left, Motorgirl!” No one will find it odd, I’m sure.
People do that here in the Netherlands, too, and it DRIVES ME CRAZY!!!
In civilized parts of the world we drive, ride and walk on the right! Walking on the other side ONLY makes sense if you plan on stepping off the road when there’s oncoming traffic. if not, behave like a normal human being and walk or run on the right side of the road.
This can get quite dangerous, too: I once almost collided with a runner who came around a blind corner at fairly high speed. I wasn’t expecting anyone around that corner/bend because I didn’t see anyone going there. Also, at 2 x 20 km/h the collision would have been at 40 km/h, while under normal circumstances the worst would be that I’d hit a pedestrian from behind at 20 - 5 = 15 km/h.
Yeah, it does depend on pedestrians being willing and able to adjust as necessary. Often that just means moving into single file so other traffic can pass. That’s my answer to your point too, Telemark. If people are walking two or three abreast, at least they can see oncoming traffic and move out of the way.
The general rule, as used here on roads without paths, is to adjust when near bends to increase visibility. If walking on the left and the road is bending to the left, you should move to the right for the bend.