"Salmon-ing" on a Sidewalk?
#27
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Eugene, Oregon, USA
Posts: 27,547
Mentioned: 217 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18377 Post(s)
Liked 4,512 Times
in
3,354 Posts
It depends.
I find it annoying when people are apparently doing that for a few miles.
But, if I'm on the left side of a 4-lane road and planning to make a left turn, or go to a business on the left within about 5 blocks, then I'll do the Sidewalk Salmon.
We also have a local bike path that ends at traffic light with no buttons or sensors to cross the road to the right side. So, one ends up doing some sort of salmon until either traffic clears, or one gets a half block down to the next light with a button.
I find it annoying when people are apparently doing that for a few miles.
But, if I'm on the left side of a 4-lane road and planning to make a left turn, or go to a business on the left within about 5 blocks, then I'll do the Sidewalk Salmon.
We also have a local bike path that ends at traffic light with no buttons or sensors to cross the road to the right side. So, one ends up doing some sort of salmon until either traffic clears, or one gets a half block down to the next light with a button.
#28
Full Member
Thread Starter
Sorry I wasn't clear, this on a .75 mile stretch of road that is quite wide enough to accommodate cyclists in the flow of traffic. The salmon-ing in this case didn't strike me as necessary
#29
Senior Member
IMO, the sidewalk is for people moving slowly - like pedestrians. Small children and the guys chugging along on BSOs/cruisers/BMX on the sidewalk don't bother me, as they are moving slowly. Taking a shortcut on the sidewalk moving slowly - also cool.
If the rider in question is chugging along slowly on the sidewalk, that's probably fine. If they're going faster, it begins to create a danger - both to the rider and to drivers. If I encountered a rider moving along pretty well, I might have a conversation about riding in the road - and offer to show them the way, selling it not as a criticism, but as a positive strategy to save time and get places faster.
That's a tough one. I think drivers who do not ride (or walk) are generally confused. Some non-cyclists have tried to tell me I'm supposed to be on the wrong side of the road, as they were taught that bike = pedestrian, not bike = vehicle. In the states I've lived in, pedestrians are supposed to go against traffic, and cyclists are supposed to ride with traffic.
So the question is whether the salmoning sidewalk cyclist is more like a pedestrian or a cyclist. I think they might actually be doing the right thing so long as they're moving slowly, but otherwise, belong in the road (as a cyclist, not a pedestrian.)
If the rider in question is chugging along slowly on the sidewalk, that's probably fine. If they're going faster, it begins to create a danger - both to the rider and to drivers. If I encountered a rider moving along pretty well, I might have a conversation about riding in the road - and offer to show them the way, selling it not as a criticism, but as a positive strategy to save time and get places faster.
That's a tough one. I think drivers who do not ride (or walk) are generally confused. Some non-cyclists have tried to tell me I'm supposed to be on the wrong side of the road, as they were taught that bike = pedestrian, not bike = vehicle. In the states I've lived in, pedestrians are supposed to go against traffic, and cyclists are supposed to ride with traffic.
So the question is whether the salmoning sidewalk cyclist is more like a pedestrian or a cyclist. I think they might actually be doing the right thing so long as they're moving slowly, but otherwise, belong in the road (as a cyclist, not a pedestrian.)
#30
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Mississauga/Toronto, Ontario canada
Posts: 8,721
Bikes: I have 3 singlespeed/fixed gear bikes
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4227 Post(s)
Liked 2,488 Times
in
1,286 Posts
It's none of your business to tell other people how or where they should or shouldn't ride their bicycle. Just ignore it and don't say anything.
#31
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Queens, NY for now...
Posts: 1,515
Bikes: 82 Lotus Unique, 86 Lotus Legend, 88 Basso Loto, 88 Basso PR, 89 Basso PR, 96 Bianchi CDI, 2013 Deda Aegis, 2019 Basso Diamante SV
Mentioned: 46 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 943 Post(s)
Liked 172 Times
in
113 Posts
For example, there are a lot of dudes in the city that like to fly through red lights, including some close passes between the pedestrians that are crossing at the lights. If I happen to catch up to them later on (because they generally aren't very fast when simply riding), I usually let them know that they are simply breeding resentment for all riders. Or, as more common phrased, they are making the rest of us look like a-holes too...
#33
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Colorado Springs, CO
Posts: 5,974
Bikes: 2015 Charge Plug, 2007 Dahon Boardwalk, 1997 Nishiki Blazer, 1984 Nishiki International, 2006 Felt F65, 1989 Dahon Getaway V
Mentioned: 54 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1364 Post(s)
Liked 1,677 Times
in
827 Posts
Say, "I noticed we both bike to work. Here's a website I found that has helped make my bike commute safer and more fun."
#34
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Madison, WI USA
Posts: 6,154
Mentioned: 50 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2363 Post(s)
Liked 1,749 Times
in
1,191 Posts
The "salmon" part is still confusing / meaningless. Sidewalk traffic is two-way. Is it a sidewalk next to a one-way street, and he's therefore avoiding circling a large block by using the sidewalk? If not, I still don't see where "salmon" comes in.
What's the local ordinance there wrt. bicycles and sidewalks? Is the person yielding to pedestrians, and riding in a manner consistent with that of a pedestrian? There's usu. language to that effect in the ordinance. Some ordinances prohibit bicycling on a sidewalk where a building directly abuts the sidewalk (safety for the cyclist and others).
What's the local ordinance there wrt. bicycles and sidewalks? Is the person yielding to pedestrians, and riding in a manner consistent with that of a pedestrian? There's usu. language to that effect in the ordinance. Some ordinances prohibit bicycling on a sidewalk where a building directly abuts the sidewalk (safety for the cyclist and others).
#35
Full Member
Thread Starter
The "salmon" part is still confusing / meaningless. Sidewalk traffic is two-way. Is it a sidewalk next to a one-way street, and he's therefore avoiding circling a large block by using the sidewalk? If not, I still don't see where "salmon" comes in.
What's the local ordinance there wrt. bicycles and sidewalks? Is the person yielding to pedestrians, and riding in a manner consistent with that of a pedestrian? There's usu. language to that effect in the ordinance. Some ordinances prohibit bicycling on a sidewalk where a building directly abuts the sidewalk (safety for the cyclist and others).
What's the local ordinance there wrt. bicycles and sidewalks? Is the person yielding to pedestrians, and riding in a manner consistent with that of a pedestrian? There's usu. language to that effect in the ordinance. Some ordinances prohibit bicycling on a sidewalk where a building directly abuts the sidewalk (safety for the cyclist and others).
I'm pretty sure I've clarified this, the BSO was cycling up a sidewalk against traffic on a two lane road. The road was wide enough that it doesn't make sense to be cycling against traffic at all. in fact, it turns out that it's illegal to operate any vehicle on the sidewalks in municipality. It turns out, a close reading of the municipal's ordinance expressly includes bicycles in the definition of the ordinance's definition of "vehicle." I think you will just have to take my word on that.
I would politely suggest starting a new thread somewhere if you continue to desire discussing this. I'm satisfied with the responses already on my topic and don't require any further input. Thanks!
#36
Senior Member
The "salmon" part is still confusing / meaningless. Sidewalk traffic is two-way. Is it a sidewalk next to a one-way street, and he's therefore avoiding circling a large block by using the sidewalk? If not, I still don't see where "salmon" comes in.
What's the local ordinance there wrt. bicycles and sidewalks? Is the person yielding to pedestrians, and riding in a manner consistent with that of a pedestrian? There's usu. language to that effect in the ordinance. Some ordinances prohibit bicycling on a sidewalk where a building directly abuts the sidewalk (safety for the cyclist and others).
What's the local ordinance there wrt. bicycles and sidewalks? Is the person yielding to pedestrians, and riding in a manner consistent with that of a pedestrian? There's usu. language to that effect in the ordinance. Some ordinances prohibit bicycling on a sidewalk where a building directly abuts the sidewalk (safety for the cyclist and others).
#37
Senior Member
If they are on a sidewalk then it's likely 100% legal. Sidewalks are never one way so no such thing as "salmoning" on the sidewalk. Only legal issue would be places that don't allow riding on the sidewalk.
#38
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Mid Atlantic / USA
Posts: 2,115
Bikes: 2017 Specialized Crosstrail / 2013 Trek Crossrip Elite
Mentioned: 43 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1002 Post(s)
Liked 237 Times
in
155 Posts
Is this creating an unsafe situation? Or does it just bother you because he's not following what you think should be a rule?
I do this for a quarter mile every time I ride to work. It's on a sidewalk that has zero pedestrian traffic (through an industrial area with nothing to walk to) because my destination is on that side of the road. And the road is a major 4 lane artery with no lights to assist in crossing. (I approach the road from the west going east, then make a turn south onto the sidewalk of this road, go 1/4 mile, and turn west to go back away from the road. I have to use this road because it's a bridge across a river that I can't cross any other way)
So rather than cross the super dangerous road with no traffic light to assist twice and ride on it with no shoulder and a 50 mph speed limit in a quarter mile stretch I stay on the sidewalk against traffic for that quarter mile and arrive alive.
It is important to look at things from the other guy's perspective. Where you think he shouldn't be doing something because there is some rule somewhere that was written without considering this specific situation, he might be trying to not die.
I do this for a quarter mile every time I ride to work. It's on a sidewalk that has zero pedestrian traffic (through an industrial area with nothing to walk to) because my destination is on that side of the road. And the road is a major 4 lane artery with no lights to assist in crossing. (I approach the road from the west going east, then make a turn south onto the sidewalk of this road, go 1/4 mile, and turn west to go back away from the road. I have to use this road because it's a bridge across a river that I can't cross any other way)
So rather than cross the super dangerous road with no traffic light to assist twice and ride on it with no shoulder and a 50 mph speed limit in a quarter mile stretch I stay on the sidewalk against traffic for that quarter mile and arrive alive.
It is important to look at things from the other guy's perspective. Where you think he shouldn't be doing something because there is some rule somewhere that was written without considering this specific situation, he might be trying to not die.
#39
Full Member
Thread Starter
It's unsafe because there are now two cyclists approaching the north on opposite ends of the road as motorists driving south, confusing the motorists
It's against the municipal ordinance, as already discussed, for all "vehicles," cycles included, to be on the side walk.
If you want more detail, might I suggest reviewing the thread again, the conversation has significantly advanced.
#40
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Mid Atlantic / USA
Posts: 2,115
Bikes: 2017 Specialized Crosstrail / 2013 Trek Crossrip Elite
Mentioned: 43 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1002 Post(s)
Liked 237 Times
in
155 Posts
Oh no...not against an ordinance. Anything but that.
In my situation, I don't care if it's against an ordinance. I'm not going to risk life and limb crossing a highway twice and riding on a shoulderless highway at 20% of the traffic speed when I don't have to. Now I wouldn't create danger for other people to protect myself. That's a major AH move. But I'm an adult. I've looked at the situation. This is the safest course of action for everyone involved.
Someone on the other side of the road who never really looked at it from my perspective would just see someone 'breaking an ordinance' and be all huffy about it. But it's worth the time to look at the whole thing through the other rider's perspective. Where he approaches from, why he's on that side, how far he's riding, etc. You might find a lot more common ground on a desire to be safe than you think.
It sounds a little bit like you just can't stand the idea that you feel compelled to follow a rule while someone else doesn't. I get it. Every time I see a see a car run a red light I wish I was a cop who could race up and ticket them because it cheeses me off. But this situation isn't that. This situation seems more like you are labeling it a dangerous situation when it's really not to give yourself justification to complain about it. I mean the confusing cars thing is a real reach. I drive a car. I see this all the time and it's not even a little bit confusing.
Ultimately either confront the guy in real life or don't. Complaining about it online does nothing.
In my situation, I don't care if it's against an ordinance. I'm not going to risk life and limb crossing a highway twice and riding on a shoulderless highway at 20% of the traffic speed when I don't have to. Now I wouldn't create danger for other people to protect myself. That's a major AH move. But I'm an adult. I've looked at the situation. This is the safest course of action for everyone involved.
Someone on the other side of the road who never really looked at it from my perspective would just see someone 'breaking an ordinance' and be all huffy about it. But it's worth the time to look at the whole thing through the other rider's perspective. Where he approaches from, why he's on that side, how far he's riding, etc. You might find a lot more common ground on a desire to be safe than you think.
It sounds a little bit like you just can't stand the idea that you feel compelled to follow a rule while someone else doesn't. I get it. Every time I see a see a car run a red light I wish I was a cop who could race up and ticket them because it cheeses me off. But this situation isn't that. This situation seems more like you are labeling it a dangerous situation when it's really not to give yourself justification to complain about it. I mean the confusing cars thing is a real reach. I drive a car. I see this all the time and it's not even a little bit confusing.
Ultimately either confront the guy in real life or don't. Complaining about it online does nothing.
#41
Full Member
Thread Starter
I appreciate you taking the time to reply. I've said yesterday I've gotten what I need from this conversation. Thanks anyway
It sounds like your situation is quite a bit different than this situation.
These ordinances exist because reasonable people agreed upon on an objective set of rules that everyone can refer to, and they usually exist for a good reason
In my situation, I don't care if it's against an ordinance. I'm not going to risk life and limb crossing a highway twice and riding on a shoulderless highway at 20% of the traffic speed when I don't have to.
These ordinances exist because reasonable people agreed upon on an objective set of rules that everyone can refer to, and they usually exist for a good reason
#42
20+mph Commuter
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Greenville. SC USA
Posts: 7,517
Bikes: Surly LHT, Surly Lowside, a folding bike, and a beater.
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1434 Post(s)
Liked 331 Times
in
219 Posts
2. Thanks for the linkage. I learned something.
3. If you have linkage to help me address #1 , I'll be forever grateful.
#44
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Mid Atlantic / USA
Posts: 2,115
Bikes: 2017 Specialized Crosstrail / 2013 Trek Crossrip Elite
Mentioned: 43 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1002 Post(s)
Liked 237 Times
in
155 Posts
You've told people how to act in this thread, not to name call, to go to other threads.
It's been a whole theme.
It's the main reason why I jumped to the conclusion that the other cyclist in your scenario wasn't really doing anything unsafe. You come across as someone who just wants to control everyone else.
If you're not actually this way, please take this as honest constructive criticism of how you come across online, said only to help.
Last edited by Skipjacks; 03-21-19 at 11:09 AM.
#45
Full Member
Thread Starter
Slightly off topic...but you're kinda bossy.
You've told people how to act in this thread, not to name call, to go to other threads.
It's been a whole theme.
It's the main reason why I jumped to the conclusion that the other cyclist in your scenario wasn't really doing anything unsafe. You come across as someone who just wants to control everyone else.
If you're not actually this way, please take this as honest constructive criticism of how you come across online, said only to help.
You've told people how to act in this thread, not to name call, to go to other threads.
It's been a whole theme.
It's the main reason why I jumped to the conclusion that the other cyclist in your scenario wasn't really doing anything unsafe. You come across as someone who just wants to control everyone else.
If you're not actually this way, please take this as honest constructive criticism of how you come across online, said only to help.
Since I am the thread starter, I assume that I have a role here as a bit of a host, and I'm trying to steer away the name calling, yes, I think that's appropriate too, in the absence of the forum moderator.
#47
Been Around Awhile
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 29,973
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked 1,536 Times
in
1,045 Posts
I don't know what else I can do to suggest that the thread is over.
Since I am the thread starter, I assume that I have a role here as a bit of a host, and I'm trying to steer away the name calling, yes, I think that's appropriate too, in the absence of the forum moderator.
Since I am the thread starter, I assume that I have a role here as a bit of a host, and I'm trying to steer away the name calling, yes, I think that's appropriate too, in the absence of the forum moderator.
#48
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Mid Atlantic / USA
Posts: 2,115
Bikes: 2017 Specialized Crosstrail / 2013 Trek Crossrip Elite
Mentioned: 43 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1002 Post(s)
Liked 237 Times
in
155 Posts
Ok, well, I suggested that you read the thread before you jump in, because many of the points you had raised have already been addressed. I am at work and I don't appreciate having to repeat myself three or four times as I've done here. I asked for suggestions, I got suggestions, I followed the suggestions. Then the usefulness of the thread to me expired. Then you resurrected the thread. I don't know what else I can do to suggest that the thread is over.
Since I am the thread starter, I assume that I have a role here as a bit of a host, and I'm trying to steer away the name calling, yes, I think that's appropriate too, in the absence of the forum moderator.
Since I am the thread starter, I assume that I have a role here as a bit of a host, and I'm trying to steer away the name calling, yes, I think that's appropriate too, in the absence of the forum moderator.
#49
Senior Member
Well, sometimes they exist for these reasons. Often though ordinances exist because people don't like something and simply want to restrict it without a valid reason outside of personnel preference (as in unreasonable). Like in my city riding a bicycle in the street around our convention center during an event will result in a fine, even though speeds then are so slow as to make riding in the street safer than nearly anywhere else in the city. Never assume an ordinance was enacted for good reason. Always look into them and question them. Especially when they restrict bicycles given the anti bicycle attitude in most north american cities.
#50
born again cyclist
i "salmon" on a sidewalk for about 700' every morning because the street that gets me to the start of the MUP that i ride is one-way the wrong way in the morning.
i see that short stretch of sidewalk almost as an extension of the MUP even though it's technically sidewalk. IMO, it's the city's fault for making the street to get to the MUP one-way.
sidewalk riding is illegal in chicago for anyone over the age of 12, but i've been doing this little sidewalk maneuver for years without issue. <breaking the law.... breaking the law....>
it helps that the sidewalk in question passes by a sewage pumping station and hardly ever has anyone on it (and on the off chance there is a pedestrian, i respectfully slow way down).
i see that short stretch of sidewalk almost as an extension of the MUP even though it's technically sidewalk. IMO, it's the city's fault for making the street to get to the MUP one-way.
sidewalk riding is illegal in chicago for anyone over the age of 12, but i've been doing this little sidewalk maneuver for years without issue. <breaking the law.... breaking the law....>
it helps that the sidewalk in question passes by a sewage pumping station and hardly ever has anyone on it (and on the off chance there is a pedestrian, i respectfully slow way down).
Last edited by Steely Dan; 03-22-19 at 02:38 PM.