Originally Posted by
Paul Barnard
Do you understand the difference between a path and a road?
Of course. Who wouldn't. Not that that matters.
Point is, if the lighting/shading realities during a ride are such that others cannot see a person, then a person's at risk without such lighting. Doesn't much matter if it's a bike lane, or a little country "automobile" roadway, or a MUP, or "path" or whatever.
It's not as though such lighting problems on a problematic stretch disappear because the route happens to be called one name or another, or it's only so big, etc.
In the area where I am, quite frequently "MUP" routes have electric bike riders, those little powered scooters, and a few other odd gems, present on the paths. And some of those (including 'regular' cyclists) can go at unconscionable speeds ... even around some of the corners. Many sections along such paths also have similar lighting/shading issues as described earlier. It's not as though the reality of lack of visibility changes due to being on this or that type of route. If it's a visibility problem, there's an easy visibility solution available for people. No "period" about it, as though it's a bad thing. People ought to choose accordingly for what they're faced with. Makes little sense to avoid being seen simply because it'd make some people feel better.