That's the point. It seems to some that the rules are the same and seems to others that they are different, and others believe that the rules of ARP apply to the trails along Lake Natoma and Folsom Lake, but not to the Humbug-Willow Creek and other trails around town.
It seems there's a need for some clarification and signage.
The city (Parks and Rec) is in the process of putting together a trail signage project that will include not only trail etiquette (to match the ARP rules) but also trail names and directional signage. The trail etiquette rules on the FFP web site are there because those are the ones the city will be posting. These are slowly being adopted throughout the region based on a recommendation from the SACOG Bicycle Advisory Committee a couple of years back to address the very issue of "rules" east and west of Hazel causing confusion (Roseville just adopted these rules).
Unfortunately, Folsom's project will not directly solve the problem, because the trails along both sides of Lake Natoma (and up to Beale's Point) are managed by CA DPR, which is not inclined to post rules beyond the "Yield triangles" they already have (bikes yield to everyone; peds yield to horses, etc.). However, once people get "trained" on the rest of Folsom's trails, there likely will be a "critical mass" of users all following the same rules, which will spill over to the State Park's paths. When I use the ARP west of Hazel, the benefit of having posted trail etiquette rules is very obvious: nearly all pedestrians use the left side or DG shoulders. East of Hazel, it is completely haphazard. Why should they be consistent? Because, while most walkers and joggers probably don't cross between jurisdictions very often, bicyclists routinely do. Consistency breeds predictability, which breeds safety and a more pleasant experience for all.
A couple of additional notes:
1) The reason none of Folsom's trails have posted etiquette rules or guide signage is because the city chose to focus on getting the system built first. Until very recently, the number of trail users on Folsom's trails was not high enough to have to worry about rules of etiquette. The fact that it is an issue is a testament to the success of these trails.
2) Having ridden trails in dozens of states, and having researched this topic in the past, it is interesting to note that there is no national consensus on the question of walkers and joggers on the right versus left on multi-use paths. However, my experience has been that walkers and joggers on the left is more common, especially in the places with the highest use (Denver comes to mind).
3) I would like to remind everyone that this topic was about bad behavior by mountain bikers on the unpaved trails. And I think the original complaint was well-founded and reasonable. But, as always, the thread quickly deteriorated into an indictment of all bicyclists as inconsiderate scofflaws. And while I will not defend the inconsiderate scofflaws, it amazes me how much effort people put into railing against a problem with few serious consequences, when there are so many more serious problems we could be trying to solve. Let's take stop sign running. While I don't condone it, the fact is that the biggest consequence (other than the bicyclist potentially getting creamed) is the bad PR for other bicyclists; scofflaw bicyclists make bicycling a little more dangerous by causing general disrespect for bicyclists. But, on the other hand, bicyclists kill about 1 pedestrian and zero motorists per year in the US (and it is big news when it happens). By contrast, motorists kill about 800 bicyclists, 7,000 pedestrians and about 30,000 of each other every year in the US alone. And many of those are a direct result of running stop signs and red lights. Where's the outrage? Where are the red light cameras in Folsom that could actually save some lives? (Oops, going off topic...)
