- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Tubeless valves
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
Except_Guide_Dogs_(licensed_by_William_Murphy_under_CC_BY-SA_2.0_on_Flickr)1 in 4 guide dogs in London have been struck by a cyclist, says charity
Note: as mentioned in the comments, Guide Dogs withdrew its claim that one in four London guide dogs had been hit. It has admitted supplying incorrect information, and many people have noted that its survey was deeply dodgy. We'll have more in depth analysis of this later.
A charity says that one in four blind people in London who get around the city with the aid of a guide dog say it has been involved in a collision with a cyclist – and seven in ten say they have suffered a near miss with people riding bikes on the pavement or ignoring red traffic lights.
Rob Harris from the charity said that collisions with cyclists or close misses left many blind people “fearful” of leaving their homes, which he described as “worrying,” reports BBC News.
Guide Dogs, which has its offices close to Euston Station, surveyed a fifth of the 320 residents of the city, home to more than 41,000 registered blind or partially sighted people, who use the working animals.
That produces a small sample size of around 64 people but the news has prompted a call from London Cycling Campaign (LCC) to people who use bikes in the city to ride responsibly and take care around all pedestrians.
LCC’s Charlie Lloyd said: "Any crash or a close pass which frightens or intimidates a pedestrian is unacceptable.
He added that it was "far worse when that person is blind, partially sighted or in any way less able than we are."
One guide dog owner, Deborah Persaud from Islington, said she was struck by a cyclist on the pavement as she walked home.
"My dress was torn, the contents of my handbag damaged and I was left with damage to my shoulder and hip," she said.
Guide Dogs says that cyclists should get off their bikes when using the pavement, be careful when approaching a guide dog from behind so as not to startle it, and call out or use a bell to alert pedestrians waiting to cross the road to their presence.
Except where permitted by law such as on shared-use paths, cycling on the footway is illegal, although Home Office guidance acknowledges that some people do so because of fear of traffic.
That guidance was reiterated by transport minister Robert Goodwill in January this year, who said that people could ride on the pavement provided they do so considerately, and that police officers need to exercise discretion in handing out fines.
Meanwhile, Guide Dogs Cymru is appealing for cyclists to join it for a fundraising ride next month along the Taff Trail – the Sustrans-managed shared use path used by both cyclists and people on foot.
Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.
Latest Comments
- Secret_squirrel 3 sec ago
Is it just me who thinks the first two items can be used to smuggle a phone into prison?
- David9694 49 min 17 sec ago
was it one of these? https://www.autotrader.co.uk/car-details/202411246675771?
- Rendel Harris 51 min 48 sec ago
I may not have expressed myself clearly, I meant that it would be okay for cycle racers because it's banned, rather than that it wouldn't be...
- lesterama 1 hour 6 min ago
Houchen is utterly corrupt and morally bankrupt, as readers of Private Eye know all too well.
- hawkinspeter 1 hour 10 min ago
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cd7n1l72j9wo
- Geoff H 1 hour 22 min ago
ALERT!!! SAVE 100%!!! Stay home!
- Geoff H 1 hour 41 min ago
Deflect. Deflect! DEFLECT!! If the lad was in the drivers 'blind spot' no amount of high-viz and lights would have done any good. There is NO...
- andyk 1 hour 44 min ago
Hi Griff, unfirtunately one of the key measurements isn't bigger - the stack - it's the same on the 54 SL8 - 544mm, as the 54cm Addict 543.3mm, so...
- Geoff H 1 hour 51 min ago
Didn't the police (in regards to thefts) say solve your own issuses? Without their assistance the police are promoting vigilante-ism. Laz (below)...
Add new comment
49 comments
It's not a survey, it's a self-selected opinion poll. Worthless.
The only things that can be extrapolated from it is that Guide Dogs wants to generate some publicity and has chosen the option of picking a cheap target.
Funnily enough I had a survey call tonight and one of the questions was whether I would want to join some sort of lottery to support Guide Dogs. Assuming it is the same group they seem to be following an aggressive strategy to publicise and commercialise.
I said No Thanks.
If one in four guide dogs gets hit by a bikes then maybe they should get better guide dogs. It's not as if they can't hear them coming a lot sooner than a human.
I believe you are thinking in terms of a quiet path. In that situation the dog will be able to hear a cyclist approaching and even the blind person would hear a cyclist before a sighted person would, as hearing is their primary sense to detect what is going on in the world around them.
Though have a quick look at the video that goes with the Guide Dog association “Cycleyes Campaign”. It literally shows what a blind person waiting at a crossing on a busy city road sees (of course unlike you and I, it is nothing) and what their primary sense (hearing) detects. Then it repeats the scene and shows at the crossing there are dozens of cyclists that can’t be heard above all the background noise from traffic etc. Of course the dog can see the cyclists and knows they are there, but the dog relies on the cyclists stopping at the crossing when in theory it is safe to walk across.
http://www.guidedogs.org.uk/cycleyes
Hmmm ... when I click on the video it says "This video is private". I guess they're editing it
By "video" I mean the CyclesEyes campaign one...
If roads and especially junctions were designed with cycling in mind more cyclists might obey traffic lights. As things stand and unpopular as this elephant in the room may be, cyclists running red lights may improve their safety and smooth out traffic flow.
Although the survey is dodgy, there is an issue of blind and visually impaired people getting hard time from people who cycle on the pavement or who don't alert obviously blind people to their presence when the blind/visually impaired person is crossing the road.
There is also an issue of visually impaired (and even legally defined as blind) people continuing to drive to the detriment of all other road users. See http://rdrf.org.uk/2013/11/01/hi-viz-for-pedestrians-and-cyclists-and-th....
Is the blind lobby successfully campaigning against this? Rights and responsibilities and all that.
er... who did they actually ask? The blind person? " did you actually see the cyclist hit your dog?", or the dog? "woof, wood, grrr, cyclist?".
I really can't imagine either were reliable witnesses
Fair play if you want dogs and bikes to collide it makes real sense to have a bike ride down the Taff Trail....there are some righteously indignant sighted dog walkers there.
Oh and it isn't really fit for purpose - but I digress....
Is this meant to be funny? I think it's a great idea, and probably takes a lot of courage for the handlers and dogs to take part and invite cyclists along.
The dogs aren't taking part...there is a sponsored bike ride along the length of the Taff Trail raising money for Guide Dogs Cymru...and as a daily user of the Trail I know that there are sections where dog walkers go out of their way to be obstructive and aggressive towards cyclists making their commute and use of this path difficult to the point where some cyclists now use the roads to avoid these areas.
And me, a dog walking, Taff Trail using bike riding joker....
And it still isn't fit for purpose
"Guide Dogs says cyclists should dismount on pavement and warn pedestrians of approach"
I know guide dogs are well trained but I didn't realise they could speak too. Perhaps cyclists should have someone with a red flag walking in front to warn all and sundry of the danger? I'm curious how many blind people have been hit by cars and perhaps this is the real story that isn't being reported? Cycling on the pavement isn't anti social as long as you're careful.
"Correction: An earlier version of this story said a quarter of guide dogs working in London had been hit by a bike. The Guide Dogs for the Blind Association has since said the information it provided was incorrect."
Ok! So what are the true figures then?
And another thing.
Please look closely at the sign in the picture used to illustrate this story. It's a double negative. It says "You must only proceed past this point if you are riding a bicycle and/or have a dog with you, but the dog must not be a guide-dog."
Huh? Surely it says 'no bikes or dogs past this point, except guide dogs'. The only question is whether the exception applies to the bike ban or just the dog ban, i.e. are guidedogs on bikes allowed?
No. A sign saying "No dogs or cycles past this point" would be a circular sign with a red border and black pictograms of a cycle and a dog on a white field. The red diagonal cancels this and affirms the opposite. Have a look in your highway code, in particular those signs which ban motor vehicles or cycles.
Surely it says; No Cycling or Dogging unless it's with a Guide
this is just those who actually responded to the survey:
"In a survey conducted by the association, of 33 guide dog owners in London who responded, 14 said they had been involved in a collision and 25 said they had been involved in a "near miss" with cyclists on pavements or jumping red lights.
A further five blind people without guide dogs said they had been in collisions with cyclists - out of 16 who responded to the survey.
There are 41,060 people registered blind or partially sighted in London with just over 320 using guide dogs in the city. "
only 10% of those with guide dogs actually bothered to respond. Can you seriously extrapolate that to the entire community? or was everybody else perfectly happy and didn't give a fig...
I too would like to know where the original (retracted) figure came from - but whatever, whilst we all like to joke about blind peds (with ipods), anyone who hits an actual blind person sucks.
It is worth noting that the respondents to this survey were invited to do so if they held strong views about cycling:
https://twitter.com/GuidedogsLondon/status/482112258756337664
So, the data used in this news article is bound to be skewed, making any findings unreliable at best.
It would be deeply-depressing, if true (and one collision is one too many). The survey data is ropey though and this story has not picked up the BBC's correction:
"Correction: An earlier version of this story said a quarter of guide dogs working in London had been hit by a bike. The Guide Dogs for the Blind Association has since said the information it provided was incorrect."
Still, not a bad reminder to be considerate of those around you and to consider their needs and vulnerabilities.
Pages