Cyclists' safety highlighted as dog walkers face fines for using long leads near cycle paths

Secret_squirrel wrote:

You're missing the point - it's still about the "othering" of an out group. Think of long leads and RLJ'ing

But nobody is calling dog owners scum, vermin or lead louts, or demanding that they have insurance and pay dog tax like the DM readers do to cyclists.

Do you dear person walk on the right-hand side of the old railway track facing nearside oncoming runners, cyclists leaving the offside of the pathway clear or do you walk two/three breast all the time and with the near cyclist coming up behind you on the left-hand side of the pathway so blind to other close cyclist and do you walk the same on all roads with much faster traffic?

.

And your point is?

.

Older and sadder wrote:

I wonder if dog walker forums have articles about cyclists whizzing past too fast and too close and frightening dogs? I used to regularly walk my dog on an old railway line which was shared by ramblers, dog walkers, cyclists and riders. Without doubt the most rude, obnoxious and entitled users were cyclists. [...]

There's often some tension between different groups about how recreational facilities are used.  And unfortunately people can be idiots.  However the giant dog in the room is the fact that so much of our "getting from one place to another" facilities e.g. road space is effectively devoted to cars.  That forces everyone else onto spaces which are inadequate or have to serve contradictory ends (e.g. dog walking, kids hanging out and efficient cycling).

Hello Garage. Another name change?

mdavidford wrote:

Hello Garage. Another name change?

Good heavens it is, isn't it? He was clearly suspended a short while back, does he think changing his name without actually opening a new account will allow him to get away with more? What's that we've had so far then, Nigel Garage, Nigel Garrage, TT Danger, Youallarecyberbullies, Garage at Large and now Lance Strongarm, any others? I remember somebody theorised that he changes his name because some users are employing software that can block out specific commenters but he can skirt round that by changing his name. That would mean he is like a badly behaved toddler desperately waving the nastier portions of his anatomy at the company or soiling the carpet in order to get attention, it doesn't matter if the attention is vilification and contempt as long as he gets some sort of recognition of his paltry little existence; as such, it seems pretty believable that this is what he's up to.

eburtthebike wrote:

"Dog walkers will also be required to pick up faeces in public places....."

Everybody's?

Just some, so if their dog doesn't do any business they will have to find some.

Always a shame when an enjoyable pastime becomes a chore.

I really don't understand dog walkers at times. I've been forced off my bike a few times by uncontrolled dogs - on or off long leads - and most times there's been no reaction at all from the owner(s). They often don't even look up. They took no notice of bells etc, even walking towards me, to at least get their dog under control. I don't want to injure a dog so I end up stopped or swerving, the latter means I've been off my bike more than once from hitting a root - wooden edge etc. 

it's getting to the point on my 29er I'm just not going to stop. If I hit a dog that shoukd have been under control, to not come off my bike and get no apology or even acknowledgement from the owner? fine. 

In shared spaces everybody has to take greater care. When I'm riding round my local park, I always slow down when there are kids or dogs about because they're unpredictable.

I'm a dog owner too and I can't tell you how many times I've had close passes by riders concentrating on their Strava performance. I don't use a long lead but it is a public park and dogs are allowed to be off lead.

In fact, I was nearly hit while jogging with my usual running partner by one loon who didn't see fit to slow down, despite the fact that there was a mob of kids on the path and that we had to run on the grass. He missed me by a few cm and gave no warning either.

If a cyclist hit my dog I'd be seriously angry and I'd expect the cyclist to pay vet bills as the signs in the park are quite clear that cyclists have to give people and pets priority. Just so you know, vet bills can be very expensive. You might want to think about slowing down.

If your dog isn't under control, in a public place, your idea on who is liable for consequential losses might come as quite a surprise. 
 

You managed to miss the point by a country mile. Paying zero attention to what your dog is doing in a public park isn't the fault of the cyclist. Failing to pay attention when a cyclist attempts to get your attention so you can control your dog, isn't the fault of the cyclist. 

I absolutely take care.  I'm just not going to put myself at risk to avoid dogs when the owner couldn't give a rats ass about their safety.  

The definition of whether or not a dog is under control is rather opaque. But if my dog is trotting along a path in the park off lead and a cyclist comes up at speed and strikes him, then it's clearly not the dog that's at fault. That's my point which you seem to be ignoring deliberately. There are a lot of strava chasers in my park and they're inconsiderate. I've had to haul him out of the way of people riding at speed a couple of times recently because the riders haven't seen fit to back off and slow down when there are people and animals on the path. The fast riders are the problem, not the people and animal trotting along the paths. It's that simple.

My dog is used to cyclists and doesn't chase because we're a family of cyclists and he's used to skateboards too, as one of my son's is a skater also.

I look after my dog and I watch what he's doing, but sometimes he might be over here mooching with another dog or checking out the smells by a tree over there. I pick up his dog mess and I take spare bags and inevitably pick up mess left by others (three on this morning's run as it happens) and nor do I use or like long leads. But if you think everyone is watching their animal like a hawk 100% of the time then you're frankly being unrealistic.

The UK's parks are shared spaces and everyone in them has to be considerate of everyone else. If you can't recognise that and continue to talk about hitting dogs, then maybe you need to consider your behaviour as you're making it sound like you're the problem here, not the dogs you're complaining about. If you're riding at speed in a public park then you're a danger to everyone else.

If you really want to train and ride flat out, go to a velodrome.

OldRidgeback wrote:

The definition of whether or not a dog is under control is rather opaque.

The UK's parks are shared spaces and everyone in them has to be considerate of everyone else. If you can't recognise that and continue to talk about hitting dogs, then maybe you need to consider your behaviour as you're making it sound like you're the problem here, not the dogs you're complaining about. If you're riding at speed in a public park then you're a danger to everyone else.

Control is not opaque - simply, no dog is ever under control unless they are on a short lead. Even the police dogs are kept on a lead and I'll wager they are more highly trained than most. You most certainly cannot guarantee that if your dog is off it's lead it will come to heel on command at all times, no matter how well trained it is. 

Parks are one shared use space but there are plenty of others where you are obligated to keep your animal under control at all times and as in my scenario I posted yesterday, the cyclist doesn't have to be going at speed for an uncontrolled dog to be a problem. 

Gimpl wrote:

OldRidgeback wrote:

The definition of whether or not a dog is under control is rather opaque.

The UK's parks are shared spaces and everyone in them has to be considerate of everyone else. If you can't recognise that and continue to talk about hitting dogs, then maybe you need to consider your behaviour as you're making it sound like you're the problem here, not the dogs you're complaining about. If you're riding at speed in a public park then you're a danger to everyone else.

Control is not opaque - simply, no dog is ever under control unless they are on a short lead. Even the police dogs are kept on a lead and I'll wager they are more highly trained than most. You most certainly cannot guarantee that if your dog is off it's lead it will come to heel on command at all times, no matter how well trained it is. 

Parks are one shared use space but there are plenty of others where you are obligated to keep your animal under control at all times and as in my scenario I posted yesterday, the cyclist doesn't have to be going at speed for an uncontrolled dog to be a problem. 

READ THIS:

The UK's parks are shared spaces and everyone in them has to be considerate of everyone else. 

OldRidgeback wrote:

Gimpl wrote:

OldRidgeback wrote:

The definition of whether or not a dog is under control is rather opaque.

The UK's parks are shared spaces and everyone in them has to be considerate of everyone else. If you can't recognise that and continue to talk about hitting dogs, then maybe you need to consider your behaviour as you're making it sound like you're the problem here, not the dogs you're complaining about. If you're riding at speed in a public park then you're a danger to everyone else.

Control is not opaque - simply, no dog is ever under control unless they are on a short lead. Even the police dogs are kept on a lead and I'll wager they are more highly trained than most. You most certainly cannot guarantee that if your dog is off it's lead it will come to heel on command at all times, no matter how well trained it is. 

Parks are one shared use space but there are plenty of others where you are obligated to keep your animal under control at all times and as in my scenario I posted yesterday, the cyclist doesn't have to be going at speed for an uncontrolled dog to be a problem. 

READ THIS:

The UK's parks are shared spaces and everyone in them has to be considerate of everyone else. 

Read what and why?

At no point have I 

- said I'm going flat out

- said I'm in a park

under control isn't "hard" to define. If it's off lead it's not under control. This has been tested previously. Thus, in a shared space, where you let your animal off lead and therefore not in control , you are now taking a risk and share some or all responsibility if that risk crystallises. Blunt fact here. 
 

I never said your scenario was what happens and is what I have issue with. I've even used zig zagging as an answer as oblivious dog owners fail to pay any attention to the world around them while they have a chat, or are in their phones world, just letting their pet run *out of control*. In that instance, if I take suitable care over my riding, and your not under control dog hits my bike, you are at fault as the owner, and you will be paying for repairs, compensation for injury, etc. 

What im saying, and you seem to ignore, is that I've put myself at risk, and injured myself, to avoid out of control dogs. I've gone over my handlebars because I swerved to avoid a dog running round a corner and zig zagging every time I tried to avoid them safely back into my path. As I was there, on the ground and in clear pain, the oblivious owner

just

walked

past. 
 

so no, I'm not the bloody problem. Are all dogs and dog owners at fault? No. Are all cyclists at fault? Again, no. Yet you gave an absolute - that "fast cyclists" are the problem. Nope. Inconsiderate people are the prob,em. 

nosferatu1001 wrote:

At no point have I 

- said I'm going flat out

- said I'm in a park

under control isn't "hard" to define. If it's off lead it's not under control. This has been tested previously. Thus, in a shared space, where you let your animal off lead and therefore not in control , you are now taking a risk and share some or all responsibility if that risk crystallises. Blunt fact here. 
 

I never said your scenario was what happens and is what I have issue with. I've even used zig zagging as an answer as oblivious dog owners fail to pay any attention to the world around them while they have a chat, or are in their phones world, just letting their pet run *out of control*. In that instance, if I take suitable care over my riding, and your not under control dog hits my bike, you are at fault as the owner, and you will be paying for repairs, compensation for injury, etc. 

What im saying, and you seem to ignore, is that I've put myself at risk, and injured myself, to avoid out of control dogs. I've gone over my handlebars because I swerved to avoid a dog running round a corner and zig zagging every time I tried to avoid them safely back into my path. As I was there, on the ground and in clear pain, the oblivious owner

just

walked

past. 
 

so no, I'm not the bloody problem. Are all dogs and dog owners at fault? No. Are all cyclists at fault? Again, no. Yet you gave an absolute - that "fast cyclists" are the problem. Nope. Inconsiderate people are the prob,em. 

READ THIS:

The UK's parks are shared spaces and everyone in them has to be considerate of everyone else. 

READ THIS:

I'm not just talking about parks.  I've said this more than once. 

I'll have a go. We have a dog that loves people but is scared by other dogs. The fear triggers an unpredictable reactive response which is sometimes the fight part of fight or flight. No idea what made him like this but we've been unable to fix it. So when we walk him, he has to stay on a lead. An extending lead gives him a degree of freedom to do doggy things but we can keep him under control and to heel on a shortened lead if required. Hope that helps.

Podc wrote:

I'll have a go. We have a dog that loves people but is scared by other dogs. The fear triggers an unpredictable reactive response which is sometimes the fight part of fight or flight. No idea what made him like this but we've been unable to fix it. So when we walk him, he has to stay on a lead. An extending lead gives him a degree of freedom to do doggy things but we can keep him under control and to heel on a shortened lead if required. Hope that helps.

No - doesn't help at all.

What you're actually saying is that you have the illusion of control but the reality is that you don't. 

Ditch the lead!

What? If we see other dogs about we can retract the lead and divert. If a dog approaches I can retract the lead. It then becomes a normal lead.

Podc wrote:

What? If we see other dogs about we can retract the lead and divert. If a dog approaches I can retract the lead. It then becomes a normal lead.

Is the reel-in spring-loaded? That I'd love to see!

zzzzzZZzzzzzzzzzzZZZzzzzzzzzzzZZzzzzz-wroah!

Podc wrote:

What? If we see other dogs about we can retract the lead and divert. If a dog approaches I can retract the lead. It then becomes a normal lead.

the lead can only be retracted if the dog allows it, the spring will not overcome the dog pulling, so are you saying you can pull the dog back to heel using the thin wire of the lead, not the handle?

Or do you have a wind in spool with a winch, like a fishing reel?

Illusion of control, a dog on a 10m leed is not under control, if you can call the dog and t will come back every time to allow the leed to be retracted, then you can call the dog back and fit a leed. If you can't call the dog back (sounds like it) the dog is not under control.

wycombewheeler wrote:

the lead can only be retracted if the dog allows it, the spring will not overcome the dog pulling, so are you saying you can pull the dog back to heel using the thin wire of the lead, not the handle?

Or do you have a wind in spool with a winch, like a fishing reel?

Illusion of control, a dog on a 10m leed is not under control, if you can call the dog and t will come back every time to allow the leed to be retracted, then you can call the dog back and fit a leed. If you can't call the dog back (sounds like it) the dog is not under control.

When I've used a retractable lead (many years ago), there was a button on the handle that locks the cable, so you can lock the cable, yank the dog towards you, unlock the cable so it winds in a bit, rinse and repeat.

But yes, the ideal is a short 1m lead and a dog trained well enough to be let loose in parks etc.

You lock the lead and pull it. Have you never used one? Takes about 3 or 4 seconds from full extension which is about 5m to dog with me. Lead is rarely at full extension anyway as there are usually other dogs about.

There is a lot of looking for issues going on here when there really isn't much to see. Sorry I tried to help originally.

Podc wrote:

You lock the lead and pull it. Have you never used one? Takes about 3 or 4 seconds from full extension which is about 5m to dog with me. Lead is rarely at full extension anyway as there are usually other dogs about.

There is a lot of looking for issues going on here when there really isn't much to see. Sorry I tried to help originally.

The thing is you're not helping - you're simply perpetuating the same old talk that other dog users say on the issue, blindly ignoring the problem. 

It may 'only' be 3 or 4 seconds but that is 3 or 4 seconds too long to get the dog under control when it is supposed to be under control at all times. On the Redways here in Milton Keynes those leads are everywhere - I can have come around a corner and be well out of your way in 3-4 seconds. I'm more than happy to share a path with you and I will take care but it extends both ways. 

Imagine this scenario: cyclist comes downhill, around bend and is confronted with a dog walker one side of the path with doggy 5 meters away on the other side of the path - no way can you retract the lead in time for cyclist to pass safely. Now imagine that the same scenario repeats itself every few hundred yards!