# Wandering walkers and irresponsible dog walkers



## Fifelad (2 Oct 2011)

Anyone else observed the "wandering walker" on a cycle path the type Im meaning are the sort that dont hear your call due to being in a trance and rather than walk in a straight line rather they waiver from left to right or if they are with someone between the two of them dont know whther to go lef or right.

Then there are the dog walkers worst type in my opinion dog is off lead and then there is the half hearted "here timmy come here boy" dog then usually makes a bee-line for your wheels ending in a near collision.

One I had a few weeks ago two people with dog loud shout of "coming through" from me they moved obviously hearing me only for the big daft dug to come bounding over from the other side of the path owner then sarcastically goes "ting ting ting" to which I pointed out that I shouted to him and he heard that ok and told him to conrtrol his dog properly.


----------



## Cyclist33 (2 Oct 2011)

Yeah! I totly agree. When I'm in front of my pc I'll elaborate.


----------



## Brandane (2 Oct 2011)

Get this all the time.... Bells don't have much effect when they are wearing earphones for their MP3 players!

As for the ones that are in a group, walking towards you and covering the whole width of the path. Surely they can see you coming, so why do they wait until you have had to stop before they can be bothered to move a couple of feet to let you through?


----------



## Fifelad (2 Oct 2011)

Cyclist33 said:


> Yeah! I totly agree. When I'm in front of my pc I'll elaborate.


----------



## John the Monkey (2 Oct 2011)

Slow down, cover your brakes, take a bit of care - avoids most problems, ime, and I navigate my way through iPodded students every evening.

If you don't want to reduce your speed now and then, don't use shared paths. Especially not on sunny days.


----------



## Fifelad (2 Oct 2011)

Brandane said:


> Get this all the time.... Bells don't have much effect when they are wearing earphones for their MP3 players!
> 
> As for the ones that are in a group, walking towards you and covering the whole width of the path. Surely they can see you coming, so why do they wait until you have had to stop before they can be bothered to move a couple of feet to let you through?



God yes! and then its the gormless smile/grimace even hello when your grinding your teeth thinking get out the f***in way you t*ats!


----------



## oldfatfool (2 Oct 2011)

Ramblers on steep country lanes are the spawn of the DEVIL


----------



## John the Monkey (2 Oct 2011)

Brandane said:


> Get this all the time.... Bells don't have much effect when they are wearing earphones for their MP3 players!


Cane Bell Suzu'll do it - lovely sonorous tone too.


> As for the ones that are in a group, walking towards you and covering the whole width of the path. Surely they can see you coming, so why do they wait until you have had to stop before they can be bothered to move a couple of feet to let you through?


Cheery shout of "Make a gap, please!" works for me.


----------



## Fifelad (2 Oct 2011)

John the Monkey said:


> Slow down, cover your brakes, take a bit of care - avoids most problems, ime, and I navigate my way through iPodded students every evening.
> 
> If you don't want to reduce your speed now and then, don't use shared paths. Especially not on sunny days.



Always slow and cover brakes its just the feeling of being invisible to some of them local cycle path dog walkers are supposed to have dogs on a lead too!


----------



## Fifelad (2 Oct 2011)

oldfatfool said:


> Ramblers on steep country lanes are the spawn of the DEVIL


----------



## Norm (2 Oct 2011)

Fifelad said:


> God yes! and then its the gormless smile/grimace even hello when your grinding your teeth thinking get out the f***in way you t*ats!


 They have priority so how about taking reasonable care rather than giving them the excuse to consider all cyclists are as obnoxious as you appear to be.

Or maybe... 


Fifelad said:


> Anyone else observed the "cyclist" on a road the type Im meaning are the sort that dont hear your engine due to being in a trance and rather than cycle in the gutter rather they ride in the middle of the road or if they are with someone between the two of them dont know whther to go lef or right.
> 
> One I had a few weeks ago two cyclist loud toot on my horn of "coming through" from me they moved ...


----------



## Chutzpah (2 Oct 2011)

As John the Monkey says, if you want to go fast use a different route.

I find a cheery hello works wonders, better than a bell in my opinion. I only have the very odd person that grumbles "should have used your bell sooner", but they're very much in the minority.

Don't get me wrong, I can't stand people that don't control their dogs, and also those with the long expanding leads taking up the width of the path (anyone fancy being garotted?) but in most cases when they have nearly had me off in reflection I probably didn't give them enough warning of my approach.

Basically, expect that they'll do something that means you'll hit them/the animal and you're usually fine.


----------



## Andy_R (2 Oct 2011)

Norm said:


> They have priority so how about taking reasonable care rather than giving them the excuse to consider all cyclists are as obnoxious as you appear to be.
> 
> Or maybe...



+1, pedestrians have priority on shared paths. You are capable of slowing down, giving them plenty of space and overtaking safely. If not, well, maybe you shouldn't use the same path as them. Think to yourself, "I am an ambassador for the local cycling lobby, I must not act like a d1ck." Because the chances are that the dog walker you have just annoyed will meet you later, with their dog in the car. So don't be a kn0b, for your own safety.


----------



## jonesy (2 Oct 2011)

I think we need a "sticky" thread with the simple title "Pedestrians have priority on ALL shared use paths"...


----------



## snorri (2 Oct 2011)

A collie attempted to round me up this afternoon, the owner had no control whatsoever and looked a bit sheepish when I suggested his dog should be on a lead in a public space if he couldn't control it.



Edit to clarify, this was not on a shared use path or any other sort of path.


----------



## Norm (2 Oct 2011)

If the owner looked sheepish, maybe that's why it couldn't control a collie **baddum tish**


----------



## Chris-H (2 Oct 2011)

We have some very good cycle routes round Bedford which attracts the usual walkers,cyclists,joggers,i find a loud warning of "passing on the left" works a treat and 9 times out of ten gets me a smile or a cheery hello.


----------



## Brandane (2 Oct 2011)

Andy_R said:


> +1, pedestrians have priority on shared paths. You are capable of slowing down, giving them plenty of space and overtaking safely. If not, well, maybe you shouldn't use the same path as them. Think to yourself, "I am an ambassador for the local cycling lobby, I must not act like a d1ck." Because the chances are that the dog walker you have just annoyed will meet you later, with their dog in the car. So don't be a kn0b, for your own safety.



A bit harsh is it not?? I don't think the OP was "acting like a d1ck"; rather he was just expecting some courtesy from fellow path users. Not looking for special treatment, just some common sense would be good.


----------



## Hip Priest (2 Oct 2011)

I only use one shared use path on my commute. I slow down when passing people, particularly if they have a dog off the lead. And if a dog does run into my path, I don't make a big deal of it. Some people always seem to seek out conflict.


----------



## exbfb (2 Oct 2011)

To a cyclist, a car is a fast moving, potentially dangerous, vehicle.

To a pedestrian, a cycle is a fast moving, potentially dangerous, vehicle.

People out for a walk don't have their "dealing with traffic / making space" heads on.

We have to accept that, end of story really.

Get through easily if you can, deal with it if you can't.

It took me a little bit of time to work that out, I find that a little eye contact makes quite the difference.
Not that easy when you'rec coming up behind them.
Thinking of using my front light on flashing mode to catch their attention.


----------



## jonesy (2 Oct 2011)

exbfb said:


> To a cyclist, a car is a fast moving, potentially dangerous, vehicle.
> 
> To a pedestrian, a cycle is a fast moving, potentially dangerous, vehicle.
> 
> ...



Quite, and nor should they have to. Motorised traffic has already taken away most of our public space in urban areas, cyclists really shouldn't be trying to impose the highway environment onto what little space remains for ambling along, enjoying your surroundings.


----------



## david k (2 Oct 2011)

being both a walker and cyclist i see both side. whether your on a bike or walking show courtesy to others


----------



## bongofury66 (2 Oct 2011)

Apart from peanuts,it is verysimple. Whether you are on a bike, walking , walking a dog, riding a horse etc etc, just have respect for each other and realise you do all share. I always slow for any kind of activity on shared paths. As a cyclist of many years and a walker (with dogs), the one creature that REALLY pisses me off is the 'prospective' Tour de France rider in full racing regalia who on his/her sparkly road bike thinks that it is acceptable to belt along on a shared path when ther other people about. Be a man (or woman), and if you want to speed, do it on a public highway with other vehicles that might just intimidate you. If you are on a shared path, take it easy eh!! Had one of these on the shared path on blackpool (bispham) sea front recently. Male, Pink uniform, pink bike, pink shades doing about 20mph. Did my best to get the dog out of the way (for the dogs benefit), and just made it. Got a heap of abuse from MR Pink. Just told the f*ucker he 'looked very pretty'. Tw*t.

rant over


----------



## Rhythm Thief (2 Oct 2011)

I agree with Norm and Bongofury. I don't often use shared use paths, but when I do I'm always prepared to stop and (if necessary) walk past anyone with a dog or children or whatever. What I don't do is expect them to get their kids/dogs/etc out of my way.


----------



## al78 (2 Oct 2011)

bongofury66 said:


> Apart from peanuts,it is verysimple. *Whether you are on a bike, walking , walking a dog, riding a horse etc etc, just have respect for each other* and realise you do all share. I always slow for any kind of activity on shared paths. As a cyclist of many years and a walker (with dogs), the one creature that REALLY pisses me off is the 'prospective' Tour de France rider in full racing regalia who on his/her sparkly road bike thinks that it is acceptable to belt along on a shared path when ther other people about. Be a man (or woman), and if you want to speed, do it on a public highway with other vehicles that might just intimidate you. If you are on a shared path, take it easy eh!! Had one of these on the shared path on blackpool (bispham) sea front recently. Male, Pink uniform, pink bike, pink shades doing about 20mph. Did my best to get the dog out of the way (for the dogs benefit), and just made it. Got a heap of abuse from MR Pink. Just told the f*ucker he 'looked very pretty'. Tw*t.
> 
> rant over



**DING*
*In a civilized society, everyone is expected to show consideration for others, regardless of rights, priority, mode of transport, whatever. It is the bloody-minded "I have rights" attitude without any regard for responsibilities that is at least partly responsible for the decline in quality of life in the UK.


----------



## edindave (2 Oct 2011)

What about 'dog walkers'?


I see a 'dog walker' almost every day on my commute, with at least half a dozen loose dogs, on a narrow 'shared use' cycle path. It's usually different dogs on different days too.

There is no control whatsoever so I tend to creep around them.

One of these days someone will hit one of the dogs.

If it's me then at least I'm insured through British Cycling.

However, I do think the dog walker ought to be in better control of the dogs, and I wouldn't like to be in their shoes having to explain to a dog's owner that a cyclist hit it and it was loose and out of control.

I am sometimes tempted to stop and have a word. Would you say something?


----------



## cycleruk (2 Oct 2011)

Chutzpah said:


> As John the Monkey says, if you want to go fast use a different route.
> 
> *I find a cheery hello works wonders, better than a bell in my opinion.* I only have the very odd person that grumbles "should have used your bell sooner", but they're very much in the minority.
> 
> ...



I use to say " excuse me please" and then people would moan that i dont have a bell, so when i got a bell
people would then say that i was too noisey when i tried over taking them!!!! . The best thing you can do is wait behind at a safe distance till a good over taking spot comes up and go past slowly or get off you bike and walk around them, then get back on after you pass them or lastly, just stick to the roads. Theres over six and a half billon people on this planet, good luck with trying keeping them all happy!


----------



## Chutzpah (3 Oct 2011)

cycleruk said:


> I use to say " excuse me please" and then people would moan that i dont have a bell, so when i got a bell
> people would then say that i was too noisey when i tried over taking them!!!! . The best thing you can do is wait behind at a safe distance till a good over taking spot comes up and go past slowly or get off you bike and walk around them, then get back on after you pass them or lastly, just stick to the roads. Theres over six and a half billon people on this planet, good luck with trying keeping them all happy!



The only place I've ever had a real problem is the Kennet and Avon canal towpath. There you can almost guarantee that if you ring your bell the person will moan that it's rude and inappropriate, but if you say "hello" they'll jump out of their skin and moan you should use a bell






Like you say, can't keep them all happy.


----------



## Andy_R (3 Oct 2011)

Fifelad said:


> God yes! and then its the gormless smile/grimace even hello when your grinding your teeth thinking get out the f***in way you t*ats!






Brandane said:


> A bit harsh is it not?? I don't think the OP was "acting like a d1ck"; rather he was just expecting some courtesy from fellow path users. Not looking for special treatment, just some common sense would be good.



So it's ok to think of other path users as tw*ts and expect them to get out of the way is it? That seems to me as the mindset of a selfish d1ck. Translate it to the road, and imagine the pedestrian is a cyclist and the cyclist is a motorist. We all have to accept each other on whatever right of way we use, be it road, shared path, bridleway. You cant have your cake and eat it, however much you wish so.


----------



## markharry66 (3 Oct 2011)

We have to respect other users and slow down no problem its a shared path that we can all agree but respect is a two way process a couple of times I have almost be pushed off my bike by retractable do leads. The owner allows the dog to wander straight across the path letting the lead span across the path hardly taking others into consideration. How about the dog mess they leave behind


----------



## apollo179 (3 Oct 2011)

exbfb said:


> To a cyclist, a car is a fast moving, potentially dangerous, vehicle.
> To a pedestrian, a cycle is a fast moving, potentially dangerous, vehicle.
> People out for a walk don't have their "dealing with traffic / making space" heads on.
> We have to accept that, end of story really.
> ...



+1
The onus rests with cyclists to navigate the shared path safely.
The attitude that other users out for a daydreaming dawddle are idiots is innappropriate.
The chavvy lowlifes who deliberately block your path with macho bluster now they are genuine moronic chavvy lowlifes.


----------



## Brandane (3 Oct 2011)

Andy_R said:


> So it's ok to think of other path users as tw*ts and expect them to get out of the way is it? That seems to me as the mindset of a selfish d1ck. Translate it to the road, and imagine the pedestrian is a cyclist and the cyclist is a motorist. We all have to accept each other on whatever right of way we use, be it road, shared path, bridleway. You cant have your cake and eat it, however much you wish so.



It's ok to THINK it; but it's not ok to say it out loud. Don't try to tell me that the actions of other people in whatever walk of life don't annoy you on a daily basis. Of course they do! But you just get on with it; accept it for what it is and deal with it, without offending anyone by thinking out loud....

Translate the circumstances to the road as you suggest... If I am in the car or on the bike and I see a big truck that needs more space on the road than I do, then I will do my best to give it that space. Even if it does not have any legal right of way over me. Again, it comes down to common sense and manners.

I was not suggesting that it is ok to go tearing along shared paths at speed and expect people to dive off the path. The picture I have in my mind is my usual ride on a sustrans disused railway path. Narrow, with shrubbery on both sides. Not much traffic either bicycles or pedetrians; so it is usually fine to make progress. As I approach the group of people coming towards me, I slow down and cover the brakes. They see me, but make no effort to step aside (not asking too much am I?). Only when I am right in front of them does it cross their dopey minds that I have nowhere else to go but the path. They then grudgingly move aside to let me through. By which time I have stopped. This happens on a regular basis.

The alternative suggested by someone, to stay off the path and use the road. Perhaps you cycle in leafy suburbia, but in this case the alternative road is a main trunk road. Single carriageway carrying heavy traffic. Perhaps that is the reason why the Sustrans path was created? I would rather incur the wrath of selfish walkers than get flattened by a truck; thanks.


----------



## twobiker (3 Oct 2011)

If I see someone up ahead I shout HELLO from about 20ft away and slow down, that gives them time to decide which way they are going to go, loose dogs are a hazard but its not worth getting sh*** y about it, live and let live.


----------



## Jezston (3 Oct 2011)

edindave said:


> What about 'dog walkers'?
> 
> 
> I see a 'dog walker' almost every day on my commute, with at least half a dozen loose dogs, on a narrow 'shared use' cycle path. It's usually different dogs on different days too.
> ...



What would you say?

They are out having to keep control of half a dozen, often untrained, dogs. What the hell are they supposed to do with them? Should they only be allowed to take them to the park where cyclists aren't allowed?

Slow down. Stop if needs be. What's the rush?


----------



## akb (3 Oct 2011)

My Commute from Sandy to Bedford is pretty much 90% shared use cycle path. I find that if i am courteous to dog walkers/children/teenagers/horses and peds, they are courteous back. Simples. 
Yes, there is the odd occasion when a dog gets in the way; but I know from experience that dogs are stubborn sometimes and dont always do as they are told straight away. So you have to make allowances and slow down. To be doing top speed on a shared use cycle path which clearly has peds/dog walkers etc on them is both stupid and irresponsible IMO. 

Anil.


----------



## sabian92 (3 Oct 2011)

Personally kids with phones or iPods are worse than dogs. A dog doesn't usually have the nouse to ignore everything and just walk straight at you.

I was on a shared cycle path last week and 2 school girls buried in their blackberries or iPhones or whatever they had with headphones weren't even watching where they were going. I stopped after asking them to mind out where they were going and they walked into me all barring a foot - they were so engrossed they didn't even see me (and I was riding during the day, with lights on and a hi-viz....), then pulled a face when I told them they should watch where they were walking and not be so ignorant to things around them.

Dozy cows.


----------



## benb (3 Oct 2011)

Fifelad said:


> God yes! and then its the gormless smile/grimace even hello when your grinding your teeth thinking get out the f***in way you t*ats!



And this is exactly the sort of attitude that we detest in motorists.


----------



## 4F (3 Oct 2011)

Use the road


----------



## Little yellow Brompton (3 Oct 2011)

edindave said:


> What about 'dog walkers'?
> 
> 
> I see a 'dog walker' almost every day on my commute, with at least half a dozen loose dogs, on a narrow 'shared use' cycle path. It's usually different dogs on different days too.
> ...



No point, people who take their ( or other peoples) dogs out to shoot in a shared public space ,rather than their own space, have already shown they have no respect for others, why should you then expect them to bother to listen?


----------



## Little yellow Brompton (3 Oct 2011)

Jezston said:


> What would you say?
> 
> They are out having to keep control of half a dozen, often untrained, dogs. What the hell are they supposed to do with them? Should they only be allowed to take them to the park where cyclists aren't allowed?
> 
> Slow down. Stop if needs be. What's the rush?




Lets see , what could they do?

Have them on a lead.
Have them under control.
Take them to a space that they pay to use, rather than making money out of a shared resource.
Have less dogs.

It's a shared space, the cyclist is using it for it's intended purpose, the dog walker is using it to make a profit, what we have here is a classic case of "The tragedy of the Commons" where one type of user , overuses the common resource for their own benefit.


----------



## Jezston (3 Oct 2011)

What


----------



## apollo179 (3 Oct 2011)

"The tragedy of the Commons"
Phenomenon whereby personal advantage operates to act to the detriment of the communal good.
Example if an obstacle is blocking one lane of a road causing traffic to back up. The problem would be solved and the general good served if one vehicle reaching the obstacle just stopped , got out and removed it. However the tragedy is that by the time the individual has arrived at the obstacle his own personal benefit lies in just going round the obstacle and going about his way with no regard for solving the problem for future traffic/ the common good.
Not sure how that applies in lybs case as i havnt thought about it - just explaining the concept to all you unnnenlightened.


----------



## Gixxerman (3 Oct 2011)

I just ring the bell and shout "Excuse me, coming through on left/right*, thanks" (*delete as applicable).
This normally works for me.
There are a few cases when the people are in their own little world or wearing headphones and they just do not hear you.
In this case, I just slow down and ride behind them until, either they notice me (looking round or peripheral vision) or I can squeeze past slowly.
It doesn't work all the time though. On one notable occaision, I am riding on a shared path and approahing from behind a man and women who are walking 2 abreast and blocking the whole path. Ring bell and shout usual warning; No respose. Ring bell several times and shout warning again but louder this time; Still no response. I suspect that they are daydreaming or wearing headphones. So I hang back and eventually squeeze slowly through where the path gets a bit wider. I am then greeted by the chap shouting at me "You shouldn't be riding on the f**king footpath". I look over my shoulder and am about to say something back, but think better of it as it will probably be wasted. I could not see any obvious reason why they could not hear me. So can only assume that they did it just to be belligerent.


----------



## Hip Priest (3 Oct 2011)

Little yellow Brompton said:


> No point, people who take their ( or other peoples) dogs out to shoot in a shared public space ,rather than their own space, have already shown they have no respect for others, why should you then expect them to bother to listen?



I don't know about you, but I've never come across a dog who can shoot on command. By all means criticise owners for not cleaning up after their dogs, but criticising any owner whose dog shoots in public is more than a little unreasonable.


----------



## Rhythm Thief (3 Oct 2011)

Little yellow Brompton said:


> Lets see , what could they do?
> 
> Have them on a lead.
> Have them under control.
> ...



Don't talk a load of toss. It's a bloke with some dogs, ferfuxake, not someone trying to build a nuclear waste tip on the orphanage playing fields.


----------



## david k (3 Oct 2011)

most dog owners i see clear up the dogs mess and politely move out of the way when i ring my bell, ive never had an issue with shared paths, not sure what people are like were others live but never had an issue in the north west


----------



## 4F (3 Oct 2011)

Little yellow Brompton said:


> No point, people who take their ( or other peoples) dogs out to shoot in a shared public space ,rather than their own space, have already shown they have no respect for others, why should you then expect them to bother to listen?



Aha, cue the dog haters. ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz


----------



## bongofury66 (3 Oct 2011)

The ideal cyclist???


View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eOO4Q1T069Y


----------



## edindave (3 Oct 2011)

Jezston said:


> What would you say?
> 
> They are out having to keep control of half a dozen, often untrained, dogs. What the hell are they supposed to do with them? Should they only be allowed to take them to the park where cyclists aren't allowed?
> 
> Slow down. Stop if needs be. What's the rush?



I'd tell the dog walker that I think they're an accident waiting to happen and have they considered putting the dogs on a lead, considering the traffic on the paths.


I can almost predict who l'll see on the path on my way to work. It's home turf, so when I see the dog walker I know to expect dogs running from the bushes into my path at random. Just never sure how many!

The loose dogs are a greater risk to cyclists who are not familiar with the paths and the people who use it regularly. This is the point I'm trying to make - I'm not bothered about having to slow down.

The fact that they are in someone's paid care just makes me think that the dog walker should be doing more to mitigate against the risk of an accident.


----------



## apollo179 (3 Oct 2011)

I regard it as i have to sucessfully navigate whatever comes in my way be it dogs schoolkids or traffic, no point whining about any of them.


----------



## Fifelad (3 Oct 2011)

Norm said:


> They have priority so how about taking reasonable care rather than giving them the excuse to consider all cyclists are as obnoxious as you appear to be.
> 
> Or maybe...



I can assure you Im not obnoxious I go out my way to say hello/good morning etc to all other path users Im only being honest what I think when they nearly cause me to crash !


----------



## Fiona N (3 Oct 2011)

John the Monkey said:


> If you don't want to reduce your speed now and then, don't use shared paths. Especially not on sunny days.



Don't have any option around here - the dog walkers claim everything which isn't actually dual carriageway. Country lanes are full of them - they seem to think that because they're on the opposite side of the fence to the animals, they don't have to control their dogs. I'd wish more dogs were injured by cars apart form the fact that it isn't the stupid, badly brought up dogs' fault but the stupid ignorant dog owners.


----------



## bobg (3 Oct 2011)

I am very disappointed by the attitude of some of my fellow cyclists, I feel a little ashamed.....

















I am


----------



## Norm (3 Oct 2011)

Chutzpah said:


> The only place I've ever had a real problem is the Kennet and Avon canal towpath. There you can almost guarantee that if you ring your bell the person will moan that it's rude and inappropriate, but if you say "hello" they'll jump out of their skin and moan you should use a bell
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 I've spent today riding the K&A from Pewsey to Reading and, until I crossed under the M4, the only other users of the towpath other than in Hungerford and Newbury (and the boaters!) were dog walkers. 

Without exception, they grabbed their dogs as soon as they heard me coming (bearing issues meant that I could be heard from a fair distance) and apologised for slowing me down. I stopped to chat with most of them, usually just a quick "He looks like he's been for a swim" or similar, but there were a couple of manic labs who needed a bit more attention.  They all thanked me for slowing and for the chat.



Fifelad said:


> I can assure you Im not obnoxious I go out my way to say hello/good morning etc to all other path users Im only being honest what I think when they nearly cause me to crash !


Then I'm glad that I said "as you appear to be", because that is how it came across in your initial posts.  IMO, at least.


----------



## doog (3 Oct 2011)

shameful posts from the same bullies on bikes that I see on my shared route/commute 

As I dog owner If I call my dog in I expect a 'thankyou'....if you dont then expect words. Get a bell and accept that on a shared route you come last behind pedestrians and dog walkers. 

I would love to be the first person to lob a little yellow brompton in a hedge , something tells me I wont be.


----------



## MontyVeda (3 Oct 2011)

drivers and cyclists, cyclists and peds, peds and mobility scooters, mods and rockers, carry on


----------



## funnymummy (3 Oct 2011)

4 hours of cycling round The New Forest on Saturday, met all sorts of folk, rambling hikers with huge rucksacks & maps, families walking & cycling, horseriders, joggers, dog walkers. All were greeed with a cheery Hellooooooooooooo, all replied with a similar happy repsonse, we appraoched lots from behind, an extar loud Helloooo was called, all kindly moved over to let us past. We had many pleasant conversations, folk spotting the numbers on our bike asked what we were doing..Dog walkers seeing us coming called their dogs to heel, several were put onto leads, we thanked them all we toodled past, horseriders were given wide slow berths & they thanked us back - It was a beautiful day full of happy cheery people out enjoying the sunshine.
Of course, there has to be one idiot, the one whose dog runs up at your bike barking, my son is a competant rider, but he is only 7, the sight of a largish dog barking it's head off caused him to wobble all over the path, he tried to move out the dogs way, it moved with him, I called out to him to stop, he did & the dog began growling at him in a menacing way, it hunched down & barred it's teeth, I rode at it shouting, the owner was walking towards us but still a good hundred yards away, she could obvioulsy see what was happening, but made no attempt to call her dog back, or hurry her step to reach us. The dog was still growling, I put myself (on my bike) between it & my son. It was still hunched down, teeth barred & snarling, it made a move I thought it was going to jumpup at me, so I grabbed my water bottle from the cage & gave the dog a damn good squirt right between the eyes! The dog turned & ran back towards its owner, who has suddenly broken into a jog, shouting at me to leave her dog alone!! I told her, she should keep her dog on alead if it was aggressive, she shouted it wasn't aggressive, it just didn't like bikes!!
I could still hear her shouting as we pedalled off!
Did I let one mindless moron ruin my day...? Nope! and until I read this thread I had almost forget about her.

The moral is no matter where go, what you do, there is alawys a twit waiting round the corner to spoil someones day.... You as a cyclist may just be that twit one day!


----------



## Fifelad (3 Oct 2011)

Norm said:


> I've spent today riding the K&A from Pewsey to Reading and, until I crossed under the M4, the only other users of the towpath other than in Hungerford and Newbury (and the boaters!) were dog walkers.
> 
> Without exception, they grabbed their dogs as soon as they heard me coming (bearing issues meant that I could be heard from a fair distance) and apologised for slowing me down. I stopped to chat with most of them, usually just a quick "He looks like he's been for a swim" or similar, but there were a couple of manic labs who needed a bit more attention.  They all thanked me for slowing and for the chat.
> 
> Then I'm glad that I said "as you appear to be", because that is how it came across in your initial posts.  IMO, at least.



No worries  Jeezo if I had known this reaction I wouldnt have bothered posting lol still thats why We are here to debate and give opinions! 

I would challenge anyone on here who hasnt cursed dog walkers or walkers at some stage (to themselves) ! 

I regularly stop to chat and stroke the dogs and make conversation. As previously said the situations that get my goat are when I have given ample warnings and slowed down and there is no reaction.


----------



## Norm (3 Oct 2011)

Fifelad said:


> No worries  Jeezo if I had known this reaction I wouldnt have bothered posting lol still thats why We are here to debate and give opinions!


 Maybe tempering it with the odd "some dog walkers" or "whilst most are great and I love a chat, there are animals attached to both ends of some leads" or the like. 

I don't think I've ever got upset with a dog walker, although that's probably just an age think. the chances are that it must have happened at some point and I've just forgotten.


----------



## Fifelad (3 Oct 2011)

Norm said:


> Maybe tempering it with the odd "some dog walkers" or "whilst most are great and I love a chat, there are animals attached to both ends of some leads" or the like.
> 
> I don't think I've ever got upset with a dog walker, although that's probably just an age think. the chances are that it must have happened at some point and I've just forgotten.



I did make the point IRRESPONSIBLE dog walkers rather than ALL dog walkers  anyhow can we all have a big love in now ? lol


----------



## Norm (3 Oct 2011)

Can I bring my dog?


----------



## Fifelad (3 Oct 2011)

Norm said:


> Can I bring my dog?



Stop it now !


----------



## david k (3 Oct 2011)

you could norm but he is roaming shared paths as we speak


----------



## Norm (3 Oct 2011)

Fifelad said:


> Stop it now !


 





david k said:


> you could norm but he is roaming shared paths as we speak


 He was practising that earlier, he's currently on board the overnight sleeper to Fife.


----------



## Little yellow Brompton (3 Oct 2011)

doog said:


> shameful posts from the same bullies on bikes that I see on my shared route/commute
> 
> As I dog owner If I call my dog in I expect a 'thankyou'....if you dont then expect words. Get a bell and accept that on a shared route you come last behind pedestrians and dog walkers.
> 
> I would love to be the first person to lob a little yellow brompton in a hedge , something tells me I wont be.



You expect to be thanked! For simply doing what you are meant to be doing, keeping your dog under control?

I have a bell all Bromptons have one as standard, care to explain just how a bell manages to clear dog shoot, wind in invisible extending leads, controls a dog that the owner can't?


----------



## XmisterIS (3 Oct 2011)

pedestrians on shared paths don't bother me too much - I just slow down for them. It is a shared use path, after all! If I want to ride fast, I take the road route.

The ones that really hack me off (and have led to arguments) are the militant ramblers on bridleways who believe that off-road bikes shouldn't be there and who will actively move to deliberately block your progress. Even if you tell them that you are allowed, by law, to ride on the bridleway, they won;t have it and say that in their opinion you shouldn't be there (therefore they are, of course, completely justified in behaving like tools, just because it's their opinion that bikes shouldn't be there).


----------



## Rhythm Thief (3 Oct 2011)

XmisterIS said:


> The ones that really hack me off (and have led to arguments) are the militant ramblers on bridleways who believe that off-road bikes shouldn't be there and who will actively move to deliberately block your progress. Even if you tell them that you are allowed, by law, to ride on the bridleway, they won;t have it and say that in their opinion you shouldn't be there (therefore they are, of course, completely justified in behaving like tools, just because it's their opinion that bikes shouldn't be there).



I've had the same issue with ramblers on Byways Open to All Traffic and my off road, er, Citroen 2CV. 

Can of worms, anyone?


----------



## apollo179 (4 Oct 2011)

MontyVeda said:


> drivers and cyclists, cyclists and peds, peds and mobility scooters, mods and rockers, carry on



Ahh the historic cyclist vs dog conflict.
I predict that like a rabid dog off its leash its gonna run and run


----------



## Jezston (4 Oct 2011)

Rhythm Thief said:


> I've had the same issue with ramblers on Byways Open to All Traffic and my off road, er, Citroen 2CV.
> 
> Can of worms, anyone?



Issues?

Surely in a collision between a 2CV and a pedestrian the 2CV would come out far worse? 

"Ah lovely day for a walk in a countryside, what Tabatha?"
"Oh indeed George, delightful ... ouch! What was that? Did a moth just fly into me?"
"I'm not sure dear ... oh! I'm guessing by that mass of crumpled metal over there that it was one of those old Citroens."
"Ah well that's ok. Ooh look at those geraniums!"


----------



## John the Monkey (4 Oct 2011)

doog said:


> As I dog owner If I call my dog in I expect a 'thankyou'....if you dont then expect words. Get a bell and accept that on a shared route you come last behind pedestrians and dog walkers.



Um... as a cyclist who also owns a dog (a friendly, but slightly thick and rather excitable Jack Russell) I have to disagree on that. He gets called in and sat when cyclists or horse riders pass us. Sometimes they let on, sometimes not - I don't really mind either way, personally.

Some people are never happy - I've met folk who moan if you ring a bell to let them know you're there, and folk who moan if you say "excuse me" instead. Memorably, one bloke said "Just pass me quietly!", a recipe for making folk jump out of their skin if ever there was one.


----------



## Norm (4 Oct 2011)

Indeed, I'm kind of uncomfortable at someone getting riled by not being thanked.

I do thank everyone who visibly controls their dogs but they are just complying with legal requirements so thanking them is akin to thanking people for not using a phone whilst driving.


----------



## Crackle (4 Oct 2011)

John the Monkey said:


> Um... as a cyclist who also owns a dog (a friendly, but slightly thick and rather excitable Jack Russell) I have to disagree on that. He gets called in and sat when cyclists or horse riders pass us. Sometimes they let on, sometimes not - I don't really mind either way, personally.
> 
> Some people are never happy - I've met folk who moan if you ring a bell to let them know you're there, and folk who moan if you say "excuse me" instead. Memorably, one bloke said "Just pass me quietly!", a recipe for making folk jump out of their skin if ever there was one.




Exactly. It's nice to get a thank you, some cyclists do look particularly glum, maybe they have an endorphin shortage and some people will always moan. I had one this morning. As soon as I clapped eyes on him I could tell he was going to moan at me. Unfortunately for him, my mood was fairly dark this morning.


----------



## doog (4 Oct 2011)

Little yellow Brompton said:


> You expect to be thanked! For simply doing what you are meant to be doing, keeping your dog under control?
> 
> I have a bell all Bromptons have one as standard, care to explain just how a bell manages to clear dog shoot, wind in invisible extending leads, controls a dog that the owner can't?



What do you call keeping a dog under control? I dont see too many cylists getting mown down by 'out of control dogs' or attacked on shared routes. Does slowing down for a dog upset you? Lose 20 seconds on your trip- you are just as bad as the impatient motorist. If you see a dog slow down. Most dog owners dont want vet fees when some blundering idiot on a bike piles into it so they will be responsible and call it in. I have read your anti dog posts on here since you joined and quite frankly I just think you are trolling - boring.

What I do see on a daily basis is young mothers with children,elderly people and people with dogs literally jumping (sometimes for their lives) because of bully boys on bikes piling up behind them, passing them without warning and not using a bell. As a cyclist, use your bell and when they pull the dog in, move over - follow it up with a thankyou or a wave.

Strangely enough I had an attitude like you , you know the' get out of my way im coming through attitude' but I grew out of it many years ago. Totally different on a road but having had 3 kids and a dog and being a cyclist who commutes on the same shared route (trailway), I have come to respect other trailway users including dog walkers rather than treat them like shoot (like you do)

I still have the odd run in, it cant be helped but just because its shared doesnt mean I own it when I am on my bike.


----------



## Little yellow Brompton (4 Oct 2011)

doog said:


> What do you call keeping a dog under control? I dont see too many cylists getting mown down by 'out of control dogs' or attacked on shared routes. Does slowing down for a dog upset you? Lose 20 seconds on your trip- you are just as bad as the impatient motorist. If you see a dog slow down. Most dog owners dont want vet fees when some blundering idiot on a bike piles into it so they will be responsible and call it in. I have read your anti dog posts on here since you joined and quite frankly I just think you are trolling - boring.
> 
> What I do see on a daily basis is young mothers with children,elderly people and people with dogs literally jumping (sometimes for their lives) because of bully boys on bikes piling up behind them, passing them without warning and not using a bell. As a cyclist, use your bell and when they pull the dog in, move over - follow it up with a thankyou or a wave.
> 
> ...




None of your hastily assembled labels ( above ) fits, I have seen cyclists taken down by out of control dogs, the last about 3 weeks ago on the Taff Trail , on a sections where a local byelaw specifically says that dogs are to be kept on a lead, some hope! If you think I'm trolling I must be a very bad troll because I'm going to suggest to you that you simply killfile me, that way you don't have to get upset by me suggesting that all dog owners need to do to shut me up is stick to the law, as I do. 

As for what do I call "being under control" a dog on a fixed lead, or one that will leave,stop and stay under verbal command, for that to work of course the dog needs to be in front of the owner, where is can be seen.

The reverse is also true a dog that is not under control includes any that are on extending leads, any that are behind the owner and that's before we start considering if the owner has bothered to train the animal in any way before taking it out into communal space for it's daily shoot. 

In short , if you can't see the animal ,it's not under control, if it's on a extending lead you can;t control it, if it's out of voice range it's out of control , that covers about 75% of the turd dispensers I encounter daily. YMMV


----------



## Emmanuel Obikwelu (4 Oct 2011)

doog said:


> What do you call keeping a dog under control? I dont see too many cylists getting mown down by 'out of control dogs' or attacked on shared routes. Does slowing down for a dog upset you? Lose 20 seconds on your trip- you are just as bad as the impatient motorist. If you see a dog slow down. Most dog owners dont want vet fees when some blundering idiot on a bike piles into it so they will be responsible and call it in. *I have read your anti dog posts on here since you joined and quite frankly I just think you are trolling - boring.
> 
> *What I do see on a daily basis is young mothers with children,elderly people and people with dogs literally jumping (sometimes for their lives) because of bully boys on bikes piling up behind them, passing them without warning and not using a bell. As a cyclist, use your bell and when they pull the dog in, move over - follow it up with a thankyou or a wave.
> 
> ...




Just because LyB has a different opinion to you dosnt make him atroll.
To suggest that is just a copout.


----------



## david k (4 Oct 2011)

Emmanuel Obikwelu said:


> Just because LyB has a different opinion to you dosnt make him atroll.
> To suggest that is just a copout.




i think the post was quite extensive and therefore dont see one sentence as a cop out


----------



## Cyclopathic (4 Oct 2011)

I really have to come down on the side of the pedestrians here. On a multi use path I think it is just common courtesy and common sense to slow down a bit, cover your brakes and be patient. I am a pedestrian and a dog walker as well and I expect to be able to let my dog have a bit of a run around without having to worry about some overly enthusiastic cyclist wiping him out as they belt along imagining that they are in a sprint finish. If you want to ride like some road warrior then do it on the road not where everybody has to use the space. I think it's just nice that there are more of these multi use paths that we can ride on and it has never even occured to me that there would be anyone who could possibly have a problem with just easing up a bit and giving pedestrians the proirity. If I see someone ambling along with their headphones on I just give them a wide berth, how is that any hardship at all. Like someone else pointed out a pedestrian today may be a car driver tomorroe and I don't think it's wise to give them a reason to want revenge.

So come on folks, lighten up a bit and don't take yourselves so seriously. I expect better from cyclists as we all know only too well what it is like to have vehicles that are bigger and faster cutting you up and being jerks. 

The best way to combat stupid and selfish behaviour is to lead by example. We can only control what we do and hope that others take a lead from that. We have no control over anyone else.


----------



## Hip Priest (4 Oct 2011)

Little yellow Brompton said:


> As for what do I call "being under control" a dog on a fixed lead



I hate those trendy fakenger dogs though.


----------



## Andy_R (4 Oct 2011)

Hip Priest said:


> I hate those trendy fakenger dogs though.


----------



## Hip Priest (4 Oct 2011)

See, no front brake. These hipster hounds are a menace!


----------



## Little yellow Brompton (4 Oct 2011)

Cyclopathic said:


> I really have to come down on the side of the pedestrians here. On a multi use path I think it is just common courtesy and common sense to slow down a bit, cover your brakes and be patient. I am a pedestrian and a dog walker as well and I expect to be able to let my dog have a bit of a run around without having to worry about some overly enthusiastic cyclist wiping him out as they belt along imagining that they are in a sprint finish. If you want to ride like some road warrior then do it on the road not where everybody has to use the space. I think it's just nice that there are more of these multi use paths that we can ride on and it has never even occured to me that there would be anyone who could possibly have a problem with just easing up a bit and giving pedestrians the proirity. If I see someone ambling along with their headphones on I just give them a wide berth, how is that any hardship at all. Like someone else pointed out a pedestrian today may be a car driver tomorroe and I don't think it's wise to give them a reason to want revenge.
> 
> So come on folks, lighten up a bit and don't take yourselves so seriously. I expect better from cyclists as we all know only too well what it is like to have vehicles that are bigger and faster cutting you up and being jerks.
> 
> The best way to combat stupid and selfish behaviour is to lead by example. We can only control what we do and hope that others take a lead from that. We have no control over anyone else.



Just one question. Why do you "...expect to be able to let my dog have a bit of a run around", when the HC specifically says "

"

*56*
Dogs. Do not let a dog out on the road on its own. Keep it on a short lead when walking on the pavement, road or path shared with cyclists or horse riders."




All I'm asking for is for people to follow the same HC I do.




For that it seems, I risk having my bike thrown into a hedge unless I kowtow to a dog owner, who deigns to let me pass whilst momentarily paying lip service to the HC.


----------



## Fifelad (4 Oct 2011)

Norm said:


> He was practising that earlier, he's currently on board the overnight sleeper to Fife.


----------



## NotFabian (4 Oct 2011)

Approx 5miles of my commute is on a shared path, the bye-law relating to national cycle network in relation to speed is 5mph(dunno if its the same across the country) this I think is ridiculously slow, however, the signs also say dogs are to be kept under control, and we're to have consideration for *all* users of the path-(not a direct quote) those of us who quote bye-laws and HC in relation to other users' malpractices is one thing but its a 2 way street. I do roll my eyes and maybe mutter under my breath at wanderers etc, but if I stuck to the rules ie speed limit, then the wanderers and dogs wouldn't impede me, so I just let the issue slide. 

If I'm out for a training ride I stay away from shared paths.


----------



## apollo179 (4 Oct 2011)

NotFabian said:


> Approx 5miles of my commute is on a shared path, the bye-law relating to national cycle network in relation to speed is 5mph(dunno if its the same across the country) this I think is ridiculously slow, however, the signs also say dogs are to be kept under control, and we're to have consideration for *all* users of the path-(not a direct quote) those of us who quote bye-laws and HC in relation to other users' malpractices is one thing but its a 2 way street. I do roll my eyes and maybe mutter under my breath at wanderers etc, but if I stuck to the rules ie speed limit, then the wanderers and dogs wouldn't impede me, so I just let the issue slide.
> 
> If I'm out for a training ride I stay away from shared paths.



Good post.
Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.


----------



## benb (4 Oct 2011)

apollo179 said:


> Good post.
> Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.



No-one is to stone anyone until I blow this whistle.
Even if they do say Jehovah.


----------



## Cyclopathic (5 Oct 2011)

Little yellow Brompton said:


> Just one question. Why do you "...expect to be able to let my dog have a bit of a run around", when the HC specifically says "
> 
> "
> 
> ...



I ride on the same path as well and as long as everyone acts in a civil way and people don't ride like idiots then there really is no risk. It's a shared path with a lot of green off to each side which is ample for dogs to have a run. However riders should just take some care and remember it isnt a road. HC isn't a law just a guideline.


----------



## Little yellow Brompton (5 Oct 2011)

Cyclopathic said:


> I ride on the same path as well and as long as everyone acts in a civil way and people don't ride like idiots then there really is no risk. It's a shared path with a lot of green off to each side which is ample for dogs to have a run. However riders should just take some care and remember it isnt a road. HC isn't a law just a guideline.



Do you need me to point out that you ignored the question?


----------



## Andy_R (5 Oct 2011)

This is now getting silly and out of hand......as usual......I find it amazing that so called "sensible adults" can take a thread, hijack it and use it to make a particular personal point. Why? It solves nothing ie it gives the op no help what so ever, instead it becomes a soapbox for those with issues. For f@cks sake, give it a rest. If you have a point to make then start your own fekking thread! Label it "RANT FOR SOMEONE WITH ISSUES" and run with that.


----------



## Little yellow Brompton (6 Oct 2011)

NotFabian said:


> Approx 5miles of my commute is on a shared path, the bye-law relating to national cycle network in relation to speed is 5mph(dunno if its the same across the country)




Ok I give up I've searched for this byelaw, with little success. Can you give me a clue where to find it?


----------



## Little yellow Brompton (6 Oct 2011)

Andy_R said:


> This is now getting silly and out of hand......as usual......I find it amazing that so called "sensible adults" can take a thread, hijack it and use it to make a particular personal point. Why? It solves nothing ie it gives the op no help what so ever, instead it becomes a soapbox for those with issues. For f@cks sake, give it a rest. If you have a point to make then start your own fekking thread! Label it "RANT FOR SOMEONE WITH ISSUES" and run with that.




I like it! :-)

An off topic rant, from somone making a particular personal point, about, off topic rants! Are you a fan of "Con Air" perchance?


----------



## Cyclopathic (6 Oct 2011)

Little yellow Brompton said:


> Do you need me to point out that you ignored the question?




Firstly I didn't have any idea that the HC had anything to say on the matter of dog walking. Secondly on this particular stretch of multi purpose path ther is amp[le room each side of the path for the dog to run around and for it to be easily visible to anybody riding along so that both dog and rider can have enough time to reach an amicle agreement about which of them shoud cross the others path. 
There are other sections of the path which are more constricted where I would put the dog on its lead. In these instances where it is not quite so life and death as other situations covered in the HC I think that there is room for a bit of common sense to be applied to the rules to save us the fate of living in an overly officious and regulated world.


----------



## snorri (6 Oct 2011)

Cyclopathic said:


> t both dog and rider can have enough time to reach an amicle agreement about which of them shoud cross the others path.



  Did you really think about that before typing?


----------



## NotFabian (6 Oct 2011)

Little yellow Brompton said:


> Ok I give up I've searched for this byelaw, with little success. Can you give me a clue where to find it?





I merely read the Cycling network signs as I passed by, which state the network route number, speed limit, and other blurb like respecting users etc etc.

As far as Antrim county council's bye laws go I'm afraid I can't supply any more info.

Maybe its the network's rules for speed on that path...who knows.

Hope you haven't lost any sleep.


----------



## Emmanuel Obikwelu (6 Oct 2011)

david k said:


> i think the post was quite extensive and therefore dont see one sentence as a cop out



Maybe not a cop out.
But little yellow brompton is not acting as a troll here so agree or disagree with him thats fair enough but to call him a troll is disingenuous or imho pretty pathetic.
Sorry doog but argue your point like man dont resort to cheap name calling from the outset.
This leaping to call people this and that without grounds is just pathetic. (sorry - hobbyhorse)


----------



## doog (6 Oct 2011)

Emmanuel Obikwelu said:


> Sorry doog but argue your point like man dont resort to cheap name calling from the outset.
> (sorry - hobbyhorse)



I haven't got the energy. He dislikes dogs and their owners and will appear on every thread that goes anywhere near the subject, filling it with his own 'funnies'- that are quite pathetic for someone who claims to hold a level of personal responsibility. I suggest we move on.


----------



## david k (6 Oct 2011)

benb said:


> No-one is to stone anyone until I blow this whistle.
> Even if they do say Jehovah.




And I want to make this absolutely clear...................even if they do say Jehova


----------



## Little yellow Brompton (6 Oct 2011)

doog said:


> I haven't got the energy. He dislikes dogs and their owners and will appear on every thread that goes anywhere near the subject, filling it with his own 'funnies'- that are quite pathetic for someone who claims to hold a level of personal responsibility. I suggest we move on.



I note that you suggest "we" move on , after you get one last lick in!


----------



## Little yellow Brompton (6 Oct 2011)

Cyclopathic said:


> Firstly I didn't have any idea that the HC had anything to say on the matter of dog walking. Secondly on this particular stretch of multi purpose path ther is amp[le room each side of the path for the dog to run around and for it to be easily visible to anybody riding along so that both dog and rider can have enough time to reach an amicle agreement about which of them shoud cross the others path.
> There are other sections of the path which are more constricted where I would put the dog on its lead. In these instances where it is not quite so life and death as other situations covered in the HC I think that there is room for a bit of common sense to be applied to the rules to save us the fate of living in an overly officious and regulated world.



I do wish the vast majority of the people taking their dog out for a crap had your point of view.


----------



## Emmanuel Obikwelu (6 Oct 2011)

doog said:


> I haven't got the energy. He dislikes dogs and their owners and will appear on every thread that goes anywhere near the subject, filling it with his own 'funnies'- that are quite pathetic for someone who claims to hold a level of personal responsibility. I suggest we move on.



If you havnt got the inclination to argue the point with little yellow brompton then thats fine but it seems a pity as someone needs to put the other side of the arguement.
Personally the dog issue isnt one i can get worked up about (name calling : yes).
I suspect both sides have valid viewpoints and just need to sit down with acas and hammer out a comprimise. 
Dog owners are in contravention of local bylaw 56a subsection viii and they do let their dogs shix all over the place but what do you do us cyclists arnt perfect either as notfabian points out.


----------



## Little yellow Brompton (6 Oct 2011)

NotFabian said:


> I merely read the Cycling network signs as I passed by, which state the network route number, speed limit, and other blurb like respecting users etc etc.
> 
> As far as Antrim county council's bye laws go I'm afraid I can't supply any more info.
> 
> ...



I haven't seen any like that , apart from in Hailey Park where there are signs saying " Ride with care" and" Keep your dog on a lead" .

I have been pacing the floor,inbetween frantic tinterweb searchs and tweeting , I'm now jittery through too much coffee and SIS Go gels!


----------



## Little yellow Brompton (6 Oct 2011)

Emmanuel Obikwelu said:


> If you havnt got the inclination to argue the point with little yellow brompton then thats fine but it seems a pity as someone needs to put the other side of the arguement.
> Personally the dog issue isnt one i can get worked up about (name calling : yes).
> I suspect both sides have valid viewpoints and just need to sit down with acas and hammer out a comprimise.
> Dog owners are in contravention of local bylaw 56a subsection viii and they do let their dogs shix all over the place but what do you do us cyclists arnt perfect either as notfabian points out.



Errr there is a difference.


I produced the HC to show that dogs are meant to be on a lead, clear, and in B&W. 

Notfabian thinks he remembers something on a sign somewhere.


Now, I'm quite happy to follow the HC, but it seems the people who want to take pooochikins out for a crap don't. And that's before we get to the shoot! :-(


----------



## Emmanuel Obikwelu (6 Oct 2011)

Little yellow Brompton said:


> Errr there is a difference.
> 
> 
> I produced the HC to show that dogs are meant to be on a lead, clear, and in B&W.
> ...



It is quite conceivable that notfabians speed limit for cyclists exist so lets give him the benefit of the doubt. 
It these dog owners are in contravention of the law isnt there something you can do about it such as contacting the police ?


----------



## Little yellow Brompton (6 Oct 2011)

Emmanuel Obikwelu said:


> It is quite conceivable that notfabians speed limit for cyclists exist so lets give him the benefit of the doubt.
> It these dog owners are in contravention of the law isnt there something you can do about it such as contacting the police ?



The HC is not a law.


----------



## doog (6 Oct 2011)

Little yellow Brompton said:


> I note that you suggest "we" move on , after you get one last lick in!



everything I posted was fact..do you not agree that you hate dogs and their owners?

Are you a scoutmaster? ....pretty dire indictment on your profession if you ask me


----------



## doog (6 Oct 2011)

Emmanuel Obikwelu said:


> If you havnt got the inclination to argue the point with little yellow brompton then thats fine but it seems a pity as someone needs to put the other side of the arguement.
> Personally the dog issue isnt one i can get worked up about (name calling : yes).
> I suspect both sides have valid viewpoints and just need to sit down with acas and hammer out a comprimise.
> Dog owners are in contravention of local bylaw 56a subsection viii and they do let their dogs shix all over the place but what do you do us cyclists arnt perfect either as notfabian points out.



bore off chum...


----------



## Emmanuel Obikwelu (6 Oct 2011)

Little yellow Brompton said:


> The HC is not a law.



So what relevance does the hc have for us in what were discussing about dogs?
Do i understand correctly - your saying that the hc says dogs should be kept on a lead but the reality is that the hc is meaningless.
What about your park bylaws what do they say.
The hc is obviously a waste of time.
If your park bylaws say that dogs have to be kept on a lead then cant you contact the police.
What does the park bylaws say about dog shix ?


----------



## Emmanuel Obikwelu (6 Oct 2011)

doog said:


> bore off chum...



what does this mean ???


----------



## Emmanuel Obikwelu (6 Oct 2011)

doog said:


> everything I posted was fact..do you not agree that you hate dogs and their owners?
> 
> Are you a scoutmaster? ....pretty dire indictment on your profession if you ask me



You do seem rather spitefull. Isnt it possible to discuss without the personal bitterness.


----------



## doog (6 Oct 2011)

Emmanuel Obikwelu said:


> You do seem rather spitefull. Isnt it possible to discuss without the personal bitterness.



as someone who called me 'disingenuous or imho pretty pathetic' you have a sense of the ridiculous.


----------



## Little yellow Brompton (6 Oct 2011)

doog said:


> everything I posted was fact..do you not agree that you hate dogs and their owners?
> 
> Are you a scoutmaster? ....pretty dire indictment on your profession if you ask me



I don't agree, I'm neutral about dogs in general. I do dislike dogs that are left to roam , not in control, that are on extending leads because it's selfishly more convinient, that shoot in public places, are agrressive and are noisy. That is the vast majority of dogs that I meet .

I'm not a scoutmaster ( I've never been a member of the BSA) , it's not a profession, and I didn't ask you.


----------



## Little yellow Brompton (6 Oct 2011)

Emmanuel Obikwelu said:


> what does this mean ???



It means " I don't really have an answer, so I'll try and pretend that ,by being correct you are boring!"


----------



## Emmanuel Obikwelu (6 Oct 2011)

doog said:


> as someone who called me 'disingenuous or imho pretty pathetic' you have a sense of the ridiculous.



I was commenting on your lapse into name calling not you personally.
I still think your resorting to innapropriate name calling was pretty pathetic.
However i had presumed that this was just a one off aberation but it seems not.


----------



## NotFabian (6 Oct 2011)

Emmanuel Obikwelu said:


> It is quite conceivable that *notfabians speed limit* for cyclists exist **so lets give him the benefit of the doubt.*
> It these dog owners are in contravention of the law isnt there something you can do about it such as contacting the police ?





Not mine, Local county council.i.e. County Antrim.

The path in question runs along side Belfast Lough, Belfast, Northern Ireland.




*Thanks so much...I feel privileged.


----------



## Emmanuel Obikwelu (7 Oct 2011)

NotFabian said:


> Not mine, Local county council.i.e. County Antrim.
> 
> The path in question runs along side Belfast Lough, Belfast, Northern Ireland.
> 
> ...



Yes lccs but colloquially known as *notfabians speed limit*. Just trying to move the discussion on rather than let it get hung up on hairsplitting, as your point was a good one and i thought it fitting to give you the benefit.
*My pleasure.


----------



## benb (7 Oct 2011)

david k said:


> And I want to make this absolutely clear...................even if they do say Jehova



Oh, I'm so sorry I got the quote slightly wrong!!


----------



## Cyclopathic (7 Oct 2011)

Little yellow Brompton said:


> I do wish the vast majority of the people taking their dog out for a crap had your point of view.




I have seen both groups of people acting stupidly and selfishly but where the system seems to work best is where there is some mutual understanding and cooperation. As a member of both groups I have sympathies for both and feel the irritations of both, as I'm sure a lot of people do. Cyclists I think should slow down on multi purpose paths and dog walkers should be aware of cyclists and pedestrians and other dog walkers and keep the dogs under apropriate control (which I do not happen to agree needs to be on the lead at all times but tailored to the particular conditions)

Finaly when the odd mishap occurs it behoves both parties to take a breath before leaping to the throat of the other and simply aknoelwdge that sometimes these things happen when a lot of people are trying to exist in the same space. A little bit of hunility on both sides goes a long way. And if people have been being careful of other users needs and slowing their speed on their bikes and covering the brakes and dog owners have mede efforts to keep the dog under control then these mishaps, inevitable as they are, will be kept to a minimum and will be of a far less serious nature than if everyone was going hell for leather and and letting dogs do anything.

It doesn't have to be such a fraught and confrontational experience. We all have a choice in the matter.


----------



## snorri (7 Oct 2011)

NotFabian said:


> Approx 5miles of my commute is on a shared path, the bye-law relating to national cycle network in relation to speed is 5mph(dunno if its the same across the country)



It's certainly not the same across the country, I've never seen a speed limit on any part of the NCN, although perhaps these exist where the NCN passes throug a Park subject to Local Byelaws.


----------



## wiggydiggy (7 Oct 2011)

snorri said:


> It's certainly not the same across the country, I've never seen a speed limit on any part of the NCN, although perhaps these exist where the *NCN passes throug a Park subject to Local Byelaws*.



Got it!

I noticed the comments about a speed limit for cyclists in certain areas e.g. like you say subject to by laws. I was certain I've seen something and I had, its Hamstead Heath: Covered by a bye-law cycling is restricted to 8mph.

Theres a few different sites I found with that info: http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=e...hampstead+heath+park&spell=1&biw=1153&bih=395

So at best guess anywhere else in the UK where such a sign exists it may not be covered by a law as such, but if you are in a park that does have a speed limit advised and you break it - potentially you could be ejected from the park? (If they catch you lol!)


----------



## doog (7 Oct 2011)

Emmanuel Obikwelu said:


> I was commenting on your lapse into name calling not you personally.
> I still think your resorting to innapropriate name calling was pretty pathetic.
> However i had presumed that this was just a one off aberation but it seems not.



Indeed a one off, I managed two years without hardly breathing on here until you popped up. How did you do it?


----------



## Cyclopathic (7 Oct 2011)

doog said:


> Indeed a one off, I managed two years without hardly breathing on here until you popped up. How did you do it?




Nobody can force you to call someone names.


----------



## doog (7 Oct 2011)

Little yellow Brompton said:


> I do dislike dogs that are left to roam , not in control, that are on extending leads because it's selfishly more convinient, that shoot in public places, are agrressive and are noisy. *That is the vast majority of dogs that I meet *.




I cannot accept that the vast majority of dogs you meet are aggressive and noisy. I do agree that they 'shoot in public places' I mean thats what dogs do! Hence we rely on owners picking it up.

I have a 5 mile trailway behind me, NCN 25 . I have cycled or ran this route almost daily for 25 years. It is heavily used by dog walkers and cyclists. Indeed its a major commuting route for cyclists between two towns. In 25 years I have come across about 2 aggressive dogs, both when running and when I surprised them . Strangely enough dogs rarely bark when being taken for a walk so the route isnt filled with aggressive, noisy dogs.

Please, please enlighten us all on where you are meeting these hounds from hell because quite frankly I dont believe you. (or if as I think you are greatly exaggerating)

I am not a dog lover, my children wanted one so as usual I end up walking the bugger (so can offer a view from both sides)


----------



## doog (7 Oct 2011)

Cyclopathic said:


> Nobody can force you to call someone names.



what did I call him? I actually accused Brompton of being a troll (as in trolling) the other guy took exception to this and to this end still wont leave it.


----------



## Cyclopathic (7 Oct 2011)

doog said:


> what did I call him? I actually accused Brompton of being a troll (as in trolling) the other guy took exception to this and to this end still wont leave it.




Sorry, I was mixing you up with someone else. I promise to get my facts straight before being nosey and interfering again.


----------



## Emmanuel Obikwelu (7 Oct 2011)

doog said:


> what did I call him? I actually accused Brompton of being a troll (as in trolling) the other guy took exception to this and to this end still wont leave it.



Presumably im "other guy" .
Yes i did point out that you calling little yellow brompton a troll was wrong - why ? because afaiaa lyb isnt a troll , at least afaiaaa in this context . Debate the issue like a responsible adult dont resort to name calling.
Still wont leave it ?. Im just dialoguing with you , fabian and lyb and now cyclopathic , presumably you would have preferred it if i had not entered the discussion at all.


----------



## Little yellow Brompton (7 Oct 2011)

doog said:


> I cannot accept that the vast majority of dogs you meet are aggressive and noisy. I do agree that they 'shoot in public places' I mean thats what dogs do! Hence we rely on owners picking it up.
> 
> I have a 5 mile trailway behind me, NCN 25 . I have cycled or ran this route almost daily for 25 years. It is heavily used by dog walkers and cyclists. Indeed its a major commuting route for cyclists between two towns. In 25 years I have come across about 2 aggressive dogs, both when running and when I surprised them . Strangely enough dogs rarely bark when being taken for a walk so the route isnt filled with aggressive, noisy dogs.
> 
> ...



Please don't try to cherry pick I said the vast majority of dogs that I see are either , not on a lead, not under control, on extending leads or aggresive /and or noisy. 

Dogs shoot in public , shared spaces, but that's not what they do, that's what owners let them get away with. 

As for where I see them...

I use about .5 mile of NCN04 every day and about 13 miles of the the Taff Trail when I'm in the mood. In addittion my office widown overlooks |NCN 04 and I can see quite easily the dog that are left to their own devices by owners. I'm sure you don't want to believe me, but please be assured , I can count, and I can work out percentages.


----------



## doog (7 Oct 2011)

Emmanuel Obikwelu said:


> Presumably im "other guy" .
> Yes i did point out that you calling little yellow brompton a troll was wrong - why ? because afaiaa lyb isnt a troll , at least afaiaaa in this context . Debate the issue like a responsible adult dont resort to name calling.
> Still wont leave it ?. Im just dialoguing with you , fabian and lyb and now cyclopathic , presumably you would have preferred it if i had not entered the discussion at all.



yes you are the other guy and yes you wont leave it alone.

I dont want *you *to 'dialogue' with me thank you. If want to join in the aggressive dog shitting debate then please do with your own experiences. LYB has offered his experiences above and so have I . We live in different parts of the country and as a result have massively differing views.


Back to the subject. Our Council have provided dog bins on nearly all paths and trailways and have done for years. Perhaps this is the reason for different dog owner behaviour between our respective areas. Could it be that down here dog owners are more responsible?


----------



## Little yellow Brompton (7 Oct 2011)

Little yellow Brompton said:


> Please don't try to cherry pick I said the vast majority of dogs that I see are either , not on a lead, not under control, on extending leads or aggresive /and or noisy.
> 
> Dogs shoot in public , shared spaces, but that's not what they do, that's what owners let them get away with.
> 
> ...




Didn't take long 7 minutes after my last post , here is the first turd dispenser. 

Note owner, not dog , not on lead, owner on phone, dog running after it's had shoot ( on one of the lumps of earth out of shot) .


----------



## Little yellow Brompton (7 Oct 2011)

Little yellow Brompton said:


> Didn't take long 7 minutes after my last post , here is the first turd dispenser.
> 
> Note owner, not dog , not on lead, owner on phone, dog running after it's had shoot ( on one of the lumps of earth out of shot) .




Bugger! Picture not attached , let me know if you want it.


----------



## doog (7 Oct 2011)

Little yellow Brompton said:


> Bugger! Picture not attached , let me know if you want it.



any dog bins in the area? Was the dog aggressive and barking?






The Council around here made a point of spraying dog shoot blue before highlighting the nearby bins. Seems to have worked. In Bournemouth down the road the Council give away free dog shoot bags- does any of that happen up your way?


----------



## Little yellow Brompton (7 Oct 2011)

doog said:


> any dog bins in the area? Was the dog aggressive and barking?
> 
> 
> 
> ...





Dog bins ? What relevance have those, the dog was off the lead , behind the owner, the owner was on the phone not paying attention. And yes there is a bin 3 yrds up the road.

Barking and agressive? Cherry pciking again. I suggest you go , again, and read again, what i said the majority of dogs i encounter are , aggresive was one subset. 


BTW the scores on the door are so far 3 dogs off lead, 0 on lead, 0 Extending lead.


----------



## Little yellow Brompton (7 Oct 2011)

doog said:


> yes you are the other guy and yes you wont leave it alone.
> 
> I dont want *you *to 'dialogue' with me thank you. If want to join in the aggressive dog shitting debate then please do with your own experiences. LYB has offered his experiences above and so have I . We live in different parts of the country and as a result have massively differing views.
> 
> ...




I doubt responsibilty has much to do with it, perhaps enforcment.


----------



## Emmanuel Obikwelu (7 Oct 2011)

doog said:


> yes you are the other guy and yes you wont leave it alone.
> 
> I dont want *you *to 'dialogue' with me thank you. If want to join in the aggressive dog shitting debate then please do with your own experiences. LYB has offered his experiences above and so have I . We live in different parts of the country and as a result have massively differing views.
> 
> ...



Yes i get the distinct impression that you have a low toleration point for people answering you back and giving opinions that are contrary to your own.
However this is a forum for open debate so i fear that you may occasionally find people dont allways just pat you on the head and say "oh what a lovely doogy".


----------



## Little yellow Brompton (7 Oct 2011)

Emmanuel Obikwelu said:


> Yes i get the distinct impression that you have a low toleration point for people answering you back and giving opinions that are contrary to your own.
> However this is a forum for open debate so i fear that you may occasionally find people dont allways just pat you on the head and say "oh what a lovely doogy".




I'm still trying to work out how the council providing bins enables owners to put dogs on leads?Maybe they are made of the same magic metal as bike bells as it seems they have the same effect?


----------



## twobiker (7 Oct 2011)

doog said:


> yes you are the other guy and yes you wont leave it alone.
> 
> I dont want *you *to 'dialogue' with me thank you. If want to join in the aggressive dog shitting debate then please do with your own experiences. LYB has offered his experiences above and so have I . We live in different parts of the country and as a result have massively differing views.
> 
> ...


Why does there need to be an" aggressive dog shitting debate", if the dog is aggressive call the authorities.


----------



## CopperCyclist (7 Oct 2011)

I walk my dog. I walk him off the lead. I let him shoot in public spaces which I them promptly pick up and dispose of in the nearest bin. If I see another walker with a dog off lead, he stays off lead. If I see another walker with dog on lead or simply by themselves, he goes on lead til we've passed.

I find the stereotype of dogs being EITHER out of control, shitting, aggressive, noisy or (fill in blank here) as wrong to make as the stereotypes that all cyclists red light jump, hold up traffic, don't pay road tax, and should stick to cycle paths.

Both stereotypes are, from my personal experience, incorrect. Of course there's always some from both groups that break the rule, but it's not far to tar everyone with the same brush.


----------



## wiggydiggy (7 Oct 2011)

Had my first view 'from the other side' a month ago when visiting a friend and his new 3 yr old rescue dog. Walking it he was on the lead constantly whilst being taught to heel which he mostly did and my friend had took a plastic bag with him. We only met 2 cyclists and they went a different way, but with smaller children/other dogs around my friend was heeling his dog. Sound behavior so far I thought.

But it was only good until mutley laid out the smelliest poo I have ever smelt  It was like the waste pipes at chernobyl had been emptied, at which point my friend said 'blow that', put his bag away and left the steaming mess on the floor.

I think that highlights and makes something the RSPCA said ring true -

"Those critical of dogs behavior should look at the other end of the lead from time to time"


----------



## Little yellow Brompton (7 Oct 2011)

wiggydiggy said:


> Had my first view 'from the other side' a month ago when visiting a friend and his new 3 yr old rescue dog. Walking it he was on the lead constantly whilst being taught to heel which he mostly did and my friend had took a plastic bag with him. We only met 2 cyclists and they went a different way, but with smaller children/other dogs around my friend was heeling his dog. Sound behavior so far I thought.
> 
> But it was only good until mutley laid out the smelliest poo I have ever smelt  It was like the waste pipes at chernobyl had been emptied, at which point my friend said 'blow that', put his bag away and left the steaming mess on the floor.
> 
> ...




The definition of a dog lead " A length of chain, leather, rope or fabric, attached to an animal that leaves shoot everywhere on one end and occasionally a dog the other"


----------



## Little yellow Brompton (7 Oct 2011)

CopperCyclist said:


> I walk my dog. I walk him off the lead. I let him shoot in public spaces which I them promptly pick up and dispose of in the nearest bin. If I see another walker with a dog off lead, he stays off lead. If I see another walker with dog on lead or simply by themselves, he goes on lead til we've passed.
> 
> I find the stereotype of dogs being EITHER out of control, shitting, aggressive, noisy or (fill in blank here) as wrong to make as the stereotypes that all cyclists red light jump, hold up traffic, don't pay road tax, and should stick to cycle paths.
> 
> Both stereotypes are, from my personal experience, incorrect. Of course there's always some from both groups that break the rule, but it's not far to tar everyone with the same brush.



Another who is quite happy to ignore the HC, but I presume you want cyclists to obey it by giving way to pedestrians ?


----------



## Rhythm Thief (7 Oct 2011)

Emmanuel Obikwelu said:


> Presumably im "other guy" .
> Yes i did point out that you calling little yellow brompton a troll was wrong - why ? because afaiaa lyb isnt a troll , at least afaiaaa in this context . Debate the issue like a responsible adult dont resort to name calling.
> Still wont leave it ?. Im just *dialoguing* with you , fabian and lyb and now cyclopathic , presumably you would have preferred it if i had not entered the discussion at all.



Aaaargh. No, no, no. You're not "dialoguing", that's only a word insofar as politicians have made it up in order to make themselves appear more important in interviews. What you're doing is "talking". Well, not literally ...


----------



## doog (7 Oct 2011)

Little yellow Brompton said:


> I'm still trying to work out how the council providing bins enables owners to put dogs on leads?Maybe they are made of the same magic metal as bike bells as it seems they have the same effect?



You have mentioned dog shoot in all but one post on this subject and are now dodging the subject of dog shoot ?? If I mentioned dogs leads you would probably ask me how they prevent dogs from shitting.

Its like banging your head against a brick wall.

Why do I love the fact that you look out of your office window and see dogs doing what dogs do




...

(enjoy your weekend and be careful where you tread



)


----------



## doog (7 Oct 2011)

Emmanuel Obikwelu said:


> Yes i get the distinct impression that you have a low toleration point for people answering you back and giving opinions that are contrary to your own.
> However this is a forum for open debate so i fear that you may occasionally find people *dont allways just pat you on the head and say "oh what a lovely doogy".*



Couldnt be further than the truth. I also post on a Leeds united forum and that gives me balls of steel, trust me. You carry on 'dialoguing' Emmanuel


----------



## CopperCyclist (7 Oct 2011)

Little yellow Brompton said:


> Another who is quite happy to ignore the HC, but I presume you want cyclists to obey it by giving way to pedestrians ?



Read and re-read this - I genuinely don't understand your post?


----------



## Little yellow Brompton (7 Oct 2011)

CopperCyclist said:


> Read and re-read this - I genuinely don't understand your post?



The HC says, dogs should be on leads on cshared use paths, it also says cyclists should give way to pedestrains on shared use paths.

You have decided to ignore one part, how about the other, or do you pick and choose?


----------



## CopperCyclist (7 Oct 2011)

Little yellow Brompton said:


> The HC says, dogs should be on leads on cshared use paths, it also says cyclists should give way to pedestrains on shared use paths.
> 
> You have decided to ignore one part, how about the other, or do you pick and choose?



Ah, now I understand. It's actually you that has made the error, or the rather large assumption. I walk my dog over some large open fields. I don't think anyone would describe them as 'shared use paths' - it's just a field. The 'paths' that are there are the ones created simply by walking - I believe the term used for them a while ago were 'desire paths'.

So, assumption leads to everyone believing dog walkers are irresponsible, Cyclists are red light jumpers, and forum members like to argue. I think I'll try to disprove the full set by ending my input to this topic here.


----------



## Emmanuel Obikwelu (7 Oct 2011)

Rhythm Thief said:


> Aaaargh. No, no, no. You're not "dialoguing", that's only a word insofar as politicians have made it up in order to make themselves appear more important in interviews. What you're doing is "talking". Well, not literally ...



Doogy was saying that i woudnt leave "it" alone - the word dialoguing suitably conveyed the meaning that the communication was a 2 way phenomenprocess. I was merely replying to doogy as part of a 2 way dialogue. If doogy had not replied to me then i would have not taken it further. Indeed i did not expect to post again beyong my single first post.
Pleasure dialoguing with you Rythm Theif.


----------



## Emmanuel Obikwelu (7 Oct 2011)

doog said:


> Couldnt be further than the truth. I also post on a Leeds united forum and that gives me balls of steel, trust me. You carry on 'dialoguing' Emmanuel



Given that invitation it would be rude not to.
Satisfy my curiosity then - why did you accuse little yellow brompton of being a troll given that in the same post you virtually aknowledge he isnt by recognising that he allways posts about dogs so he clearly does have a genuinely held opinion and is not just being mischeivously provocative.


----------



## doog (7 Oct 2011)

CopperCyclist said:


> Read and re-read this - I genuinely don't understand your post?



he's quoting his obsession with an obscure part of the highway code that is both unenforceable and little known. He is countering this piece of 'advice' (for thats all it is) with the laws that exist regarding dangerous and careless cycling. 

Being a cop you would know that these offences apply to a road and that the definition of a road includes a highway. As a responsible pedestrian, cyclist and dog walker I would like to see the definition of a road changed in these instances to include trailways and all other other public paths that are open to cyclists just in case they fall out of this definition. 

Something needs to be done to slow the bully boy likes of Brompton down as they scatter old grannies . Although dogs off leads are a great deterrent to speeding cyclists we really do need the law changed and enforced. I find 2 jack russells on retractable leads great fun for slowing these morons.


----------



## doog (7 Oct 2011)

Emmanuel Obikwelu said:


> Given that invitation it would be rude not to.
> Satisfy my curiosity then - why did you accuse little yellow brompton of being a troll given that in the same post you virtually aknowledge he isnt by recognising that he allways posts about dogs so he clearly does have a genuinely held opinion and is not just being *mischeivously provocative.*




Any mischief in his posts would surely be given away by a hint of humour - I cant find any so you may have a point.


----------



## Little yellow Brompton (7 Oct 2011)

doog said:


> he's quoting his obsession with an obscure part of the highway code that is both unenforceable and little known. He is countering this piece of 'advice' (for thats all it is) with the laws that exist regarding dangerous and careless cycling.
> 
> Being a cop you would know that these offences apply to a road and that the definition of a road includes a highway. As a responsible pedestrian, cyclist and dog walker I would like to see the definition of a road changed in these instances to include trailways and all other other public paths that are open to cyclists just in case they fall out of this definition.
> 
> Something needs to be done to slow the bully boy likes of Brompton down as they scatter old grannies . Although dogs off leads are a great deterrent to speeding cyclists we really do need the law changed and enforced. I find 2 jack russells on retractable leads great fun for slowing these morons.



Could I suggest you never take up debating or archery as interests?


----------



## Little yellow Brompton (7 Oct 2011)

CopperCyclist said:


> Ah, now I understand. It's actually you that has made the error, or the rather large assumption. I walk my dog over some large open fields. I don't think anyone would describe them as 'shared use paths' - it's just a field. The 'paths' that are there are the ones created simply by walking - I believe the term used for them a while ago were 'desire paths'.
> 
> So, assumption leads to everyone believing dog walkers are irresponsible, Cyclists are red light jumpers, and forum members like to argue. I think I'll try to disprove the full set by ending my input to this topic here.



You are right, as this was a cycling forum, and the discussion was about shared use cycle routes , I made the assumption that you were making a point about dogs on said routes. 
Bad me , bad , bad me!


----------



## raindog (7 Oct 2011)

Jesus Christ guys, if you've really nothing else to do but this, I've got a really big garden with which I could do with some help.....


----------



## Emmanuel Obikwelu (8 Oct 2011)

raindog said:


> Jesus Christ guys, if you've really nothing else to do but this, I've got a really big garden with which I could do with some help.....



Whereabout in france are you and can you provide free board and lodging. And do you have sky sports.


----------



## Cyclopathic (8 Oct 2011)

With the issue if shred use paths cyclists, pedestrians and dogs, as with most things in life I find virtually all problems can be negated by the judicious application of courtesy, care and consideration for other people. If you ride your bike like a road warrior trying to get a kidney to the hospital for transplant and if one walks ones dogs with an eye out for traffic rather than aproaching a dog walk like an afternoon of hare coursing, and god knows even smile and sayhello to one another then none of the problems talked about in this thread need ever come to anything unsavory. I think the above are reasonable adjustments to make for the advantages ofo having paths in our cities that are available to people in this way. A dog off the lead really is not the massive problem that some here would have us believe as long as one is riding sensibly and not in a bubble of ones own entitlement. Quoting the hc is all well and good but there are other hazards on these paths for cyclists such as small children who are in some instances even less aware of the dangers of traffic and more likely to step out in front of a bike than a dog. If one rides in a way that necessitates emergency stops and swerves into the hedge for a dog it can only be a matter of time before such dramatic evasiv manouevers have to be employed to avoid a todler or other vulnerable pedestrian.


----------



## twobiker (8 Oct 2011)

If its a shared path doesn't that mean we have to share ?.


----------



## Little yellow Brompton (8 Oct 2011)

Cyclopathic said:


> With the issue if shred use paths cyclists, pedestrians and dogs, as with most things in life I find virtually all problems can be negated by the judicious application of courtesy, care and consideration for other people.



I find, if people stick to the "rules" then there is no need for any extra courtesy, care and consideration.


Highway code.

*56*
Dogs. Do not let a dog out on the road on its own. Keep it on a short lead when walking on the pavement, road or path shared with cyclists or horse riders.





*62*
Cycle Tracks. ... Take care when passing pedestrians, especially children, older or disabled people, and allow them plenty of room. Always be prepared to slow down and stop if necessary...


There we go job done!

I follow, No 62, I expect others to follow No 56. So far all I see is, on the shared paths No 56 being totally ignored, and here lots of people going "yes but... " whilst coming up with reasons why they can ignore No 56.


----------



## david k (8 Oct 2011)

he didnt suggest 'extra' courtesy, he suggested courtesy, which is the same as rule 56 and 62


----------



## Emmanuel Obikwelu (8 Oct 2011)

david k said:


> he didnt suggest 'extra' courtesy, he suggested courtesy, which is the same as rule 56 and 62



Cyclopathic was not speaking with reference to the hc rules.
Little yellow brompton is making the point that , with refernce to the hc rules :
"if people stick to the "rules" then there is no need for any extra courtesy, care and consideration." 
ie - extra to that allready provided in the hc rules.
In arguing for courtesy you are fundamentally supporting lybs view that dog owners who fail to abide by the hc rules are at fault (which obviously they are)
The wider point remains that cyclists are hardly without sin themselves so we should all just get on as best we can together.


----------



## Cyclopathic (9 Oct 2011)

Little yellow Brompton said:


> I find, if people stick to the "rules" then there is no need for any extra courtesy, care and consideration.
> 
> 
> Highway code.
> ...



If you read what I said you'll notice that I do not "totally" ignore rule 56. I let my dog off thelead where there is ample green space either side for him to run around on, which is what he does for the most part. Aprt from that I'd rather live in a world where people were considerate first and sticklers for rules for rules sake a long way down the list. I fail to see why you let yourself get so upset about this or why you can't find the magnanimity in you just to let people let their dogs run about without being such a sourpus about it. If your willing to slow down for children and the infirm how much more does it stretch your generosity to offer the same kindness to dogs. How much does it really affect your life or come to that even your journey time if once in a while you have to take care not to hit a dog? I'd bet not very much. The benifit for dog walkers to be able to let their dogs have a bit of a frolic outwieghs any percieved inconvenience to people who have to slow down a bit.


----------



## doog (9 Oct 2011)

edited for the sake of board harmony

(the subject has been done to death




)


----------



## Little yellow Brompton (9 Oct 2011)

Cyclopathic said:


> If you read what I said you'll notice that I do not "totally" ignore rule 56. I let my dog off thelead where there is ample green space either side for him to run around on, which is what he does for the most part. Aprt from that I'd rather live in a world where people were considerate first and sticklers for rules for rules sake a long way down the list. I fail to see why you let yourself get so upset about this or why you can't find the magnanimity in you just to let people let their dogs run about without being such a sourpus about it. If your willing to slow down for children and the infirm how much more does it stretch your generosity to offer the same kindness to dogs. How much does it really affect your life or come to that even your journey time if once in a while you have to take care not to hit a dog? I'd bet not very much. The benifit for dog walkers to be able to let their dogs have a bit of a frolic outwieghs any percieved inconvenience to people who have to slow down a bit.



I didn't say you did totally ignore it, I had you down as "...people going "yes but... " whilst coming up with reasons why they can ignore No 56."


----------



## Emmanuel Obikwelu (10 Oct 2011)

doog said:


> edited for the sake of board harmony
> 
> (the subject has been done to death
> 
> ...


----------



## Fifelad (16 Oct 2011)

Everyone will be pleased to know I have used the cycle path several times sice the thread was started and have exchanged pleasantries with dog walkers, ramblers and horse riders. However Im going to through a hand grenade in ...... a family of cyclists with a dog not on a lead that was going haywire...


----------



## lukesdad (16 Oct 2011)

Hand grenades no good, havn t you lot heard of photon torpedoes ? Works on dogs peds and motorists IME.


----------

