# Dogs on shared paths...



## johnnyh (25 Jul 2011)

Canal tow paths to be exact, the one between Bath and Bradford on Avon is a cycle path and shared use.

Lots of folk use it without issue, but I just wonder should dogs be kept on a lead on such a pathway?

Thoughts people?


----------



## Little yellow Brompton (25 Jul 2011)

johnnyh said:


> Canal tow paths to be exact, the one between Bath and Bradford on Avon is a cycle path and shared use.
> 
> Lots of folk use it without issue, but I just wonder should dogs be kept on a lead on such a pathway?
> 
> Thoughts people?




Definition of a dog lead


A length of leather, cloth, rope or chain with an animal that distributes shoot on one end and occasionally, a dog the other.


Of course the turd dispenser should be on a lead, but that means that the owner won't be able to pretend that poochikins isn't having a shoot . If the turd dispenser is allowed off the lead, it can have a shoot whilst behind the owner and said owner can then walk away from it, denying all knowledge.


----------



## snorri (25 Jul 2011)

I think cyclist safety is affected more by the level of dog behaviour than the use of a lead. 
A well trained dog off a lead should not present problems to anyone. An untrained dog on or off a lead can present all sorts of problems, like running across the path and blocking the progress of other users with the outstretched lead.


----------



## david1701 (25 Jul 2011)

take careful aim for the neck when you hit them, reduces the likelyhood of knocking your front wheel out of true and also guarantees a clean kill.

nb this post was kidding please god no one read it seriously


----------



## doog (25 Jul 2011)

touch paper well and truly lit


----------



## postman (25 Jul 2011)

I think all dog owners should have a licence for their dogs.Im will shout it out I HATE THE BL==== THINGS.


----------



## johnnyh (25 Jul 2011)

Ok, now we've had some replies I'll put some substance behind the question.Cycling back from Bath via the canal path ( something I do pretty often), and as per usual I give priority to pedestrians and slow up near dogs. Personally I love dogs, wouldn't hurt one if I could help it.Anyhow, as per usual the dog walkers are fifty percent letting their dogs off the lead, so I am stop start pretty much the whole 10 miles.I come across a couple with one dog by them on the left verge, and a lovely little yorkie on the right next to the canal. I slow to about 10 mph and go between them and you can guess, the yorkie makes a beeline to the other side. I had no chance to avoid and so kept straight and saw the little fella go right under the front wheel. Big yelp and hobbling dog scurries off fast.I brake and stop within 3 meters and call to the owners, " is he alright?", a snotty " yes thanks" is the reply, to which I retort " keep him on a bloody lead" and ride off.I feel sorry for the dog, obviously hurt, but can't feel at all sorry for the owners.Doubtless they will moan about the yob on a bike who ran over fluffykins, but with at least 20 dogs off the lead every day, it was gonna happen sometime.Love dogs, detest stupid owners!


----------



## on the road (25 Jul 2011)

Because it's a shared path you have to accept that you're going to have to slow down all the time, if you down like it then ride on the road.


----------



## johnnyh (25 Jul 2011)

as i said, i do slow down, and I also have a cheery hello for folk, that isnt the point is it?


----------



## Saluki (25 Jul 2011)

I used to cycle on the N Staffs canal towpaths and there were always dogs without leads about. Some owners train their dogs, some don't. Never acually ran a dog over but had a couple of near misses with bounding up labradors. When I walk my dogs on towpaths, I have one or two of mine off lead but they have excellent recall and as soon as I see a bike, I catch them until the bike has passed. If the bike is behind me, if the cyclist rings their bell, I move me and the dogs out of the way.
Manners on both sides required. There are plenty of rude dog owners, mostly with unruly dogs. There are also a few rude cyclists too, blasting along the path without care or attention to any other path users.
A few more owners bagging their poo from the centre of the path, wouldn't go amiss either. I love dogs, I work with dogs. I am not that fond of some of their owners though.


----------



## johnnyh (25 Jul 2011)

indeed, I love dogs and hate the fact one got hurt. But it is a shared path, and surely owners know if their dog isn't under control and should ensure it is for its own safety?


----------



## on the road (25 Jul 2011)

But what do you consider to be an out of control dog, one that wonders across the path to smell some dog poo without looking both ways first? What you have to remember is that dogs have minds of their own so will change direction without warning, and the other thing is they don't know that bikes can hurt them, you can't teach a dog that.


----------



## fossyant (25 Jul 2011)

Very simple. Slow to a crawl cover brakes. Just as unpredictable as kids and people. If its a pain, use the road.


----------



## Little yellow Brompton (25 Jul 2011)

on the road said:


> But what do you consider to be an out of control dog,



One that is not walking to heel. 


If you can't train your turd dispenser to be in public then it shouldn't be in public.


----------



## doog (25 Jul 2011)

fossyant said:


> Very simple. Slow to a crawl cover brakes. Just as unpredictable as kids and people. If its a pain, use the road.



yep


----------



## snorri (25 Jul 2011)

on the road said:


> But what do you consider to be an out of control dog, one that wonders across the path to smell some dog poo without looking both ways first? What you have to remember is that dogs have minds of their own so will change direction without warning,


If the dog has a mind of its own, then it has not been fully trained. The owner will be aware of that and should have the dog on a lead when on shared paths.


----------



## vickster (25 Jul 2011)

I was riding through the park carefully on my road bike yesterday (shared path, where ok pedestrians have priority) and there was some bint on her bike (so not a ped) with about 8 yappy dog-rats (I kid ye not, most were smaller than my cat ) which were strung out across the path. I had slowed to a crawl but couldn't get through. I politely suggested that she stop so the stupid mutts would stop too. She had the temerity to suggest that I go off the path onto the mud, I pointed out she must be kidding, she only needed to call the hounds and stop for 10 seconds. 

The number of owners who get out the way but don't think to perhaps call their dogs is astounding too, most are apologetic when the dog lurches across in front of my path. It was amusing in the park this evening - there was an elderly labrador lumbering along the path with a 4ft stick in its mouth taking up most of the path, which was quite sweet lol


----------



## on the road (25 Jul 2011)

Little yellow Brompton said:


> One that is not walking to heel.
> 
> 
> If you can't train your turd dispenser to be in public then it shouldn't be in public.



So a dog that's on a field running after a ball is out of control?  

If you hate dogs so much then stick to then ride on the road.


----------



## johnnyh (25 Jul 2011)

hehehe I didn't realise what a touch paper I had lit! 

A dog that is 3 meters away from its owner, not on a lead, and liable to act in a random manner cannot be considered under control, simple.

I have never come close to hitting a pedestrian, be it an adult or a child, and I take great care around dogs, but one that turns and dashes into the wheel is hardly a dog under control.

now where is that tin helmet...


----------



## on the road (25 Jul 2011)

snorri said:


> If the dog has a mind of its own, then it has not been fully trained. The owner will be aware of that and should have the dog on a lead when on shared paths.


Cyclists should be taking more care when on a shared path.


----------



## on the road (25 Jul 2011)

When I'm riding along a shared path I always slow down for dogs, I don't mind riding at walking pace or even having to stop. Shared paths are not for wannabe racers.


----------



## sabian92 (25 Jul 2011)

The worst thing is when dog walkers see you coming toward them and don't realise their dog who's on a 10 foot bungee lead suddenly makes for a very effective "cyclist-catapult".

The tragic thing is, they look at you like it's your fault they didn't work it out.


----------



## johnnyh (25 Jul 2011)

Canal boat dwellers dogs are the best, they have to be the best disciplined dogs on the path.


----------



## Stu1961 (25 Jul 2011)

If it's a shared path, then you should be expecting the odd dog or two.........on the other hand, the dog owners should be expecting bikes (vehicles)..........so should make sure the dog is not running about back and forth across the path, after all, you wouldn't let your dog loose on a road (I know I don't)


----------



## Little yellow Brompton (25 Jul 2011)

on the road said:


> So a dog that's on a field running after a ball is out of control?
> 
> If you hate dogs so much then stick to then ride on the road.




Is it your field? If it's not, then it shoudn't be off the lead.

I don't mind dogs, under control, that don't leave shoot everywhere, I've just never met one.

As for sticking to the road , last week I was almost taken out by a turd dispenser on one of the extending reel things, 25 ft away from it's owner , it decided to dash across the road to fight the turd dispenser on the other side. What is the point of those fishing reel things?


----------



## johnnyh (25 Jul 2011)

Indeed, and if you consider I pass approx 20 to 30 dogs a day, each way, and do it 5 times a week, I think I am pretty good around them - certainly more responsible than the owners who arent in control...







... digs trench


----------



## Crackle (25 Jul 2011)

*For Cyclists*
*Look after your waterways*


_avoid cycling where your tyres would damage the path or verges (eg when they are wet or soft)_
*Consider others*


_*give way* to others on the towpath and warn them of your approach_
_dismount under low or blind bridges or where the path is narrow_
_never race one another_
_we recommend you obtain third party liability insurance and equip your bike with a bell or equivalent_
*Take care*


_access paths can be steep and slippery. Join or leave the towpath with care_
_take special care if cycling at night. Use front and rear lights_
_thorny hedge trimmings can cause a puncture. We recommend plastic-reinforced tyres_

I would say, like on the road, Give way means stop if necessary.




*For All Users*
*Look after your waterway*


_clean up after your dog and keep it under control_

I'll leave you lot to debate the rest, I promised myself not to.


----------



## peelywally (25 Jul 2011)

if their joggers with a dog and female like i encountered today i dont mind , mustve hung back and given those girls right way for at least half a mile


----------



## Angelfishsolo (25 Jul 2011)

on the road said:


> But what do you consider to be an out of control dog, one that wonders across the path to smell some dog poo without looking both ways first? What you have to remember is that dogs have minds of their own so will change direction without warning, and the other thing is they don't know that bikes can hurt them, you can't teach a dog that.


If you know that a dog will behave in a given negative way to a given occurance (eg a dog will chase a bike) keeping a dog of a lead in those circumstances means the dog is not under control. 
As a rule a dog needs to be under control at all times in a public place either by means of a lead of verbal commands to which the dog will immediatly respond. 
I have posted this before and got torn to shreds so lets see this time
EDIT - It is worth pointing I have been involved in Animal Rescue for 20 years and care deeply for all animals.


----------



## doog (25 Jul 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> If you know that a dog will behave in a given negative way to a given occurance (eg a dog will chase a bike) keeping a dog of a lead in those circumstances means the dog is not under control.
> As a rule a dog needs to be under control at all times in a public place either by means of a lead of verbal commands to which the dog will immediatly respond.
> I have posted this before and got torn to shreds so lets see this time






give it time. . Dog threads are like buses, none for months then a load come along at the same time 

still the nights are drawing in it will be who has the 'brightest light' thread soon..sigh


----------



## gaz (25 Jul 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> I have posted this before and got torn to shreds so lets see this time


*makes dog sound* raaaaaaugh *shakes head*


----------



## Angelfishsolo (26 Jul 2011)

gaz said:


> *makes dog sound* raaaaaaugh *shakes head*


----------



## on the road (26 Jul 2011)

Little yellow Brompton said:


> Is it your field? If it's not, then it shoudn't be off the lead.


Do you make the rules? Dogs are allowed to be off the lead in parks.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (26 Jul 2011)

reiver said:


> Yes one of those long leads, owner stands one side of the path, the dog the other, just before cyclist passes dog runs away from owner.
> 
> Of course dogs shouldn't be kept on a lead, they need to run around and enjoy themselves. My mutt likes to hurtle about with a 4' stick in his mouth, his hobby seems to be trying to pass me and getting his stick caught up in my legs, I guess cyclist must fear for their spokes
> 
> ...


Of course dogs need to run around. It is cruel not to allow them to. The important thing is that it is done in the right places. Open fields, forestrys, mountains NOT shared paths.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (26 Jul 2011)

on the road said:


> Do you make the rules? Dogs are allowed to be off the lead in parks.


+1


----------



## on the road (26 Jul 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> If you know that a dog will behave in a given negative way to a given occurance (eg a dog will chase a bike) keeping a dog of a lead in those circumstances means the dog is not under control.
> As a rule a dog needs to be under control at all times in a public place either by means of a lead of verbal commands to which the dog will immediatly respond.
> I have posted this before and got torn to shreds so lets see this time
> EDIT - It is worth pointing I have been involved in Animal Rescue for 20 years and care deeply for all animals.


This is the most sensible post


----------



## Angelfishsolo (26 Jul 2011)

on the road said:


> This is the most sensible post


Thank you very much.


----------



## Little yellow Brompton (26 Jul 2011)

on the road said:


> Do you make the rules? Dogs are allowed to be off the lead in parks.



Do I make the rules? No the owner of the field does, did you ask them if it was OK to let poochikins run where it wanted to, or do you just make a presumption?


As for the idea that turd dispensers are allowed to be off the lead in parks, I suggest you try reading what some of the park owners think:-

http://www.royalparks.org.uk/docs/dogs/RP_DogsLeafletWEB.PDF
http://www.cardiff.gov.uk/content.asp?nav=2868,4407,6232&parent_directory_id=2865


----------



## abo (26 Jul 2011)

http://www.stockton.gov.uk/resources/leisure/14776/dogcontrolareasprestonpark/dogwalkingcontrol.pdf

Not that they seem to be enforcing the new rules, if what I saw on Sunday was anything to go by :/


----------



## NormanD (26 Jul 2011)

I know I'm cruel


----------



## Crackle (26 Jul 2011)

Actually I will make another post, just not a debating one.

Definitions of control: Well, they're open to interpretation but roughly:-

Under Control means - A dog which responds to commands when given, sit, stay, come etc... So generally it can be away from you in those circumstances but must respond when told.

Under Close control - means at heel, ready to sit or lie and if you can't be 100% sure of this, on a lead.

I will add one last thing. Laws and rules are a last lowest common denominator. We revert to them when someone is not acting sensibly, they act as an arbiter in such circumstances. Most of the time we shouldn't need them and most of the time I'd say most of us don't. In most circumstances it's a case of live and let live and then we all rub along nicely. Shared paths in particular, need a lot more live and let live.


----------



## david1701 (26 Jul 2011)

peelywally said:


> if their joggers with a dog and female like i encountered today i dont mind , mustve hung back and given those girls right way for at least half a mile




Seriously though after a quiet word with a cow farming friend I discovered the slower you go the closer the dogs get to investigate, his advice for dealing with stray dogs is to just hoon it past and they'll not really give a shoot. Then again he did shout 'You've been tangoed' at me when he first saw my orange night riding jersey


----------



## abo (26 Jul 2011)

reiver said:


> You are clearly so anti dog, your views on the subject are worthless.



Not so. Dog owners, like all other park users, need to abide by whatever bylaws, park rules etc. are in place. So however badly put, the sentiment is still valid.


----------



## youngoldbloke (26 Jul 2011)

Did you know that pedestrians have priority on towpaths? (And their dogs??) And you still need a permit to cycle on British Waterways towpaths (except London), and it can be withdrawn if you don't behave yourself? permit Couldn't see anything about dogs on leads, however.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (26 Jul 2011)

reiver said:


> I still believe our place is on the road, I do occasionally use paths, but when I do so I treat the pedestrian or for that matter the dog with the same care and respect that I wish vehicles to show me when I am on the road.



On my Road Bike I ride on roads. On the MTB I will ride on trails which often include shared paths. 99.9% of people I meet have dogs under control or at least are embarrassed if there dog run sin front of me when I am almost track standing. There is always the 0.01% of dog walkers (like cyclists) who believe they have a god given right to allow there dog to do what ever it wishes.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (26 Jul 2011)

youngoldbloke said:


> Did you know that pedestrians have priority on towpaths? (And their dogs??) And you still need a permit to cycle on British Waterways towpaths (except London), and it can be withdrawn if you don't behave yourself? permit Couldn't see anything about dogs on leads, however.



I did and I have one


----------



## on the road (26 Jul 2011)

Little yellow Brompton said:


> Do I make the rules? No the owner of the field does, did you ask them if it was OK to let poochikins run where it wanted to, or do you just make a presumption?
> 
> 
> As for the idea that turd dispensers are allowed to be off the lead in parks, I suggest you try reading what some of the park owners think:-
> ...


OK I'll ask the local council if dogs are allowed off the lead in the local park, which the answer will be yes. And for your information, the parks round here belong to the people of the city but is managed by the council, there is a bylaw which allows dogs under control to be off the lead in our parks.

By the way, I don't live anywhere near London or Cardiff so what you've put is totally irrelevant. Just because one law applies to where you live, it doesn't mean it applies to the rest of the country. Different cities have different bylaws. You should do your research a bit better


----------



## Angelfishsolo (26 Jul 2011)

on the road said:


> OK I'll ask the local council if dogs are allowed off the lead in the local park, which the answer will be yes. And for your information, the parks round here belong to the people of the city but is managed by the council, there is a bylaw which allows dogs under control to be off the lead in our parks.
> 
> By the way, I don't live anywhere near London or Cardiff so what you've put is totally irrelevant. Just because one law applies to where you live, it doesn't mean it applies to the rest of the country. Different cities have different bylaws. You should do your research a bit better


----------



## johnnyh (26 Jul 2011)

oooooooh I do believe my innocent post has ended in


----------



## doog (26 Jul 2011)

your werent fishing were you



any dog post kicks off as does RLJ'ing, drafting etc etc....I have never seen such girly bitchin as on cycling forums, bikeradar being the worst -in fact the commuting forums of most cycling forums waver in and out of mass hysteria at times- its like world war 3 out there- people need to take a chill pill.


----------



## Jonathing (26 Jul 2011)

IMHO dogs should be banned from shared paths until they can learn to share. The same goes for motorists on the road and cyclists most places as well.


----------



## abo (26 Jul 2011)

on the road said:


> OK I'll ask the local council if dogs are allowed off the lead in the local park, which the answer will be yes.



Well, the answer could be 'maybe'; see my post re. Preston Park.


----------



## Sir Humphrey Appleby (26 Jul 2011)

My dog seems less inquisitive when she's not on a lead. If she can't have a sniff she wants to but if she's free to go whereever she likes then she really isn't interested.


----------



## Mad at urage (26 Jul 2011)

johnnyh said:


> Ok, now we've had some replies I'll put some substance behind the question.Cycling back from Bath via the canal path ( something I do pretty often), and as per usual I give priority to pedestrians and slow up near dogs. Personally I love dogs, wouldn't hurt one if I could help it.Anyhow, as per usual the dog walkers are fifty percent letting their dogs off the lead, so I am stop start pretty much the whole 10 miles.I come across a couple with one dog by them on the left verge, and a lovely little yorkie on the right next to the canal. *I slow to about 10 mph and go between them* and you can guess, the yorkie makes a beeline to the other side. *I had no chance to avoid *and so kept straight and saw the little fella go right under the front wheel. Big yelp and hobbling dog scurries off fast.I brake and stop within 3 meters and call to the owners, " is he alright?", a snotty " yes thanks" is the reply, to which I retort " keep him on a bloody lead" and ride off.I feel sorry for the dog, obviously hurt, but can't feel at all sorry for the owners.Doubtless they will moan about the yob on a bike who ran over fluffykins, but with at least 20 dogs off the lead every day, it was gonna happen sometime.Love dogs, detest stupid owners!


Then you didn't slow down enough to have the bike under sufficient control, i.e. you could not stop in the space you could reasonably expect to remain clear*. Dog wasn't under sufficient control either: Blame 50/50.


*Given a dog whoich you knew was off the lead, _you could reasonably expect _it might dash in front of you and should be prepared to stop in case it does.


----------



## on the road (26 Jul 2011)

Mad@urage said:


> Then you didn't slow down enough to have the bike under sufficient control, i.e. you could not stop in the space you could reasonably expect to remain clear*. Dog wasn't under sufficient control either: Blame 50/50.
> 
> 
> *Given a dog whoich you knew was off the lead, _you could reasonably expect _it might dash in front of you and should be prepared to stop in case it does.


+1


----------



## recumbentpanda (26 Jul 2011)

I too frequently cycle the Bath to Bradford on Avon canal towpath route. It's a beautiful scenic ride, but very narrow and bouncy in places. Inconsiderate dog owners can be an obstacle. Sad that the OP hit one, - I have been known to come to a complete halt in the face of an aimlessly wandering pooch, which usually elicits earnest apologies from the owner when they finally turn round to see why that man on the bike is sitting stock still in the middle of the path . . .

It has to be accepted that this is a shared - use route, and not only dogs, but walkers, boat-dwelling children and unsteady holiday cyclists from the local bike hire companies have also to be cared for. Why this is a particular issue on this route however, is revealed by the answer to those who say 'if you don't like it, use the roads' The road route alternatives are only for the very fast, the very strong (very steep hills) and the very brave. Even the motorists die regularly on those routes, yet still resist calls for speed restrictions on sections of road I would be afraid to cycle on at much over 25mph (blind bends, trees, soft verges etc etc). The main A36 must once have been a beautiful cycling road, but has long been turned into a wilderness of homicidal accellerator-abusers. 

Meanwhile, we must be grateful for one of the most beautiful cycle routes in the whole world (not kidding) and exercise a duty of care to all around us. Except of course, those cyclists who buzz along it as if they were on the A36, terrifying all and sundry . . . except for one doughty 70 year old a few years ago, who having been 'buzzed' by one inconsiderate bike rider on the way out, saw the same offender coming back the other way still riding with total lack of consideration for all around him. He stuck his walking stick deftly through the guy's front wheel as he passed, and watched with satisfaction the smooth trajectory he described into the canal . . . Even as a cyclist, I have warm feelings towards that old guy, and I'm betting it was well worth the probable loss of a good stick


----------



## Amanda P (26 Jul 2011)

on the road said:


> they don't know that bikes can hurt them, you can't teach a dog that.



I suspect this dog will have learnt.


----------



## Little yellow Brompton (26 Jul 2011)

reiver said:


> I still believe our place is on the road, I do occasionally use paths, but when I do so I treat the pedestrian or for that matter the dog with the same care and respect that I wish vehicles to show me when I am on the road.
> 
> 
> You are clearly so anti dog, your views on the subject are worthless.





An "interesting" point of view.

If I was anti debt, would that mean that my opinion that 10-12=-2 would be worthless?


----------



## Little yellow Brompton (26 Jul 2011)

on the road said:


> OK I'll ask the local council if dogs are allowed off the lead in the local park, which the answer will be yes. And for your information, the parks round here belong to the people of the city but is managed by the council, there is a bylaw which allows dogs under control to be off the lead in our parks.
> 
> By the way, I don't live anywhere near London or Cardiff so what you've put is totally irrelevant. Just because one law applies to where you live, it doesn't mean it applies to the rest of the country. Different cities have different bylaws. You should do your research a bit better





If you cannot bring your dog to heel with a command, then it's not "under control" and so should be on a lead. I know you will find that irksome and so you will huff and puff about how your poochikins has a "right" and it's never hurt anyone, but wriggle as you like the byelaw for whichever park you want to name will say on a lead or under control.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (26 Jul 2011)

Little yellow Brompton said:


> If you cannot bring your dog to heel with a command, then it's not "under control" and so should be on a lead. I know you will find that irksome and so you will huff and puff about how your poochikins has a "right" and it's never hurt anyone, but wriggle as you like the byelaw for whichever park you want to name will say on a lead or under control.


Not true. Many parks are dog friendly places with no requirement to keep a dog to heal. Dogs are encouraged to run free and play. The only requirement in such places is that the dog obeys commands. Bye-laws vary from town to town so I wouldn't be quite so sweeping with your statements.


----------



## rowan 46 (26 Jul 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> Not true. Many parks are dog friendly places with no requirement to keep a dog to heal. Dogs are encouraged to run free and play. The only requirement in such places is that the dog obeys commands. Bye-laws vary from town to town so I wouldn't be quite so sweeping with your statements.



Not arguing just wished to point out there is usually a requirement to clean up after their dog


----------



## Angelfishsolo (26 Jul 2011)

rowan 46 said:


> Not arguing just wished to point out there is usually a requirement to clean up after their dog


I did not reply to a post you made so not sure if you are confused or quoted wrong post?.


----------



## screenman (26 Jul 2011)

Sustrans has been really kind to dogs around this way, they have put in a 20 mile long toilet for them.

Slow down and always expect the unexpected when dogs, kids in fact anything else that moves is around on shared paths. Up here we get dogs chasing us up the road, they have come out of front gardens, must say though it can help when doing intervals.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (26 Jul 2011)

reiver said:


> In hind sight I think your post was well written, you will clearly win the "*turd dispenser" *lovers over with your carefully chosen words, well done, keep up the good work.


Well said. I didn't realise that 10 year olds were alowed on the forum


----------



## screenman (26 Jul 2011)

Pedigree Chum have gone into administration, they have called the retrievers in.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (26 Jul 2011)

screenman said:


> Pedigree Chum have gone into administration, they have called the retrievers in.


There was contamination in the meat but will need a Lab test to confirm fully


----------



## abo (26 Jul 2011)

Little yellow Brompton said:


> If you cannot bring your dog to heel with a command, then it's not "under control" and so should be on a lead. I know you will find that irksome and so you will huff and puff about how your poochikins has a "right" and it's never hurt anyone, but wriggle as you like the byelaw for whichever park you want to name will say on a lead or under control.



Ok, I'll post it again:

http://www.stockton.gov.uk/resources/leisure/14776/dogcontrolareasprestonpark/dogwalkingcontrol.pdf

Areas are clearly marked 'on lead' 'off lead' 'no dogs'


----------



## Little yellow Brompton (26 Jul 2011)

rowan 46 said:


> Not arguing just wished to point out there is usually a requirement to clean up after their dog



ROFL!!!!!!!! 



Oh I do like the old jokes, they really are the best! :-)


----------



## Little yellow Brompton (26 Jul 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> Not true. Many parks are dog friendly places with no requirement to keep a dog to heal. Dogs are encouraged to run free and play. The only requirement in such places is that the dog obeys commands. Bye-laws vary from town to town so I wouldn't be quite so sweeping with your statements.




Which bit, that the dog is not under control unless it is, or that the byelaws will insist that it's under control ?


As for byelaws varying from place to place, they will only do so slightly as they have to be approved by the home office and fit within the standard template.


----------



## Little yellow Brompton (26 Jul 2011)

abo said:


> Ok, I'll post it again:
> 
> http://www.stockton....kingcontrol.pdf
> 
> Areas are clearly marked 'on lead' 'off lead' 'no dogs'




and the byelaws for the park are...?


----------



## Angelfishsolo (26 Jul 2011)

Little yellow Brompton said:


> Which bit, that the dog is not under control unless it is, or that the byelaws will insist that it's under control ?
> 
> 
> As for byelaws varying from place to place, they will only do so slightly as they have to be approved by the home office and fit within the standard template.


Everything you posted was untrue. By your reckoning dogs could only get exercise if the owners have access to private land. I say again the only binding law is that a dog must be under control or tight control on a foot or shared path.


----------



## Little yellow Brompton (26 Jul 2011)

reiver said:


> In hind sight I think your post was well written, you will clearly win the "*turd dispenser" *lovers over with your carefully chosen words, well done, keep up the good work.




In my experience, the owners of turd dispensers will never, ever change their view that they and their little poochykins can ever do any wrong, so it's pointless trying to convince them. 

What can be done however, is ensure sure that people who have been cowed by the barrage of " Dogs have rights " and " where else do you expect them to go?" realise that there are others who find it unnaceptable that poochykins is allowed to run wherever it want's, crap wherever it needs to, and generally interfere with people quietly going about their daily business.


----------



## Andy_R (26 Jul 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> There was contamination in the meat but will need a Lab test to confirm fully



...and any dogs that consumed the suspected contaminated food will have to go for cat scans...I'll get my coat......


----------



## Angelfishsolo (26 Jul 2011)

Little yellow Brompton said:


> In my experience, the owners of turd dispensers will never, ever change their view that they and their little poochykins can ever do any wrong, so it's pointless trying to convince them.
> 
> What can be done however, is ensure sure that people who have been cowed by the barrage of " Dogs have rights " and " where else do you expect them to go?" realise that there are others who find it unnaceptable that poochykins is allowed to run wherever it want's, crap wherever it needs to, and generally interfere with people quietly going about their daily business.


Were you bitten as a child or a cat in a previous life? You sound like a driver commenting on a cycling inncident with vitriolic wrath.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (26 Jul 2011)

Andy_R said:


> ...and any dogs that consumed the suspected contaminated food will have to go for cat scans...I'll get my coat......


Yes a Pal told me the same thing but as he's a bit of a Wag I thought it a tall tail


----------



## Little yellow Brompton (26 Jul 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> Everything you posted was untrue. By your reckoning dogs could only get exercise if the owners have access to private land. I say again the only binding law is that a dog must be under control or tight control on a foot or shared path.




Not my reckoning, but not a bad idea. If you bought a fish without somewhere to keep it people would think you mad, and possibly cruel, but they see nothing wrong with buying a dog without having somewhere for it to crap and then using communal facilities. 


As for the other part of the dispute, we agree that "dog must be under control or tight control on a foot or shared path." which is more it seems than other dog owners do. As for the rest of the UK land mass, there was talk of "fields" which would be private land, so that would be down to the landowner, and "parks" which will be covered by local byelaws , the vast majority of which will mention lead or control and will be ignored for the most part becuase it's inconvinient.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (26 Jul 2011)

Little yellow Brompton said:


> Not my reckoning, but not a bad idea. If you bought a fish without somewhere to keep it people would think you mad, and possibly cruel, but they see nothing wrong with buying a dog without having somewhere for it to crap and then using communal facilities.
> 
> 
> As for the other part of the dispute, we agree that "dog must be under control or tight control on a foot or shared path." which is more it seems than other dog owners do. As for the rest of the UK land mass, there was talk of "fields" which would be private land, so that would be down to the landowner, and "parks" which will be covered by local byelaws , the vast majority of which will mention lead or control and will be ignored for the most part becuase it's inconvinient.


What a strange person you are.


----------



## Little yellow Brompton (26 Jul 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> Were you bitten as a child or a cat in a previous life? You sound like a driver commenting on a cycling inncident with vitriolic wrath.




Neither*, in fact I've owned dogs, trained them,worked with them, my father bred them.

All of those dogs were kept under control, weren't excercised ( a modern euphanism for "taking the dog for a shoot somewhere where I can pretend it's not mine") in public areas, and certainly weren't allowed onto a 20ft fishing reel "lead" because it was convinient.

* I have been bitten by a dog whilst on a bike, but I was an adult.


----------



## Little yellow Brompton (26 Jul 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> What a strange person you are.



Because I see owning a dog as something that is a responsibility, not a right? You may be right.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (26 Jul 2011)

Little yellow Brompton said:


> Neither*, in fact I've owned dogs, trained them,worked with them, my father bred them.
> 
> All of those dogs were kept under control, weren't excercised ( a modern euphanism for "taking the dog for a shoot somewhere where I can pretend it's not mine") in public areas, and certainly weren't allowed onto a 20ft fishing reel "lead" because it was convinient.
> 
> * I have been bitten by a dog whilst on a bike, but I was an adult.


So you come from a breeding background. That explains it. 
FYI there are a minority of bad dog owners just as there are a minority of bad cyclists and bad drivers. Most owners clean up after their dogs just as most cyclists obey traffic laws and most drivers aren't out to kill cyclists.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (26 Jul 2011)

Little yellow Brompton said:


> Because I see owning a dog as something that is a responsibility, not a right? You may be right.


No for believing dogs have no right to run and play. I will point out again that I do know the score here after 20Years in animal rescue (unpaid, off my own back).


----------



## Little yellow Brompton (26 Jul 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> So you come from a breeding background. That explains it.
> FYI there are a minority of bad dog owners just as there are a minority of bad cyclists and bad drivers. Most owners clean up after their dogs just as most cyclists obey traffic laws and most drivers aren't out to kill cyclists.



Explains what? Why I have no sympathy, or time, for some dog owner that tells me that he can't control his dog?


This morning I saw 6 dogs in 1/2 mile of shared route ( the only 1/2 mile of 5 of my commute) none were on a lead, none were under control. That 1/2 mile consists of dodging turds as well as dogs and the only time it was not like that was when it was snowing when suddenly it seemed poochykins didn't need "excercise" 

This afternoon , it was only 2 dogs , taken out for a "walk" by two girls 10-12 , neither whom had a lead or a bag, or any control.

To today's example to be a "minority", I would need to see at least 9 dogs tomorrow who were under control, I won't hold my breath.


----------



## Little yellow Brompton (26 Jul 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> No for believing dogs have no right to run and play. I will point out again that I do know the score here after 20Years in animal rescue (unpaid, off my own back).



Please feel free to show me where this "right" is enshrined?


----------



## Angelfishsolo (26 Jul 2011)

Little yellow Brompton said:


> Explains what? Why I have no sympathy, or time, for some dog owner that tells me that he can't control his dog?
> 
> 
> This morning I saw 6 dogs in 1/2 mile of shared route ( the only 1/2 mile of 5 of my commute) none were on a lead, none were under control. That 1/2 mile consists of dodging turds as well as dogs and the only time it was not like that was when it was snowing when suddenly it seemed poochykins didn't need "excercise"
> ...


Explains why you hate dogs. To breedes they are income nothing more.
I think your data gathering needs to sample a larger area than the same path you keep talking about.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (26 Jul 2011)

Little yellow Brompton said:


> Please feel free to show me where this "right" is enshrined?


Talk to the RSPCA as you are a tedious little person and I can not be bothered to converse with you any more.


----------



## Little yellow Brompton (26 Jul 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> Talk to the RSPCA as you are a tedious little person and I can not be bothered to converse with you any more.




Is it a coincidence that you suddenly can't be bothered the moment you are asked to back up your opinion?


----------



## Little yellow Brompton (26 Jul 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> Explains why you hate dogs. To breedes they are income nothing more.
> I think your data gathering needs to sample a larger area than the same path you keep talking about.



I don't hate dogs, we covered that earlier. As to "breeders" I wasn't the breeder that was my father, and I would suggest that to UK dog owners , dogs are a fashion accessory/toy for the kids/ ego booster and nothing more, certainly not something that they see any need to take any responsibility for.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (26 Jul 2011)

Little yellow Brompton said:


> Is it a coincidence that you suddenly can't be bothered the moment you are asked to back up your opinion?



OK. This from the Kennel Club http://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/download/6026/gcdsresandcare.pdf

This is from the Countryside code.

*Keep dogs under close control*
_*The countryside is a good place to exercise dogs.*_ By law, you must control your dog so it doesn’t disturb or scare farm animals or wildlife.


*Keeping your dog on a lead*
_*You don’t have to put your dog on a lead on public paths, as long as it’s under close control*_. However, you should keep your dog on a short lead:


if you can’t rely on it obeying you
on most areas of open country and common land or open access land between 1 March and 31 July
always near farm animals
if there are signs asking you to do so
If a farm animal chases you and your dog, it’s safer to let your dog off the lead. Don’t risk getting hurt by trying to protect it.


This from Defra

All dogs, in particular puppies, need rest. However,
individual dogs have different needs and some will
sleep for long periods after exercise or food; others
will need less rest and will be more active. A dog
needs regular exercise and regular opportunities to
walk and run. The amount of exercise a dog needs
varies with age, breed and health. Some breeds
of dog need a lot of exercise and you should take
account of this when choosing a dog. Young dogs
may need to have their exercise restricted during
periods of rapid growth, to avoid developmental
problems. Exercising dogs in extremes of weather
can lead to suffering.

http://www.defra.gov.uk/publications/files/pb13333-cop-dogs-091204.pdf

Enough.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (26 Jul 2011)

Little yellow Brompton said:


> I don't hate dogs, we covered that earlier. As to "breeders" I wasn't the breeder that was my father, and I would suggest that to UK dog owners , dogs are a fashion accessory/toy for the kids/ ego booster and nothing more, certainly not something that they see any need to take any responsibility for.



Then you are treating all dog owners in the same way that some motorists treat cyclists. Can you not see that?


----------



## Little yellow Brompton (26 Jul 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> OK. This from the Kennel Club http://www.thekennel...sresandcare.pdf
> 
> This is from the Countryside code.
> 
> ...



I say again.

"Please feel free to show me where this "right" is enshrined?"


----------



## Downward (26 Jul 2011)

Cyclists have to give way on Canal towpaths.


But Dogs walking on Cycle routes gets my goat. I've taken to going on the road unless I'm having a pootle.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (26 Jul 2011)

Little yellow Brompton said:


> I say again.
> 
> "Please feel free to show me where this "right" is enshrined?"



Show me where it states dogs can not be exercised in public places. I have shown you three sites two of which have strong legal powers that talk about the requirement to exercise dogs. You claim this should only be done on private land so please back this up.


----------



## Little yellow Brompton (26 Jul 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> Then you are treating all dog owners in the same way that some motorists treat cyclists. Can you not see that?




I can only play the cards I'm dealt, outside of working dogs, I can't remember seeing in the last ten years , on a shared path or a public park any dog that was kept under control.

BTW I apologise, I just remembered I DID see a dog on a lead this afternoon. 

That makes it 8-1 today, only need to see 8 tomorrow for your "minority" to be right.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (26 Jul 2011)

Downward said:


> Cyclists have to give way on Canal towpaths.
> 
> 
> But Dogs walking on Cycle routes gets my goat. I've taken to going on the road unless I'm having a pootle.



That is your choice. By cycle routes you mean shared rights of way I take it. If so they are for pootling and not for speed.


----------



## Little yellow Brompton (26 Jul 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> Show me where it states dogs can not be exercised in public places. I have shown you three sites two of which have strong legal powers that talk about the requirement to exercise dogs. You claim this should only be done on private land so please back this up.




I claimed nothing of the sort.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (26 Jul 2011)

Little yellow Brompton said:


> I can only play the cards I'm dealt, outside of working dogs, I can't remember seeing in the last ten years , on a shared path or a public park any dog that was kept under control.
> 
> BTW I apologise, I just remembered I DID see a dog on a lead this afternoon.
> 
> That makes it 8-1 today, only need to see 8 tomorrow for your "minority" to be right.



Dogs DO NOT NEED TO BE ON LEADS. They just need to be under control.Quite possibly your definition of control means a dog that will walk at heal and is scared of its' master. That is not my idea of control that is fear.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (26 Jul 2011)

Little yellow Brompton said:


> I claimed nothing of the sort.





> Not my reckoning, but not a bad idea. If you bought a fish without somewhere to keep it people would think you mad, and possibly cruel, but they see nothing wrong with buying a dog without having somewhere for it to crap and then using communal facilities.




So what did this mean?

Time up - You Sir are a :troll:


----------



## Crackle (26 Jul 2011)

Little yellow Brompton said:


> In my experience, the owners of turd dispensers will never, ever change their view that they and their little poochykins can ever do any wrong, so it's pointless trying to convince them.
> 
> What can be done however, is ensure sure that people who have been cowed by the barrage of " Dogs have rights " and " where else do you expect them to go?" realise that there are others who find it unnaceptable that poochykins is allowed to run wherever it want's, crap wherever it needs to, and generally interfere with people quietly going about their daily business.



Oh bugger it, rules are made to be broken....

It's an interesting rant, I pretty much agree with the bit about owners cleaning up. I'm less interested in the control debate, I see far too many parallels in this kind of rant to drivers on other forums ranting about cyclists on roads, of course the irony is normally lost on most people. If I wasn't a cyclist, I don't think I'd support shared use paths, most cyclists are simply too inconsiderate to use them safely. what's that you say, you're not one of them, oh really. Well I apologise for tarring you with the same brush, I can't think how that happened.

And you're right, dogs don't have rights, owners do. I think under law, dogs are seen as a usual accompaniment and public land is just that, for use by the public and their usual accompaniments.

I refer you back to my earlier post about everyone rubbing along. There's a lesiure path by me which became a shared path but obviously someone objected to cyclists being on it and still does because every now and then, tacks are scattered along it's length. Clearly they feel the same way about cyclists as you do about dogs. it's a small step to this sort of intolerance and relatively easy to judge the majority by the actions of a few. A rant is good but do you really want the same level as venom you're directing at dog owners, directed back at you for being a cyclist?


----------



## rowan 46 (26 Jul 2011)

I am not sure about the statistics that most owners clean up after their dogs it may be true in more affluent and civic minded areas. I work in an area of birmingham called chelmsley wood for 2 days a week this clients flat backs onto a piece of land used by dog walkers. Lots of people come to walk their dogs occasionally you see a woman pick up never seen a man do it and most of the time the owner just looks away ignoring while the dog does it's business. nevertheless it's not the dogs fault. There may not a majority of bad dog owners but there are certainly enough of them to keep several animal charities busy. To keep on topic it's not hard on a shared use path to keep your speed down and be alert for kids, dogs etc. Dogs can be a nuisance but then I guess from the dog owners point of view they can and do view us in the same way.


----------



## Little yellow Brompton (26 Jul 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> Dogs DO NOT NEED TO BE ON LEADS. They just need to be under control.Quite possibly your definition of control means a dog that will walk at heal and is scared of its' master. That is not my idea of control that is fear.




No my idea of control is, "a dog needs to be under control at all times in a public place either by means of a lead of verbal commands to which the dog will immediatly respond. "

I rarely if ever see that in public.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (26 Jul 2011)

Little yellow Brompton said:


> No my idea of control is, "a dog needs to be under control at all times in a public place either by means of a lead of verbal commands to which the dog will immediatly respond. "
> 
> I rarely if ever see that in public.



I see you can quote me. Well done. Have a look at what other people are saying to you. You are making yourself look like an idiot. I'm not sure if that is true or not.


----------



## vickster (26 Jul 2011)

After the dozy bint on a bike and her 8 rats experience yesterday, I rode through the park today on my commute. 3 owners called/kept their dogs out of my way. Two called to heel and 1 was shielded by the owner. 

Seems the cyclist was the bad egg, and I do wonder if she was a dog walker rather than owner


----------



## Mark_Robson (26 Jul 2011)

Little yellow Brompton said:


> No my idea of control is, "a dog needs to be under control at all times in a public place either by means of a lead of verbal commands to which the dog will immediatly respond. "
> 
> I rarely if ever see that in public.



Wow your making progress and actually referring to dogs as dogs and not turd dispensers.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (26 Jul 2011)

Mark_Robson said:


> Wow your making progress and actually referring to dogs as dogs and not turd dispensers.



Maybe these dumb two legged creatures can actually learn


----------



## Little yellow Brompton (26 Jul 2011)

Crackle said:


> Oh bugger it, rules are made to be broken....
> 
> It's an interesting rant, I pretty much agree with the bit about owners cleaning up. I'm less interested in the control debate, I see far too many parallels in this kind of rant to drivers on other forums ranting about cyclists on roads, of course the irony is normally lost on most people. If I wasn't a cyclist, I don't think I'd support shared use paths, most cyclists are simply too inconsiderate to use them safely. what's that you say, you're not one of them, oh really. Well I apologise for tarring you with the same brush, I can't think how that happened.
> 
> ...



Fine, I rub along by slowing down and sometimes stopping when the dogs obstruct the path, the dog owners rub along by errr... not having the dog under control, using a lead that stretches across the width of the path, leaving the branch their dog was carrying wherever the dog drops it, staring straight ahead when their dog is taking a shoot behind them ( oh look, not on a lead , so they can pretend they don't notice), throwing ball across the path for the dog to run in front of me....

I'm willing to be convinced that there are "responsible" owners, I've just yet to meet one.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (26 Jul 2011)

Little yellow Brompton said:


> Fine, I rub along by slowing down and sometimes stopping when the dogs obstruct the path, the dog owners rub along by errr... not having the dog under control, using a lead that stretches across the width of the path, leaving the branch their dog was carrying wherever the dog drops it, staring straight ahead when their dog is taking a shoot behind them ( oh look, not on a lead , so they can pretend they don't notice), throwing ball across the path for the dog to run in front of me....
> 
> I'm willing to be convinced that there are "responsible" owners, I've just yet to meet one.



In the same way that al cyclists are black-lycra clad ninjas who ride on pavements, zig zig in and out of cars, jump red lights and deliberately hold up cars. Yep you are winning hearts and minds here.


----------



## Little yellow Brompton (26 Jul 2011)

Mark_Robson said:


> Wow your making progress and actually referring to dogs as dogs and not turd dispensers.




The "dog" was someone elses text. More often I see turd dispensers, owners take them out to distribute turds, somewhere, anywhere, just as long as it's not their own patch.


----------



## Little yellow Brompton (26 Jul 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> In the same way that al cyclists are black-lycra clad ninjas who ride on pavements, zig zig in and out of cars, jump red lights and deliberately hold up cars. Yep you are winning hearts and minds here.



I long ago gave up any idea that you could win the hearts and minds of dog owners, they simply will not accept that they or their animal , or any other ( apart from the nebulous "minority), is ever in the wrong.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (26 Jul 2011)

Little yellow Brompton said:


> I long ago gave up any idea that you could win the hearts and minds of dog owners, they simply will not accept that they or their animal , or any other ( apart from the nebulous "minority), is ever in the wrong.



Rather like you then.


----------



## Little yellow Brompton (26 Jul 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> In the same way that al cyclists are black-lycra clad ninjas who ride on pavements, zig zig in and out of cars, jump red lights and deliberately hold up cars. Yep you are winning hearts and minds here.



Yep! And I try to combat that by not doing any of the above, but I've not seen any owners trying to disabuse me of my ideas, rather they simply reinforce them. I wonder if I will suddenly meet the "majority" tomorrow/next week/month/year?


----------



## Little yellow Brompton (26 Jul 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> Rather like you then.


I'm often wrong, but so far not about turd dispensers.

It would be pleasant if I was.


----------



## johnnyh (26 Jul 2011)

dear Admin,

I am truely sorry for starting this tripe and would not be annoyed if you rid us of it.

Then the dog lovers and dog haters can forget all about it and get onto the rights and wrongs of compulsory helmets or RLJ's!


----------



## Angelfishsolo (26 Jul 2011)

johnnyh said:


> dear Admin,
> 
> I am truely sorry for starting this tripe and would not be annoyed if you rid us of it.
> 
> Then the dog lovers and dog haters can forget all about it and get onto the rights and wrongs of compulsory helmets or RLJ's!



I bet you are. You love it really


----------



## Crackle (26 Jul 2011)

johnnyh said:


> dear Admin,
> 
> I am truely sorry for starting this tripe and would not be annoyed if you rid us of it.
> 
> Then the dog lovers and dog haters can forget all about it and get onto the rights and wrongs of compulsory helmets or RLJ's!



You cad! You knew exactly what you were doing. Shame on you. I'll think of a suitable pennance.....


----------



## johnnyh (26 Jul 2011)

Crackle said:


> You cad! You knew exactly what you were doing. Shame on you. I'll think of a suitable pennance.....



It was an honest question in the first instance, but I must say I have found the resulting dialogue rather amusing.

Suitable pennance..?

having to read it all through again?


----------



## on the road (26 Jul 2011)

I would just like to thank johnnyh for setting the cat amongst amongst the pigeons


----------



## johnnyh (26 Jul 2011)

no need, it was nothing, really...  sheeesh I shall think very carefully about starting any other threads.

although I would like to discuss ASL's...


----------



## Little yellow Brompton (26 Jul 2011)

johnnyh said:


> no need, it was nothing, really...  sheeesh I shall think very carefully about starting any other threads.
> 
> although I would like to discuss ASL's...



ASLs


You mean

'AckneyCarriage Start Lines?


----------



## apollo179 (26 Jul 2011)

My experience is that dog owners usually control their dog as i approach mainly out of a desire to protect the dog from the danger that i pose to it.
I (obviously) slow down before any potential hazard , including dogs and always acknowledge and thank the dog owner for their action in attending to their dog. My take on the dog issue is im a bigger danger to the dog than he is to me. When the dog is the bigger danger than i will act accordingly and navigate the obstacle with due care.


----------



## element (26 Jul 2011)

To the guy who thinks 10 mph is slow, have a think, around people and dogs that is too fast. . I would suggest that cyclists consider the dogs point of view when it comes to large bright lycra clad objects hurlting towards them at high speed, strangely when cyclists see my two rottweilers they slow down and give me plenty of time to get the dogs under control and pass me very carefully. 
Where ever you walk dogs there is a potential for problems, I walk my dogs in a privately owned 57 acre field and I still have to deal with trespassers who are quite surpised that they have two big dogs barking at them. We all have to make slight modifications to what we do to accomodate other people thats life, pedestrians cars cyclists and dog walkers all seem to hate each other according to the internet but in the real world most poeple are ok, many are considerate and we can all co-exist. There are always some who are too insecure to modify their behavior in any way that can be a car driver who is too impatient to wait for a safe overtaking point, or a cyclist rushing down a towpath running over dogs and hopping up onto pavements to skip red lights. Either way being a prick like the guy moaning about dogs and their owners does not do anyone any favours.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (26 Jul 2011)

element said:


> To the guy who thinks 10 mph is slow, have a think, around people and dogs that is too fast. . I would suggest that cyclists consider the dogs point of view when it comes to large bright lycra clad objects hurlting towards them at high speed, strangely when cyclists see my two rottweilers they slow down and give me plenty of time to get the dogs under control and pass me very carefully.
> Where ever you walk dogs there is a potential for problems, I walk my dogs in a privately owned 57 acre field and I still have to deal with trespassers who are quite surpised that they have two big dogs barking at them. We all have to make slight modifications to what we do to accomodate other people thats life, pedestrians cars cyclists and dog walkers all seem to hate each other according to the internet but in the real world most poeple are ok, many are considerate and we can all co-exist. There are always some who are too insecure to modify their behavior in any way that can be a car driver who is too impatient to wait for a safe overtaking point, or a cyclist rushing down a towpath running over dogs and hopping up onto pavements to skip red lights. Either way being a prick like the guy moaning about dogs and their owners does not do anyone any favours.


Well said


----------



## Little yellow Brompton (27 Jul 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> Explains why you hate dogs. To breedes they are income nothing more.
> I think your data gathering needs to sample a larger area than the same path you keep talking about.



Different route this morning, about 15 miles, want to hear what the scores on the doors were this morning?


----------



## on the road (27 Jul 2011)

You sound like a little old grumpy man, get a life


----------



## NeilEB (27 Jul 2011)

Little yellow Brompton said:


> Different route this morning, about 15 miles, want to hear what the scores on the doors were this morning?



Not really - you clearly have your own opinion, why let little things like facts get in the way?


----------



## Angelfishsolo (27 Jul 2011)

on the road said:


> You sound like a little old grumpy man, get a life





[media]
]View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mLNrLI3OBwg[/media]


----------



## wiggydiggy (27 Jul 2011)

This is really turning into a shaggy dog story now


----------



## Angelfishsolo (27 Jul 2011)

wiggydiggy said:


> This is really turning into a shaggy dog story now



Barking up the wrong tree do you thing?


----------



## Woz! (27 Jul 2011)

Little yellow Brompton said:


> Different route this morning, about 15 miles, want to hear what the scores on the doors were this morning?




/unsubscribe


----------



## Cyclopathic (27 Jul 2011)

If dogs are alowed off the lead in parks and on normal paths then they should be allowed off the lead on shared use paths. Shred use means just that and as such we make compromises. One can't expect to bomb down a shared use path as if in a sprint finish. When I am riding past people with dogs I just slow down and take care. It is just the same really as when you aproach a family who have small children who are also liekly to run out unexpectedly. I haven't noticed that taking this sort of care around less predictable pavement users has hindered me in any way or lessened the quality of my life, quite the opposite really as there is satisfaction to be had from working together with people to make sure that things like shared use paths work properly and allow everyone to use them without incident.

There is a whole other issue around dogs and dog owners that are out of control but as I say that is another issue.


----------



## johnnyh (27 Jul 2011)

I guess the question must be, should dogs wear helmets?


----------



## Angelfishsolo (27 Jul 2011)

johnnyh said:


> I guess the question must be, should dogs wear helmets?


You are gonna get a slap


----------



## apollo179 (27 Jul 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> You are gonna get a slap



I can think of some cyclists who should wear a muzzle !


----------



## Angelfishsolo (27 Jul 2011)

apollo179 said:


> I can think of some cyclists who should wear a muzzle !


Would you care to elaborate?


----------



## apollo179 (27 Jul 2011)

No


----------



## Angelfishsolo (27 Jul 2011)

apollo179 said:


> No


Thought not.


----------



## Little yellow Brompton (27 Jul 2011)

NeilEB said:


> Not really - you clearly have your own opinion, why let little things like facts get in the way?



I was offereing to supply facts.


----------

