- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Tubeless valves
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
Except_Guide_Dogs_(licensed_by_William_Murphy_under_CC_BY-SA_2.0_on_Flickr)1 in 4 guide dogs in London have been struck by a cyclist, says charity
Note: as mentioned in the comments, Guide Dogs withdrew its claim that one in four London guide dogs had been hit. It has admitted supplying incorrect information, and many people have noted that its survey was deeply dodgy. We'll have more in depth analysis of this later.
A charity says that one in four blind people in London who get around the city with the aid of a guide dog say it has been involved in a collision with a cyclist – and seven in ten say they have suffered a near miss with people riding bikes on the pavement or ignoring red traffic lights.
Rob Harris from the charity said that collisions with cyclists or close misses left many blind people “fearful” of leaving their homes, which he described as “worrying,” reports BBC News.
Guide Dogs, which has its offices close to Euston Station, surveyed a fifth of the 320 residents of the city, home to more than 41,000 registered blind or partially sighted people, who use the working animals.
That produces a small sample size of around 64 people but the news has prompted a call from London Cycling Campaign (LCC) to people who use bikes in the city to ride responsibly and take care around all pedestrians.
LCC’s Charlie Lloyd said: "Any crash or a close pass which frightens or intimidates a pedestrian is unacceptable.
He added that it was "far worse when that person is blind, partially sighted or in any way less able than we are."
One guide dog owner, Deborah Persaud from Islington, said she was struck by a cyclist on the pavement as she walked home.
"My dress was torn, the contents of my handbag damaged and I was left with damage to my shoulder and hip," she said.
Guide Dogs says that cyclists should get off their bikes when using the pavement, be careful when approaching a guide dog from behind so as not to startle it, and call out or use a bell to alert pedestrians waiting to cross the road to their presence.
Except where permitted by law such as on shared-use paths, cycling on the footway is illegal, although Home Office guidance acknowledges that some people do so because of fear of traffic.
That guidance was reiterated by transport minister Robert Goodwill in January this year, who said that people could ride on the pavement provided they do so considerately, and that police officers need to exercise discretion in handing out fines.
Meanwhile, Guide Dogs Cymru is appealing for cyclists to join it for a fundraising ride next month along the Taff Trail – the Sustrans-managed shared use path used by both cyclists and people on foot.
Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.
Latest Comments
- mark1a 5 sec ago
USPS also use many RHD vehicles, so the driver enters & exits on the nearside.
- ktache 16 min 9 sec ago
I was in awe of his comedy craft when I saw him at Reading's Hexagon back in February, the first half was incredible, the second wasn't quite up to...
- Car Delenda Est 16 min 54 sec ago
The perverse result of this is people saying yes to everything, or at least everything that doesn't affect them, to get as much funding as possible.
- kingleo 36 min 17 sec ago
I believe that straight forks that are used on carbon frames are more dangerous than the old steel forks because they are more rigid, the old steel...
- Rendel Harris 54 min 4 sec ago
That was my thought exactly, surely a business opportunity for someone to set up fitting centres in major city centre bike shops and just sell the...
- S.E. 1 hour 8 min ago
Yes, sleep apnea produces more CO... I'm not aware of any doping effect but what do I know....
- Gd29 3 hours 16 min ago
That's true enough. But doesn't address my point that the chainset you get as a replacement will not physically fit chainrings from the chain set...
- brooksby 3 hours 46 min ago
In all fairness, it almost certainly NEVER happened…
- mitsky 4 hours 6 min ago
1) I'd love to see anyone tell an EV driver that they shouldn't be on the road or move out of the way because they pay less VED....
- wtjs 8 hours 16 min ago
Many of my fellow Tories sincerely hate bike schemes, and our friends sincerely hate these schemes, and road changes create enormous noise on...
Add new comment
49 comments
Apparently this is up for discussion on You and Yours on Radio 4 on Monday 1st September.
I will make a point of listening to see whether they repeat the original lies or bring some other 'facts' to the discussion.
But they weren't, as the charity later admitted.
So when is road.cc going to change its headline?
..
RLJ nobber cyclists attacking the blind, is this the Daily Mail?
Are we reading the same comments thread? I can't see anyone attacking "the blind". In fact I think everyone is in agreement that a cyclist hitting *anyone* is A Bad Thing.
People are, quite rightly, attacking the Guide Dogs for the Blind Association for publishing an inflammatory and wholly inaccurate press release which sought to demonise an actually largely innocent group.
Sorry just spent 5 minutes reading the Daily Mail and it must have had some kinda weird UKIP voting mental change to me.
^^ This.
A non-story based on a self-selecting opinion poll and then extrapolated to give spurious and totally inaccurate "data" which was then sensationalised into an attention grabbing headline.
Bike journo Jon Stevenson went off on one at Guide Dogs Association on Twitter last night, absolutely furious about their underhand tactics - essentially pitting one vulnerable outgroup against another. Disgraceful tactics and as usual, everyone is still running with the first story rather than pay any attention to the retraction and apology.
"Guide Dogs says that cyclists should ... call out or use a bell to alert pedestrians waiting to cross the road to their presence."
I'm a little confused here. How am I to know whether someone is blind/visually-impaired?
Should I ring my bell for every person who is standing by the roadside, just in case they cannot see me and just in case they were going to cross the road? Many (presumably) not visually-impaired pedestrians will often just step out without looking or listening.
In that case, should motorists also be driving around hooting their horn all the time too (oh wait, they do).
Is that a serious question ? But I’ll give an answer.
I thought it was universal knowledge that blind / visually impaired carry a white stick. Perhaps they might not have a white stick if they are been guided by a dog. In which case it is obvious that it is a Guide Dog, as instead of a lead the person will be holding what can be best described as a handle that is attached to a harness on the dog. Not always, but usually Guide Dogs also have some sort of hi-viz jacket or have a hi-viz band on the harness.
Anyway no matter what the statistics are, I think it is awful that there are any people on bikes that are frightening blind people even to the point the blind person is fearful going out.
One statistic I do find quite sad, is that in London there are 41,000 registered blind or partially sighted, but there are only 320 Guide Dogs. Perhaps the Guide Dog association have done a PR disaster by trying to use “sensationalism” to draw attention to their “Cycleyes Campaign” in a way that has got some cyclists backs up. I hope it doesn’t discourage cyclists taking part in sponsored rides ect to help them fund more Guide Dogs. All the campaign is asking for, is for cyclists to be considerate and appreciate the difficulties blind and partially sighted people have.
On a positive note of blind people and cycling, where I am there is a group that regularly takes blind people out cycling on tandems
It actually was a serious question.
I know all about white sticks, and guide dogs. But someone can be visually impaired, and basically not able to see properly, and not have a stick or a guide dog. A bloke I know from college is like that (I know that sounds like a cliche, but it is true).
I will try and look out for someone with a white stick or a guide dog on a harness by the side of the road (when also trying to look out for evil white van drivers), but I cannot know for certain whether someone intends to cross. It worries me that am I more likely to freak someone out, if they cannot see - properly, or at all - and suddenly a bell starts ringing close by?
In that case, should motorists also be driving around hooting their horn all the time too (oh wait, they do).[/quote]
Ha - have you been to India? Now THEY know how to hoot (or "horn" in local grammar")
It's important to recognise that cycling closely to a blind person could be intimidating and awareness of these issues should rightfully be raised, but instead, London Guide Dogs seem to have trolled the situation by using lurid and dangerously poor statistics that are just fuelling anti-cycling sentiment.
https://twitter.com/geckobike/status/504883235181309952/photo/1
Have you seen the correction put out *after* the press release, demonstrating what a disingenuous survey and stat this was...
Surely this is just another reason for infrastructure improvements and strict liability. Oh, and a better education system so people can try and understand statistics properly...
Probably swerving to avoid all the dog shit on the pavement …..
Yeah, if a blind dog does a crap on the pavement how does the blind owner know to pick it up or where to pick it up?
Any cyclist who strikes a blind pedestrian and/their dog should have the book thrown at them. Regardless of the stats in this survey, only an absolute tool would try to make excuses for that.
In all fairness, any cyclist riding on the pavement (whether shared-use or not) who strikes a (blind or not-blind) pedestrian and/or their dog should probably have the book thrown at them.
Fixed that for you...
No one is making excuses.... people are rightly reacting badly to a horribly cynical piece of PR, once again utilising the easy target of cyclists to drive coverage.
I'm going to start making some wild public accusations of my own... then retract them at a later date once I've got the publicity I want... to hell with the damage it does to the groups I've slated in the process.
I for one am happy to tell this society to go fcuk themselves, you won't be seeing any future support from me.
It's very disappointing, they appear to have quite a big press office, with several contact numbers for media and even out of office hours contacts, I can't see how the original "story" could have possibly have been an accident.
I notice that their statistic of 90% of blind people feel unsafe due to people parking cars on the pavement wasn't screamed from the roof tops?
This to me was a deliberate grab at headlines at the expense of what they saw as an outgroup that was an easy target. It's pretty disgusting really.
The worst thing about this is it shows how bad journalism has got these days. It has simply become extrapolate the most sensationalist headline from the most sensationalist source.
Yep its an untrue story. The BBC have fessed up and posted a correction .
From the BBC website.....
"Correction: An earlier version of this story said a quarter of guide dogs working in London had been hit by a bike. The Guide Dogs for the Blind Association has since said the information it provided was incorrect."
320 London residents have guide dogs - an absolute drop in the ocean - I wonder how many London cyclists have ever even cycled past a guide dog, let alone hit one!
This is story is total b@ll@cks!!
I have, I used to pass a blind chap regularly who walked his dog along a split segregated cycle track near my home. I think the actual reason why he used it, is because it was a relatively safe place for him to let his dog do its doggie business (and for obvious reasons, blind people have special exemption from the laws on bagging and binning said business).
Well naturally, the dog had a poor understanding of the signs indicating which part of the path it should be guiding its owner along, so how to handle such a situation. Answer, slow down, call out "passing on your right mate", and let the freewheel do a bit of clicking so they know where you are.
I spoke to the chap a few times, and he was fine with that, and he knew there was a cycletrack there. If you're in a busier part of town you may want to dismount whether it's required or not. Really, the could have summed it up with one rule, just be considerate.
If this 'survey' shows anything (which it doesnt) it is, more than anything, the failure to provide decent infrastructure.
Again.
Disappointing response on here. The survey might not be brilliantly designed, but it doesn't change the fact that a non-trivial number of people using guide dogs have been hit by a cyclist. That's shit. There are some selfish cyclists out there. There are too many cyclists who ride on the pavement.
True, there are a lot more cyclists who aren't selfish, but this "shoot the messenger" approach to the survey just feels like denial. It's still 14 people who said they'd been involved in a collision.
If drivers responded to a similar survey with a similar "yes but no..." approach ("it's only 14 cyclists who have been hit by cars, and it's a small sample size..."), people on here would rightly be up in arms.
Call out shit drivers. But call out shit cyclists too. Colliding with a guide dog user is definitively shit cycling.
Well said, Sir.
Let's take a quick poll, have any of you ever hit a guide dog? I haven't, nor have my family or anyone I know who rides a bike. That's significantly more people than took this survey, therefore my conclusion that no cyclist has ever hit a guide dog probably carries more weight.
I don't think such an extremely dodgy doggy survey is at all helpful. Just stirring up Daily Mail readers again for no purpose.
But pavement racers are knobheads, all the same.
Some cyclists are irresponsible it's true. I certainly think it's wise to be careful around anyone visually impaired. But I'm not really convinced by the data in this survey.
Pages