“F*ck people who don’t have their dogs on the lead” – actress Rebel Wilson after London bike crash

Yes I saw that too.  Disgusting.  I also thought the story was very weak on the dog owner.  Dogs running free are a blight on pretty much all our public spaces.  I realise that some people like them, but other people don't, and far too many owners have no respect for this.

I love wildlife but I hate dogs if that makes sense. Dogs are more part of the human world than nature (look at ridiculous breeds) and a lot seem to be either status symbols or something they lost interest in and can't be arsed looking after properly. Dog walking on 'shared' access paths grinds my gears as most of it seems to be without a lead and with icy stares if you ride near their crappy dog. 

Rick_Rude wrote:

I love wildlife but I hate dogs if that makes sense. Dogs are more part of the human world than nature (look at ridiculous breeds) and a lot seem to be either status symbols or something they lost interest in and can't be arsed looking after properly. Dog walking on 'shared' access paths grinds my gears as most of it seems to be without a lead and with icy stares if you ride near their crappy dog. 

bore off milemuncher - away and add more spacers to your bianchi 

Too poor for Bianchi. Too poor for even a Ultegra spec'd Cannondale these days. Oddly enough I did have to add a spacer to my KTM after my mate lost it doing me a favour by polishing my wheels. You got that bit right. Well done. 

I find that dogs are fine.  It's the lack of control their owners exert that is the problem.  Dogs should be under control on public ways.  Unless it's incredibly well trained, that means on a lead -- and not a stupid extending one that means your dog is 3m away from you and free to wonder across the path or into the carriageway at will.

I'm with Richard Ballantine on dog control.

If riding within your limits at an appropriate speed most of the time a cyclist will be able to react to an incoming dog. They don't approach from behind and jump in front. If you're in an area that dogs are likely to be, just beware as you would passing a primary school at 3pm. I ride off road with my dogs,they love it. Let's just all coexist nicely. Potholes are far more dangerous.

Nice attempt to deflect blame from the negligent dog owners on to the victim of said negligence.

I've also had dogs run from behind my bike and try to bite the wheels or me.

Anytime your dog is in a public place where it could cause harm it must be under your complete control. In the vast majority of instances this means a short lead.

The vast vast majority of dog owners I have encountered ignore this.

Rich_cb wrote:

Nice attempt to deflect blame from the negligent dog owners on to the victim of said negligence. I've also had dogs run from behind my bike and try to bite the wheels or me. Anytime your dog is in a public place where it could cause harm it must be under your complete control. In the vast majority of instances this means a short lead. The vast vast majority of dog owners I have encountered ignore this.

Quite, as it explicitly states in HWC 56

Rule 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.

Seems to be those strappy things that seem to be the fashion these days because people can't be bothered to walk where the dog wants to go, or to control them and stop them where they want to go. And they do it on pavements where if a dog does decide to bolt, they would be in the middle of the road before they would be stopped. 

Msiv wrote:

If riding within your limits at an appropriate speed most of the time a cyclist will be able to react to an incoming dog. They don't approach from behind and jump in front.

That's nonsense I'm afraid. When dogs are excited, for example by seeing a squirrel or other prey animal, they will bolt without considering what's around them, and if that means straight under the wheels of a cyclist that's what they do. Suggesting that if a cyclist is knocked off by a collision with a dog it will most of the time be because they are riding outwith their limits and/or at excessive speed sounds suspiciously like victim blaming to me.

Rendel Harris wrote:

Msiv wrote:

If riding within your limits at an appropriate speed most of the time a cyclist will be able to react to an incoming dog. They don't approach from behind and jump in front.

That's nonsense I'm afraid. When dogs are excited, for example by seeing a squirrel or other prey animal, they will bolt without considering what's around them, and if that means straight under the wheels of a cyclist that's what they do. Suggesting that if a cyclist is knocked off by a collision with a dog it will most of the time be because they are riding outwith their limits and/or at excessive speed sounds suspiciously like victim blaming to me.

I'd concur with that and add if you are cycling at a slower speed than a dog can run, there's every chance that one could approach from behind and become tangled in your wheels.

I take great care when I know there are dogs about or I see an owner carrying a lead with nothing attached - but I've had a dog run out into the road in front of me before now, with no warning (still not sure how I managed to not hit it).  I give parked cars a wide berth, not just because of the door zone, but also because animals and small children can emerge without warning (or full grown adults, if it is a large van).

The reaction might well be 'lose control and fall off'.

yes and maybe collect £50,000 even in circumstances which might be considered a grey area.

https://metro.co.uk/2020/10/28/cyclist-who-sued-dog-owner-after-being-kn...

The one that took me off off attacked from behind.

S.3 Dangerous dogs act should apply to dogs out of control.  Applies to all breeds.

Hmm, so if my neighbour's friendly and fluffy little pooch chases after a squirrel it means she's a dangerous dog? I think if you tried to take her owner to court, the judge would just laugh at you.

Dogs Dangerously Out of Control
(Section 3 Dangerous Dogs Act 1991)

Under section 3 of the Dangerous Dogs Act an owner, or a person in charge of a dog, commits an offence if the dog causes reasonable apprehension to a person that they will be injured, whether or not they actually are injured. Unlike most offences in English law no criminal intent or recklessness is required for liability to arise and a person can therefore be guilty of an offence even if their dog was on a lead and had never behaved in such a way before. Where no injury is caused the case may only be dealt with in the magistrates’ court and the maximum penalty is 6 months imprisonment and/or a fine of £5,000. The court has the power to order the dog be destroyed or kept under control and they may specify the measures for control (eg keeping the dog on a lead in public). The court can also disqualify you from keeping dogs and can also order compensation to be paid to the victim.

If your dog injures a person, or an assistance dog (eg a guide dog), then a more serious “aggravated” offence is committed. The injury does not have to be a bite; a scratch or bruise would suffice. The “aggravated” offence can be dealt with in either the magistrates’ court or the crown court and the maximum penalties are as follows:

OldRidgeback wrote:

Hmm, so if my neighbour's friendly and fluffy little pooch chases after a squirrel it means she's a dangerous dog?

If your neighbours fluffy pooch runs after a squirrel, into the road and cyclist ends up under a bus as a result, then yes, it is a dangerous dog - as it is dangerously out of control.