Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

news

Cyclist asks for consideration on shared use paths after garotting with extendable dog lead

“If I’d been travelling any faster it could have been lethal"...

A cyclist who thought he was being throttled by an extendable dog lead has urged pet owners to be aware of the dangers of shared use paths.

The anonymous cyclist in Deal, Kent, said that he was knocked off his bike and a thin leash garotted him when he was riding along Sandwich Quay at lunchtime on Friday last week.

He grazed his body and ruined his cycling tights.

He told Kent Online: “It was ridiculously long and really thin. I was just riding along minding my own business and, then, wallop!

“Someone did come to help me but the man who was holding the lead walked away. No apology or anything.

“If I’d been travelling any faster it could have been lethal.”

He has pointed out that not only can extendable leads catch on cyclists’ bodies, they can also get caught in bicycles and has asked users of shared paths to be more considerate.

Gary Holmes, vice-chairman of Deal Tri, said: “Whilst riding in mixed environments cyclists should always be vigilant, but I share this man’s concerns about dogs and extendable leads and appeal to owners to be aware of the risks to other cycle path users.”

Back in 2010 we reported a horrific incident involving a boy in Lancashire.

The child, 6-year-old Isaac Hargreaves from Morecambe, was riding close to his home in a cul-de-sac when he pedalled into the lead which was extended to such an extent that the dog was on one side of the road and the owner on the other.

Isaac was caught by the lead at upper chest height, causing a severe friction burn to his shoulder and neck before he fell off the bike, bruising his back

Lancaster City Council, which also covers the Morecambe area, has released a picture of the neck injury to illustrate the dangers of extendable leads. The boy’s father, Darren, also talked to them about the incident which happened during the summer.

"I have always regarded our small, quiet cul-de-sac to be a safe place for children to play," he said "Isaac loves to ride circuits of the road with his brother which is why I thought it was unusual to hear him crying that day. I ran out to find him walking towards me from where the incident had occurred, just metres from my house, with terrible burn marks on his chest and neck.

"Isaac had cycled round a bend in the road and straight into an extendable dog lead. The owner of the dog was on one side of the road and the dog was on the other when the accident happened. The lead appeared to have caught Isaac's shoulder and moved up to his neck as he fell backwards.

"If he hadn’t been wearing his helmet which had cracked on impact, his injuries could have been far worse. Thankfully, Isaac has fully recovered but as a parent, it saddens me to think my beautiful little boy will have to bear the physical scars for the rest of his life."

Add new comment

69 comments

Avatar
KirinChris | 8 years ago
0 likes

While generally on the side of keeping dogs under control I have to say some of the "They wouldn't need it if they trained their dog" stuff is ill-considered.

Not all dogs and not all breeds are the same. Some are very good at recall and others are not, even given a reasonable amount of training.

There are also perfectly good reasons why people use extendable or long leads. You may have a very well-trained, well-behaved dog but be in a place where dogs are forbidden from being off-lead. So the long lead is a way to let them run without breaking the rules. Perhaps the rules are to blame not the well-behaved dogs/owners - a situation cyclists should have some sympathy with.

None of that excuses or justifies letting them cross over paths where people are cycling, running etc.

But just as we don't like having the sins of pavement-riding red-light-jumping people on bike-shaped-objects visited on us, don't lump all dogs and owners together or assume the same solutions work in every situation.

Avatar
hylozoist | 8 years ago
0 likes

I was attacked and bitten by a dog on an extended lead a few months ago, so I'll attest to the fact that extending leads give no control whatsoever over a dog in that situation.

I was cycling slowly up an off-road shared use path (up from Beverley Brook to Sunset Road on Wimbledon Common if you're interested) and the dog and middle aged woman owner were walking down towards me. Dog raced towards me, and I stopped and put a foot down as it approached - it took the opportunity to nip my leg before the owner was able to bring it under some sort of control. I was surprised as it looked like a fairly normal labrador type dog and I was expecting it just to get in my way rather than actually attack.

I don't have a dog, but I grew up in a house with dogs ranging over the years from well-trainable pedigrees to slightly nutty rescue dogs. For those occasions when you need the dog on the lead, it should be a short one so that you can control it, and when it's off the lead it should be really off the lead, not attached to an extending cable. If the dog is never safe to be let off the lead, you should work on the training, or just resign yourself to being permanently closely attached to your dog.

Perhaps Sustrans and councils should put up 'no extending dog lead' signs on shared use cycle paths and wait for the deluge of outraged mail to come in  1

Avatar
OldRidgeback | 8 years ago
1 like

In some instances it's primarily the dog owners that need training.

Avatar
paulrbarnard | 8 years ago
0 likes

If the dog is not on a short lead it is in law not under control and the owner is liable for damage caused by the dog by default.

I had a problem with my dog once when a jack russell attacked it but came of much worse for wear. The owner posted signs up warning others of my dangerous dog! A quick chat with the local dog warden resulted in the removal of the signs and official ones going up pointing out the owner of the jack russell was completely to blame due to it not being on a lead and therefor not under control. My dog was on a short lead and under control when it was attacked.

Long story but if the dog is not on a lead, no matter how obedient or under control you think it is, it is not legally under control.

As for long leads; they have their place but that is only where there are no other people present. I use a long lead but it is locked at a couple of feet length when walking on paths and my dog walks to heal. I use the longer length if we are near livestock or other animals just in case. Mostly he is off the lead when we are walking through the countryside but only if there is no one about.

Avatar
Matt eaton | 8 years ago
0 likes

There's no place for extending dog leads on any sort of shared infrastructure. The roads are an example of shared, multi-modal infrastucture and it certainly wouldn't be acceptable there. We need to see some rather higher standards for motor-free paths in this respect.

Avatar
kevinmorice | 8 years ago
0 likes

Frankly I don't believe his story.

To get tangled round the neck it would have had to be above handlebar height at between the dog and owner ends. Quick experiment in my living room; even if I hold the lead at shoulder height (which is silly and unrealistic and I am 6'2"), and the far end is approximate labrador height there is no way that you can pass between me and the imaginary dog (regardless of distance to dog) on either a road or mountain bike without snagging some front end bike parts or actually hitting me.

Even if hitting the lead above handlebar height was possible, to do that sort of damage implies that the owner had to hold on and the dog had to stay still(-ish). At the sort of pace he had to be going to do that sort of damage to his neck even a big dog is going to be severely injured by being yanked off its feet, assuming the owner had managed to hold on.

Avatar
jazzdude | 8 years ago
0 likes

I have seen extendable dog leads that are very long. If the dog is so far from the owner you could easily not see the lead, just the dog and the owner and not realise they are attached.

Avatar
fenix | 8 years ago
0 likes

It could be that the owner was on a bank and so higher than the cyclist? Or as has been pointed out - maybe he tried to lift the lead over the cyclist and just made things worse.

Avatar
jestriding | 8 years ago
0 likes

I don't know how anyone can identify these reckless dog walkers? Perhaps they need some form of registration? Their dogs already have to be registered; how about the owners? A nice big plate front and back should be adequate. A licence, registration and the payment of some tax for dog walkers to access that shared path should sort out the hazards and any conflict between user groups.

And have you seen how many walkers fall on their noggins. Perhaps it should be compulsory to wear a helmet...

Avatar
Exup | 8 years ago
0 likes

To follow on from my earlier post and lots of discussion by others:-
Here are verbatim excerpts from the Castlereagh Dog Warden's formal response following a complaint I made (April 14) about a gentlemen who had repeatedly not kept his large dog under control on a lead: "..... after reviewing the pictures and your statement, the dog appears to be within a few metres of the owner and this would be deemed under control". The Dog Warden goes further: "Currently there is no legalisation in the Castlereagh Borough Council area that states dogs must be kept on a lead whilst in public. Some Councils have adapted legalisation under the Clean Neighbour and Environment Act(Northern Ireland) 2011, which means they can designate areas of the Council area as ‘Dog Control Orders’, this allows the Council to introduce legalisation for dogs to be kept on a lead. However, Caslereagh Borough Council have to date, decided against adapting this legalisation. "

I was not too happy that the dog warden was not willing to take any action to reduce the risk of accidents to me and others. However, I replied with thanks as it would appear that he has just accepted legal liability for any accidents that I have due to this determination !

Oh and the gentlemen with the large dog assaulted me a month later !

Avatar
Captain Badger | 2 years ago
0 likes

Why has an article for 6 years ago appeared???

Avatar
Colin Peyresourde replied to jazzdude | 8 years ago
0 likes

 39

jazzdude wrote:

I have seen extendable dog leads that are very long. If the dog is so far from the owner you could easily not see the lead, just the dog and the owner and not realise they are attached.

I don't think anyone is arguing that they he should've seen it, just that the height seems a little odd on a normal upright bike.

Avatar
OldRidgeback replied to jestriding | 8 years ago
0 likes
jestriding wrote:

I don't know how anyone can identify these reckless dog walkers? Perhaps they need some form of registration? Their dogs already have to be registered; how about the owners? A nice big plate front and back should be adequate. A licence, registration and the payment of some tax for dog walkers to access that shared path should sort out the hazards and any conflict between user groups.

And have you seen how many walkers fall on their noggins. Perhaps it should be compulsory to wear a helmet...

Perhaps they should have to be tested also?

Avatar
FluffyKittenofT... replied to Matt eaton | 8 years ago
0 likes
Matt eaton wrote:

There's no place for extending dog leads on any sort of shared infrastructure. The roads are an example of shared, multi-modal infrastucture and it certainly wouldn't be acceptable there. We need to see some rather higher standards for motor-free paths in this respect.

Though one of the cases mentioned in the article _was_ on a road (if a cul-de-sac), with the dog-lead stretched from one pavement to the other. Would have been interesting had it been a motorcyclist or a HGV coming round the corner as opposed to a small child on a bike.

Avatar
FluffyKittenofT... replied to kevinmorice | 8 years ago
0 likes

nevermind.

Avatar
Simon Walker | 8 years ago
0 likes

I walk two dogs but don't need a lead of any type because I've trained them properly.

One whistle and they come to me a sit, they will do this when they see bikes, cars (or horses) coming on their own.

When they are on a lead, it's a normal one. I exercise them where they can be off the lead and have a good run away from roads which is a mile walk from home. If you have a dog, you must be prepared to make the effort and take the time to look after them properly.

Basically if you have a dog, you should train it, and train yourself to have proper control around other dogs, people, bikes, cars and live stock etc.

Irresponsible dog owners are a problem, I've been chased and barked at while on my bike by out of control dogs more than once, its incompetent owners thats the problem

Avatar
Leodis | 8 years ago
0 likes

The birch

Avatar
Kestevan | 8 years ago
0 likes

I regularly use a shared use path at the side of the canal. There are often dog walkers with dogs on extendable leads or running free, and parents with small children.

I've found that if you slow down as you pass and don't ride like a cock, they get their animals under control, and everything works.

Yes, there are some peds who are arsey about it, but I also see plenty of cyclists who fly past at stupid speeds. There are undoubtedly dicks in both camps....

Avatar
mudshark | 8 years ago
0 likes

This nearly happened to my 4 year old son who was running along - those leads should only be used when others not about.

Avatar
eezytiger | 8 years ago
0 likes

I'm a dog owner and a cyclist and, while I've never encountered the dangers reported here, I've never understood the sense of these long leads. How can you have any control of your dog when it's 20' away? If you have full control of your dog you wouldn't need a 20' lead. I use a 6' leash and moderate length according to environment and risk. If it's safe for the dog to be off lead then she's off lead. There is no need for a 20' lead when walking your dog. You're the pack leader. You decide what the dog does and where it goes. Extending leads are just stupid, IMHO.

Avatar
triplettravel | 8 years ago
0 likes

Another case of why shared use paths are not a solution for cycling. They are bad enough with just pedestrians but add dogs and they are terrible.

Avatar
bikebot replied to triplettravel | 8 years ago
0 likes
triplettravel wrote:

Another case of why shared use paths are not a solution for cycling. They are bad enough with just pedestrians but add dogs and they are terrible.

So as an example, you would recommend that everyone should mix it with the traffic around Park Lane & Hyde Park Corner, rather than use the cycle track through Hyde Park?

Avatar
LondonDynaslow | 8 years ago
0 likes

Could the Duchess of Cambridge's uncle please help us find this example of pure evil?

On a lighter note, did he really say "I was just riding along"? #shitcyclistssay

Avatar
Leodis | 8 years ago
0 likes

Nasty injury and I hope for a speedy recovery.

To be honest I find the a lot of dog owners irresponsible, be it Bruce getting his 300 yard walk of the day down the shared use path (which I stopped using because its covered in dog shit) or the more adventurous ones in the Lakes using poop bags and then dumping them in walls, dangling in hedges, behind or in trees and farmers fields anywhere but in a bin.

Host troll.

xx

Avatar
therealsmallboy | 8 years ago
0 likes

Surely you'd see a person walking a dog in the distance and slow down that's just common courtesy on a shared use path. We all just need to get along. Dog walkers should look out for cyclists and reign the dog in and hold it until the cyclist passes. Cyclists slow down and pass slowly and respectfully. There are far too many people who think they have a right to do what they want when they want at other people's expense.

I ride my MTB on off-road bridleways and shared-use paths and always show mutual consideration if I come across somebody else, no matter what they are doing. Families, kids, dogs, other cyclists etc. When I see them approaching in the distance or if I approach them from behind, I knock the speed off (usually with an associated brake squeel which they hear) and pass them as slowly as need be. I also walk my dog on the same paths and bridleways and show cyclists the same courtesy, they almost always do the same. I'll often say hello too, because we're all just out enjoying the countryside aren't we?

The way I see it, this person has either plowed through the section where he encountered somebody else at the same speed he was going on his own (which is inconsiderate and stupid), or there is more to the story- were they in fisty-cuffs and the bloke used the lead as a weapon?

As others have said above, it is a dog owner's responsiblity to ensure that the lead doesn't trip/garrot anybody else and they certainly shouldn't allow them to be strung at head-height across a path, but if you ride your bike straight into an extended rope (which aren't exactly hard to spot) then you get a Darwin award and a nice little scar. You also need to ask yourself the question of why you were going so fast that you didn't see the person, the dog, or the lead. Self-preservation clearly doesn't come naturally to some. If this person was riding along and there was a fire in the middle of the path would they have gone straight through it and then sold a sob-story to the press about the dangers of setting cyclists on fire?

I don't condone the irresponsible lead-control, but this bloke sounds like a bit of a lemon and needs to accept it as a 50/50.

Avatar
FluffyKittenofT... replied to therealsmallboy | 8 years ago
0 likes
therealsmallboy wrote:

Surely you'd see a person walking a dog in the distance and slow down that's just common courtesy on a shared use path. We all just need to get along. Dog walkers should look out for cyclists and reign the dog in and hold it until the cyclist passes. Cyclists slow down and pass slowly and respectfully. There are far too many people who think they have a right to do what they want when they want at other people's expense.

I don't agree. Those thin extensible leads are hard to spot, especially at night. Especially if the dog itself is way off the path somewhere. All you see is what appears to be a pedestrian off to one side (I do appreciate the trend for LEDs on dog collars, though, sometimes that little light off to one side is the only clue that there may be a lead strung across the path in front of you)

Would motorists tolerate a situation where thin steel cables were strung across roads at random points, and they'd have to stop and wait while they cable was wound in again before proceeding?

Mainly though its just another reason why shared-use paths are best avoided if possible. Though I'm not talking about 'enjoying the countryside' rather than actually going somewhere (I am told this 'countryside' thing exists out there somewhere - is it nice?).

Avatar
NigelSign | 8 years ago
0 likes

Easy answer is don't use shared cycle lanes to ride on. Stick to the road, most cycle paths/lanes and shared pavements are not fit for purpose.

Avatar
bikebot replied to NigelSign | 8 years ago
0 likes
NigelSign wrote:

Easy answer is don't use shared cycle lanes to ride on. Stick to the road, most cycle paths/lanes and shared pavements are not fit for purpose.

The places that have the greatest problem are Parks, and in London at least where cycling provision has been made it usually is fit for purpose. The same is also true of the good bits of Sustrans infrastructure such as the Bristol Bath route.

There's nothing unreasonable about expecting people to keep their dogs under control on these routes. It's in the highway code after all (rule #56).

I have heard second hand that in Clapham at least, the Police have warned some dog walkers around the cycle track through the common, which is naturally a busy route.

Avatar
zagatosam replied to NigelSign | 8 years ago
0 likes

"Another case of why shared use paths are not a solution for cycling. They are bad enough with just pedestrians but add dogs and they are terrible."

Agree whole heartedly- but there again many roads in the UK are not fit for purpose either  102

Avatar
CXR94Di2 | 8 years ago
0 likes

As mentioned when in close proximity to walkers, dogs, kids and wild animals beware of the unexpected. You can't expect to carry the same speed if it's busy. Ring your bell or shout

Pages

Latest Comments