Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

forum
road.cc bike forum

ENFORCE Highway Code Rule 56- Dogs required to be on short leads on shared cycle paths

by pete1999
Sat, Dec 23, 2017 21:51
11

I have raised a formal complaint against South Kesteven District Council (south lincolnshire) about their reluctance to enforce Highway Code Rule 56 on a 2km stretch of National Cycle Route 15 which runs along the river in Grantham.  Highway Code Rule 56 requires dogs to be on a short lead when walked on paths shared with cyclists (and horses).  Twice recently an unleashed dog being walked along the shared cycle path has run under my wheel. I avoid using the phrase "I hit a dog" because in both incidents the dog was unavoidable.  

The Council wish to treat the issue as a low priority PSPO (Public Space Protection Order).  A PSPO is a bureaucratic process to turn anti-social behaviour into a crime - typically used to criminalise dog fouling.  I suggest it is a safety issue where adult and child cyclists are at risk from uncontrolled dogs, probably more so from dogs on a retractable/extendable "cheese-wire"  lead.  The Council want more evidence and consultation. I argue that the Department for Transport has already decided it to be of national concern hence the reason it is in the Highway Code.  That is not good enough for my Council!!  Nevertheless, I am conducting a survey along the 2km route which I use 3 times a week.  In addition, I use a Garmin Virb helmet cam ALL THE TIME.  So far, of the 89 dogs recorded approx 1/3 have been unleashed.  Approx 50% have contravened the Highway Code (unleashed or on a long lead). In addition, I have many clips of "near misses" (and the two actual impacts).

Remarkably, along that 2km route there are a total of 57 cycle-related signs so there can be no doubt it is a shared cycle path.  What I have asked the Council for is permanent signage along the route requiring dogs to be on a short lead.   In the early part of my survey I stopped and talked to walkers of unleashed dogs.  I found them defensive, ignorant and impossible to reason with.  People with their dogs on an extended lead just tend to be thoughtless, unaware of the danger to both cyclists (adults and children) and their own dogs.

On a broader note, how about a campaign to outlaw the use, selling or manufacture of retractable leads which use "cord".  Any permitted retractable lead should be hiviz and reflective tape.  

In addition, of those agencies which offer advice to dog owners (eg Kennel Club, RSPCA, Blue Cross, PDSA etc), including topics such as the "dog and the law", NONE mention the Highway Code.

 

If you're new please join in and if you have questions pop them below and the forum regulars will answer as best we can.

Add new comment

11 comments

Avatar
fenix | 6 years ago
0 likes

You need those cutters that Bonds BMW has in The World is Not Enough

Avatar
don simon fbpe | 6 years ago
1 like

Local shared path is horrendous in sections and the attitude of the dogs' owners is appalling. I will occasionally have a word with an owner if the dog is causing real problems, there appears to be a whole range of definitions to "being under control".

Generally people are fine, from time to time, you get awkward ones. I don't understand how a supposed animal lover is happy to put their dog at risk. It beggars belief.

I wasn't aware of this bit of Highway Code and it is likely to be repeated as lack of bell is often cited by muppet walkers who are on the look out for problems.

Avatar
Canyon48 | 6 years ago
1 like

Tbh, I didn't really read the post.

But I totally agree, why the hell some pet owners don't take responsibility for their dogs I have no idea.

I've collided with two dogs, one ran out from behind a hedge and the other ran straight into me because its owner threw a ball (literally right in my direction) not realising I was there (somehow).

The amount of "£$% I have to put up with from dog owners who blame me when their dog wanders straight into my path is unbelievable.

I don't dislike dogs, if I had a dog, I'd take it to a park (or the field right outside my house), why some people chose to let their dogs loose on shared use cycle paths, is beyond me.

Avatar
the little onion | 6 years ago
1 like

Absolutely. And out of curiousity, does anyone know if the Highway Code is applicable to canal towpaths owned by the Canal and Rivers Trust. We have seen £2 million spent on the Leeds-Liverpool canal towpath to turn it into a shared cycling and walking route, under a Cycle City Ambition grant from the DfT. One of the hazards to cyclists is the astonishing number of anti-social dog owners who refuse to keep their animals on a short lead. Could these rules be applied here?

Avatar
Bluebug replied to the little onion | 6 years ago
0 likes
the little onion wrote:

Absolutely. And out of curiousity, does anyone know if the Highway Code is applicable to canal towpaths owned by the Canal and Rivers Trust. We have seen £2 million spent on the Leeds-Liverpool canal towpath to turn it into a shared cycling and walking route, under a Cycle City Ambition grant from the DfT. One of the hazards to cyclists is the astonishing number of anti-social dog owners who refuse to keep their animals on a short lead. Could these rules be applied here?

They would be covered under bylaws not the highway code. Plus the highway code isn't always law so bylaws are preferable as they can be legally enforced.

Avatar
pete1999 replied to the little onion | 6 years ago
1 like

Dear Little Onion

If the land is private the owner can do what he wants.  However, if the towpath has been designated a "shared cycle path" (segregated or unsegregated) by Sustrans, the local council, county council or by The National Byway, then the Highway Code would be applicable.  But bear in mind, that aspect of the Highway Code is not legally enforceable.  Many towpaths are designated "public footpaths" ie strictly for pedestrians.  However, public footpaths can be designated by county councils to allow cyclists, horse-riders, horse-drawn carriages etc.  Check out your county councils "definitive byways map" for the official status of the towpath.  If all else fails, try pointing the Canal and Rivers Trust to Highway Code Rule 56 and suggest they should erect signage accordingly in accordance with the spirit of the Highway Code.  Ultimately, the land owner has public liability for all persons on his property.  Ask them if they have public liability insurance that covers accidents between pedestrians and cyclists on their towpaths.  An insurance company may well require appropriate signage. Hope that helps.

PS I have edited my response after reading  the bid submitted for the grant here.  It has lots of useful info.  For instance the canal charity were to pay £1.6m to upgrade their towpaths to accept cycles. In note, however, that the bid recognises that cycling is a minority activity - involving only 2% of the West Yorkshire population, hence the bid anticipates objections from other user groups.  The bid states that cyclist accidents will be reduced - obviosly meaning cyclist vs vehicle.  I note a mention of the risk due to placing cyclist and pedestrains on the same towpath, however, there is no mention of dog walkers.  I suggest you contact the Canal people and ask them to acknowledge the dog walker threat to cyclists and request they erect appropriate signage. 

By the way,  bespoke self-adhesive vinyl signs can be designed and purchased on ebay at approx 99p each.  If all else fails, put up your own signs to protect yourself along your route.  I have done so in Grantham. See attached.

Avatar
longassballs | 6 years ago
2 likes

Bane of my life. One could think you were going over the top, reading this, but your points are difficult to argue. It is dangerous. For me so far it's only been an extreme annoyance. One day I'll either hit someone or someone will hit me, after shouting at a dog owner and I would rather neither happened. I don't have the patience to rationally discuss with a dog owner why their dog should be on a lead once never mind ten times a ride ignoring the fact the dog owner probably wouldn't want that conversation either even in the unlikely event they were conjucive to my argument - signs being th best answer. Can't see a million of 'em being produced though... good luck on your route though! I applaud that you're actually doing something about it ratger than just being angry

Avatar
pete1999 | 6 years ago
2 likes

Answer      YES! Cheesewire

Avatar
pete1999 | 6 years ago
0 likes

QUIZ - Here is a quiz for the forum.

Is the dog in the attached photo on a lead or not? The photo is a still taken from my Garmin virb helmet cam and is totally original (no touch up).  Of course, in reality, you are travelling at 10mph and you have 2 seconds to decide!!

Avatar
pete1999 | 6 years ago
0 likes

Man injured by cycling through 2 dachshunds on extended leads. Lead cut through his waterproof jacket then cut into his skin

Avatar
pete1999 | 6 years ago
0 likes

Photo of 6 year old boy from Morecombe garotted by dog lead

Latest Comments