Dog's On Leads

Mr_Shab said :

Jeebus zig. You need a hobby that leaves you less pent up and aggro. Can the boxing and take up needlepoint.

There’s plenty of bikepath to go around, folks. Just like car drivers, a small number of cyclists are prone to high-visibility displays of arsehattery, but the majority just move quietly along without bothering anyone. I would suggest that most people’s problems with cyclists are self-generated and not really all that valid. Having to slow down for a cyclist going through a green lane shouldn’t disrupt the traffic if you’re travelling at a safe speed and not tailgating.

I do about 100km a week on (offroad) cyclepaths that pass through off-lead areas and don’t actually encounter many off-lead dogs. Their owners have the good sense to keep them off the paths (doggy gets to gambol in the grass, owner gets some exercise, cyclist goes past and no-one’s feelings are hurt). Some dog-walkers keep to the paths, but posess the good sense to keep their dogs on a lead and to their left (rather like one would keep their dog on a lead when walking right next to a road). I’ve only ever had problems where a person had a poorly controlled dog that wanted to chase me and wouldn’t respond to a call; or had a dog on a lead that was careening spastically all over the bikepath. That behaviour is every bit as inconsiderate as not slowing your bike down when going past a pedestrian.

In the words of Rodney King…(etc)

Thats exactly why this pathetic article and all the whiny posts about unrestrained dogs got me so fired up. It just happens to be a cyclist complaining about things AGAIN…not a jogger, fellow dog walker or anyone else.

Not to mention that tylersmayhem has done two stories which are clearly anti-dog so it seems he has an axe to grind.

Jeebus zig. You need a hobby that leaves you less pent up and aggro. Can the boxing and take up needlepoint.

There’s plenty of bikepath to go around, folks. Just like car drivers, a small number of cyclists are prone to high-visibility displays of arsehattery, but the majority just move quietly along without bothering anyone. I would suggest that most people’s problems with cyclists are self-generated and not really all that valid. Having to slow down for a cyclist going through a green lane shouldn’t disrupt the traffic if you’re travelling at a safe speed and not tailgating.

I do about 100km a week on (offroad) cyclepaths that pass through off-lead areas and don’t actually encounter many off-lead dogs. Their owners have the good sense to keep them off the paths (doggy gets to gambol in the grass, owner gets some exercise, cyclist goes past and no-one’s feelings are hurt). Some dog-walkers keep to the paths, but posess the good sense to keep their dogs on a lead and to their left (rather like one would keep their dog on a lead when walking right next to a road). I’ve only ever had problems where a person had a poorly controlled dog that wanted to chase me and wouldn’t respond to a call; or had a dog on a lead that was careening spastically all over the bikepath. That behaviour is every bit as inconsiderate as not slowing your bike down when going past a pedestrian.

In the words of Rodney King…(etc)

Danman said :

Zig – For the record, hitting things is already one of my sporting activities, it’s called Boxing.

I knew by the sounds of your posts that you enjoyed getting punched around the ring

How lame, did you think of that joke all by yourself? lol

Zig – For the record, hitting things is already one of my sporting activities, it’s called Boxing.

I knew by the sounds of your posts that you enjoyed getting punched around the ring

zig said :

Kramer – Just because it is legal by the book doesn’t mean it doesn’t annoy the piss out of drivers in peak hour traffic….

Learn to share.

There will be another 200 comments on this post if we start talking about the things that “annoy the piss of of drivers in peak hour traffic”.

Sharing is what this is all about (and virtually every other thread to do with cycling, motorbikes, cars, or pedestrians). A select number of people are not behaving in a manner which allows a public facility to be shared equally by all.

Timberwolf65 said :

Sell you bike and buy a dog…problem solved!

End of post.

hehe I want to buy a horse now just so I can ride on cycle paths leaving nice big horse turds everywhere for the cyclists.

Sell you bike and buy a dog…problem solved!

End of post.

zig said :

southeeplace – Thanks for your rather condescending and useless post. It’s pretty typical of the useless rant that pervades this wonderful blog. For the record, hitting things is already one of my sporting activities, it’s called Boxing.

I think you’ve just answered everyones question.

southeeplace – Thanks for your rather condescending and useless post. It’s pretty typical of the useless rant that pervades this wonderful blog. For the record, hitting things is already one of my sporting activities, it’s called Boxing.

She was cute AND offered her details & you neglected to take them?? I’ve changed my mind, cyclists really are crazy! 😉

zig said :

haha southeeplace, so instead of coming up with rational arguments/debate you choose to slander/personally attack me.

Good job….

My initial post was not a personal attack Zig. You will be doing particularly well if that’s the worst you cop here given your enlightened views.

It was also a long way from being libellous (slander is oral Zig) as I’m sure my suggestion to you to take a warm lavender infused bath and calm down wouldn’t cause anyone here to think less of you. I don’t think you need any assistance in that regard – you’re doing a standup job.

Previously I’ve chosen not to enter the ‘debate’ in any meaningful way because the debate is endless, tired and pretty useless. I don’t think it’s going to change anyone’s attitude.

I ride a bike. A fair bit in fact. It’s good fun and keeps me from getting too fat (it also gets me to work which is handy too).

I collected a dog once. It was off its lead on a bike path near the High Court. I had slowed down to walking pace as it was looking likely that the dog would do something ‘unpredictable’. Just as I was passing, the dog did a benji marshall sidestep onto the opposite side of the path. I hit the dog and then hit the deck despite my efforts. The owner was very apologetic (and cute). After I’d dusted myself off I suggested that perhaps a lead was a good idea given the traffic on the path. She took that on board and assured me that the dog didn’t usually do crazy stuff like that. She offered her details but I declined given that everything seemed to be okay. Happily she didn’t offer to feed my bike to me as she realised, as the owner of a dog of its lead, she was at fault.

It still think dogs are great. Dogs on leads are better though (it’s a safer situation for everyone involved and really shouldn’t cause much inconvenience to dog owners/handlers).

I drive a car too. I’ve seen plenty of cyclists do bad stuff (red lights etc). That’s particularly annoying as it contributes to or causes motorists’ negative views about cycling. I’ve been known to politely counsel such cyclists while driving, window down, much to the embarrassment of anyone in the car with me. I can’t, however, really recall any time when I’ve been delayed or inconvenienced by a cyclist. If it’s occurred, it wouldn’t have cost me more than a couple of seconds at most. That’s why I can’t really understand the angst that cyclists seem to cause Zig and his or her crew.

Anyway, in summary, let’s get along. This is a pretty silly issue in the scheme of things. If cyclists cause you angst, I suggest you’re in need of some perspective. Take up a sport that allows you to hit things (mowing people down in your ute isn’t sport Zig).

A long and probably pointless post is over now. Hugs Zig.

tylersmayhem said :

Look, to be perfectly honest, I am pretty much taking quotes out of the whole cycling on the roads posts, turning them around, and trying to make the point that cyclists think it is acceptable to slow down cars on the road, but at the same time find it unacceptable to be slowed down on the cycle paths

As usual PsydFX, it seems you take out of a post what you like, but conveniently leave behind point brought up if they contrast to your response.

What do you mean as usual? are you talking about your previous post where I thought your first course of action should have been ringing the pound instead of posting on here?

As for this post, where I can understand that you don’t find my comments to be constructive, surely you can’t deny the parallels between the comments on this post and the comments on the cycling-on-roads posts. Merely the point I was trying to highlight.

people masturbating = wankers

*worlds smallest violin playing for tylersmayhem*

*dueling banjos*

I think it’s time to run over cyclists in my ute.

I think it’s time to stop feeding the troll.

Cyclists = Wankers.

Kramer – Just because it is legal by the book doesn’t mean it doesn’t annoy the piss out of drivers in peak hour traffic….

Learn to share.

Yes that is true Niftydog but there are a hell of a lot of areas where this hasn’t been done. How anal do you want to get?

How about just be aware of other people. Alot of the time when walking my dogs I’ll see maybe 1 or 2 cyclists the whole time during a 30-40 minute walk in an area that is designated as off-leash. Does that really warrant putting my dogs on a leash the entire time? They are well behaved and don’t hassle anyone.

If one day however a cyclist somehow cleans one of them up when they are crossing across to the other side to investigate whatever smell/dead bird takes their fancy I’ll be making the reponsible cyclist eat his own bike through his arsehole.

zig said :

Kids having fun towing a skateboard….omg omg quick call the police for blocking a major arterial cycle path.

towing the family cat on a skateboard, now that would be funny.

Zig – to quote some of your posts…
“Quoted from the ACT Safe Cycling Guide:
…
Also remember that people may be walking dogs on leads.”
People walking dogs on leads, which is the issue expressed by the OP – dogs on cyclepaths not on leads.

“Cyclists riding two or three abreast on the road is the same as to two blokes running side by side on a path is it not?”
Cyclists are legally allowed to ride two abreast, even on a single lane road.

Ignorant people = wankers.

Looking closely at that map you’ll see that quite a few of the off-leash dog areas within suburban green space seem to be carefully and painstakingly drawn around the major bike paths – even if the off-leash area overlaps the path – just as The Enigma said.

zig,
Troll score: -342/10. Entertainment value: priceless.

Riding a bike with blatant disregard for anyone elses well being but your own also makes one a wanker.

Watching internet porn makes you a wanker.

Niftydog – I always find cyclists anti-social too, how dare they ride past without even saying hello. Wow.

How dare a small child wear thongs? My god where is the world coming too?

Kids having fun towing a skateboard….omg omg quick call the police for blocking a major arterial cycle path.

Rowdy kids, oh noes quick ban them from walking in a group.

And that evil broken glass, heaven forbid. WOW.

Same for me Danman. Have been cycling on paths for almost 2 years now and only had incidents where you think the person has seen you, but it turns out they hadn’t. So always ring the bell regardless now.

The Enigma – There are plenty of cycle paths that go through designated off-leash areas. Have you actually looked at the map you provided? Fadden Pines cycle paths go through off-leash areas for instance. As do a number of areas around the Lake. Get your facts straight or better yet just do us a favour and go ride yourself into the lake.

> I encounter these situations every day, and guess what, both parties pass with a minimum of fuss and a smile wink and nod.

Me too Danman…in the car or on the bike, generally speaking I rarely have any problems.

Cyclepaths or road users (motorised or otherwise) – It seems canberra has above average w@nkers per capita. Quite a few in this thread alone..

Umm helooooooo sharing is caring people.

If nether group want to share then funk off and leave it to the users who are willing to.

I encounter these situations every day, and guess what, both parties pass with a minimum of fuss and a smile wink and nod.

Zig,
it’s one thing to have irrational arguments, but you are acting more like a troll.

cycle paths often GO THROUGH the designated off-leash areas
If you looked at http://www.gim.act.gov.au/website/gimmapviewer/viewer.htm?SERVICE=dog&QUERYDOG=yes&TITLE=Dog%20Exercise%20Areas&LOGO=Tams_Colour_logo2.gif, you would see that there are NO off-leash dog runs that co-incide with major bike paths.

I’ll make sure I never cycle over bridges, so I can avoid you and your family.

& I should add that what is a personal attack is calling people wankers for simply riding a pushbike.

I didn’t read that as a personal attack zig…sounded like fair suggestions to me.

timberwolf65, ever heard of irony? For the record: uncontrolled off-leash dogs wanting to say hello x2, pack of rowdy school kids hogging path x1, antisocial joggers x2, cycling kid towing friends on skateboard wavering all over path x1, little girl riding erratically in thongs and consequently almost coming a-cropper right in front of me x1, broken glass shards x34,243,748,902… all in about 25mins.

However, I did also encounter a lot of people sharing the path too! Three older riding couples said a friendly “G’day” as we passed them, about 6 well controlled dogs both on and off leash, an extended family of about 10 people (+ pram) all keeping left, plenty of joggers and walkers sharing the path and dozens of cyclists happily yielding to oncoming and passing traffic.

zig said :

Niftydog – Cyclists riding two or three abreast on the road is the same as to two blokes running side by side on a path is it not? Learn to share.

No, it’s not. It’s barely even logical to compare them. The equivalent of what I witnessed last night is an massive pack of cyclists blocking the entire road in both directions and ignoring all the cars honking at them.

The crux of this entire debate is that the paths are for everyone to share, and some people simply aren’t sharing. It really is that simple.

No cyclist would ever be so arrogant as to claim the cycle paths are exclusively for their use – that is a completely fabricated argument.

Because you’re full of logic aren’t you zig?

Cyclists riding two or three abreast on the road is the same as to two blokes running side by side on a path is it not? Learn to share.
I can finally agree with you. yes, those are rude cyclists.

How often do you see cyclists do this? – not that often. And they generally take up a whole lane, not the entire road.

It’s rare to see 2 pedestrians in single file. They often walk side by side, taking up the whole width.

haha southeeplace, so instead of coming up with rational arguments/debate you choose to slander/personally attack me.

Good job….

zig said :

Cyclists seem to think that cycle paths are exclusively for cyclists. Wankers.

Zig, given your comments in relation to this thread and in the previous articles you’ve authored for this fine blog (both articles expressing frustration, verging on rage, about something happening on Canberra’s roads), perhaps you should add some lavender to your bathwater. It seems your life would become infinitely better if you could find some way of avoiding travel. Perhaps a chauffeur or your own road network would be the go. Swallow the book of calm, serenity now etc. all the best.

Cyclepaths or road usere (motorised or otherwise) It seems canberra has above average wankers per capita. Quite a few in this thread alone..

Umm helooooooo sharing is caring people.

If nether group want to share then f*ck off and leave it to the users who are willing to.

I encounter these situations every day, and guess what, both parties pass with a minimum of fuss and a smile wink and nod.

Zig,

You’re the one who doesn’t get it.
Dogs should be on leads on most cycle paths.

cycle paths often GO THROUGH the designated off-leash areas
That’s not true. The major cycle paths as listed on the Canberra cycleways map are also on-leash dog areas. There’s a reason for that.

Pretty much any big fat walkway with a white line in the middle is a on-leash dog area.

You should check your facts before you make deceptive/false arguments.

Niftydog – Cyclists riding two or three abreast on the road is the same as to two blokes running side by side on a path is it not? Learn to share.

What were the other things that these so called ‘cyclist haters club’ do to you, That’s terrible about the two ipod joggers, how dare they, they should be hung for that!

“Also remember that people may be walking dogs on leads. ”
– this is all about dogs OFF lead. I personally have no issue with dogs on lead, particularly if they are kept left.
“Cyclists should keep left where possible”
– makes it hard when pedestrians are on the right. Everyone should keep left where possible.

Cyclists seem to think that cycle paths are exclusively for cyclists
Nowhere has that been stated or even alluded to. And you call us wankers?

peterh – You don’t get it, cycle paths often GO THROUGH the designated off-leash areas. It is the cyclists who need to be wary of off-leash dogs in those areas, not the other way around. The rest of the time it should be up to the owner if they have a trained dog. It seems an aggressive cyclist thinks they always have right of way…..it clearly says in the guide that cyclists are to GIVE WAY which includes dismounting if necessary.

tylersmayhem – No but I’ve had some near misses where some cyclists either don’t know the rules, don’t indicate or blatantly ride through red lights.

Not all cyclists are evil, but a large proportion of them need a reality check.

There must be some clandestine RiotACT Cyclist Haters club going on here, ’cause when I went riding last night I had the single worst string of unpleasant encounters on a bike path that I’ve ever had in my life. My favourite was the two mates who’d gone jogging together… both with iPods on. How antisocial is that? Arrange to go for a run with you mate, and then spend the entire time completely ignoring each other and everyone else trying to use the path.

zig said :

Cyclists seem to think that cycle paths are exclusively for cyclists. Wankers.

Troll score: 0/10

> Cyclists seem to think that cycle paths are exclusively for cyclists. Wankers.

You know what I think??? And the fact that I ride a bicycle makes me a wanker??? I’d say spouting irrational & unfounded generalisations is one thing that makes people wankers in my view. The anti-cycling mob in this city will never cease to amaze me…I don’t know why a few skinny lads & ladies on two wheels are so threatening to you.

I know full well that cycle paths are not exclusively for cyclists, at least I thought I knew…apparently I think otherwise according to you. I’m confused now.

tylersmayhem said :

Cyclists seem to think that cycle paths are exclusively for cyclists. Wankers.

Re-read my OP, then re-read again – idiot! Where in there have I implied that I believe cycle paths are exclusively for cycles?

Don’t even think about coming back to say “well, you’re one who doesn’t”. You’re painting all cyclists with the same brush AGAIN, and I wouldn’t be surprised if you were the f**kwit who tried killing me while riding on the road recently.

What were you doing on the road anyway, isn’t there cycle paths that you can ride on!!

Cyclists seem to think that cycle paths are exclusively for cyclists. Wankers.

Re-read my OP, then re-read again – idiot! Where in there have I implied that I believe cycle paths are exclusively for cycles?

Don’t even think about coming back to say “well, you’re one who doesn’t”. You’re painting all cyclists with the same brush AGAIN, and I wouldn’t be surprised if you were the f**kwit who tried killing me while riding on the road recently.

zig said :

Answer me this:

If unleashed dogs aren’t allowed on cycle paths then why does the ACT Government provide off-leash areas around numerous cycle paths?

so that they have an area for their dogs to be let off the leash. not on the cycle paths.

that simple.

good call to the above comment, shove that in your bikes and ride it!

Answer me this:

If unleashed dogs aren’t allowed on cycle paths then why does the ACT Government provide off-leash areas around numerous cycle paths?

Quoted from the ACT Safe Cycling Guide:

“Shared paths/footpath/cycle paths
• It is permissible for cyclists to ride on footpaths in
the ACT
• Show courtesy to other users, especially
pedestrians. Remember that small children are
unpredictable and older people may not see or
hear you. Also remember that people may be
walking dogs on leads. Give them a wide berth.
Cyclists must give right of way to pedestrians,
wheel chairs and motorised scooters used by
people with disabilities. This might occasionally
involve dismounting and walking the bike
• Cyclists should keep left where possible.”

http://www.tams.act.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/13989/enjoying_safe_cycling_Aug08.pdf

Cyclists seem to think that cycle paths are exclusively for cyclists. Wankers.

zig said :

Geeze, people are dying across the globe from war, famine, poverty and disease and almighthy righteous Canberra cyclists are worried about dogs on their precious bike path. WOW.

Just get rid of the cycle paths all together that way no one gets to use them.
Perhaps people who can’t tolerate sharing need to move somewhere else.

I don’t think they are worried about dogs on the cycle paths, just unleashed uncontrolled dogs. It is a cycle path after all, and unleashed dogs are NOT allowed on them.

Getting rid of cycle paths will just mean more bikes on footpaths. That would be easier… NOT.

I think it is the people with unleashed dogs (in onleash areas) that are not sharing. They have special areas and yet want to over run areas designed for other uses as well.

Look, to be perfectly honest, I am pretty much taking quotes out of the whole cycling on the roads posts, turning them around, and trying to make the point that cyclists think it is acceptable to slow down cars on the road, but at the same time find it unacceptable to be slowed down on the cycle paths

As usual PsydFX, it seems you take out of a post what you like, but conveniently leave behind point brought up if they contrast to your response. I you were to read previous posts, you’d see the following quote:

As a cyclist, I slow down when I see a dog, because they’re unpredictable,

It doesn’t matter if cyclists slow down. Due to the unpredictability of dogs, unless you were to stop, dismount and walk your bike by, they are quite likely to jump straight out in front.

this post is not to do with cyclists and the speed they use – it’s got to do with owners who refuse to leash their animals in a place where it is 1. illegal 2. dangerous for the animal 3. dangerous for the cyclist and 4. dangerous for other users of the cycleway be they walkers of cyclists.

Cyclists on the road and cyclists on the bike paths are 2 different kinds of people.

I see what you are trying to say, but it’s simply not a generalisation that is fair to draw. I have cycled on the road for a long time now. Finally after a motorist took it a little too far, I decided my life is worth little to some motorists, simply becuase I ride a cycle (the fact it’s completely legal for me to ride on the road, and I’m considerate, polite and safe when on the road). So I have started using the cycleways. It’s added about 30% on to my travel time, but I’m less likely to get mowed down by an aggressive driver. Therefore, I was a road cyclist until a week or so ago – but I haven’t changed as a person, or the way in which I ride.

Exactly Brad

Why can’t we all just get along??

or those famous words from Kamahl:

Why are people so unkind?

Hax,
I think you misread a lot of posts.

When I’m legally driving/cycling/walking, I have the right to share (this path with you, please show the same courtesy).

perhaps people who can’t tolerate others hopes, dreams, wishes and opinions should go post somewhere else…. zig person. you could go to the war-zones, poverty-zones…

I think we’ve established some clear rules here :

– When I’m driving, I have right of way.
– When I’m cycling, I have right of way.
– When I’m walking my dog, we have right of way.

Typical

Geeze, people are dying across the globe from war, famine, poverty and disease and almighthy righteous Canberra cyclists are worried about dogs on their precious bike path. WOW.

Just get rid of the cycle paths all together that way no one gets to use them.
Perhaps people who can’t tolerate sharing need to move somewhere else.

roflcopter

There should be a curfew on off-lead cats on recumbents so they can’t use green lanes during summernats.

Holden Caulfield said :

In my time on RiotACT one thing has been made abundantly clear. People suck.

Tagline!

😀

PsydFX said :

cyclists think it is acceptable to slow down cars on the road, but at the same time find it unacceptable to be slowed down on the cycle paths.

Cyclists on the road and cyclists on the bike paths are 2 different kinds of people.

Anyway, cyclists on roads don’t chase after you trying to bite your ankles do they?

Ok, maybe some do.

In my time on RiotACT one thing has been made abundantly clear. People suck.

RuffnReady said :

Why is it so unacceptable to ride at a slower rate when in the presence of pedestrians and their dogs?

So, if I was a pedestrian wandering all over the road expecting the cars to slow down that would be alright too?

Look, to be perfectly honest, I am pretty much taking quotes out of the whole cycling on the roads posts, turning them around, and trying to make the point that cyclists think it is acceptable to slow down cars on the road, but at the same time find it unacceptable to be slowed down on the cycle paths.

Oops, just to add, if your dog isn’t trained to come when called what’s it doing off the leash in a public space?

Good comments bohemian.
It seems to me it’s a matter of cyclists giving slower users adequate warning of their approach (which tylersmayhem did, though not all cyclists do) and those other users being considerate enough to then move themselves, their dogs, their kids or whatever, across (which the dogowners tylersmayhem speaks about did not do, but some users of bikepaths do). It shouldn’t be that hard!

Dogs off leashes are a problem for everyone – other walkers, such as kids en route to school, other dog walkers, joggers/fitness walkers, mums pushing prams/strollers en route to shops etc are on these paths also. I’m actually quite scared of large dogs off the leash, and I like dogs. No leash means unpredictability to everyone except the owner. There is simply no excuse for these dog owners. Put the dog on the leash or go to a permitted off-leash area people!

I reckon a yellow line down the centre and keep left signs would help, though. They have ’em on escalators, stairs etc in some countries.

I also ride on bike paths all the time and I’ve never had a problem with dogs off leashes – except for the chihuahua incident I’ve mentioned on another post.

Most dog owners seem to be fairly responsible and only let a dog off a leash when they no it can handle it. All I do is ring the bell a fair distance away to give a bit of warning.

BTW, I think this should be taken as bell etiquette:

ding – stay where you are I’m coming past.

ding, ding – I’m coming past and you’re a bit close to the middle.

ding, ding, ding, ding – get out of the f****** way!! (or you’re wearing an ipod and wandering all over the place. Maybe we should licence ipods on bike paths)

AngryHenry said :

Is it too radical an idea that maybe we should just all respect each other the way we would like to be respected.

Holy donuts, Batman! A calm and rational post, on RiotACT, in a thread about cyclists? I must have stepped through a worm hole on the way back to my desk…

I ride on bike paths all the time (buggered if I’ll ride on the roads given the danger presented by inept and/or homicidal drivers), and quite frankly I’m sick of all the dogs and people that walk on them. I know that legally they are entitled to, but that needs to change – bike paths should be for BIKES, or other wheeled vehicles like prams or shopping trolleys. Pedestrians already have footpaths everywhere (and if riding on a footpath, whihch I rarely do, i will always give way to the pedestrian), and they are not hampered by not being on the path – if you are on LEGS, walk on the grass, how hard is that?

PsydFX said :

Why is it so unacceptable to ride at a slower rate when in the presence of pedestrians and their dogs?

So, if I was a pedestrian wandering all over the road expecting the cars to slow down that would be alright too?

I know that legally they are entitled to
No they’re not. If the dog is unleashed, they are possibly breaking the law.
Refer back to
– http://www.gim.act.gov.au/website/gimmapviewer/viewer.htm?SERVICE=dog&QUERYDOG=yes&TITLE=Dog%20Exercise%20Areas&LOGO=Tams_Colour_logo2.gif

bike paths should be for …….shopping trolleys
Yeah…..not sure that’s legal either. Unless you own it.

I ride on bike paths all the time (buggered if I’ll ride on the roads given the danger presented by inept and/or homicidal drivers), and quite frankly I’m sick of all the dogs and people that walk on them. I know that legally they are entitled to, but that needs to change – bike paths should be for BIKES, or other wheeled vehicles like prams or shopping trolleys. If you are on LEGS, walk on the grass, how hard is that?

Just learn to bunny hop – or at least lift your front wheel. If a dog runs out in front of you, its you or the dog going down. It’s happened to me before, and I’ve never launched so high on a road bike and I landed safely too (just pity the dog wasn’t so well as he got collected by my rear wheel). A shame that the dog had to go through that pain for the owner to learn such a simple lesson.

I’m sure all dog owners put their dog on a leash when walking next to a busy road, so why not do the same when walking on a cycle path?

Sorry kids, got a little excited as it was probably tylersmayhem who zoomed passed me this morning and nearly hit me and my little dog when she was ON the lead,

Probably not. I am quite a similar cyclist to Danmanm other than the fact that I wear cycle pates to guard against chaffed balls.

I give walkers, joggers, other cyclists and everything in between plenty of notice by bell or voice. When (as most people do) move to the side if they’ve taken up more than 50%, I always thank them and give them a nod, smile, wave or a mixed combo of all.

Because I am a cyclist, don’t assume I’m the c**khead one who “zooms” past people with little or no regard. I just ask all uses of the paths to be aware, responsible and thoughtful.

From http://www.tams.act.gov.au/live/pets/wherecanitakemydog
– You can extake your dog to areas not otherwise designated as a Dog Exercise Area or a Dog Prohibited Area, but your dog must remain on the leash

And for Dog exercise off-leash areas
– http://www.gim.act.gov.au/website/gimmapviewer/viewer.htm?SERVICE=dog&QUERYDOG=yes&TITLE=Dog%20Exercise%20Areas&LOGO=Tams_Colour_logo2.gif

Why is it so unacceptable to ride at a slower rate when in the presence of pedestrians and their dogs?
It’s not, but even at a slow rate on a bike, say dropping from 20km to 10km, is still faster than walking pace, and still dangerous if a dog decides to chase. And more likely the dog will catch you if he wants to take a bite.

It’s only a slight inconvenience for cyclists to slow down for a pedestrian with dogs, but it’s also only a slight inconvenience for dog owners to show some responsibility rather than passing on the responsibility to the cyclists.

dr. faustus said :

As a dog owner, my understanding of the laws in the ACT is that all that is required for you to have committed an offence (and risk having the dog put down) is for someone else to feel threatened by the dog. Now, maybe that isn’t the exact wording of the law (and, this being the Internets, I’m sure someone will post the actual law within minutes),

According to http://www.tams.act.gov.au/live/pets/Dog_Policy the process seems to be Person is attacked by\feels threatened by dog => Attacked\Threatened person complains to Domestic Animal Services (part of TAMS) => On-Call Ranger investigates dog attack immediately \ threat of dangerous dog when they can => Dog is declared dangerous under the Domestic Animals Act 2000.

Dogs that have been declared dangerous are seized immediately, need to be registered as a dangerous dog to the Dog Registrar, and have to undergo a Dangerous Dog Assessment by Domestic Animal Services, which determines if it can be returned to its owner without further endangering the public.

Thats just how I read it, I may be wrong. (Anyone who works for Canberra connect want to comment?)

By the way, if you are attacked\threatened by a dog, call Domestic Animal Services on 6207 2424, as soon as possible to inform them of the attack. For after emergency hours assistance from Domestic Animal Services, call Canberra Connect on 13 22 81.
Rangers are avaiable 24/7/365

lulu said :

The most effective way to control my dog is by voice. On a lead, he pulls and strains and walkng is a battle for us both (well it was until we discovered the gentle leader anyway). Off lead he’s calm and instantly obedient. if I say, “get over” he gets to my left. I think he’s safer off lead than on because I’d have to pull him to the left on lead, off lead he gets there much quickr on his own. It’s (correct use of apostrophe) a shame laws can’t recognise that some dogs are more controllable this way.

They do,,that’s why they have off lead areas.
The problem was and still is that alot of people think their dog is fine offlead until something goes wrong.

My eldest dog used to go to the offlead tracks and she loved it. We never had a problem with her and we began getting to know other dogs/owners and would all meet up on weekends so our dogs could play.
Then when dog restrictions were bought in here she wasn’t allowed to go to the offlead track anymore. Not only that she had to be kept muzzled and a certain onlead area recommended.

Not a problem, until she was attacked by another dog that wasn’t on it’s lead and it’s owner was too far away to do anything. With her muzzle in place she couldn’t do a thing to protect herself and she was ripped up pretty bad. I was kicking the dog and trying to find a stick when the owner got there and he tried to punch me for kicking his dog. (I am a women by the way)
While I rang police and Rangers he grabbed his dog and took off.
I was left with a hefty vet bill and a very freaked out dog.

Luckily she was young and it hasn’t affected her socialising, but it sure affected mine.
Now I carry a big stick.

lulu said :

It’s (correct use of apostrophe) a shame laws can’t recognise that some dogs are more controllable this way.

Probably because it would confuse people. Those who don’t know about the Lulu amendment would assume you’re an ignorant owner allowing your dog to run loose and report you, and ignorant dog owners would asume that if your dog can go around off-lead their terrors can too.

ACT learner drivers having to keep to the NSW 80kph maximum was probably brought in for the same reason.

Why is it so unacceptable to ride at a slower rate when in the presence of pedestrians and their dogs?

As a dog owner, my understanding of the laws in the ACT is that all that is required for you to have committed an offence (and risk having the dog put down) is for someone else to feel threatened by the dog. Now, maybe that isn’t the exact wording of the law (and, this being the Internets, I’m sure someone will post the actual law within minutes), but managing your dog in such a way that other people aren’t threatened by it is a pretty reasonable suggestion. Either way, it seems to me that, as a cyclist or a pedestrian, you have legitimate reason for complaint if an off-lead dog threatens you in a public area (regardless of whether it’s an off-lead area or not).

If your dog has a history of chasing cyclists, then you’re an idiot if you let it off-lead in an area where cyclists are common. I’m not sure how anyone could argue otherwise.

Our dog isn’t too bad with cyclists, but doesn’t like those razor scooters, so whenever we’re walking and see one, we keep a tight grip on him. He also likes to meander all over the path, so when we’re on a shared bike-path, we keep him on a short leash and make sure there is plenty of room for cyclists to get past. It’s not that difficult.

I would have thought it was just responsible dog ownership (after all, who wants to risk their dog being injured if they’re hit by a cyclist), but if maybe it’s easier to think of as just not being a jerk.

Just on a side note, I saw a red belly black about 5 cm from my front tyre on the strip of bike path between Mcarthur Avenue and Lyneham the other day.

Going about 30km/h as soon as I saw it, I was on top of it, and it scared the cr@p out of me..

Just a heads up to watch out – the heat seems to bring them out onto the bike pathes as well as sunny rocks etc.

astrojax said :

my dog also notes that no room is too small to swing a cat.

Depends on the size of the cat how you hold it…
Google reckons the average housecat is 30 inches (75cm) from tail to nose.

So if you don’t extend your arm, and make a tight gripping fist around the tail near the tip, with a square room about 1.5m wide, and using yourself as a counterweight I reckon you’d be able to make a few full circular rotations.

Bigger rooms would be needed if you choose to extend your arms.

The most effective way to control my dog is by voice. On a lead, he pulls and strains and walkng is a battle for us both (well it was until we discovered the gentle leader anyway). Off lead he’s calm and instantly obedient. if I say, “get over” he gets to my left. I think he’s safer off lead than on because I’d have to pull him to the left on lead, off lead he gets there much quickr on his own. It’s (correct use of apostrophe) a shame laws can’t recognise that some dogs are more controllable this way.

Well it’s NOT OK because my dogs do bite.

They should be put down then.

I think we are dealing with a moron people!

The Brad said :

So we should place kids under 10 in harnesses when they walk or ride on cycle paths with an adult?
not kids under 10, but I do like your attempt exaggerating the point to deflate it.
I thought it was a reasonble point to kids that are likely to run in front of a car or bike should be not allowed to run freely, near bikes. So probably kids under the age of 2.

i could walk my boys on a leash, but as we are considering tying them together with bungee cord, the resulting mayhem probably wouldn’t help. restraining them in the pram seems to work for now.

my dog asked me to post and complain about cats that sit, unsupervised and free, in front yards or on nature strips and deliberately incite excitement and leash-straining while out on our walks. this flagrant behaviour has to stop – owners ought to wake up to themselves and unleash their cats only in off-leash areas, and certainly not on cycle paths.

my dog also notes that no room is too small to swing a cat.

zig said :

So are cats allowed on cycle paths?

How about magpies?

Lizards?

Kangaroos?

cats are…. on a leash. try that one. better to strap the cat to a skateboard.

Get back on the green lanes your lot lobbied so hard for … and we all paid for.

No, I didn’t lobby hard for “green lanes”. And regardless of that – drivers like you seem to hate cyclists using them. Read my post from the beginning, and you might pick up on the fact that I used to cycle on the road and in Government designated cycle (including the “green” ones you seem to have a problems with), and I’ve had one too many close calls with ignorant motorists. So, as so many before you have harped on about – I now use the cycle paths. And it appears there are just as many inherent risks to both cyclists as well as dogs and their owners.

I’m happy the share roadways and cycle lanes with anyone. But don’t go calling me a f**kwit for almost hitting an animal because as an owner, you do not consider the risks of walking on a designated cycleway. Bikes tend to go faster than walking speed.

Come on people rage up! raAAaaage!
We need a new addition to the Riotact groups – (Troll).

There’s nothing like a dog or cat story to polarise RiotACT

So are cats allowed on cycle paths?

How about magpies?

Lizards?

Kangaroos?

Come on people rage up! raAAaaage!

damn straight.

The biggest problem that faces Canberra is the fact that so many people here are public servants and can only think in black and white. There is no grey to a public servant.

Too bad the world doesn’t work that way.

Danman you could have summed up your entire post with this:

RAAAAAAWWWWWWRRRRRRRRRRRRR!

They’re not called ‘cycle ways’ they’re called FOOT PATHS and they are a SHARED facility.

The government has put in place CYCLE PATHS so you don’t have to use the foot paths and get cranky about pedestrians,

ey’re not called ‘cycle ways’ they’re called FOOT PATHS and they are a SHARED facility.

No – this happened on a CYCLE PATH and as you say yourself – it is a facility that has been put in by the Gov. If you bother to read my post again, you’ll see me following quote “…I’m happy to share cycleways with pedestrans and their dogs”.

I vowed silence but I must digress

Zig, you would probably get your point across more is you ommitted the following statements

I’m so sick of cyclists who think they own every piece of bitumen that they place their precious tyres on
I have a mountain bike and stick to trail biking not this pansy bitumen crap

Statements such as these will win you no fans, on either side of the fence.

FYI – I have a MTB – I ride 96km a week on pansy bitumen SHARED cycleways from Ngunnawal to inner north.

I chose to not ride on the road (Green cycleways or whatever we wish to call them) because I refuse to get tarred with the same brush as arrogant self righteous cyclists by people like yourself, additionally, I am a road user and commute 2 days a week down Northbourne in my automobile. I’m not saying that every road cyclist is a law abiding angel, but I have seen on repeated occasions the blatant disregard and extreme attitude and angerm management issues of fellow motorists directed at cyclists on Northbourne. I chose to not be a party to that for my safety alone.

I would liek to think I am a courteous cycle way user, I oft get lose dogs wandering whilst their owner pis farts around somewhere else. I slow down to avoid situations.

If I come to a pedestrian crossing, I cross if there is no traffic, if there is, I slow to a stop, and more often than not, I get ushered through by the motorist, to which I thank them.

If I see peopel walking, I give them ample notice, if they are ipodified, I slow and take a wide berth.

mate if bush track could get me to work as efficiently as the cycleways, I’d be all for it, but claiming that something is pansy, due to choice of ease is pretty rich.

Anyway, like someon esaid, its about sharing, not all cycleway users are arsehats – and certainly I am not. If you see someone, including me, being an arsehat, perhaps you can let them know, lest you influence their future behaviour 🙂

Most of all, I am courteous because I ride lycra free 🙂

So we should place kids under 10 in harnesses when they walk or ride on cycle paths with an adult?
not kids under 10, but I do like your attempt exaggerating the point to deflate it.
I thought it was a reasonble point to kids that are likely to run in front of a car or bike should be not allowed to run freely, near bikes. So probably kids under the age of 2.

Straw man arguments are unhelpful and suggest the debate is reaching its natural conclusion.

I worry about so many of you who think that every part of life should be both controllable and controlled.

It would be a sad and grey world if you had your way.

Fortunately there’s little risk you’ll actually get it.

So we should place kids under 10 in harnesses when they walk or ride on cycle paths with an adult? Yeah right….When I used to walk to primary school, I used to do so on cycle paths some of the way. Both with friends and on my own. I’m so sick of cyclists who think they own every piece of bitumen that they place their precious tyres on. For info I have a mountain bike and stick to trail biking not this pansy bitumen crap.

How about cyclists just accept the fact that they may just have to SLOW down a little when approaching someone walking their dog.

Or better yet just ride on the green cycle lanes if you are really that worried about plouging into someones dog. Perhaps you’ll do us all a favour and try to take on a big 18 wheeler semi.

monomania said :

SadMushroom said :

Why should they be put down??
My dogs are registered correctly and we follow all the laws to a “T” in regards to owning them.
We have regular checks through Animal Services and we are cleared to own them.

Get used to it.

Some people do own/trian certain types of dogs, usually as guard dogs. These dogs have a purpose and as long as the owners are deemed responsible then they are allowed to have them.

Well maybe you’ll have to get used to not having them if enough people get sick of hearing about people, especially children being mauled and sometimes killed by animals who have been bred to attack and be highly effective when they do.

That is where you should check facts.
Most attacks/maulings are by dogs claimed as being “loving family pets”.
Do you notice almost all dog attacks have quotes like “he’s always been a wonderful dog, we never expected this”, “he was always such a friendly dog”

They are NOT dogs trained to guard or bred for anything. They are house pets.
Almost ALL attacks are from dogs not onleads or roaming the streets or not kept securely by their owners.

That is exactly was the OP was about.

When enough people get sick of hearing about attacks then dog leash and confinement laws will be made stricter and all those that ignore them will be facing the loss of their dogs.

I walk my dog most mornings, and never let it off the leash. The reason for this is that my dog (that Mrs Berlina insisted on getting but I have to walk) is a mongrelised Jack Russell and mini fox cross thing with less brains than a potatoe and can’t be trusted not to run off and play with other dogs. When walking around the roads near my house, dogs are on leads, but as soon as you go onto the nearby tracks and trails NONE of the dogs are on leads (despite it being an on leash area. Of course, the owners run up and try to control their dogs, but always ending up looking stupid. Maybe it’s easier to just stay on the roads…

As for the bike vs car thing, the answer is simply. If your bike and my V8 collide, you will come off second best. Regardless of intent, or legality, that’s just the way things are. It’s just like if I run into a Kenworth…

if someone is walking small children on the bike path do cyclists believe that small children should be restrained also?

Yes. I’m worried about your kids/dogs, not my own safety.
If someone is walking small children, they should be responsible for the child. Be aware of the risks, and be proactive.

I think bicycle riders should have to sit a bicycle road licence test to qualify to ride on roads with cars.
Not a bad idea. Too any stupid cyclists on the road taking stupid risks. I’m a stupid cyclist :-), but smart enough to stay off the road. I don’t want to be a statistic, but I don’t want to make your dog/small child a statistic either.

At the end of the day people need to accept that we live in a community that has shared infrastructure.
Then tell the dog owners to share it. Taking up more than 50% is not sharing it, and that includes if the dog decides to cross into the bike path.

I meant ladder! Damn!

Is it too radical an idea that maybe we should just all respect each other the way we would like to be respected.

Dog owners should understand that not everyone is a dog person, cyclists should understand that they are not part of some special persecuted group (anyone can ride a bike, even f*ckwit drivers) and we should be decent enough and climbed the evolutionary oadder far enough to be able to share these spaces equally.

Or maybe we should be the ones peeing on the trees to let others know we have claimed this territory.

Small children on bike paths are even more unpredictable than unleashed dogs. I do think that if you are walking with a small child on a bike path then you need to take some responsibility for making sure they are keeping to the left and not zigzagging all over the show oblivious to the cyclists. (Especially at times when everyone is commuting to work.) Holding their hand is a good start, keeping them on your left is even better. I have on occasion encountered the “Walking School Bus” children on their way to Turner Primary School, and they are really good – the parents make sure they keep left and watch out for others using the path. If 6 parents can keep 20+ children acting safely, I can’t see any reason for one parent to not be able to make sure their one child is also acting safely.

Putting all the flaming and anger aside, here’s my thought as a dog owner, one who drives a car and occasionally, cycle.

It’s great to know that there are public areas where dogs are welcomed and allowed to roam free unleashed. However, I always believe that dogs on walk should be on a leash unless I am absolutely sure that there is no one – human or animals – around. Animals, regardless how tame they are, are always unpredictable. Different dogs react to different things like a moving vehicle, bicycles, human, other dogs, cats, kangaroos etc. If I ever let my dog off the leash, I’m aware of what’s going on in my surrounding. If there are oncoming bicycles or other dogs on walk, I’ll make sure my dog will be back on the leash. So far, I’m lucky that the same gesture has been reciprocated by other dog owners on walk with their dogs.

I’ve had my fair of encounter with cyclists, pleasant or otherwise, while walking or driving. All I can say is that some cyclists should be educated on the use of roads in the ACT. Some cyclists live under the illusion that they will not be hit by car even if they cycle two-by-two on a cycle path adjoining a busy main road or a very narrow road. I can never understand why some cyclists choose to cycle on a one-lane road with very busy traffic during peak hour, while there is a perfectly under-utilized shared footpath right next to it.

Then we have the rude cyclists not worth mentioning. Some cyclists do need to learn to slow down on shared footpath when there are other people walking on the path. Having said that, I’ve encounter cyclists who are grateful and courteous enough to thank me when I pulled my dog off the footpath to let them through. No cyclist have attempted to run me or my dog over yet.

I’m aware that they are idiots out there that have no regards for anyone or the law when it comes to their pet and cycling. But as Zig at #25 pointed out, we have to learn accept that we live in a community that has shared infrastructure.

I wouldn’t leave my small child unrestrained on a road so, in short, yes they should be restrained on a cycle or shared pathway.

I’m not a cyclist but it seems to be, in any given argument, cyclists are automatically wrong. If they shouldn’t use roads or paths, where precisely would we like thm to be? Should we just ban them and save the aggravation?

As a dog owner and a car owner, if bicycle riders are going to get so uppity about dogs on bike paths I think bicycle riders should have to sit a bicycle road licence test to qualify to ride on roads with cars.

After all I’ve almost hit several cyclists who either fail to give way when they are supposed too or simply pull out expecting you to give way regardless of the road rules.

At the end of the day people need to accept that we live in a community that has shared infrastructure.

On a side note, if someone is walking small children on the bike path do cyclists believe that small children should be restrained also?

The Brad said :

I’m with Tylersmayhem on this.
As a cyclist, I slow down when I see a dog, because they’re unpredictable, but if you don’t put your dog on a leash, you’re playing Russian Roulette with your pets life.
If I ever run over a dog, I’ll be mortified. But some owners play the risk.

Please SHARE the path, don’t dominate it. i.e. take up 50% of it. Preferably the left hand side. And if your dog is trained from a dog school, it should be on your left hand side, which should further reduce the odds of the dog being hit because you will be between the dog and the rider.

Is anyone else seeing the parralells in this comment and previous comments relating to cyclists on the road?

SadMushroom said :

Why should they be put down??
My dogs are registered correctly and we follow all the laws to a “T” in regards to owning them.
We have regular checks through Animal Services and we are cleared to own them.

Get used to it.

Some people do own/trian certain types of dogs, usually as guard dogs. These dogs have a purpose and as long as the owners are deemed responsible then they are allowed to have them.

Well maybe you’ll have to get used to not having them if enough people get sick of hearing about people, especially children being mauled and sometimes killed by animals who have been bred to attack and be highly effective when they do.

If its not vehicles v’s bikes, its bikes v’s peds.

As much as my 96km on bike paths a week is qualification to comment, this argument is eternal, so I chose to not comment.

I’m with Tylersmayhem on this.
As a cyclist, I slow down when I see a dog, because they’re unpredictable, but if you don’t put your dog on a leash, you’re playing Russian Roulette with your pets life.
If I ever run over a dog, I’ll be mortified. But some owners play the risk.

Please SHARE the path, don’t dominate it. i.e. take up 50% of it. Preferably the left hand side. And if your dog is trained from a dog school, it should be on your left hand side, which should further reduce the odds of the dog being hit because you will be between the dog and the rider.

Ari – this person’s dogs are muzzled, restrained, appropriately marked as dangerous dogs and contained according to the law. Do you honestly believe they should still be put down and the owners are being irresponsible? Or is it other people who allow their dogs to approach these animals (illegally) that are at fault?

Madame Workalot said :

Good on you for looking after your dogs Sadmushroom, might I suggest muzzling them if they do bite though. I understand your frustration, but better to be safe than sorry.

Ari – this person is being responsible and minimising the danger to other animals to meet their duty of care. How about cutting them a little slack?

Thankyou Madame Workalot,

They are always muzzled, it is law here. They also have to wear the flouro red/yellow striped collar to warn others.

I am NOT trying to curtail anyone due to my own inept training.
I am following the LAW as it is where I live and if other dog owners showed any responsibility they would too.
My dogs are socialised well but there is a difference between meeting another dog and having a dog run at you barking and growling. These are the people that failed in their dogs training and trying to curtail others by not allowing others to walk in an ‘onlead’ area without being attacked.

Ari- Those are the people getting fines and losing their dogs due to attacks,,,not me.

Sorry kids, got a little excited as it was probably tylersmayhem who zoomed passed me this morning and nearly hit me and my little dog when she was ON the lead, and I understand that we all need to take responsibility, cyclists and dog owners alike. I always take special care to make sure she is on the lead when we pass people, though i’m one of the lucky ones as she doesn’t take much interest in others. What I find interesting though is, would we be having this same conversation if it were little kids running up and down the cycle/foot path talking to people and their pets? Maybe not…

Ari said :

SadMushroom said :

Well it’s NOT OK because my dogs do bite.

They should be put down then.

Why should they be put down??
My dogs are registered correctly and we follow all the laws to a “T” in regards to owning them.
We have regular checks through Animal Services and we are cleared to own them.

Get used to it.
Some people do own/trian certain types of dogs, usually as guard dogs. These dogs have a purpose and as long as the owners are deemed responsible then they are allowed to have them.

My dogs do NOT pull towards other dogs when walking and people on footpaths can pass within inches and my dogs ignore them. My dogs do NOT attack other dogs or people as they are not savage dogs, they are guard dogs. There is a big difference.

IF another dog runs at us barking then I have to be careful, as if it does try to bite me or my dog then they will attack. By law they are allowed to do so to protect themselves and me. My dogs can only be in trouble if they attack ‘unprovoked’ which I have never ever had happen.

Dog rules such as dogs having to be on a leash or dog free areas in Canberra (and NSW for that matter) are a total waste of time as most people ignore them & the authotities do not police them.

Madame Workalot said :

Ari – this person is being responsible and minimising the danger to other animals to meet their duty of care.

No he’s not. He railing that the rest of society should curtail its activities because of his own inept socialisation of his dogs.

Good on you for looking after your dogs Sadmushroom, might I suggest muzzling them if they do bite though. I understand your frustration, but better to be safe than sorry.

Ari – this person is being responsible and minimising the danger to other animals to meet their duty of care. How about cutting them a little slack?

niftydog said :

If I had my way the gov. would fix all the cycle paths and it would cost us all a lot more money.

I’d agree with that. It would give me even more good paths to walk my dog off-lead.

Oh, and of course the random apostrophes.

http://www.angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif

Yeah, that’s right Ari, every single bike owner in the entire city is a card-carrying member of Pedal Power. Amazing isn’t it?

If I had my way the gov. would fix all the cycle paths and it would cost us all a lot more money.

Lady From Holt, woah! That’s a little flamey for my liking.

Problem with bikes is quite often, if you are walking, you cannot hear them until they are right behind you. It is a shared space and we should consider that first and foremost, when riding I always will veer off the path if I’m approaching a pedestrian from behind and give them heaps of space so I don’t catch them by suprise, I find when people are walking towards me they’ll be courteous enough to move aside and let me cycle on by.

When I walk my dog he’s always on lead because he will just take off and get into anything, ususally we just run him with the bike because he is more focused when he’s running. But when we do go for walks it really annoys me when people walk their dogs off lead and can’t control them, my dog has a lot of attitude but is only little (I beleive it’s called ‘little dog syndrome) so when a dog aggressively charges through the park unrestrained(which is not an off-lead park) marking it’s territory while it’s owner is 100 metres away and completly not in control of their animal, my dog goes spastic and runs the risk of being injured. This is something I am trying to train out of my dog and often if someone else has a dog on a leash we’ll go and say hello, most of the time this works out fine, occaisonally he’ll get into a scrap, especially if he comes across a male who hasn’t been desexed, but because they’re both on leads the situation is very easy to manage.

I have this anxiety about one day having to flee a much larger dog on the charge with a Jack Russell tucked under my arm, that would be most immasculating!

SadMushroom said :

Well it’s NOT OK because my dogs do bite.

They should be put down then.

Lady_from_Holt said :

OMG get over yourself. They’re not called ‘cycle ways’ they’re called FOOT PATHS and they are a SHARED facility.

Ummmm, no. They ARE called “cycle paths” (see the ACT Road Rules), and yes, they are a shared facility, which means you need to be mindful of others rightfully using them and use a bit of tolerance and common sense. Too bad for you, I guess.

Aside from the fact that I’d never dice with death on the cycle lanes, for me they are nowhere near as direct as the cycle paths, so I guess I’m stuck with it.

It is ACT law that all dogs be kept on leads on cycle paths. Even in off leash areas once the dog is on the cycle path it must be placed on a leash.
If you do hit an off lead dog on the cycle path it is the owners responsibility and you cannot be held accountable.

I am in Queanbeyan but also have alot of trouble with off leash dogs while I am walking my dogs. I walk in an ‘on leash’ zone but each day the majority of people walking their dogs let them run free. These dogs will run at you barking while their owners yell and scream at them to stop.
The owners always say “”Sorry, but it’s OK he doesn’t bite”
Well it’s NOT OK because my dogs do bite. I am not battling to keep away from their dogs I am battling to keep between their dog and mine.
My dogs are registered appropriately and microchipped. The are muzzled and wear a warning collar which should be enough to let these people know to stay away..

Each few months when it gets bad I call the rangers and tell them where and what time I am walking. The rangers make visits to the paths and warn people once, after that they receive fines. I hate to be the dobber but I am NOT going to have my dogs in trouble because some fat old silky terrier tries to attack me and my dogs while his owner sits on the bench reading a magazine.

What I am finding hard to stomach are the dog owners who think it’s fine to walk their dogs on a cycle way…off a leash.

F*ck me, yet another cyclist who acts like a princess.

Get back on the green lanes your lot lobbied so hard for … and we all paid for.

Even more dangerous than stray dogs are apostrophes without any owners in sight…

Unfortunately, many areas with cycle paths in Canberra are actually designated as “off-leash” areas for dogs. One such area is the green belt in Cook that runs from Lyttleton down to Redfern.

You can view a map of approved off-leash areas on this site:
http://www.tams.act.gov.au/live/pets/wherecanitakemydog

Sigh. I don’t own a dog, but I guess it would be nice for Fido to run free sans leash. I don’t see how this translates to allowing a dog to behave however the heck it wants to, and it can make it just as unpleasant if you are trying to go for a walk along one of these greenways/cycle paths. Like most facets of life, not everyone wants to play within the rules.

I guess as a cyclist, you’re possibly stuffed both ways. Take the road and run the gauntlet (so to speak), or take the cycle path and face the little critters of nature.

Happy cycling?

This has all the hallmarks of a hastily written spray. 🙂
prestest? wrinting? breaks?

OMG get over yourself. They’re not called ‘cycle ways’ they’re called FOOT PATHS and they are a SHARED facility. How about we start setting a speed limit to you cyclists so we don’t have to worry about you speeding along and hitting us and our dogs. And you think your tiny little bell is going to get you out of trouble, chances are, even if dogs were on a lead they would get in your way. Silly us for walking on these paths – it must be terrible for you when there are people and animals in your way. The government has put in place CYCLE PATHS so you don’t have to use the foot paths and get cranky about pedestrians, use them and stop bloody whinging! Next time you go out of your home I’m going to put a lead on you and then you can see what its like! I bet if you had children you’d put them on a lead too, don’t want them running and talking to their friends – how inconvenient! When I walk my dog, I carry the lead but when she is good, I take it off, and then you b@stard cyclists zoom past and expect us both to not notice. What a load of s__t

Why don’t you put a call into Urban Services and suggest they monitor the people walking their dogs off lead and not under appropriate control in the area ? If its a regular thing than you should be able to give them times and places to target.