Dogs & Cyclepaths

hairyleg

Hi
Been riding to work now for 10yrs and I use the local cyclepath.

Friday on the way home I passed a woman and 30mtrs up the path was her Dog,as a I was about to pass the dog she called it and the dog turned into my path,Bang down I went and god it hurt.

Road rash to the legs,bruised shoulder/hand and twisted ankle lucky the bike was fine just the mudguard snapped.

What I'll like to know where do you stand legally??
I don't get paid if I'm off work,lucky I had the weekend to recover but still very sore.

stephenlinden

Had something similar one time but didn't get taken down, just chased by a dog for over a mile and it nearly got run over around 4 times.

Initialised

On a 'Shared use path' dogs should be kept on a short leash. http://www.highwaycode.info/rule/56

Like red lights for cyclists and speed limits for cars they are treated more like guidelines than rules.

Last time I hit one we'd both dodged the same way, I got bruised, possibly broken ribs. It's one of the reasons I don't normally go that way any more and tend to stick to the road.

Legally (assuming you exchanged details etc...) you'd be in the right but you'd probably need an accident lawyer.

Worst thing pedestrians can do on a shared path is change course suddenly because they hear a bike. You're all ready to go left (ride on the left walk on the right) and they dodge to the left, the dog/kid is perfectly safe until they call it and it steps into your path :rolleyes:

kelsen

I'd hazard a guess that you and the dog owner both share some of the responsibility. The former for not keeping the dog under close control, and you for failing to spot a potential hazard and taking the appropriate course of action to avoid it.

veronese68

I'm no expert, but I think there is some responsibility to have a dog under control.
Unfortunately some dog owners are 'tards, as with any other group. I've often passed dogs that would be no problem had their idiot owner not called them from the other side of the path. The worst case was when I was wondering why a dog was running towards me at great speed, so I braked, when a tennis ball pinged off my front wheel. Thankfully the dog had more sense than the owner and saw me.

mroli

I think in the instance above, the dog was under control -the owner called it back into the bike. Poor dog and cyclist. Bad owner. Please go slow past dogs - they can be unpredictable.

roger_merriman

Initialised wrote:

On a 'Shared use path' dogs should be kept on a short leash. http://www.highwaycode.info/rule/56

Like red lights for cyclists and speed limits for cars they are treated more like guidelines than rules.

To be fair on a lead is just advice while speed limits/redlights are legal requirements.

And if the dog was 30 meters ahead doesn't sound like a this is a shared pavement say?

It sounds like OP may have to chalk this up to bad luck/poor judgment, in that they saw the dog 30 meters ahead? and made the assumption that the dog would not move? Dogs seem to have poor judgment regarding bikes and seem to treat them as walkers.

First.Aspect

Strictly, the dog should probably have been under control. But Britain is very "controlled" already and there might not be many places to walk a dog in that area.

It should be possible for you to cycle past without incident, taking into account that the dog might turn into your path. Its no different to passing a sheep on a country lane. Live and let live and all that - rather like our message to motorists!

My experience of shared use paths is that you can use a bicycle on them, but you can't expect to cycle at any speed on them.

Go slow, for your sake and for the dog's sake. Chalk this one down to experience.

gtvlusso

First Aspect wrote:

Strictly, the dog should probably have been under control. But Britain is very "controlled" already and there might not be many places to walk a dog in that area.

It should be possible for you to cycle past without incident, taking into account that the dog might turn into your path. Its no different to passing a sheep on a country lane. Live and let live and all that - rather like our message to motorists!

My experience of shared use paths is that you can use a bicycle on them, but you can't expect to cycle at any speed on them.

Go slow, for your sake and for the dog's sake. Chalk this one down to experience.

+1

The cyclepath I use occasionally is shared use. It has paths that lead off to various parks, fields and a skate park. It is quite heavily used by kids on scooters and BMX bikes, as well as dog walkers and joggers.

There are lots of dogs off the lead, the key is slowing up, being attentive and half expecting the dog to go under your wheels.....I have had to slow to a stop more often than not.

Yet the same stretch of shared path also has a strava segment......I am waiting for the serious collision between cyclist and another. Hence I use the dual carraigeway more often....

EKE_38BPM

Shared use path with peds, kids and dogs around? Ride slowly past them and prepare to stop. They don't make for swift progress so I generally avoid them and stick to roads.

wgwarburton

Hi,
+1 from me: It's a shared path so you need to be going slowly to accomodate the other users... We have a nice cycletrack that takes me halfway to the station but it's used by dogwalkers, pedestrians and slow cyclists; it isn't a viable route for making decent progress on a bike, so I stick to the road when that's what I want to do... and I'm no speed merchant: FCN is about 8 or 9 depending on hats (Thanks again, Rob!).
Sorry if this seems hard but in the absence of further info I think the right course of action is to take it easy on the track and maybe look for a road if you want to keep the pace up. Govenment guidelines state that if you want to be going over 30Km/h (~18mph) you should be on the road but that doesn't take into account the level of use of the track. Interestingly, I came across the following in a review of shared use paths: "The TfL standards have a section devoted to non-segregated paths (referred to as shared use paths) which state that the cyclist design speed should be 10mph, reduced from the 15mph used on other paths."

Cheers,
W.

Benjo74

First Aspect wrote:

Go slow, for your sake and for the dog's sake. Chalk this one down to experience.

+1 more.

It might be a little inconvenient to slow down and carefully roll past the dog, and it might slow you down briefly, but that's life. It's a shared path and so you occasionally have to make allowances. Agreed the dog should be on a short lead, but if its anything like the shared path I commute on (between Lower Sydenham and Lewisham) then it's not unexpected or even unreasonable for the owner to let the dog off for an early morning run. And I'm not a "dog person" or anything, just trying to be rational, realistic and practical.

Hope you heal well, and that the accident hasn't put you off.

spen666

Initialised wrote:

On a 'Shared use path' dogs should be kept on a short leash. http://www.highwaycode.info/rule/56

Like red lights for cyclists and speed limits for cars they are treated more like guidelines than rules.

Last time I hit one we'd both dodged the same way, I got bruised, possibly broken ribs. It's one of the reasons I don't normally go that way any more and tend to stick to the road.

Legally (assuming you exchanged details etc...) you'd be in the right but you'd probably need an accident lawyer.

Worst thing pedestrians can do on a shared path is change course suddenly because they hear a bike. You're all ready to go left ( ride on the left walk on the right) and they dodge to the left, the dog/kid is perfectly safe until they call it and it steps into your path :rolleyes:

Where do you get this from?

I was always taught to overtake on the right. You seem to be suggesting undertaking pedestrians if I understand what you have written

EKE_38BPM

spen666 wrote:

Initialised wrote:

On a 'Shared use path' dogs should be kept on a short leash. http://www.highwaycode.info/rule/56

Like red lights for cyclists and speed limits for cars they are treated more like guidelines than rules.

Last time I hit one we'd both dodged the same way, I got bruised, possibly broken ribs. It's one of the reasons I don't normally go that way any more and tend to stick to the road.

Legally (assuming you exchanged details etc...) you'd be in the right but you'd probably need an accident lawyer.

Worst thing pedestrians can do on a shared path is change course suddenly because they hear a bike. You're all ready to go left ( ride on the left walk on the right) and they dodge to the left, the dog/kid is perfectly safe until they call it and it steps into your path :rolleyes:

Where do you get this from?

I was always taught to overtake on the right. You seem to be suggesting undertaking pedestrians if I understand what you have written

I think it would be a good idea if people always walked on the left, but on a path through a park I don't think there is or should be a rule saying that peds must keep left. It is up to the overtaker (be it another ped, a runner, a cyclist or whatever) to pass the overtakee safely on whatever side.

Can you imagine the outcry in the Daily Fail: "Frail British Granny fined for walking on the Right!"

bucklb

Would be a start if we could rely on cyclists riding on the left. I'm bemused by how many seem to default to riding on the right on the cyclepaths (esp along the Coast Road)

byke68

I allways slow down when there's a dog approaching, as before, they are very unpredictable. Most dog owners will grab their dog if they see a cyclist approaching and keep hold of it until you've passed by. I normally utter a quiete "thanks" or a nod of the head.
On the other hand there are the moron dog owners who don't give a toss!

Headhuunter

This is why I avoid cycle paths, if you want to use them safely you generally have to crawl along them as they're usually full of pedestrians, kids, dogs, glass and other litter, random dumped detritus or street signs and the like where they run alongside a road and there are roadworks or whatever.... Use the road, it's easier and faster....

rhext

Go slow for your sake! Don't know about the dog. In my opinion, the appearance of most dogs would be vastly improved by the addition of tyre tracks.

mudcovered

byke68 wrote:

I allways slow down when there's a dog approaching, as before, they are very unpredictable. Most dog owners will grab their dog if they see a cyclist approaching and keep hold of it until you've passed by. I normally utter a quiete "thanks" or a nod of the head.

This sums up 95% of my dog encounters on my commutes to and from work on the canal towpath. Slowing is the key for any other path users (both with and without dog).

byke68 wrote:

On the other hand there are the moron dog owners who don't give a toss!

This covers the rest. I've been ranted at once by a complete tool who thought that me skidding had spooked his dog. The reason I skidded was to take avoiding action as his already spooked dog jumped off his boat into my path :evil: . I couldn't even see the dog to slow in that instance until it was already moving. Still managed to avoid it though. I've also been chased a few times by loose dogs. A firmly shouted STOP usually does the trick for that one (often to the great surprise of the owner).

One other trick I've found is to always be on the opposite side of the path to an oncoming dog even if that puts you on the same side as the owner (more so if said owner is on a bike themselves).
Mike

Kieran_Burns

GREAT trick to play on dogs when they jump up at you.

Bellow SIT!! and watch them suddenly lurch into the sitting position in mid-air. It's hilarious.

I'm more of a cat person myself.

Corporate Camper

rhext wrote:

Go slow for your sake! Don't know about the dog. In my opinion, the appearance of most dogs would be vastly improved by the addition of tyre tracks.

Not mine though!
Sambreeze Kristiina (Miia) by lappies2007, on Flickr

gtvlusso

Wilma ran into a cyclist yesterday.....

My Wifes fault; she threw the dogs ball directly across the path of the cyclist in a big park in Bristol. Cyclist was going at a rate of knots downhill.....Wilma hit the back wheel at full belt.

Luckily all okay. Wilma has a bloodied front leg.....but is not limping.

PedalPedant

spen666 wrote:

Initialised wrote:

On a 'Shared use path' dogs should be kept on a short leash. http://www.highwaycode.info/rule/56

Like red lights for cyclists and speed limits for cars they are treated more like guidelines than rules.

Last time I hit one we'd both dodged the same way, I got bruised, possibly broken ribs. It's one of the reasons I don't normally go that way any more and tend to stick to the road.

Legally (assuming you exchanged details etc...) you'd be in the right but you'd probably need an accident lawyer.

Worst thing pedestrians can do on a shared path is change course suddenly because they hear a bike. You're all ready to go left ( ride on the left walk on the right) and they dodge to the left, the dog/kid is perfectly safe until they call it and it steps into your path :rolleyes:

Where do you get this from?

I was always taught to overtake on the right. You seem to be suggesting undertaking pedestrians if I understand what you have written

I'd guess Initialised is refering to this:

https://www.gov.uk/rules-pedestrians-1-to-35/general-guidance-1-to-6

"If there is no pavement, keep to the right-hand side of the road so that you can see oncoming traffic."

That specifically refers to roads but I don't see why the same can't be applied to shared use paths.

PP

hairyleg

After riding all winter in the dark and only seeing the same faces/dogs each day,now its getting light in the evening
time to move back on to the road,its just a same that Cyclepath has more Dogs on it now than Bikes and the local football pitch now has cctv due to the mount of dog doo on it.By the way I own Dog and a lead.

Big_Paul

Definitely not a fan of dogs, seen many a middle aged woman with several dogs with not a lead in sight and one particular idiot with six dogs running about. People might think it's great their mutt is so friendly as it hurls itself as a cyclist, but if it gets run over, they'll be the first to complain. If I hit a dog with Marathon Winters on my wheels, it would be like attacking it with a cheese grater.

mroli

Definitely not a fan of cyclists, seen many a cyclist on bikes not wearing helmets or hi viz and one particular idiot jumping red lights. People might think its great to weave in and out of traffic as a cyclist, but if they get run over they'll be the first to complain. If I hit a cyclist with a 4x4, it would be like attacking it with a large lump of metal. :roll:

Not all dogs/owners are bad people...

bunter

in this country cycle paths in general are inadequate/dangerous. "Shared Use" in particular is a misnomer as, in order to ride safely, a cyclist has to take even lower than normal priority as a road user - any speed faster than a brisk walk is hazardous. I have some sympathy with pedestrians who want to be able to enjoy being outdoors and away from the road without showing constant vigilance and always keeping to a predictable line. You can't reasonably expect this from children, dogs, drunk people, people on the phone, texting or just anyone who loses concentration for a moment. I think we should make a point of using the road as we are entitled to do. Using cycle paths simply encourages the perception among drivers that we are not road-going vehicles with equal rights and responsibilities. Don't do cycle paths, kids!

veronese68

mroli wrote:

Not all dogs/owners are bad people...

Very much so, very few dogs are bad people. I saw several dogs riding through the park today, none of them were a problem. A couple of them ran across the front of me causing me to brake, but I saw them coming and I wouldn't expect two dogs chasing each other to give a monkeys about what I was doing. Common sense tells me to be careful around animals and small children.
The only times that I've had a problem have been when the owner has got involved.

wgwarburton

bunter wrote:

in this country cycle paths in general are inadequate/dangerous. "Shared Use" in particular is a misnomer as, in order to ride safely, a cyclist has to take even lower than normal priority as a road user - any speed faster than a brisk walk is hazardous. I have some sympathy with pedestrians who want to be able to enjoy being outdoors and away from the road without showing constant vigilance and always keeping to a predictable line. You can't reasonably expect this from children, dogs, drunk people, people on the phone, texting or just anyone who loses concentration for a moment. I think we should make a point of using the road as we are entitled to do. Using cycle paths simply encourages the perception among drivers that we are not road-going vehicles with equal rights and responsibilities. Don't do cycle paths, kids!

Kids? Seems to me that kids is one of the groups that benefit from cyclepaths.

I think there's a bit of a misunderstanding about the point of cyclepaths. Think of them as being intended for pootling and you won't go far wrong.

At the moment we can use shared paths for pootling or roads for pace. This is a reasonable compromise though it sometimes doesn't work so well in practice (as we see above).

Cheers,
W.

Kieran_Burns

mroli wrote:

Definitely not a fan of cyclists, seen many a cyclist on bikes not wearing helmets or hi viz and one particular idiot jumping red lights. People might think its great to weave in and out of traffic as a cyclist, but if they get run over they'll be the first to complain. If I hit a cyclist with a 4x4, it would be like attacking it with a large lump of metal. :roll:

Not all dogs/owners are bad people...

bunter

WGWarburton wrote:

bunter wrote:

in this country cycle paths in general are inadequate/dangerous. "Shared Use" in particular is a misnomer as, in order to ride safely, a cyclist has to take even lower than normal priority as a road user - any speed faster than a brisk walk is hazardous. I have some sympathy with pedestrians who want to be able to enjoy being outdoors and away from the road without showing constant vigilance and always keeping to a predictable line. You can't reasonably expect this from children, dogs, drunk people, people on the phone, texting or just anyone who loses concentration for a moment. I think we should make a point of using the road as we are entitled to do. Using cycle paths simply encourages the perception among drivers that we are not road-going vehicles with equal rights and responsibilities. Don't do cycle paths, kids!

Kids? Seems to me that kids is one of the groups that benefit from cyclepaths.

I think there's a bit of a misunderstanding about the point of cyclepaths. Think of them as being intended for pootling and you won't go far wrong.

At the moment we can use shared paths for pootling or roads for pace. This is a reasonable compromise though it sometimes doesn't work so well in practice (as we see above).

Cheers,
W.

I agree with you -in fact I thought that was pretty much the point I just made
Pootling = brisk walking pace up to slow jogging speed. Part of the problem though is that one of the main groups that misunderstand the point of cyclepaths is drivers, many of whom seem to think we are obliged to use them and would be safer if we did (both of which are untrue, imo). I have been harrassed by a driver for wasting thousands of pounds of tax payers' money by not using a cycle path (which was a white line painted down the middle of the pavement).