Control of dogs whilst out walking

beveragelady

I'm really annoyed with myself that I got caught up in this sort of sniping on the internet.

We have established that I am not breaking any laws by walking them off-lead on Coillte property. (Or at least, we haven't established that I am breaking the law, which amounts to the same thing.)

Some people have their own reasons for feeling strongly about this sort of thing. I'm sorry that that has been their experience of dogs and dog owners, but it doesn't change the law.

It's annoying that somebody would go poking around through old posts to try to make me out to be a hypocrite, but it's not surprising. I have things to do, I'm going to go and do them before I say what I really think and end up defending myself from the confines of the prison forum.

SNAKEDOC

ThisRegard wrote: »

The opposite of the argument can be very easily made. Just because your nephew is afraid of dogs, dog owners are now reponsible for this as opposed to his parents?

All you have to do is ask an owner would you mind putting the dog on the lead until you pass and explain why. But it's easier to go home seething about it instead of resolving it there and then.

Asking for the dog to be put on the lead after my nephew nearly has a heart attack when he sees a dog right infront of him. Kinda useless after the fact isnt it. Can anyone here give me an answer as to why dog owners insist on having their dogs off the lead. The long flex leads are just as good and keep the dog under proper control.

dharma200

These threads all go the same way.... Unfortunately for me my opinion is formed from expereince of dog owners loosing their dogs forever, of having my own dog attacked twice by dogs who were off lead..... Having people repeatedly come to me because they have lost their dogs due to walking them without a lead, and it never having happened before lol...
I am my dogs protector and will ensure my dog is safe, I am not thinking about other humans really, but about the safety of my own dog. Either way you will always have people who beleive their dog is special, exceptionally intelligent, and will never run off, until said dog runs off. I hope for the dogs sake of those who walk their dog unleashed the worst doesn't happen...

ganmo

My opinion is developed from having to protect livestock from dogs that 'escaped' their owners.

beveragelady wrote: »

Not sure what this means, the sentence is unclear.

I stay within the law. I extend courtesy to others who do the same.

My point was that you are putting the rights of your dog above that of your fellow humans

DoctorEdgeWild

Still no links to a law that says a dog must be on a lead?

Pretty clear cut in that case.

It sucks that some people are afraid of dogs but that's their problem to deal with, not a dog owners. I personally don't like ketchup/tomato sauce but sometimes my housemate uses it on his dinner. It's not his problem, it's mine so he should not be forced to do without.

The law says 'effectual control', not 'on a lead/leash'.

beveragelady

beveragelady wrote: »

My friend (who is sometimes wrong) is adamant that sporting rights have nothing to do with bringing a dog, on or off the lead, onto land, and so are not relevant here.

Your friend is not wrong, but again you have confused matters!

The issue of sporting rights has nothing whatsoever to do with the general issue of dog control, or private property in general.

It was to do with hunts, being an issue you raised.

In a previous post you referred to the specific issue of hunts and I merely pointed out that it was not analogous as they are often held on foot of easements such as sporting rights reserved over property, or indeed with the permission of the landowner. In those cases the dogs can be left off the leads, the legislation specifically allows for this, and as I have said before the issue is one of consent of the landowner and that consent is present.

DoctorEdgeWild

DoctorEdgeWild wrote: »

Still no links to a law that says a dog must be on a lead?

Pretty clear cut in that case.

It sucks that some people are afraid of dogs but that's their problem to deal with, not a dog owners. I personally don't like ketchup/tomato sauce but sometimes my housemate uses it on his dinner. It's not his problem, it's mine so he should not be forced to do without.

The law says 'effectual control', not 'on a lead/leash'.

But this is not a site about care of dogs and their general well being.

It's a site about walking, hiking, outdoor pursuits and the like. It's about property, other people's property, and in this context bringing dogs onto other peoples property.

And as I keep saying, that's an issue that depends on the landowner. People have to forget about the Control of Dogs Acts, get away from it, drop it.

If you have the consent of a farmer to cross his land with a pack of wild dogs, dragging you along on a sled, you can do so. Forget the Control of Dogs Acts.

If you have the consent of the landowner to cross with dogs on a leash, you can again do so. Or follow whatever the rules are. I think beveragelady says in Coillte lands the dogs must be under control, so clearly this means that a leash may not be necessary...or else they would have said a lead was necessary. I have complained about other people, not like beveragelady, who go to places like the National Park in Killarney and let dogs off the leads despite the signs everywhere telling them not to do so.

If you have no consent, well then it doesn't matter if the dog is under control or on a lead or whatever, you have no consent. That is unwelcome, but as in cases like the Reeks it is caused by walkers who cannot control their dogs spoiling it for everyone, including those who can.

SNAKEDOC

DoctorEdgeWild wrote: »

Still no links to a law that says a dog must be on a lead?

Pretty clear cut in that case.

It sucks that some people are afraid of dogs but that's their problem to deal with, not a dog owners. I personally don't like ketchup/tomato sauce but sometimes my housemate uses it on his dinner. It's not his problem, it's mine so he should not be forced to do without.

The law says 'effectual control', not 'on a lead/leash'.

Ok the likeness of not liking tomato sauce to being afraid of dogs is a bit silly. Does someone throw sauce in your face no. If someone is afraid of a dog then they should not have to face a dog head on in a PUBLIC PARK because the dog owner thinks their perfect little dog deserves to roam free. There is nothing wrong with flex leads and the arguement that oh well you might trip over the lead is ridiculious.
No one has yet answered the question. Why is it so important to have a dog off the lead.

Panda_Turtle

SNAKEDOC wrote: »

No one has yet answered the question. Why is it so important to have a dog off the lead.

Much more fun for the dog and much less effort for the human. ..no laws broken..happy days.

Halloween Jack

I was on a stretch of the wicklow way last year, an idiot on a mountain bike whizzed by followed by her dog off leash.

The dog proceeded to make a beeline for a flock of sheep and began aggressively harrying them, the girl was way further down the hill before she realised what was going on. She eventually realised and had to make her way back up hill to try and get her dog under control.

I remember thinking at the time that repeated incidents like that could lead to problems for walkers etc re access.

CardinalJ

Halloween Jack wrote: »

I was on a stretch of the wicklow way last year, an idiot on a mountain bike whizzed by followed by her dog off leash.

The dog proceeded to make a beeline for a flock of sheep and began aggressively harrying them, the girl was way further down the hill before she realised what was going on. She eventually realised and had to make her way back up hill to try and get her dog under control.

I remember thinking at the time that repeated incidents like that could lead to problems for walkers etc re access.

I was knocked off my bike mountain biking by a dog following its owner. Unfortunately a 'trail dog' is now a thing.

Panda_Turtle

What's with all the dog haters on this forum. Im outta here.

tommba

Effectual control.

Dog owners have no effectual control of a dog that is not physically restrained. Some owners might have the romantic notion that their dog is totally under their control via verbal command, but that's all it is, a romantic notion.

When a dog is not physically restrained it may choose to obey it's owner, but it is the dog's choice, not the owner's, whether the dog responds to commands, and that is the reality.

When a dog owner calls it's dog back, the dog isn't coming back because the owner has control of it, it is coming back because it is choosing to do so. It is a distinction that too many animal owners fail to realise.

duckysauce

SNAKEDOC wrote: »

Ok the likeness of not liking tomato sauce to being afraid of dogs is a bit silly. Does someone throw sauce in your face no. If someone is afraid of a dog then they should not have to face a dog head on in a PUBLIC PARK because the dog owner thinks their perfect little dog deserves to roam free. There is nothing wrong with flex leads and the arguement that oh well you might trip over the lead is ridiculious.
No one has yet answered the question. Why is it so important to have a dog off the lead.

A dog needs alot of exercise a proper run how can it do that on a lead , and those flex lead's are a joke they do not control your dog at all , have you ever used one of those flex leads ?.

beveragelady

beveragelady wrote: »

We all share the few wild bits that are left in the country, and as long as we all stay within the law none of us has the right to dictate how we use them.

Not sure what this means.

There are many wild bits left in the country.

We don't "share" them at all. Usually they are owned by farmers. And they have every right to dictate how we use them. To the point of telling us to clear off their land. And sadly when people leave dogs off leads on farmers lands, it increases the likelihood of this happening.

Halloween Jack

duckysauce wrote: »

A dog needs alot of exercise a proper run how can it do that on a lead , and those flex lead's are a joke they do not control your dog at all , have you ever used one of those flex leads ?.

Just because your dog needs excercise does not entitle you to have it off its lead on privately held land.

I dont have a problem with dogs off leashes in the park or at the beach etc, i do have a major problem with them being off leads in places where access to the general public is likely to be a delicate issue.

My previous post and another post that followed highlighted two possible problems with dogs off leads in mountain areas, its dangerous for the dog, other people using the mountains, livestock etc and simply not on imo.

On the other hand i saw a guy going up djouce a few weeks back with 2 massive huskies clipped into a harness on his waist. No problem with that, and surely a 4 hour hill walk is sufficient excercise if you absoultey must excercise them in the hills?

DoctorEdgeWild

If people have a problem with the law, maybe it is worth pushing for a change in it?

I personally think the way it is now is fine, owners can choose to walk their dogs on a lead (that's what I do with mine) or can choose to keep their dogs under control with training. (not implying that dogs on a lead are not trained by the way, mine happen to be both).

I'm all for land owners making their own rules for their own private property by the way, but public areas should be controlled by legislation that is as fair as possible to everyone, be they dog owners, dog phobia sufferers, farmers, walkers, ramblers etc.

duckysauce

Halloween Jack wrote: »

Just because your dog needs excercise does not entitle you to have it off its lead on privately held land.

I dont have a problem with dogs off leashes in the park or at the beach etc, i do have a major problem with them being off leads in places where access to the general public is likely to be a delicate issue.

My previous post and another post that followed highlighted two possible problems with dogs off leads in mountain areas, its dangerous for the dog, other people using the mountains, livestock etc and simply not on imo.

On the other hand i saw a guy going up djouce a few weeks back with 2 massive huskies clipped into a harness on his waist. No problem with that, and surely a 4 hour hill walk is sufficient excercise if you absoultey must excercise them in the hills?

Never mentioned it been off in private land , was responding to poster talking about public parks, maybe read the threads first.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=89089471&postcount=69

Halloween Jack

duckysauce wrote: »

Never mentioned it been off in private land , was responding to poster talking about public parks, maybe read the threads first.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=89089471&postcount=69

The op of this thread specifically talks about dogs in the mountains, that is what this thread is about, hence it being in the outdoor pursuits forum, if it was about canine control in general it would be in legal discussion or pets or somewhere else.

I suggest you take heed of your own advice mate.

duckysauce

Halloween Jack wrote: »

The op of this thread specifically talks about dogs in the mountains, that is what this thread is about, hence it being in the outdoor pursuits forum, if it was about canine control in general it would be in legal discussion or pets or somewhere else.

I suggest you take heed of your own advice mate.

Hi I am not your mate , if you bothered to read http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=89089471&postcount=69

The poster asked a specific question about dogs in public parks which I answered.

SNAKEDOC

Its a very contentious issue. I am a dog lover and mostly i love seeing dogs out with their owners enjoying parks or mountain areas or whatever but i also am wary of owners who absolutly insist on having their dogs off a lead in areas swarming with other people. I was in glendalough at the weekend and saw not 1 but five dogs all being walked off a lead and no lead even in sight. This was between the upper car park and the junction at the top of the waterfall. I have never spoke up to an owner before but im going to start.
There is nothing wrong with an extended lead while walking a dog why do owners need to let their pets run around free in parks like this when there are other areas where they can where they wont annoy other park users.

duckysauce

SNAKEDOC wrote: »

Its a very contentious issue. I am a dog lover and mostly i love seeing dogs out with their owners enjoying parks or mountain areas or whatever but i also am wary of owners who absolutly insist on having their dogs off a lead in areas swarming with other people. I was in glendalough at the weekend and saw not 1 but five dogs all being walked off a lead and no lead even in sight. This was between the upper car park and the junction at the top of the waterfall. I have never spoke up to an owner before but im going to start.
There is nothing wrong with an extended lead while walking a dog why do owners need to let their pets run around free in parks like this when there are other areas where they can where they wont annoy other park users.

What other areas are there in that area, that won't annoy other park users ?. And what were the dogs doing that got up your nose ? And as I said any dog trainer will tell you those flex leads do not control your dog. Have you used a flex lead ?
Do you own a dog or ever had your own dog ? And what are you going to say to dog owners in a public park with no signs about leads for dogs ?

ThisRegard

SNAKEDOC wrote: »

Its a very contentious issue. I am a dog lover and mostly i love seeing dogs out with their owners enjoying parks or mountain areas or whatever but i also am wary of owners who absolutly insist on having their dogs off a lead in areas swarming with other people. I was in glendalough at the weekend and saw not 1 but five dogs all being walked off a lead and no lead even in sight. This was between the upper car park and the junction at the top of the waterfall. I have never spoke up to an owner before but im going to start.
There is nothing wrong with an extended lead while walking a dog why do owners need to let their pets run around free in parks like this when there are other areas where they can where they wont annoy other park users.

And tell us, what chaos did they cause by being off the lead ? I imagine none whatsoever, otherwise you'd be leading with that if they did.

Feel free to speak to these people, but expect to be ignored and for them to think you're a crazy old busy body. Will you be as quick to speak to the morons who arrive during the summer with their music, cans and footballs ?

Enduro

SNAKEDOC wrote: »

There is nothing wrong with an extended lead while walking a dog

Yes there is. They are a very dangerous trip hazard, particularly in a low light situation (misty, very overcast, or dusk for example). I run in the mountains all the time, and ecounter plenty of people walking dogs, both on and off leads. By far the most dangerous from my experience are the ones on the extended lead.

SNAKEDOC

I have owned dogs before yes and i have used a flex lead on plenty of ocasions with a strong breed of dog with no hastle. The only time i had trouble was on a beach when it took sand in to it on a wet day. Trip hazards how. If the owner reels in the lead when they encounter someone then its as good as a shortened lead.
These are just silly excuses. There is no real reason to have your dog off a lead. I used to go running with my fiances dog a boxer on a shortened lead and used the flex lead when noone was around i never had any issues. Infact i would have had issues without one.

And this regard i never said the dogs in wicklow caused caose. I simply mentioned it because its a national park with signs all over the car parks saying keep dogs on leads, so why do owners think the rules dont apply to them and if i said it to anyone with a dog i would be quick to point out the signs to which they are commiting an offence. Would they think im an old busy body then or should i just go ahead and call the duty ranger. The parks are there to be enjoyed by everyone and it does not subtract anything from your walk by keeping your dog on alead in areas where it should be on.

ganmo

There are a few issues with those leads,

Dog is never sure how far away is correct(is allowed 10ft away and then suddenly is pulled back) Dog can take a run and rip the lead out of your hand when you stop the reel

ThisRegard

If the rangers had an issue with it, they'd be doing it themselves without prompting.

You still have yet to say what your particular problem was with the dogs you saw off the leads ?

Enduro

SNAKEDOC wrote: »

I have owned dogs before yes and i have used a flex lead on plenty of ocasions with a strong breed of dog with no hastle. The only time i had trouble was on a beach when it took sand in to it on a wet day. Trip hazards how. If the owner reels in the lead when they encounter someone then its as good as a shortened lead.
These are just silly excuses. There is no real reason to have your dog off a lead. I used to go running with my fiances dog a boxer on a shortened lead and used the flex lead when noone was around i never had any issues. Infact i would have had issues without one.

The reality is that most people cannot wind the lead in fast enough to deal with someone closing in on them at greater than walking speed, particularly if they only see them late (because it might be on a turn/junction in a forest trail for example).

It is a trip hazard because if I don't see the lead accross my path then I will trip over it. Is that not obvious? the key word in your defense of them is "if". mostly people don't seem to be able to. (And yes, I have been tripped up in the past... nowadays I'll look for the clues to indicate that a lead could exist, and if necessary grab the lead myself to pull the obstacle out of my way if it is completely blocking the trail). Short leads are no problem. Loose dogs are nowhere near as dangerous a problem from my POV.

SNAKEDOC

The lead is there though and the dog is controled whether the fog owner fails to reel it in or not. My point is that the other party is safe in the knowledge that the dog is controlled on a lead. I have had dogs come up to me and jump on me all be it in a playful manner but i dont want someones dog jumping on me when im out for a walk frankly and dog owners should know better.

My issue with the dogs in glendalough is that its a national park where there are several signs insisting all dogs be on leads yet i meet five dogs being walked off leads.
As regards the rangers im sure they are a little busy to be on dog warden duties and i would presume dog owners are intelligent enough to rad a sign and obey it particularly in such a popular public area where thousands of visitors come every year. There are literally hundreds of other places more descreet to walk your dog off the lead if need be why do it in an aa where it is. NOT ALLOWED.

Stark

Don't really want to get into the pros and cons of walking a dog off lead but just want to say that I agree with the other posters that those extending leads are ****ing lethal. Having someone's dog come up to me (which isn't really a problem unless you suffer from irrational phobias) is far preferable than tripping over a hard to see lead and potentially coming home with a broken nose (which happened to my mother a few years back when she went out for a run at dusk and some eejit was out walking a dog with one of those).