To think if you don’t like dogs, don’t walk this route?

[YippeeKayakOtherBuckets]

I’ve just been told off, aggressively, for having my dogs off lead.

We walk to school down a woodland path that is used by literally dozens of dog walkers, I counted fifteen other dog owners just on this walk, the vast majority off lead. There is nowhere on the length of the path that can’t be easily reached by a faster route, the path runs a winding way alongside a quiet road with a wide path.

Anyway, dogs, joggers and the odd cyclist all usually use the route along with pedestrians and it’s generally accepted that you’ll meet several dogs on the way. This woman, who I’ve not seen before, got right in my face and said ‘put your dogs on a lead, I don’t like dogs’.

I’m terrible at confrontation so just apologised and moved on.

But it’s really rattled me. Am I being unreasonable? One of mine is a bouncy 4month old lab, he’s well trained and doesn’t approach people or dogs unless I let him, but he is, as I say, bouncy and large so that might be why she picked on me and not the other dozen people she must have passed.

If I see her again (and have the nerve) wibu to suggest that she walks the other way round?

Not really, more that I was wondering why specifically dogs and not all animals in a public space, as otherwise it seems as though you just have a personal problem with dogs rather than genuine concerns for the environment or for others.....
I'm also pretty shocked so many people/kids have been jumped on by dogs, I live in a very friendly dog area, but also very popular for family's with kids and neither me or my DCs have been jumped on by on or off leashed dogs unless we stop to say hello to them in which case the owner normally warns. Obviously not the case everywhere though

Hey ruffina how is it a defence? What a weird thing to say! It’s just a reflection on peoples’ odd priorities.

*Ruffina

A £1000 (at least) licence fee is what we should have, not what we do have*

Ah! YOU think there should be a £1,000 annual dog license fee.

Now it makes sense...Well about as much sense as the rest of the shit you spout.

If referring to problems caused by cats isn’t used to minimise those caused by dogs, why mention them? Of course that’s defensive FFS.

As for LasMeninas ‘baby out with the bath water’, there is no ‘baby’, no thing worth keeping. The point was that all dogs should be on leads. If some - maybe most - dogs are too energetic to be exercised on lead in a public space...THEN DON’T GET THOSE DOGS. It’s really pretty simple.

As for LasMeninas ‘baby out with the bath water’, there is no ‘baby’, no thing worth keeping

Well, that is your opinion, and one you've been arguing for days now with very little support. You're certainly in the minority, so you might as well just get used to it.

It's not fair to keep a dog on a lead on every walk, they need free runs. As the OP has pointed out, there are multiple, shorter routes this woman could have taken and it doesn't take a genius to think "wooded area, may contain dogs"

Since when is asking a question defensive? I asked why specifically dogs and not all animals on public land as a genuine question, as it seems your posts are rather anti-dog than 'safety for all' so your proposed law seems more like a bias rant as opposed to a sensible, caring solution?
Most breeds of dogs need lots of exercise so if no one 'got those dogs' they would live in shelters for the rest of their lives or be put to sleep needlessly?
Surely dog only parks are more humane solution for all involved...

She should be able to take every route and expect dogs on short leash on every one.

My dog has is a cocker spaniel so hardly aggressive looking, and has perfect recall. She never bothers other people, not even picnicking people with food.
From time to time I am asked to put her on a lead but I just say no. I'm within my rights to have her off lead and she needs to be exercised off lead. I walk away if people get angry which they do sometimes.
I agree that dogs take lower priority that people in the big scheme of things but there is a sense of entitlement in some people which does grate when they want to insist that dogs should be on leads...no rationality with these people at all. If the dog is under control then people have no right to insist on leads.

All I know is, if a dog came up to my sons face and was going to cause an allergic reaction, I would physically intervene and if that meant harming a strangers dog I wouldn't hesitate.

Why is there entitlement in people asking you to leash your dog? All people want to do is walk without interference from dogs. They don’t know you or your dog.

For all they know you’re an irresponsible dog owner. Which after all seems to be very common.

Sometimes wish I could walk down the street without interference from people 😂 esp since I've met more dogs with good manners than I have humans

All I know is, if a dog came up to my sons face and was going to cause an allergic reaction, I would physically intervene and if that meant harming a strangers dog I wouldn't hesitate

Again, I don't think many people would argue with you there.

All I know is, if a dog came up to my sons face and was going to cause an allergic reaction, I would physically intervene and if that meant harming a strangers dog I wouldn't hesitate.
I think I'd rather pick my child up away from the dog than hurt it and potentially risk it retaliating and hurting my child in a far more severe way

wish I could walk down the street without interference from people 😂 esp since I've met more dogs with good manners than I have humans

Sure, lots of hermits, dog lovers and other cranks have said the same.

Hahaha yeh ok @Ruffina Id rather be any of those things than rude though.
Just can't help but feel that more animals are hurt by humans than the other way around and there doesn't seem to be any sensible rationalising when it comes to making sure they are all protected

Cats can be dangerous too. Particularly to small babies who's mouth smells like milk. And far less trainable. Surely if such laws where actually considered it would apply to all animals in public spaces not just one?
From previous threads, I think there are about 2 or 3 recorded instances worldwide of a cat inadvertently suffocating a baby (due to warmth and nothing to do with milk). It is incredibly rare.

And I doubt many babies are left unattended to sleep in public spaces.

My cousins baby was leapt on in her pram whilst drinking a bottle of milk. Thankfully she was ok but had some pretty nasty scratches.
I was also attacked by a cat for walking close to a bush it was hiding in, ripped the skin on my legs and wasn't pleasant. Obviously no way of letting the owners know in either instance either.
Anyway I don't hate cats or any animals for that matter, I just don't see how a law that meant dog owners who had their dogs off leads or who did not pick up their dogs dirt would have their animals removed from them and be banned from keeping animals, wouldn't apply to any kind of pet in the public as some people would feel the same about an approaching/littering/disease spreading cat

Because on any sensible assessment the amount of nuisance and harm created by dogs is far in excess of any other animal.

Dog bites are far, far more common that cat bites. There are a minute number (well within single digits) of recorded suspected cases of cats suffocating babies. Cat bites sometimes require antibiotics and it is possible that, if left untreated, death could occur through infection, however, there are no recorded cases of death directly as a result of a cat bite or scratch. I cannot trace any instance of a cat bite or scratch causing life-changing injuries.

Comparing that to the prevalence and seriousness of dog bites is idiotic.

It’s all a bit silly. Big dogs don’t belong in small city parks. They need space to run free without fear of being pounced on by badly behaved children.

Putting all dogs on leads at all times isn’t kind to the dogs or enforceable.
There should be dog licences - £1, 000 feels a little excessive but all owners should be required to have insurance for vets bills and damage caused. Unless a registered breeder, the number of dogs each owner has should be limited.
Any dog biting anyone in a public space should be destroyed - not allowed to wander around in yellow coat.
Children should be taught to stay away from dogs they don’t know.
Then we could all be happy with or without our dogs.

Our dog runs very well off lead. He needs to run many miles a day. A trot around a suburban park would not be sufficient. He’s not created to live a town life. He rarely goes on a lead and it’s never a problem(for us or anyone else). We don’t usually go anywhere that there will be children as they can’t be trusted not to frighten him.
Obviously in pubs, restaurants, shops etc he’s on a lead but otherwise he’s free to chase squirrels, rabbits and deer.

I wasn't comparing dog and cat bites? Not sure why you thought that? Idiotic perhaps. I don't think I even mentioned bites anywhere actually. The majority of dog bites are provoked in some way, rarely does a dog bite out the blue for no reason---- FWIW.
My original point was that if dog owners should have their animals removed for life for failing to pick up their dirt, then why should cat owners not also face those same penalties, as outdoor cats defecate wherever they like (including private property) leaving others to clean it up.

I have some sympathy with that. But I think we should start by protecting people from the major animal menace, which is dogs.

By your logic one can insist that you keep your DH indoors because for all we know, he might be a rapist or he might attack someone when they're walking. And we have a RIGHT to walk where we want without fear.

You have an extreme and irrational perspective.
In fact I think you're a troll so I'm not going to feed you any more.

A significant amount of dog bites are unprovoked. As mentioned upthread, it's happened to me twice in the last year or so.

I haven't called for people to have their pets removed if they don't clean up after them. I'd advocate licensing princnipally to try and compensate those who suffer life changing injuries as a result of dog bites. Secondly I think licensing would help protect dogs from neglectful owners.