Outrun an Alsation

calistro

Doing some Hill Training this morning and a bloody big Alsation dog came out of a gate of a house snarling and barking. He came right up, stopped and then the fecker bit me on the hip. Anyone know of any good training tips to outrun this breed:D:D

gerard65

calistro wrote: »

Doing some Hill Training this morning and a bloody big Alsation dog came out of a gate of a house snarling and barking. He came right up, stopped and then the fecker bit me on the hip. Anyone know of any good training tips to outrun this breed:D:D

You won't outrun a German Sheperd or any other dog. If a dog starts chasing you, stop and face it. Stay calm and don't stare it in the eye. Have you reported it, you know the house it came out and if you can show the bite mark - well - its curtains for the dog.
There is a divice on the market you can get which omits a high pitch noise (out of human hearing range) which is suppost to frighten dogs away.
Did you get medicial treatment on the bite, you may need a couple of shots.

henryporter

Under the Control of Dogs Act the German Shepherd is one of the breeds meant to be kept under control by its owner at all times. I would make a complaint to the Gardai or the local dog warden to make sure the owner keeps the animal away from the public - remember it's not the dogs fault; they only do what dogs do; its the dumb owners that need to be taught the lesson.

Also when dogs see people running they like to join in for a bit of crack and they do nip because that's how they play. Try doing what the last poster says - stop and tell the dog to go home, but don't be any more adventurous than that - dogs, like humans are very unpredictable.

cphowlin

I've had a few problems with dogs before. If i have a water bottle with me i usually throw a bit of water in their face if they come at me and its enough to put them off...

Condo131

As henryporter says, under the control of dogs act, all dogs must be under effective control in a public place. The High Court has ruled that effective control means being on a lead.

However, wrt German Shepherds, aka Alsatians, come under the Restricted Breeds Amendment to the act. They must be kept on a chain lead, no more than 2m long AND the dog must be muzzled. In the op's case, none of this happened. Imho, the OP should report this to the Gardai AND his/her local dog warden. This could have happened to a child or someone less capable - don't assume it's a one off.

FYI, Mugshots of restricted breeds are HERE.

btw, Op, is your Tetanus jab up to date? I reckon it's in your interests to check out your medical status and bill the dog owner for costs at least.

RacoonQueen

I've no fear of dogs being a dog owner myself I've often been joined by dogs on my runs and hopped on and nipped, as has been said thats how they play. However, I did once come across two not very friendly looking labradors I immediately stopped running and walked past them. They were both outside their house and alone. One of them actually bit the back of my leg, there was no way in hell I was running up their long driveway to complain so I let it be. I've actually seen them numerous times since and have kept running past so either they're happy with the warning they gave me or I caught them on a bad day.

Dogs will react three ways if you come across them, they'll ignore you, they'll join in and play or they'll see you as a threat and they'll try to protect their territory.

Complain to the owner and/or the Gardai if you're bothered by it. My small mongrels have got loose a couple of times(when I say got loose I actually mean an idiot male who lives in my house let them out 'cos he's male and is therefore an idiot) and chased local kids, we're lucky that no one has ever complained to be honest.

BeepBeep67

calistro wrote: »

Anyone know of any good training tips to outrun this breed:D:D

Run with someone slower and meatier than you

iceage

Pepper spray.

gerard65

iceage wrote: »

Pepper spray.

Illegal

Magnet

THIS....:D

http://www.mainirishairsoft.com/scripts/prodView.asp?idproduct=584

DustyBin

watch crocodile dundee and learn from Mick


Disclaimer: may not actually work

calistro

Bit worried now about Tetanus. Still fairly sore where he bit me. A kid came out and took in the dog and shut the gate. I called out the owner and he was very apologetic, brought me in to the house to clean up the wound a bit. TBH I run by this house quite a lot and the gates are always closed, he said that his wife had just gone to drop the kids to school and forgot to shut the gate. Not sure if I should report it or not, I told him at the time it was OK and he was as shocked as I was, but in hindsight what if it was a kid passing by the gate. I don't really want the dog put to sleep as I have 2 of my own and one has chased a cyclist but didn't bite him (probably needs more training):). But seriously if I do/don't report and someone else gets bit then what. Any suggestions??

gerard65

calistro wrote: »

Bit worried now about Tetanus. Still fairly sore where he bit me. A kid came out and took in the dog and shut the gate. I called out the owner and he was very apologetic, brought me in to the house to clean up the wound a bit. TBH I run by this house quite a lot and the gates are always closed, he said that his wife had just gone to drop the kids to school and forgot to shut the gate. Not sure if I should report it or not, I told him at the time it was OK and he was as shocked as I was, but in hindsight what if it was a kid passing by the gate. I don't really want the dog put to sleep as I have 2 of my own and one has chased a cyclist but didn't bite him (probably needs more training):). But seriously if I do/don't report and someone else gets bit then what. Any suggestions??

I'm not a doctor but I always thought it was important to get any animal bite seen properly. A responsible owner would have a dog who bites once put down. I don't want to seem like a 'hang em all' but if a dog bites once it'll bite again, also its the law, one bite and your out.

gerard65

RacoonQueen wrote: »

Complain to the owner and/or the Gardai if you're bothered by it. My small mongrels have got loose a couple of times(when I say got loose I actually mean an idiot male who lives in my house let them out 'cos he's male and is therefore an idiot) and chased local kids, we're lucky that no one has ever complained to be honest.

It was the man's wife who let the dog out.:D Now apologise woman!!

iceage

gerard65 wrote: »

Illegal

http://www.pepper-spray-store.com/vicious.shtml

I'll take my chances.

Funny, I run regularly past a halting site near Clonmel, and this morning I was bothered by two dogs, a greyhound type and a snappy little terrier mutt. As I approuched I tryed something I'd seen on TV. I raised my hand to them palm out in the "stop" motion and with a firm NO. The greyhound type backed off and the mutt followed suit

John_Rambo

iceage wrote: »

http://www.pepper-spray-store.com/vicious.shtml

I'll take my chances.

And get mauled! Seriously, the pepper spray marketing is just marketing for a product. Harming, kicking, pepper spraying, lashing out at or hitting a dog is a sure fire way of getting bitten or worse. The OP's story is awful, completely unacceptable. As others said, get a tetanus jab, call the Gardai if it's really bothering you.

I would be careful about jumping down peoples necks with dogs too, number one, you could be dealing with nutcases, number two, the dog owners could be in the right. I was running in St. Annes Park in Dublin and saw two jogger lose the head with couple walking a dog off lead. They were using bad language and really going for them. The guy ran up to them to inform them that the bye laws allow off lead walking during certain hours. The joggers answer was to push him away and tell them the dog should be on the fooking lead, unbelievably aggresive!! The girl got a right shove from one of the joggers too. I got stopped by the Gardai later on asking if I had seen the two joggers, I don't know if they were caught.

The dog walkers were perfectly within their rights to walk the dog off the lead, I checked out the bye laws, and the dog wasn't bothering anyone.

If you feel a dog is threatening, stop running, keep your hands by your side, bend your head down, don't stare at the dog and walk calmly by. The dogs shouldn't be out on the roads, but in some areas it's the accepted thing.

John_Rambo

iceage wrote: »

Funny, I run regularly past a halting site near Clonmel, and this morning I was bothered by two dogs, a greyhound type and a snappy little terrier mutt. As I approuched I tryed something I'd seen on TV. I raised my hand to them palm out in the "stop" motion and with a firm NO. The greyhound type backed off and the mutt followed suit

Just saw this edited..

Good one. Sometimes a confident stern shout will do it. Travelers dogs will scamper if you bend down and pretend to pick up a stone...

gerard65

John_Rambo wrote: »

The dog walkers were perfectly within their rights to walk the dog off the lead, I checked out the bye laws, and the dog wasn't bothering anyone.

Actually their not. Those by-laws are rubbish. The law of the land over-rules any park by-laws and dictates that a dog should be under control by its owners at all times and that has been determined by a court ruling that the dog must be on a lead.
However, I agree with you that some people go over the top about dogs. The vast majority of dogs are fine, its their owners that are tossers.

John_Rambo

gerard65 wrote: »

Actually their not.

They are, checked it out with Raheny Garda station and the local council. The council have erected signs in the park stating when it is legal to have your (not listed) dog off the lead in St. Annes Park just so there is no confusion. The times vary from season to season.

1. A person in charge of a dog in an area specified in the First Schedule to these
Bye-Laws [ except (a) American Pitbull Terrier, (b) Bull Mastiff ,
(c) Doberman Pinscher, (d) English Bull Terrier, (e) German Shepherd
(Alsatian), (f) Japenese Akita, (g) Japenese Tosa, (h) Rhodesian Ridgeback,
(i) Rottweiler, (J) Staffordshire Bull Terrier, and to every dog of the type
commonly known as a Ban Dog (or Bandog) and to every other strain or cross
of every breed of every type of dog described above] shall keep the dog on a
sufficiently strong chain or leash, not exceeding two metres in length if a fixed
leash, or ten metres if retractable, while in that area, except during the
following times when the dog may be unleashed in such areas (but excluding
the North Bull Island and any other such area for which a Special Amenity
Area Order is made) provided that such dog must still be under the effectual
control of the person-in-charge of the dog in accordance with the Control of Dogs Acts, 1986 and 1992:

January & December: 8.00 a.m. - 11.00 a.m.
4.00 p.m. - 5.00 p.m.

February & November: 8.00 a.m. - 11.00 a.m.
4.30 p.m. - 5.30 p.m.

March & October: 8.00 a.m. - 11.00 a.m.
5.30 p.m. - 6.30 p.m. (Wintertime)
6.30 p.m. - 7.30 p.m. (Summertime)


April & September: 8.00 a.m. - 11.00 a.m.
7.30 p.m. - 8.30 p.m.

May & June: 8.00 a.m. - 11.00 a.m.
July & August: 8.30 p.m. - 9.30 p.m.

John_Rambo

Just to confirm... dogs should not bite people, what happened to the OP is really bad, I am not condoning having a German Shepard (with obvious guarding instincts off the lead on a footpath or road)

nerraw1111

Perfectly legal to have a dog off it's leash. District court decisions have no effect on the law. Dogs off leads are great fun

Op. I'd leave it at that. Owner was very apologetic, took you in and gave a reasonable explanation. Mistakes happen.

gerard65

nerraw1111 wrote: »

Perfectly legal to have a dog off it's leash. District court decisions have no effect on the law. Dogs off leads are great fun

All this was discussed on a thread sometime ago. The row continued until a poster linked to a site which quoted a court case in which a Judge determined that the only way a dog can be under 100% control when in public is to be tethered. I can't find the article atm but I think it was a newspaper report on a case.
But one way or another an dog owner should be capable of controling their animal, leashed or not.

nerraw1111

gerard65 wrote: »

All this was discussed on a thread sometime ago. The row continued until a poster linked to a site which quoted a court case in which a Judge determined that the only way a dog can be under 100% control when in public is to be tethered. I can't find the article atm but I think it was a newspaper report on a case.
But one way or another an dog owner should be capable of controling their animal, leashed or not.

100% agree gerard.

Dogs can be legally off the leash but alas not everyone are responsible dog owners.

John_Rambo

gerard65 wrote: »

But one way or another an dog owner should be capable of controling their animal, leashed or not.

Yep... and if you can't control it (some dogs are just too enthusiastic, blind, thick, instinctive etc...) stick it on the lead.

nomadic

I was running in the phoenix park last week and something came running up beside me and scared the crap out of me. I thought it was a bear or something but turned out to be an Irish wolfhound. Pointless story but seeing as were talking about dogs...

robinph

If a dog bites you then it is no longer under the control of the owner and any law or by-laws about being allowed to have dogs off leads is completely irrelavent. If any dog is off the lead then IMO it should have a muzzle on, where ever it is that your letting it off the lead.

I hate dogs, but will make allowances for them running up and trying to attack me if they have the muzzle on as at least then I can tell that the owner has some consideration for the creature doing unexpected things on encountering other people.

John_Rambo

robinph wrote: »

If a dog bites you then it is no longer under the control of the owner and any law or by-laws about being allowed to have dogs off leads is completely irrelavent.

Of course the by-law is relavent. If the dog bites someone, it is evidently out of control (read the by law above, it states the dog must be in control) and therefore breaking the by-law. You can't have your dog running around off lead biting people and claim it's under control.[/QUOTE]

robinph wrote: »

I hate dogs

That's your issue, I had a mate that was the same, not pure hatred, but more of a fear. He got over it though with socialisation with dogs. However, if I were you and had a hatred of dogs I would check the local by-laws carefully.

robinph

John_Rambo wrote: »

Of course the by-law is relavent. If the dog bites someone, it is evidently out of control (read the by law above, it states the dog must be in control) and therefore breaking the by-law. You can't have your dog running around off lead biting people and claim it's under control.

I think we are actually agreeing there? I was just saying that if the dog is biting people, it is therefore out of control and the fact that a local park by-law says that your allowed dogs off their leads means nothing as you've broken the law regarding not having the dog under control.

John_Rambo

Breaking the by-law = Breaking the law.

Best of luck to the OP and get a tetanus shot!

seamus

gerard65 wrote: »

also its the law, one bite and your out.

That's not entirely true.

If a dog causes injury to a person, the person must be taken to court where the judge can make an order to declare the dog a "dangerous dog". The judge can then separately decide if this dangerous dog poses a risk to public safety such that it must be destroyed.

No dog is nor can be automatically put down if it bites someone.

However, by and large if the attack is unprovoked and serious harm has been caused, judges are usually unsentimental about destroying the animal.

In the case of the OP, going by the fact that the dog only bit once (out of excitement or fear probably) and the owners were accepting of their fault, I would get a tetanus shot and bill the owners for it then leave it at that. A single bite when the dog has been accidentally let out doesn't indicate that the animal poses any threat to the public.

Condo131

John_Rambo wrote: »

... checked it out with Raheny Garda station and the local council. The council have erected signs in the park stating when it is legal to have your (not listed) dog off the lead in St. Annes Park just so there is no confusion. The times vary from season to season.

We've had this discussion wrt St. Annes before. True, the Bye-laws exist and afford a dog owner a degree of protection, but cannot be relied upon as a defence.

However these Bye-Laws are not compliant with the control of dogs act and, as such, cannot be relied upon. The law, as opposed to this bye-law, is quite clear: Any dog must be under effective control, at all times, in a public place. Furthermore the High Court has ruled that effective control means being on a lead no more than 2 metres long. Imho, the only way the St Annes bye-law could be compliant with the law, is to exclude all other members of the public from the park during the specified times - but then again you'd have to exclude other dog owners too.

Condo131

FYI,

Control of Dogs act (1986)

21. —(1) The owner of a dog shall be liable in damages for damage caused in an attack on any person by the dog and for injury done by it to any livestock; and it shall not be necessary for the person seeking such damages to show a previous mischievous propensity in the dog, or the owner’s knowledge of such previous propensity, or to show that such injury or damage was attributable to neglect on the part of the owner.

Note: Bold and underlining are my emphasis

John_Rambo

Condo131 wrote: »

Imho, the only way the St Annes bye-law could be compliant with the law, is to exclude all other members of the public from the park during the specified times - but then again you'd have to exclude other dog owners too.

That's a bit silly. But, it is your opinion and everyone is entitled to one. 99% of people in the park have no problem with the by-law and I don't see any history of excessive dog attacks in the area. Excluding joggers, runners and other users use of the park is ridiculous. I wouldn't stand for that at all. The best thing is to abide by the by-law, keep your dog under control, if you can't put it on a lead.

Your quoting of the dog act regarding someone damaged or someones livestock being damaged not having to prove prior bold tendencies... of course they don't. If your dog kills sheep you have to pay, if your dog bites someone, you have to pay. Simple as, why underline it and bold it?

robinph

John_Rambo wrote: »

That's a bit silly. But, it is your opinion and everyone is entitled to one. 99% of people in the park have no problem with the by-law and I don't see any history of excessive dog attacks in the area. Excluding joggers, runners and other users use of the park is ridiculous. I wouldn't stand for that at all. The best thing is to abide by the by-law, keep your dog under control, if you can't put it on a lead.

Your quoting of the dog act regarding someone damaged or someones livestock being damaged not having to prove prior bold tendencies... of course they don't. If your dog kills sheep you have to pay, if your dog bites someone, you have to pay. Simple as, why underline it and bold it?

As far as I can tell nobody is dissagreeing with you on any point there.

All that Condo131 is saying is that the Bye-Law itself is unenforecable as it does not comply with the rules in the Control of Dogs act or ruleings from the High Court.

walshb

I just hope this incident has been reported to the relevant authorities.

As far as I am aware it's not just on a lead, but under control whilst on that lead.

Can't blame the dog, it is the arsehole owners who need chastising.

John_Rambo

robinph wrote: »

All that Condo131 is saying is that the Bye-Law itself is unenforecable

I don't know how often Condo131 runs in the park, but, I run in the park and it works very well except, rarely, when people unfamiliar with the by-law decide to take on dog walkers with perfectly controlled dogs.

walshb wrote: »

I just hope this incident has been reported to the relevant authorities.

Sounds like the OP and the dog owner parted on friendly terms. Good to see in the PC claim culture some parts of the country have now. Nothing like an apology and a hand shake. I recently got put on the bonnet of a car out running on the footpath. The woman nearly had a heart attack, I was fine, she won't do it again. I didn't see much point in getting the Gardai involved.

Condo131

John_Rambo wrote: »

That's a bit silly. But, it is your opinion and everyone is entitled to one.

I agree, it is a bit silly. That was the point.

Yes everyone is entitled to an opinion, including both you and I. However there is a good deal of precedent in law in this area, so I repudiate your implied assertion.

What the Bye-law for St. Annes is saying in effect, is that the Control of Dogs Act does not apply between particular hours. It is in legal terms "a nonsense". A local authority authority *CANNOT* derogate from the law.

John_Rambo wrote: »

Your quoting of the dog act regarding someone damaged or someones livestock being damaged not having to prove prior bold tendencies... of course they don't. If your dog kills sheep you have to pay, if your dog bites someone, you have to pay. Simple as, why underline it and bold it?

I emphasised it to illustrate that the onus of proof is NOT on the person who was attacked.

John_Rambo wrote: »

99% of people in the park have no problem with the by-law

That may well be the case, however, the remaining 1% are fully entitled to have the Control of Dogs Act applied in St. Annes at all times.You state 99%, imho, the figure is likely to be considerably lower.

John_Rambo wrote: »

I don't see any history of excessive dog attacks in the area.

A single dog attack IS excessive. I am not aware of any register of dog attacks, consequently, neither you nor I can know with any degree of accuracy how many attacks occur. However THIS may help in giving some indication of relative freqency of dog attacks in ireland. Or THIS. THIS US paper is a bit dated, nevertheless its relevant.

John_Rambo wrote: »

Excluding joggers, runners and other users use of the park is ridiculous.

That is the ONLY way that St Annes can comply with the Control of Dogs Act, during times it permits dogs to be off lead. I agree, that would be ridiculous, therefore, see my first point.

John_Rambo wrote: »

I wouldn't stand for that at all. The best thing is to abide by the by-law, keep your dog under control, if you can't put it on a lead.

As I said previously, the High Court has ruled that a dog is NOT under effective control in a public place, unless it is on a lead of 2 metres maximum length. Furthermore, the courts have ruled, separately, that a public place is "a place into which the public is invited" - that includes private property such as office car parks, football grounds, shopping centres etc.

Edit:

John_Rambo wrote: »

I don't know how often Condo131 runs in the park, but, I run in the park and it works very well except, rarely, when people unfamiliar with the by-law decide to take on dog walkers with perfectly controlled dogs.
FYI, I don't run in St Annes and have never done so, though I do run regularly in another park in Dublin (where, incidentally, I rarely see any dog off lead). You say you run in the park, yet I see you've never posted on the ART forum before. Unlike having to have your dog on a lead in a public place, you are under no obligation to post here....but ....???

As regards your last phrase, even if I'm overstressing the point, a dog that is off lead in a public place, is neither under effective control nor compliant with the Control of Dogs Act, irrespective of legally defective Bye-laws

plodder

I'd agree with Dublin City Council for allowing dogs off the lead at certain times. I've always thought it's a kind of cruelty to dogs to be brought to parks but never allowed ever to run free. I'd take a slightly more liberal interpretation of "under control" as well (though maybe the courts have taken a different view). Surely, a well trained dog, which responds to its owners commands is effectively under control? The big problem with dogs is the ones that are loose on the streets, or even let out by mistake, without their owners being around.

To the OP, I'd say defo go to the doc for Tetanus shots, and send the bill to the dog owner. A little €60 reminder should concentrate his mind no end in the future.

My2Cents

Hi Condo131,
Do you have a link/reference for that High Court ruling? I find it very difficult to believe that the Council would have those bye-laws in place if they have been tested and overturned in the High Court. Surely that would expose them to serious potential liability in the event of an incident.

On a lighter note, any dog prone to chase in St Anne's is going to be far too busy with the squirrels to pay much attention to the runners...

Oryx

Sounds to me like this incident was an oversight on the owners part, and really should be dealt with as such. Yes, they had a dangerous breed loose, but it seemed accidental and they were very apologetic about it. I dont think they should be pursued by the gardai for a once off event, but should cough up for any medical treatment. I despair at our culture which seems not to allow for grey areas anymore. Everyone wants compo or penalities on folk for one off stuff like this.

I love dogs, have two myself. They cannot be blamed for chasing something that is running away, its in their nature. And they can get out on you, accidents happen. As long as someone is being responsible the other 99.9% of the time, youve got to allow that this could happen by mistake. If I passed a house and got a dog chasing me every day, well then I think Id have an issue with it.

I get dogs loose on my run routes, they can bark and chase or sometimes go to attack. Key thing if the dog is aggressive is to stop running, dogs will automatically chase things . What works for me is to face the dog, spread my arms so I look bigger, make moves towards them, like a threat, and shout at the mutt to 'git home'. Its pack rules, youve got to be a tougher dog than them. I keep moving but dont turn away from them till I can see theyre not going to go for me. Ive never had a dog bite me, so far (!) this has always made the dog back off.

John_Rambo

Condo131 wrote: »

You say you run in the park, yet I see you've never posted on the ART forum before. Unlike having to have your dog on a lead in a public place, you are under no obligation to post here....but ....???

Ok... I don't know if you are trolling or just having fun! You admit you don't know the park, you don't know the good vibe between dog owners, runner, joggers, cyclists and families that exists in the park. The by-laws state that you are under no obligation to keep your dog on a lead within certain hours once it's under control. People do this. People that have dogs that can't be let off the lead don't let their dogs off the lead. End of! You can argue till you are blue in the face that you can't have control of the dog without a lead. But... you are wrong. Plenty of hunters, farmers, Police forces, armies, search and rescue services and other people that have dog aid along with pet owners have perfect control of their dogs off lead.

In the locality there is a large island, a complex dune system, a beach and a long seafront where there are no offlead dogs allowed. If you really need to run during the hours of offlead dogs there are plenty of alternatives. Just send me a PM and I will direct you to these areas.

Best of luck, and run safe. Better, faster, stronger.

robinph

I think your still missing the point that is being made.

Even I am not suggesting that dogs should be kept on a lead at all times despite my hatred* of them. What is being said is that the local by-law for that particular park has no legal basis as it is overruled by the Control of Dogs act and apparently High Court rulings as well.

It is just a kind of local agreement that people can get away with letting dogs off their leads during certain times and a blind eye will be turned. Any incident occurs though and the local by-law saying you can have a dog off the lead will be ignored and the actual rules of the Control of Dogs act will be applied. And if the dog was off a lead then it is deemed not to be under control by that act, despite what any local by-law says about dogs being allowed off their leads during certain times.

I am not actually suggesting that they should be kept on leads at all times, or even that they should not be allowed to run free in a particular park. If there is even a slight chance that they will try and bite something though then they should definitely have a muzzle on before being taken out or off the lead.

* Hatred is too strong a word really, but I'l stick with it for now.

My2Cents

robinph wrote: »

I think your still missing the point that is being made.

What is being said is that the local by-law for that particular park has no legal basis as it is overruled by the Control of Dogs act and apparently High Court rulings as well.

But it isn't overruled by the Control of Dogs Act, which merely refers to 'effective control', rather people have claimed a high court ruling has defined effective control as being on a lead but I'd really need to see the ruling to believe that the ruling had the effect that 'effective control' meant this in all circumstances and not restricted to the specifics of the case at the time.
Dublin City Council (and Fingal for Portmarnock Beach and the Burrow Strand) are leaving themselves open for serious claims if Condo's interpretation of the case law is correct.

gerard65

Is the Dublin Council the only Council to allow dogs to run wild and harass other park users? Marley Pk has a dog run, an area fenced off where dogs can socialise with each other off the lead, but you must keep your dog on a lead in all other areas of the park. This is enforced by the park ranger. I can't understand why the Dublin Council can't do this as well. Whats it like in other parts of the country?

My2Cents

gerard65 wrote: »

Is the Dublin Council the only Council to allow dogs to run wild and harass other park users? Marley Pk has a dog run, an area fenced off where dogs can socialise with each other off the lead, but you must keep your dog on a lead in all other areas of the park. This is enforced by the park ranger. I can't understand why the Dublin Council can't do this as well. Whats it like in other parts of the country?

They don't "allow dogs to run wild and harrass other park users", in St Anne's you have specific times when walking dogs off lead is allowed but they have to be under effective control i.e. good recall, and not interfering with other users. Outside of that there is a fenced socialisation area but it's quite small. Fingal co council allow dogs off-lead outside of the Life-guard patrolled area in Summer and everywhere in Winter on Portmarnock beach (they also have restrictions on horses) and Burrow Strand in Sutton.
Coillte also allow dogs off-lead as long as they have good recall and don't interfere with other users in many of their woodlands.

plodder

The law isn't always cut and dried though *. For instance, there could have been judgements in specific cases, where dogs that weren't on leads, were held to be not "under control". It doesn't necessarily mean that would always be the case. But, you'd have to look at the judgment(s) to know that. Then, you'd have the possibility of the judgement being overturned by the supreme court. But, it's certainly true that if there is any conflict between a bye-law and the Control of Dogs Act, then the Act would take precedence.

The best kind of reference on this would be an opinion on all of the relevant laws and decisions, written by a lawyer, not by the likes of us unfortunately.

* Caveat. I'm not a lawyer

John_Rambo

gerard65 wrote: »

Is the Dublin Council the only Council to allow dogs to run wild and harass other park users?

This doesn't happen. As a jogger who runs in the park I can tell you that the only animals that run "wild" are the actual wildlife. Nobody gets harassed.

Your over dramatising what happens and getting emotional.

Do you even use the park?

Condo131

My2Cents wrote: »

Hi Condo131,
Do you have a link/reference for that High Court ruling?

I do..... somewhere (fat use that is to us here! :rolleyes:). It appeared in the legal supplement in the Irish Times about 2 years ago. I've been trying to find it to no avail. When I do, I'll post it, even if it means starting a new thread. It is certainly of interest to runners, apart from the wider public.

My2Cents wrote: »

I find it very difficult to believe that the Council would have those bye-laws in place if they have been tested and overturned in the High Court. Surely that would expose them to serious potential liability in the event of an incident.

I agree, but it happens all the time with various Council Bye-laws around the country.

John_Rambo wrote: »

Ok... I don't know if you are trolling or just having fun!

Nope. I'm deadly serious about this. I've been running 27 years; bitten once, been seriously threatened (by dogs) maybe 30 - 40 times, threatened by owners many times, tripped up numerous times and regularly take avodiing action. I regularly come across children being menaced by dogs.

I regularly come across Restricted Breeds that are neither on leads nor muzzled - anytime I approach the owner I get something along the lines of "you shouldn't be running here" or the other colloquial suggestion.

The VAST MAJORITY of dogs are NOT a problem to anyone, runner or otherwise, on or off lead.
I have issues with four broad categories of dog that are not on a lead:
1. Restricted breeds
2. Agressive dogs, whatever the breed (I find that the owner is usually aggressive and foulmouthed too) (Hint, if you have a 'discussion' with an owner, don't swear or raise your voice - they usually do both. Get in a shouting match and you'll get nowhere)
3. Playful dogs - liable to trip you.
4. Dogs that appear to have the brains of a goldfish and simply wander aimlessly, oblivious to their surroundings (the type that are often seen wandering aimlessly on roads/motorways - Now there's an idea: allow dogs off lead on motorways - solve all our dog problems! :D:D )

John_Rambo wrote: »

You admit you don't know the park, you don't know the good vibe between dog owners, runner, joggers, cyclists and families that exists in the park.

Now who's jesting. I reckon that if you were to stand at the park gate (without a dog) and survey those going in, you'd find a VERY different outcome from non-dog owners.

John_Rambo wrote: »

But... you are wrong. Plenty of hunters, farmers, Police forces, armies, search and rescue services and other people that have dog aid along with pet owners have perfect control of their dogs off lead.

You really do need to check out the Control of Dogs Act (1998).

Exemptions from certain requirements

7. Articles 5 and 6 shall not apply to a dog which is:—


(1) (a) kept by the Garda Siochana or by the Defence Forces,


(b) kept by the Dublin Port and Docks Board Harbour Police or by an Airport Police Fire Service at a State Airport,


(c) kept by the Central Fisheries Board or a Regional Fisheries Board,


(d) kept by the Customs and Excise service of the Revenue Commissioners,


and which is being used by a member, constable, officer or official of the said bodies in the execution of their respective duties, or,


(2) (a) used by a bona fide rescue team for the purpose of searching for a missing person or being trained for such searching, or,


(b) being trained by a bona fide training establishment for use by a person who is unable to find their way without guidance, or, having been so trained, is being used for the purpose of guidance by such a person.

John_Rambo wrote: »

If you really need to run during the hours of offlead dogs there are plenty of alternatives. Just send me a PM and I will direct you to these areas.

Thanks, but, when in Dublin, I generally run in Corcagh Park, where I find it is very rare to find a dog off lead.

John_Rambo wrote: »

Best of luck, and run safe. Better, faster, stronger.

You too....but look out for the dogs! :D

seamus

gerard65 wrote: »

Is the Dublin Council the only Council to allow dogs to run wild and harass other park users?

As someone who walks my dog on-lead in many Dublin parks, I can tell you that there no dogs "running wild" or harrassing other park users. Since I'm walking a dog, I would expect to be a magnet for other dogs and have more hassle with loose dogs than your average walker. Since I've never had a problem I'm confident that you're massively overstating any problem that you think exists.

Marley Pk has a dog run, an area fenced off where dogs can socialise with each other off the lead

Which, according to you, is illegal because a High Court judgement has said so.

Can anyone provide a link to this High court judgement? As said above a judgement which declared that a single dog off-lead was not under effectual control, does not mean that all dogs off-lead are not under effectual control.

gerard65

John_Rambo wrote: »

This doesn't happen. As a jogger who runs in the park I can tell you that the only animals that run "wild" are the actual wildlife. Nobody gets harassed.

Your over dramatising what happens and getting emotional.

Do you even use the park?

I use Bushy. And the dogs off their leashes can be a bloody nuisance and its not only during the times their allowed under the by-law.
I've had a few problems with dogs 'running wild' (I'm standing by my opinion) and I've seen kids and adults been distressed by 'over playfull' dogs (I am not over dramatising these incidents).
As for getting emotional? I'm stating the facts.
Let me point out that I'm not afraid or dislike dogs. I have no feelings one way or the other for them, so maybe its not me who's getting emotional in this debate.

John_Rambo

Condo131 wrote: »

I've been running 27 years; bitten once

Case closed. You have a lot worse things to be worried about.