Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Lugnaquilla zig zag route closed due to assault by dog owner

Options
124

Comments

  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 48,331 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    the grant might encourage other farmers to allow access? yes, some farmers have allowed it, but how prevalent is the practice?



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,066 ✭✭✭HerrKuehn


    Very prevalent. You wouldn't have access to the majority of the Wicklow mountains if access wasn't granted, e.g. Lugnaquilla, Luggala, Djouce. Some of it is owned by Coillte which obviously allows access, the national park part is really just around Glendalough.



  • Registered Users Posts: 480 ✭✭getoutadodge


    An overview of commanages here. There should be conversion to national parks to allow rewilding ...in selected beauty spots only.. ..compensated via buyouts to the shareholders... now that the grazing of sheep is clearly uneconomical.

    https://www.irishexaminer.com/farming/arid-20290477.html



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,154 ✭✭✭Viscount Aggro


    I read that the farmer stood in front of the guy to block him. Not sure thats a wise move. You will always meet someone tougher



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,211 ✭✭✭The Continental Op


    So maybe the farmer should charge individuals for access or car parking? Its quite normal to pay to park a car when using the amenities in a town so why not in the country and you are accessing someone private property so why shouldn't they charge? Could be easier for the government to underwrite the insurance and pay to allow access for everyone?

    Wake me up when it's all over.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2,066 ✭✭✭HerrKuehn


    You can park on the roadside near the zig zags. No need to pay for any parking.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 48,331 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    managing/policing that or setting up any infrastructure might not be worthwhile/feasible.



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,867 ✭✭✭Christy42


    I would add that your dog has no interest in sheep right now. It doesn't understand the concept of someone else's sheep. If for whatever reason it decided those sheep look tasty or fun to play with (and they likely are) then it would be after them in a second if you gave it a chance at the right time. Don't let them near wildlife and don't give them a chance.



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,244 ✭✭✭✭Furze99


    Dog walking is great, it's get people off their backsides and out getting a bit of exercise. Dogs cause problems though in farmlands and on mountain lands. Many love to chase things, it's in the nature. Whether livestock or wildlife, they love it. Even people who put them on leads, after a while let them off as they think it unfair to have the dog on leash all the time. Already in some public parks, there are designated dog walking areas, to segregate dog walkers from kids and other members of the public. This is probably what'll happen elsewhere with all non work dogs or non care dogs banned off farmlands and mountains. Simpler to enforce that the current laissez faire approach.



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,244 ✭✭✭✭Furze99


    The scum bag and that is the right term in this case, was ignoring the farmers directly expressed wish, which is well signposted, not to bring his dogs up that way. The dogs could have been brought back to the car they presumably arrived in and he and his young companion gone up without any problem. It was perfectly reasonable for the farmer to stand on his path and tell him to go back. Isn't that what you would do?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2,454 ✭✭✭RoboRat


    I know, I saw my FIL's dog turn and he was given away as the dog would have been shot if it wasn't rehomed. My own childhood dog bit my sister for no reason. I have had dogs all my life and whilst I love them, I know their dangers. Dogs are natural predators, irrespective of how well-behaved and lovable they are.



  • Registered Users Posts: 478 ✭✭Run Forest Run


    Well, people ignore stupid rules all the time in society.

    Like I said, good luck policing outdoor spaces when you're trying to ban people with dogs. Not going to happen. You will always get people who just stick 2 fingers up and do their own thing. And you can label them anything you wish, it's irrelevant.

    And yes it could be considered discrimination. I agree that your dog should not be out unattended. But if you think they might be a danger to sheep, then the onus is on you to better train your dog - and/or keep them on a lead. I have dogs, and they are always under my supervision and control when outdoors. They know they're not allowed to chase livestock or deer etc.

    Nope, it's not a polarized view. It's a common sense view. These outdoor spaces should be for everyone, not just people who don't have a dog. Like I said, dog walking is one of the biggest reasons why people want/need to walk outdoors, so yes it could be considered discrimination to ban this very large group of people from such outdoor amenities. It's nanny state BS!

    We can see how unfair people think it is, that this trail is now closed to hikers because of certain people's behaviour. Well this is how many dog walkers feel when you try to ban them just because a minority of dogs cause problems. I guess certain people will get a taste for what that feels like now.

    Post edited by Run Forest Run on


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,354 ✭✭✭MacDanger




  • Registered Users Posts: 2,454 ✭✭✭RoboRat


    Do you bring your dog to a restaurant, the shopping centre, or the cinema? If not, why not? These are also private property and have rules about dogs. Why not ignore those rules too? Are they not being discriminatory? Perhaps you should have a picket outside the local Tesco to complain.

    Nobody needs to police the outdoor spaces as the farmers will just close them off if they become too much hassle, or they feel threatened. People may argue and stick 2 fingers up, but they are now trespassing on private property and can be prosecuted. Perhaps the farmer will invest in a bull... it's a great way to keep trespassers off his land - nothing like 1 tone of bovine madness running full pelt to put manners on idiots.



  • Registered Users Posts: 15,747 ✭✭✭✭whisky_galore


    What would you do if someone tried to barge into your property uninvited?



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    More nonsense.

    Subsidies are paid based on acceptance of rules and regulations, they are not some type of coverall excuse for a land grab.

    Ireland subsidises many industries, I'd like to know what the owner of the back garden does for a living. Say they may work for a FDI corporation that receives generous - some EU states might say questionable - tax and other breaks.



  • Moderators, Music Moderators Posts: 11,358 Mod ✭✭✭✭lordgoat


    Common sense? I love how you a dog owner determines if your dog is a danger to animals that you don't own and probably know **** all about.

    Your posts come across as an entitled, whinge and at times blatantly stupid.

    Why is is so difficult for many dog owners to understand that some places you don't get to walk your dog even if you really really want to, and in other if you do want to walk it you have to keep it on a leash. It's not a nanny state - it's just the opposite of being an ignorant prick.



  • Registered Users Posts: 15,747 ✭✭✭✭whisky_galore


    Maybe it will happen sometime in the distant future, whenever the public can learn to behave like grown adults, respect the outdoors and others and take their rubbish home with them.

    lol.



  • Registered Users Posts: 478 ✭✭Run Forest Run


    You're making a very stupid argument now.

    Your local tesco is not comparable to an outdoor space that people use for outdoor pursuits like hiking/walking. Cop yourself on, it's a ridiculous point.

    Well then I guess places will get closed off, because there is literally zero chance that you are going to police all dog walkers and prevent them all from using these outdoor spaces. I know plenty of people who walk these routes with signs prohibiting dogs... they're pointless and unenforceable rules. And illogical rules too, considering how many people get dogs for the very purpose of going for walks in nice scenic places. You're fighting a losing battle trying to prohibit such a large group of the outdoor community.

    Clearly there are plenty of people who enjoy the nanny state mentality. Rules and more rules for everything. Which is ironic actually, because this is something people are trying escape from when they enjoy their time in the outdoors. In my experience anyway.



  • Moderators, Music Moderators Posts: 11,358 Mod ✭✭✭✭lordgoat


    You keep saying rules are illogical. There's nothing illogical in not allowing dogs on certain walks. There's nothing illogical about dogs needs to be on leashes on certain walks. Also for a better accurate definition of irony, claim someone is making a very stupid argument but then try and dispute it by making a genuinely very stupid argument repeatedly.

    It's really not difficult, don't bring your dog on a walk to a place that isn't suitable. This isn't the nanny state, it's called being a decent **** human, not an arsehole. Well in my experience anyway.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 33,919 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    People with this sort of attitude can f*ck off and take their stupid mutts with them.

    They ruin outdoor spaces for everyone else trying to enjoy them.

    Probably have the dogs barking morning noon and night when they get home too.

    Life ain't always empty.



  • Registered Users Posts: 437 ✭✭TipsyMcStagge


    Oh absolutely exactly the same type 100%. This is just another example of the rampant stupidity and entitlement of dog owners.



  • Registered Users Posts: 478 ✭✭Run Forest Run


    If/when that route opens back up, you can guarantee there will be people walking their dogs on it... and it's impossible to police them all.

    The people I mentioned are actually great dog owners, nothing like what you are describing. They just happen to disagree with these stupid rules, and consider them to be highly discriminatory against a large section of the outdoor community who need quality outdoor spaces to walk just like anyone else. Call them whatever you like, but they're just minding their own business and enjoying the outdoors. Their dogs are not attacking or bothering anyone.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,454 ✭✭✭RoboRat


    Unfortunately, I have to lower myself to making stupid statements to counter stupid mentalities - it's the only way to make a pertinent point. Yes, it's stupid to think that you can bring your dog into Tesco. It's also stupid to think you have a right to ignore the requests of a farmer on *their* land. It's even stupider to justify this by saying that you are being 'discriminated' against because a farmer wants to safeguard their livestock.

    I'll break it down simply, you seem to require this.

    1. It's not your land. It's private property and the farmer is accommodating you by letting you use it.
    2. If they say no dogs, there is a reason. Old fluffy might be as good as gold with the sheep but the sheep are scared of him. He's a dog, they're sheep. imagine being in a field with a 'tame' tiger - irrespective of how tame the tiger is, you would be planking it. Sheep can't rationalise - it's either a predator or it's not... danger or not. Danger is bad - danger worries the sheep and makes them act irrationally. Fluffy might also have a bit of fun and bound at the sheep - you know he's harmless and won't hurt the sheep. The sheep see a predator running at them (think of being with the tiger again).
    3. Just because you may be a good dog owner, there are others that let their dogs run, ****, and basically do what they want. They are not good dog owners, and unfortunately, they are quite common - a quick stroll in a park will verify this.
    4. The farmer can't stand at the gate and inspect those entering. Believe it or not, they have a job to do, and it's a damn tough job at that.
    5. The farmer has the right to withdraw their accommodation should they wish... especially if they have been assaulted. They then close the walkway for all parties because... well see point 4.
    6. You have no right to dictate the terms of their land, nor do you have a right to ignore their wishes or give '2 fingers'. See point 1.
    7. If the sign says no dogs, then find somewhere else to walk your dog, or just leave your dog at home and walk there - it's not rocket science. There are approximately 6.9 million hectares in Ireland, I'm sure you can find somewhere.
    8. Finally, the nanny state only happens BECAUSE of entitled people who cannot use common sense. If everyone used a bit of cop-on, was a bit more amenable to others, and generally didn't act like petulant troglodytes, we wouldn't need as many laws. The problem is that people ignore requests, which leads to strife, and then laws have to be implemented because these very people cannot be trusted to do the right thing... you give them an inch, and they'll take a mile.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,454 ✭✭✭RoboRat


    If it continues to happen then it will be self-policed by the walkers. They won't turn a blind eye anymore if it means they lose an amenity.



  • Registered Users Posts: 33,919 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    If they were great dog owners they would not bring their dogs where they are not allowed and not wanted.

    This land belongs to other people and those people get to decide who can access that land.

    Would you allow strangers to come into your garden or house without permission?

    How about crap on your front lawn?

    I mean these people are great dog owners so why not?

    Your 'not bothering anyone' really means 'not bothering ME'.

    Life ain't always empty.



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,244 ✭✭✭✭Furze99


    You've an extraordinary attitude. Can you not read the room? Do you not know where you're not wanted. You turn up with your dog or dogs where they are not wanted and they will be shot. End of. That'll learn you because it'll all be your own thick headed fault.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,080 ✭✭✭Man Vs ManUre


    Can a blind man or woman with a guide dog do the route now Baravore carpark —>> up the waterfall —>> across and up the big to Lug —>> over to the 2nd peak —>> down the shrubby path —>> down the zig zags —>> out onto the road and all the way back to the carpark?? I hate that road walk back to the carpark.



  • Registered Users Posts: 15,747 ✭✭✭✭whisky_galore


    It's difficult to say if the poster is on here to get a rise out of people or is genuinely that stupid.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 28,389 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    There’s plenty of scenic outdoor spaces where dogs are allowed and welcome.



This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement