first mate

4.35pm and yes, as anticipated the 'NYE' fireworks have started up again, that's a full 16 hours after the event they are meant to celebrate has been and gone.

My primary issue is the noise level and the fact that it begins at dusk and continues well into the early hours, the odd random bang being possibly the worst aspect as you never know when the next volley will occur. This is no longer about celebrating a turning point as the clock strikes 12am, but more a lengthy indulgence in ear shattering bangs, where there also seems to be competition as to who can create the loudest most startling barrage of sustained noise. A new thing is daytime fireworks, where buyers are urged to forget the visual aspect and focus on getting the biggest bang for their buck. I am lucky as I am not super sensitive to noise but I really feel for those who are. As for pets, I am afraid there are now many that require serious medication to get them through- and those meds are not cheap. The fault here is not with the animals or people sensitive to extreme bangs, but with those who insist on their right to impose it on all around them, not just for half an hour a few times a year, but for hours on customary dates and now spreading to random events throughout the year.I New Year fireworks is a very recent construct, and now Halloween Fireworks are becoming a thing. Why should we encourage and condone a proliferating societal noise addiction? It really is isn't healthy. Let those who wish to damage their eardrums enjoy their pastime through headphones; they can turn the volume up as high as they like. If last night was the end of it then that is great but I think there'll be more through the weekend and more discarded jumbo firework boxes dumped in the park. I hope we follow other countries in adopting low noise fireworks and drone shows instead.

The debate cannot come soon enough. Tonight has been relentless and the loudest possible 'neighbour' garden fireworks the worst part.

But if the notion of inconsiderate cycling becomes more of a thing perhaps cyclists, especially e-bike and time triallers, will take it upon themselves to voluntarily slow right down abd even dismount in shared use spaces. Lime bike riders I have seen in the local parks and today zooming across the pedestrianised part of Dulwich Sq, mostly seem to go very fast- so not sure how the geofencing works.

On that basis alone, we can probably also agree that cycling fast through a park, when there are many other park users around (children on two wheels, pedestrians, dog walkers), is not a good idea. Adhering to 5mph seems sensible enough. I always cycle at snail's pace through local parks for that reason. As I have also mentioned, Lime bike users seem among the worst for speeding. Perhaps it is very difficult to cycle very slowly on powered bicycles?

You seem to be advocating this, so you tell us? If you think children on foot should be kept on a lead, then what about children on bikes, scooting or wheeling?

Haha, very droll. Or, you could simply ask all park users on paved areas to be mindful of other users- dogs should be kept on lead and not allowed to career around paved areas, toddlers and young children carefully supervised, and cyclists or other wheelers, observe park speed limits and always give way to pedestrians.

Within Peckam Rye Park, it is my understanding that dogs are ideally kept on lead on paved areas (unless obedient), they must be on lead around the pond and inside the Japanese and American Gardens, and they are not allowed at all in the Arboretum, which is fenced off. Dogs are allowed off lead on any of the playing fields and within the wooded area. Dogs do need areas in which they can run free. Clearly if there is a football game or similar then it is sensible to keep your dog on a lead (but not a requirement). However, unless your dog is very obedient, you'll probably put them on a lead rather than face irate football players. In any park it is probably wise and safer to have your dog on a shorter lead on any paved areas, likely to be used by cyclists and even cars- unless you have a dog that will walk to heel no matter what is going on. But, in my view, this should not give cyclists permission to use paved areas as race tracks- it may not be law but it is sensible and more fair to other park users, most of which are likely to be pedestrians.

This is very true. For some people, not even just the elderly, their pet/s may be their most important companion.

Where you have bicycles and pedestrians sharing space (with pedestrians taking priority as you would expect in a smaller park like Dulwich Park) doesn't it make sense to ensure riders slow right down? My main beef is with Lime bike riders some who seem to want to go as fast as they can in the park, sometimes listening to music through headphones. Is cycling fast with headphones plugged in, along a space shared with pedestrians a good idea?

Well now we know that Mal is possibly not even human (maybe a part bicycle cyborg) perhaps DKHB can be turned after all?

Anyone that is a regular user of Dulwich Park and Peckham Rye knows that dogs are not kept on lead in all sections, nor required to be. Anyway, this is not a thread about dogs but cyclists. I agree that cyclists should adhere to 5mph or less if lots of people around. In my experience, the worst offenders are Lime bike users. No doubt the temptation to hurtle through at 15 mph is too great

Ooh Mal, no hot date with DKHB for you then!

Thanks Earl, is Cllr Livingstone now the Cabinet Member in charge of streets?

I shouldn't have to. There ought to be publicly available information on CPZ implementation plans, especially for the streets involved, but it seems there is nothing. Rockets may have a point, perhaps this has all been put on the back burner until the elections are over.