Dulwich Park - Dogs Must be Kept on Short Lead

[Jah Lush]

What the hell has paying your taxes got to do with anything? Get a grip woman.

[taper]

An awful lot of that park is dogs on leads though. Some of it unnecessarily. It is one of my least favourite parks in the area because so much of it is regulated and managed. The number of signs forbidding various activities, with the cafe area as the apotheosis, is ludicrous.

[spider69]

Don't be harsh on the OP she did admit she needed to clear her head. Perhaps she was in a different park?.

[Applespider]

Dogs should be able to run free in (parts) of the park since it would be a miserable dog indeed who didn't get to run.

However, there are a few dog owners/walkers in Dulwich Park who let their dogs off the lead and then seem to abdicate all responsibility for keeping them under any kind of control. If you are scared of dogs, or have a kid on a scooter/skates or on a bike, then having dogs running back and forth across the 'road' with their owners ignoring them can be a little unnerving. The majority of owners do keep control, do pick up poo and are considerate. The bad owners don't = and no number of signs or rules will make them do so.

[SueOrr0103]

Thanks everyone who have offered sensible suggestions. I have written to the council to clarify and will post their reply here.

I was of the understanding that dogs cld be taken off the lead only in the off the main road exercise area and that they shd be kept on a lead on the main circular road that walkers/ cyclists usually use.

If I'm wrong I stand corrected. Since no one is quite sure, I have asked the council to clarify.

I don't think I'm insane as someone here has suggested nor do I have a phobia for dogs. But yes if a big dog (def a lot bigger than the one the kindly "lane lover" has suggested) jumps at me I get scared. Surely parks are meant for people like me as well. But I might be wrong. I will leave the analysis for the psychoanalysts here.

[chuff]

Just read the link ianr posted a link to. The dogs on leads areas are inside of the tarmac road/path. This includes the area around the cafe, pond, children's playground and inside the tennis courts. It also includes the grass pitches surrounding these areas but not the path and grass outside.

[first mate]

Sue,

if you were on the circular road when the dog jumped at you then I can understand why you might be hacked off. However, I think your use of the word attacked leaves you open to the charge of exaggeration. I am sure that you can see that if you report this incident to the park in those terms and using that word then it can be used to skew figures on dangerous dogs incidents in the park.

I am still curious as to how close the dog got to you when it jumped and did it make contact with you? I have asked you this a few times and you have not answered.

All dog owners should teach their dogs as young pups not to jump up at people- that is basic dog obedience. perhaps those with ill-mannered or poorly trained dogs should be sent on a compulsory dog training course.

[first mate]

Chuff, I am not aware of any regulation that requires owners to keep dogs on lead on the open fields???unless of course people are playing football or similar. The way you seem to describe it the only place one could let a dog off lead would be right around the edge of the park.

[uncleglen]

The dog exercise area is around the edge of the park and that is the only area where dogs are supposed to be off the leash- but given the number of owners who probably do not adequately train their dogs these things are going to happen and the dog will stray off the area

[first mate]

I've checked and it states that dogs on lead areas are central areas and sports pitches. I would take it that the central area means the gardens, cafe, ponds etc... Clearly sports pitches are defined by chalk markings, so it can be interpreted that any field area outside of the markings is okay. in the winter months and on rainy days when sport is not played I guess the bylaw becomes redundant.

there are no designated exercise areas mentioned in the bylaws- only areas where dogs are prohibited and where they should be kept on lead. The notion of the dog walk therefore seems to be erroneous.

Aside from that, you may be aware that in the summer months the outer area of the park is used by joggers and some cyclists practising their mountain biking skills, who can become irate at finding dogs off lead. I think there just has to be a little give and take.

[chuff]

First mate, it was the sports pitches I meant when talking about inner green areas but not all grassed areas are meant to be used as sports pitches. The grass outside the cafe for instance is probably not dogs on leads but a good idea so they don't run into the cafe area.

It states in the Southwark web link that the main road/path is not within the dogs on leads area so why do we keep having this debate about dogs being off lead there? They're allowed to be. As cyclists are allowed to cycle and every other permitted activity in the park can happen there too.

I agree the councils signs are confusing though.

Firstmate, I agree with you btw, second para not directed at you.

[uncleglen]

It doesn't really matter whether there are rules, bye-laws, laws etc. because the irresponsible dog owner will still exist and make peoples' lives a misery anyway.

[chuff]

They probably will yes, but this minority will probably do lots of anti social acts and even other dog owners will dislike others that don't pick up poo! The majority of us are responsible and considerate, even those that don't pay high earners tax!

That tax comment was ridiculous btw. What Jah said.

There has been no evidence so far that the op was attacked by the dog, or whether it actually touched her. A thoroughly sensationalist post.

Tell me uncleglen, what's the solution?

[cazfay]

Just to say there are clearly marked (and really nice!) dog exercise areas in the park. They are all around the boundary of the park, under the trees, with clear tracks marked on the ground. It's a much more fun & interesting area for dogs than the concrete 'road' in the middle or sandy horse track so I'm really not sure why dog owners don't use the dog exercise areas? I love running on it & hardly ever see any dogs...

[chuff]

The reason I'm not using the outer track at the moment cazfay is that it's been really muddy and I'm not always dressed for just dog walking, a lot of the time I'm on my way to work, walking through and giving the dog a walk too. I use it more in the summer when the ground is dry and the park's busier.

[first mate]

Caz, sorry, where are the signs that clearly say 'dog exercise area'? As you can see the sign that was photographed by the OP is at the beginning of the very track you speak about, and this states that dogs should be kept on a short lead.

It is during the late spring and summer months that the joggers begin to appear and some do get upset when dogs are on the track and, as they see it, in their way. In the winter months, dog owners tend to be the most frequent users of the park and therefore make use of much of it because there are not that many other people about, especially when it rains.

I like to be in an open space with my dog, with a view of other people and other dogs, this is not always possible in the wooded areas. Additionally, a number of dogs have been startled when joggers/cyclists burst out of the undergrowth and some dogs have reacted out of fear at being startled, also leading to complaints. Other joggers, ones that dislike dogs, have complained about dogs being too near to them and on a few occasions joggers have tried to kick dogs away from them. This is imply to indicate that there is no universal acceptance that dogs should be exercised off lead around what is known, but not officially demarcated, as the dog walk.

I think their is confusion about where dogs can go and I don't think that the ill placed signage by the council/parks authorities help.

[Otta]

Given up reading every post so sorry if I'm repeating.

Whether or not the dog actually attacked with teeth ready to bite is not the point. A person that is not entirely comfortable with dogs could be very frightened of a large dog charging at them with friendly intentions, because they're probably not adept at reading dog's minds. So to ask "did the dog ACTUALLY attack you" is beside the point.

At the end of the day, within the boundaries of the horse track dogs should not be off leads, or even on those long extendable leads. There are lots of little kids running around, and not everyone likes dogs, they can be scary. Just because you might not find them so (I personally love dogs), it's stupid to assume that no one else should.

The grass area around the edge of the park has always been fair game for dogs running around.

So if I am reading this right and the OP was approached by the dog in the central area of the park, then the dog owner was in the wrong. And Southward definitely need to revise their signage.

[LadyDeliah]

Nope, I think it was on the road (in a dog off leads permitted area), she said the dog ran up to her and she screamed.

This later changed to attacked and jumped up upon, but she has not confirmed the dog touched her or how close it got, despite being asked a number of times.

"First Mate, I was not attacked by the dog in those off the road areas where I have seen people exercise their dogs. I was attacked on the main road in the park very close to where the ice cream van usually stands."

Hysterics and over-reaction indicating a possible dog-phobia

People with phobias need treatment for their phobia, not a change in the behaviour of everyone else.

[Mustard]

From the signs, she appeared to think that all dogs should be on a lead. Then in a further post she said she thought dogs should be on a lead on the road where joggers and cyclists are.

[LadyDeliah]

She said

"I was attacked on the main road in the park very close to where the ice cream van usually stands."

[grabot]

Phobia implies that the fear is irrational. Avoiding a dog in a locked car would certainly be a phobia. But being afraid of a dog that is physically capable of assaulting a person seems somewhat rational; between May 2012 and 2013, 6,334 people in England were admitted to hospital after dog attacks.

[Mustard]

LadyDeliah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> She said

>

> "I was attacked on the main road in the park very

> close to where the ice cream van usually stands."

if

I missed that part. Attack is really not the correct word to use here. If you have a fear of dogs not on leads, then really, Dulwich Park is not the best place to go to clear your head. There are some enclosed areas there without any dog access, but not many. Or, the track where cyclists are, if you have adequate footwear on, would probably be a good bet as there aren't many dogs up there at all.

[bonniebird]

I wonder out of the 6,334 dog "attacks" how many of those dogs are excersised, socialised, etc or beaten, abused etc and bite back, out of 10 million dogs in the UK. MOST dogs are lovely and not aggresive, hope the OP is ok but "attacked"?

[Otta]

Yeah but there are cyclists, and they're far worse!

[spider69]

Otta Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Yeah but there are cyclists, and they're far

> worse!

Wait for it to come back......