I knew when I suggested this that there would be a parade of affronted "responsible dog owners". Sandy67 Have you actually read the posts on this thread? You're engaging in the same spurious conflation of non-harmful and harmful regulation breaking as earlier posts (now moved to Beyond SE23 I think). Your smileyed analogies equate problems caused by kids on bikes with those caused by those caused by dog **** and by increasingly prevalent unpredictable and dangerous weapon dogs (See the link in my 1st post).

If everyone were like you, having a whole section of open land rendered unusable by children because animals need exercise would just be ****ing irritating. But it's not just irritating is it, it's dangerous because they're clearly not all like you are they.

Allowing any dogs means you're going to attract delinquent idiots who care nothing for rules. What's the problem with making the Triangle a dog park. It's a waste of time making that dog free - no one would want to sunbathe or eat a picnic over there so your dog would be safe from temptation.