Poll shows U.S. drivers distracted by dogs
U.S. driving skills are going to the dogs.
That's the gist of a new survey by AAA and the pet product company Kurgo that examined the driving habits of American dog owners. The study finds that drivers are frequently distracted by their canine passengers in multiple ways: from restraining them to feeding them to driving with them on their laps.
The survey shows that during the past year, 56 percent of dog owners have driven with their pets at least once a month. But only 16 percent of them use a pet restraint device -- a safety measure advocated by the AAA.
"Drivers should use a pet restraint system every time their dog is in the vehicle," said AAA Mid-Atlantic spokeswoman Christine Delise. "A restraint will not only limit distractions, but also protect the driver, the pet and other passengers in the event of a crash or sudden stop.”
Petting the pooch is the most common form of dog distraction, with 52 percent of dog owners reporting doing that while driving. Almost one in four -- 23 percent -- say they've used their hands or arms to protect their pets while braking. Nineteen percent have used hands or arms to prevent dogs from invading the front seat, the poll found.
Less common, but perhaps more dangerous, activities include reaching into the backseat to interact with their dogs (18 percent), holding or allowing a dog to sit in the driver's lap (17 percent) and feeding a dog (13 percent).
According to the survey, dog owners are indulging in these practices even though they know them to be unsafe. According to the poll, 83 percent of dog owners are aware that an unrestrained dog in a moving car presents a danger.
According to the survey, 42 percent of the owners say they do not use a restraint device because they believe their dog is calm. But AAA points out that a dog, whether calm or frenetic, can be thrown in a crash or a sudden stop -- posing a hazard to both human and canine occupants of the vehicle.
“An unrestrained 10-pound dog in a crash at only 30 mph will exert roughly 300 pounds of pressure, while an unrestrained 80-pound dog in a crash at only 30 mph will exert approximately 2,400 pounds of pressure. Imagine the devastation that can cause to your pet and anyone in its path,” said Delise.
AAA said other reasons given for not using a restraint include never having considered it (39 percent), taking the dog only on short trips (29 percent) and wanting to let the dog hang its head out the car window.
Comments
Hmmm, a study "by AAA and the pet product company Kurgo" -- certainly Kurgo does not manufacture restraint systems.
Posted by: anonymous | July 19, 2011 12:05 PM
Good grief...so, where are the numbers that show how many accidents were actually caused by "dog distraction?" Crap study.
Posted by: Joe Ross | July 19, 2011 1:19 PM
===
Hmmm, a study "by AAA and the pet product company Kurgo" -- certainly Kurgo does not manufacture restraint systems.
===
And surprise, surprise, Kurgo does! C'mon AAA, are you that desperate?
Posted by: MD resident | July 19, 2011 1:24 PM
I see people driving with small dogs on their laps quite a bit. It seems to be most common in Columbia and Odenton. Someone in a silver Lexus SUV recently almost got into a head-on collision with me because they were reaching for their dog while cutting a left turn too tight (I was in the left turn lane waiting on the light). Drivers distracted by their poorly behaved dogs are a major problem rivaling texting. However, I have seen some people with perfectly behaved dogs that don't climb all over them and stay put.
My neighbors are part of the group who don't train or correct their dogs. They have two little monsters that hop around the car, chew on stuff, and don't respond well to commands. This is in stark contrast to my family's chocolate lab that sits and stays put just like a normal passenger. All it takes is persistence and time.
Posted by: BigDragon | July 19, 2011 1:50 PM
TEXTING dogs are the worse!
Posted by: Anonymous | July 19, 2011 1:53 PM
In recent years, we've seen a lot of well-meaning, but ultimately intrusive, restrictions on drivers. Seat belt laws, cell phone laws, texting laws, etc. are all a part of it. To a lesser extent, stop light cameras and speed cameras probably at least partially fit the bill. It wouldn't shock me to eventually see the powers that be ban having your dog riding next to you, or even fiddling with the radio or drinking a cup of coffee or a bottle of water.
We all want a world that's a safe place. We all want roads to be safe places. However, sometimes I think measures like this go too far. I mean, one could make an argument for padded sidewalks, because, after all, people could far and break their back. Better not carry on a conversation while you're out on a stroll with a companion, it's too distracting and you could walk in the path of on-coming traffic inadvertently while making googlely eyes at your love or discussing the budget deficit with a friend. Don't walk your pet -- we all know how distracting they are. I'm being a little facetious to make a point here.
Americans have a love affair with the open road. There's a certain freedom in being able to hit the road and take a trip. And a lot of people are very close to their pets and enjoy having them along for the ride. My dog rides in the car with me and really loves it and looks forward to it, he is so happy he leaps into the car. And, you know, even many of the drivers and pedestrians we see while driving around get a kick out of seeing him stick his head out the window and peering around.
Is there a little risk involved? Sure, a very small one. There's also a little risk involved in taking a medicine your doctor prescribes, ever see a list of side effects on common medicine? There's a little risk in eating most food -- you could have a heart attack, or get diabetes. There's risk in walking down the street. There's even risk in staying at home (Carbon monoxide anyone?). Some people say cell phones may cause radiation.
Adults are supposed to be allowed to weigh things and make up their own mind and take some small risks here and there.
Also, I'm not even sure sitting in complete silence with your hands at ten and two and your back straight in an empty car is safer for a lot of people than having a song playing and a cup of coffee or a dog or a friend or whatever in the car. I've tried just sitting by myself in silence. You know what happens? I get nervous and start making mistakes on the road that I don't usually make. And then my mind starts to wander and I distract myself inadvertently. There's something to be said, I think, for relaxed peaceful drivers being better drivers -- and for some people, having a little music or a beverage, a dog or a human friend, or, yes, even a cell phone conversation can allow them to relax and take their time and drive better.
Obviously, people do have to use common sense. If you're executing a difficult driving maneuver, you need to stop paying attention to your dog or driving or your coffee or whatever, and make sure you get it right. That's where a lot of accidents come in, people not using common sense. If you're looking down at something for a second or two, make sure you're going slow and giving plenty of space to the car in front of you and look back up very quickly. Accidents come in when people fail to do these things, but if they don't do these things to begin with, taking away their dog or phone or bottle of water isn't going to help -- bad drivers find a way to be bad drivers, and they find distractions. Give them a ticket for negligence if they cause an accident that way, and let the rest of us continue to do what we've been doing and make our own choices.
Posted by: John | July 19, 2011 2:52 PM
Dogs can contribute to accidents. My question is why do people still drive around with dogs in the back of PU trucks? I can't believe this happens. Is there a law concerning animals that are unsecured in open vehicles? There ought to be!
Posted by: ruth | August 1, 2011 1:41 PM