Talk:Overtoun Bridge

Attribution probably required

This article has been created by copying the text from Overtoun House. As I'm uncertain how to properly attribute that I'm leaving this note here. Eric Corbett 23:08, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Dog numbers

According to the Times, "... more than 600 dogs jumped from it on to rocky ground almost 60ft below. In the past 70 years, between 50 and 100 dogs have been killed after leaping off Overtoun Bridge". This seems to suggest that most dogs survive the jump, or maybe that most of the incidents took place prior to 1945. Or maybe it's neither of those, and the article is mistaken. Anyone know? Open4D (talk) 14:49, 20 July 2015 (UTC) hello — Preceding unsigned comment added by 197.229.77.245 (talk) 11:20, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

Shrubberies

It's pretty clear from the photographs that the dense foliage at the end of the bridge would prevent a clear view of the ravine. If you were shorter than the height of the walls, there would be no indication at all that you were above ground level. 74.84.210.70 (talk) 15:36, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, the explanation is clear enough. Dogs don't realize they're on a bridge, so they think they're hopping over a short stone wall. It seems like short walls that are perfectly safe to hop over are common enough in the area, so without actually seeing the ravine, dogs wouldn't attach any particular importance to the walls of the bridge. (As opposed to humans who are tall enough to see over the wall and understand instantly that it's a bridge instead of a pair of arbitrary placed barriers.)

I think this is a bit of a manufactured mystery, where people ignore the obvious because it's boring and doesn't draw the tourists. ... but unless there's a source that says so, it can't go in the article. ApLundell (talk) 15:41, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

That doesn't explain it as you're ignoring several factors. It happens almost exclusively on one part of the bridge, the North East. It happens intermittently not consistently. Dogs have been known to do it repeatedly. From dog's eye line the bushes aren't visible. Most importantly, that doesn't explain why they would want to go running off at that particular spot. 157.52.4.213 (talk) 15:53, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

"That doesn't explain it as you're ignoring several factors. It happens almost exclusively on one part of the bridge, the North East."

People in the town (either living there or touring there) will walk dogs from the North end of the bridge on leaving Dunbarton to walk their dogs. As to why the East side of that end (as opposed to the West side of it), on approaching to the bridge from Dunbarton, there is a bend in the path leading to it that affords a slightly better view of the ravine on looking to your right at that bend. This would be the North West corner. Dogs can see that, and on wanting to jump over the wall, will remember they saw a ravine on that side, so pick the East side to jump instead.

"It happens intermittently not consistently."

Not every dog is off it's lead. Owners may know the reputation of the bridge beforehand, and choose NOT to let the dog run off by itself. Small dogs, incapable of jumping that height, go in and out of fashion, leading to some periods of not many dogs being physically able to jump it even if they tried.

"Dogs have been known to do it repeatedly."

Dogs are sometimes stupid, like people. People frequently break their legs multiple times doing various activities.

"From dog's eye line the bushes aren't visible."

That's pretty much the point. If a dog could see the top of the bushes, it might be able to recognize that if it can't see the bottom, then it (the dog) is up higher than it seemed.

"Most importantly, that doesn't explain why they would want to go running off at that particular spot."

That's explained in the article. 2601:CF:300:4B70:2D55:B590:9D53:F2BE (talk) 00:42, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

Recent edit warring

Please discuss, Loonball5, why you keep reverting information that has no place in this article? Cassianto^Talk 18:03, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

Another editor tweaked that sentence this morning, and felt no reason to remove it. I don't either. It's been present in the article for two years, so you should probably try to start a discussion rather than make this about me. Loonball5 (talk) 18:10, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

Please familiarise yourself with WP:BRD. The stupid piece of information telling readers of an encyclopaedia that there is a sign on the bridge telling people to keep dogs on a lead, is beyond comprehension. I've deleted this per BRD. The information was boldly added two years ago, I've revereted it, and now the onus is on you to discuss. That's how it works around here. But since you're clearly OWNing this article and have now breached 3rr at least two times over, for which you've been reported, you were clearly never going to honour your side of the bargain here, were you? Cassianto^Talk 18:15, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

I'm familiar, champ. You're making a bold removal, I'm reverting it, and you're refusing to discuss. Classic WP:OWN behaviour. Loonball5 (talk) 18:21, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

It's not appropriate to discuss this here anymore. And don't patronise me. Cassianto^Talk 18:44, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

The real reason

Someone figured it out - the height of the paths changed. This changes the angle of deflection of wind coming into/exiting the valley which could create an occasional high frequency sound that draws the dogs off. 24.140.226.1 (talk) 22:59, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

Removed paragraph that was unsupported

I removed this paragraph

"Studies have shown that since the 1950s or 1960s an estimated 50 dogs have leapt from the bridge. Dogs that leap over the bridge parapet fall 50 feet (15 m) onto the waterfalls below. The only linking factors for this unexplained event are that dogs mostly jump from the same side of the bridge, in clear weather, and they are breeds with long snouts.[5]"

The article cited does not support the claim that there were "studies" Waughd (talk) 00:41, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Unexplained dog deaths

I will not remove this section on my own, but I think for the most part all of this section is generally unsupported,and often with questionable references. It's clear that there have to be some reference to all the publicity (as that is real), maybe after "Overtoun Bridge has attracted international media attention because of the number of dogs who have reportedly leapt from it..." and include some of the notable references. But it seems clear that there is little evidence of the number of dogs jumping (which is anecdotal at best), and lots of folks that have ideas as to why the dogs are jumping. The "dog jumping" is really a fact that has not been established, so I'm not sure how theories on a non-established fact are relevant. Listing unsupported ideas for non established facts is not what wikipedia is for. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Waughd (talk • contribs) 01:13, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Thank you sinebot, I went back to add my sig. Waughd (talk) 01:16, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Other events

I also think this part should be removed. Based on the reference, this event was probably true. But, I don't it's relevant. If it were, we would have a list of every person who jumped or pushed/threw someone off each bridge in the world. This is clearly not relevant to the article. If it had been a notable person, that could be relevant, or if the bridge truly had an abnormal number of people jumping off that might be worth adding. Waughd (talk) 01:31, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

If anyone knows how I made the font change, I would be curious (I don't see any markup), so I don't know what happened Waughd (talk) 01:55, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

@Waughd: You left a space at the start of the paragraph, as shown below:

No Space looks like this

<- Note the space there.

Wyatt Tyrone Smith (talk) 13:51, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

Self-published work.

An anonymous IP recently re-added a rather obviously self-published work, with the edit summary of Please point to evidence of this, “this” being the books self-publication. The book isn’t even in WorldCat (see here). The “publisher” is a dormant company, of only a couple years existence. The single name associated with the “company” is the author. Qwirkle (talk) 12:55, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

The Guardian

Not currently used in the article, putting it here for possible use The doggy bridge of sighs. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:22, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, I deleted the info attributed to this source as it's a columnist, not a news report, and while she's a witty writer, don't think it's a significant source. Also, it was being cited for a named "dog behaviourist" being local, she didn't write that he was. . . dave souza, talk 19:05, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

So help me God I'm gonna find out how many dogs have kicked it on this bridge

This article. Man. This article's got some crunchy, I-came-out-of-nowhere, I-heard-someone-else-say-it, fuck-it-we'll-print-it-for-tomorrow, editorial-standards-who?-we're-the-Times numbers in it in regards to dogs and their jumping from said bridge. I'm determined to track down where all the following figures and details come from:

1. 600 dogs in total having jumped from Overtoun Bridge
2. Between 50-100 dogs having jumped in the last 70 years
3. The name "Dog Suicide Bridge" being applied to the bridge

Thanks to a handy email from another editor, I've got my mitts on the full text of an article from The Times on this bridge, from 2015 - which mentions the '600 dogs' number, but doesn't mention where this number comes from, annoyingly. Let's go through it:

Spooked dogs leap to their deaths from haunted - Times, The (London, England) - June 26, 2015 - page 17

Michael Glackin

A Victorian bridge has been dubbed "Rovers' leap" after more than 600 dogs jumped from it on to rocky ground almost 60ft below.

"Rovers' leap" - where does this come from? The lead at the minute says it's been dubbed "Dog Suicide Bridge", but that doesn't have a source either; that addition dates back to this diff, which cites a Youtube video of Unsolved Mysteries. The video isn't available anymore; a brief look through the WayBack Machine here shows a relatively long description that cites "at least 50" dogs having died as a result of jumping off the bridge. (I did look for the episode in question; I couldn't find mention of Overtoun Bridge having been mentioned in an episode of Unsolved Mysteries.)

"Rovers' leap" also sounds like editorialising, and something pulled out of a tabloid headline, not an actual-factual switch-it-out name used by locals in anything more than passing.

The '600 dogs' quote mentioned in the first sentence isn't explained later in the article, either, it's just thrust in there.

In the past 70 years, between 50 and 100 dogs have died after leaping off Overtoun Bridge in the Scottish village of Milton, West Dunbartonshire. The phenomenon has left pet owners and locals baffled.

See, here's the thing. You've got between 50-100 dogs having jumped off this bridge since the 1950s, which leaves between 500 and 550 dogs having leapt off before that. This diff to Overtoun House cites the first reports of dogs jumping off Ye Olde Bridge having come in in 2005, citing this New York Times article published in 2019, which makes no mention of 2005.

Having done a Google search limiting dates to between 1998 and 2005, I've found a few - well, two - early mentions of Overtoun Bridge having a high number of dog fatalities, but they all date to 2005; maybe it's my poor Google-fu, but I couldn't find mention before then.

From 27 June 2005, we have this forum post that makes passing mention, with no sources linked before or after:

Postby gap74 » Mon Jun 27, 2005 11:48 pm Is that the bridge that dogs were apparently throwing themselves over recently?? Am sure there was a thread about this strange phenomenon somewhere!

And more notably, from the 5 August 2005, we have this addition to the article Bridge:

*Overtoun Bridge, - Scotland, dogs have leaped to their deaths rom this bridge, leading to urban legends.

With no source. The subheading "Notable bridges" was taken out in December 2006, at which a point it still had no source. The section was moved to List of bridges, which then got moved to List of bridges in the United Kingdom#Scotland, where it still does not have a citation, though any mention of dog deaths has seemingly been removed, if it ever got ported over to begin with.

These are the only two mentions of Overtoun Bridge vis a vis dog deaths in 2005 that I could find; it doesn't seem likely that the latter Wikipedia addition was the source of later reporting, because there is no reporting from 2005 after this on this topic. It also doesn't explain the forum post before this - so clearly there's some report from or before June 2005 that makes mention of this, somewhere, which means the Wikipedia addition didn't come out of nowhere, it was added after someone had seen something. It would be really weird to make up that dogs jumped from one obscure bridge in Scotland after seeing a really obscure forum post on it. It doesn't read like griefing or vandalism at all. I have a feeling the source I'm looking for from this time may have been in a local tabloid, and for 2005, I highly doubt they would have web editions.

Post-2005, it seems media attention kicks up; here is that same Google search, now limited to between 1998 and 2006. All of a sudden, we have sources.

If I can find mention of any local tabloids or newspapers, then I may have something to chase up, in terms of archives and requests. It's looking like the best route, as no major newspaper mentions this bridge before 2005 in regards to dog deaths - even this article in The Herald from 1995, covering the case of a father unfortunately throwing his newborn son off the bridge, doesn't mention it, and that's in an article about a literal murder. You'd expect it to be mentioned as part of the morbidity, but it's not.

Going through the 2006 sources - a Daily Mail article (archived), a Guardian article (archived) and an article from The Express (archived slightly unreadably on archive.is, but seemingly it breaks the WayBack Machine). None make mention of 600 dogs, all make mention of about 50 dogs in the past 50 years. Let's go through them one at a time.

From the Daily Mail, 17 October 2006:

Other dogs have not been as fortunate. In the past half-century, some 50 dogs have leapt to their deaths from the same historic bridge. During one six-month period last year, five dogs jumped to their deaths. [emphasis added]

Okay, that's specific, and narrows it down from 50-100 to just 50; it also gives us a time period - the year before, 2005 - and a specific number of deaths - 5 - to focus on. We can assume that the forum post mentioned earlier was likely talking about this. Again, no mention of 600 dogs; I'm starting to think that's local tabloid legend.

In an attempt to solve a problem which has left many local dog owners so concerned, they will no longer walk their pets on the doomed bridge, a host of specialists converged on the west Scotland town earlier this year to investigate - and finally solve the mystery. [emphasis added]

That gives us more details; we know 5 dogs jumped off the bridge in a six-month period in 2005, and that in early 2006, a number of people visited the bridge with the express intention of investigating it. That gives us more local newspaper clues, because that'd definitely be picked up on.

I will say that this is a Daily Mail article. There's a reason it's deprecated, an example of which can be seen in the following sentence from the article:

A famous Austrian experiment has shown dogs can pick up on the thoughts and intentions of their owners from many miles away

Which is a reason we don't cite it anymore. I wouldn't cite it - it just gives me something to go on to see what else I can find.

At the end of the article, I think I've found the source of the epithet "Dog Suicide Bridge":

Dog Suicide Bridge is on Channel Five on Wednesday night at 8pm

And being in the UK, I may be able to track it down and watch it. Onto the next source, The Guardian, 19 October 2006:

In the past 50 years, it has claimed as many dogs, and there are sometimes spikes in the piteous graph of doggo-demise, like one six-month period last year, when a full five canines did a suicide leap.

Article topics in the UK get passed around newspapers like a spliff at a party; this article was written two days after the Daily Mail one, so it may just be parroting that claim. There's nothing else in the article on dog numbers and dates.

The next source, from the Daily Express, was published on the 12 October 2006:

Over the past 50 years, dozens of pets have inexplicably leapt to their deaths on a mysterious, haunted private estate.

Non-specific, but it's the first mention of dog deaths in a...reliable-enough source, so it's something. And again, it mentions:

The Dog Suicide Bridge will be shown at 8pm next Wednesday, October 18, on Channel 5.

And if Chekov's gun is real enough, that documentary is probably where I'll have to look.

So, what did we learn?

1. "Dog Suicide Bridge" is a name possibly (probably) taken from a Channel 5 documentary aired in 2006.
2. There are likely records somewhere showing about 50 dogs having leapt to their deaths since the 1950s.
3. The number is unlikely to be closer to 100.
4. In a six-month period in 2005, 5 dogs jumped to their deaths from Overtoun Bridge...
5. ...and the story wasn't picked up by national media in the UK until a documentary was announced about a year or so later.

What did we not learn or figure out?

1. None of the earliest sources I could track down online mention 600 dogs.
2. "Rovers' leap" also isn't found in any of the earliest sources.
3. The original details of 5 dogs jumping from Overtoun Bridge are likely to be found in local newspapers and tabloids, none of which are likely to have had online editions in 2005.
4. The other unsourced numbers - 600 dogs having jumped in total, 50-100 dogs having jumped in 70 years - are also probably found in local newspapers and tabloids, none of which are likely to have had online editions in 2005.
5. I'm going to have to spend an evening tracking down and watching a crunchy, 240p Channel 5 documentary from 2006.

I'm gonna return to this later to figure out where these numbers come from. --Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) 18:14, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

@Ineffablebookkeeper: I've done some more research on this and have some thoughts. First, I believe you are misreading the Times article. I read it as saying that more than 600 dogs have leapt from the bridge, and of those, some 50 to 100 died in the past 70 years. So if you trust those numbers - which, of course, you should not - then the dog fatality rate is around 8 - 16%. (I'm assuming, as seems likely, that almost all of the 600 dogs leapt in the past 70 years.) Second, it seems clear that there actually is a phenomenon of dogs inexplicably leaping from the bridge. It seems equally clear that nobody is actually counting how many dogs made the leap or, out of those dogs, how many died. Almost all of the numbers we see are estimates. Third, I've done some additional research and found some more articles. The most significant and apparently the most reliable is the earliest I saw, an article from the Independent, dated Mar. 4, 2005. It includes the statement, "Animal behaviourists are concerned at an apparent spate of canine "suicides" in the town after at least five dogs are said to have thrown themselves from an historic bridge in the past six months." It refers to this as "a sudden rash of unexplained incidents." So it sounds like the assertion of five leaps (and, apparently, five deaths) in a six-month period in 2004 - 2005 is pretty solid, and it also sounds like there was no known pattern of dogs leaping off the bridge prior to 2004. Incidentally, it also includes that statement that "the bridge is fast becoming known as "rover's leap,"" so this term was not just made up by the Times. Following the Independent article, the bridge received some additional coverage, then a 2006 documentary seems to have brought it to broader attention. An expert interviewed in a 10/12/2006 article in the Express (non-RS, I guess) argues, it seems to me plausibly, that the phenomenon is caused by a population of mink. Anyway, if you want copies of the articles I found, email me and I'll reply with copies. John M Baker (talk) 19:59, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

@John M Baker: - thank you for your research! You're right - I didn't twig that not all 600 would have to be fatalities; that's on me. There definitely is a phenomenon of dogs jumping from the bridge, and I apologise if I made it seem like I didn't think that was the case.

The article from the Independent - for some reason, that didn't crop up in my search at all, and that explains the epithet of "Rovers' leap". I did manage to find a few clips from that 2006 documentary; the expert they interviewed actually has a Wikipedia article, though I can't remember his name. Mink aren't that common in the UK from what I know, so I'd imagine any dog smelling mink below the bridge would be akin to five-year-old me encountering a chocolate fountain for the first time, and that explanation seems plausible; I didn't cover it as it's already covered in the article at present. If you could send me a copy of the Independent article, I'd be grateful - thank you! --Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) 14:28, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

@Ineffablebookkeeper: I've sent you the Independent article. It's probably worth specifically mentioning in the article. John M Baker (talk) 19:43, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

Should it no be "Rover's loup" or perhaps lowp? Unless of course it's multiple English dugs, all named "Rover". . . dave souza, talk 20:30, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

I'm a little tired at the minute, so I'm gonna jot down key parts of the Independent article in order to insert them at some other time:

Kelbie, Paul (4 March 2005). "Spate of canine 'suicides' from bridge baffles animal experts". The Independent. p. 15.

• "At least five dogs are said to have thrown themselves from a historic bridge in the past six months" - so, for looking at local sources, that's six months back from March 4th. It mentions that the latest incident was a woman who watched her dog leap to its death, but doesn't give a name; the caption for the article's image names "Suzan Maclennan, a local dog-owner", but there's no mention that they're the same person.
• The article includes comments from someone from the SSPCA and an animal behaviourist, who both confirm that dogs don't commit suicide, have a strong fight or flight response, have a good ability to judge distances, and that the pattern of deaths is abnormal. There's no mention of any dog deaths or jumps before this article was written within the article, but clearly there is a pattern and it's not well. It also comments that their sense of smell and fine hearing may play into dogs jumping.
• And, finally, it mentions the epithet "Rover's leap".

I'll write this up at some point when I'm not half-dead. Thanks again for the article, as I have no access to ProQuest; I wonder if there's anything else on there or not. --Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) 20:48, 16 November 2021 (UTC)