Jump to content

first mate

Member
  • Posts

    4,870
  • Joined

Everything posted by first mate

  1. skylorrikeet, well said, if you want you or your child to get bitten then using pepper spray is a great way to go about it. As Anna said earlier, rather like child abuse, canine on human attacks are usually carried out within the home and are invariably the reult of poor boundaries and ownership- very occasionally you get a rogue dog with a screw loose. Dogs that are very badly treated may become fear aggressive to humans or children. Children, if not taught how to behave around dogs can end up getting a warning nip. However, random attacks by strange dogs on children when out in parks etc.. is very rare. I too worry about the levels of panic I see in some children when they are around dogs and wonder why this is? There have always been kids that are phobic about dogs, often because they have been pushed over as kids by an overly excitable, poorly trained, dog, or even been given a nip, however I often come across kids on the street (where my dog is on a lead) who shrink away in fear as I approach with my dog, or even start to cry and scream. The parents also seem anxious. Given that my dog is small and I am not a gorgon I find this puzzling.
  2. Prior to being a sewing shop, Moo 2 was an excellent clothes shop for many,many years and one that will be/is sorely missed. I just pray a chain does not move in because a homogenised high street would spell the end for the ED I have known and loved all these years. Be careful what you wish for folks. As to the landlord, I have heard a rumour, though that is all it is, that another independent shopowner on the lane is also landlord of a number of shops on the street, one of which is the former Moo2. Anyone know if this is true?
  3. Mako, Just to clarify. There are already areas of the park (PR) where dogs are not allowed and where it is asked for dogs to be kept on leads. Parkies already have the powers under law to issue on the spot fines for dog fouling. So, the issue is how to get people to adhere to what is already in place. For instance, would Southwark put resources to more Park officers...that is the only way fouling could be reduced, by catching offenders and fining them on the spot. There is a feeling that Southwark will not want to increase these officers because they don't have the money. So, on that basis, how will they tackle dog fouling? DCO's won't make any difference at all. As an analogy, there would be little point in making more and more legislation against speeding cars without the means (cameras or traffic police) to catch the speeders. There is really only one way that DCO's could improve dog fouling and that would be a straight ban of all dogs from parks. The fear about instating dog conrol orders is not about dogs on leads in certain areas per se, it is the fact that once in place the council can extend them as they see fit WITHOUT consultation in future. I hope that is now clear.
  4. The wolves of the forum ;) I too miss Hugo and underneath the puffery and plumage of le coq sportif was a sometimes wise and kindly bird....just to keep the animal theme going.
  5. Hickory, That is awful. It is strange that someone can be given quite a tough penalty for doing much the same on twitter at distance, but if they are following you, presumably looking for an opportunity to carry out what they threaten, then it doesn't quite count. Of course, I know that twitter gives solid evidence and a trail to the culprit, but it is discomfiting to learn that the police are able to do so little. I hope you are okay.
  6. Mako, indeed, my feeling is a more broad ranging survey on a variety of perceived issues in the parks, might be more efficacious, killing a variety of birds with one stone, so to speak. It might be cheaper too and give a general overview of ways public spaces could be improved as well as providing more balanced and coherent view of what the public want. It is also the case, I believe,and from what I have gleaned on the forum, that the biggest issue with dogs is fouling (as in the title of this thread) which is arguably a kind of litter, albeit a highly unpleasant form, and one that none of us want.
  7. Well yes, okay, but that survey is only one very specific kind of anit-social behaviour, there have been no surveys on litter or the like.
  8. Should posting of photos, and naming and shaming, be done for most common forms of anti-social behaviour, or just dog fouling? I feel slightly uneasy about the idea, I can also imagine threads full of photos of one infraction or another.
  9. How I wish I had been able to catch the serial litterers who had left Dulwich Park in such a state this morning. All along the bowling green, tissues, crisp packet, empty glass bottle, doilies, paper plates...nice. I spoke to the community warden and he said that he'd recently asked some picnickers to extinguish a BBQ, reluctantly they had done this, but left a load of rubbish behind. He managed to catch up with them and had a word and was told by one guy that he would like to punch him in the face. I just think that as a community we should try to tackle all forms of anti-social behaviour.
  10. Chunksmum, I think your experience re the dog walker who had care and custody of the dog that has attacked your dog is awful. I would contact Trevor Cooper a dog law specialist to see what recourse you can get- I've a feeling you may have to sue the dog walker. If the dog he is walking has attacked your dog or other dogs before then that dog should be on a lead. I would add, as we know, all dogs are capable of 'having words' and one dog warning off or chastising another can look and sound very frightening but, if normal and proportionate, there is never a bite- as in puncture wounds. The severity of your dog's injuries means the dog that inflicted the damage is a danger to every dog and it needs to be pursued.
  11. Elmgrove, from what I have heard the leaflets/survey were being handed out to people. Don't know of any dog owners who it was handed out to.
  12. Precisely, there are already national laws in place for dog fouling where on the spot fines can be issued, there are already areas of the park where dogs should be kept on lead. If there are not the resources to police and enforce perfectly good existing legislation what is going to change with putting in more, will Southwark invest in more park and dog wardens...? Of course not. Southwark, by the way, axed all their dog wardens. The only difference with instituting dog control orders is that Southwark then have the power to make whatever changes they like without consultation.....complete ban of dogs.
  13. I'd recommend going round to try to see whoever owns the dog, if possible try to see the dog so you can see what conditon it's in.It could be that the owners are going out in the evening and not aware of what their dog is doing. Failing that you could try the immediate neighbours. In my experience it is not that easy to get the RSPCA involved. If you cannot see the dog and it is on domestic premises they won't attend. Southwark noise will simply attend your property and take noise measurements- only if the sound exceeds so many decibels will they take action. I really hope you can talk sense into the owners because a dog that is barking and crying for hours on end is suffering immensely.
  14. Taper, I'm tempted to say "stop urining"- but I know you're being ironic ;)
  15. DaveR, come on, your simplification of points is a cheap rhetorical device. Your constructive contribution so far is to have a dog-free area in the park- good, except, as I have pointed out, those areas alrewady exist. Do you have anything else to add?
  16. DaveR, I'm sorry that you have found nothing of use in this debate so far. It's never helpful, in my view, to label others as stupid, simply because you don't agree with what they say. Not the behaviour of someone engaging in a "sensible" debate, is it? Everything you have cited as of zero use and "stupid" is a matter of perception, those of others versus yours. As for your suggestion about a dog-free zone, I'm sure you'll know, there are already dog-free zones within the park, the problem is an anti-social minority do not adhere to requests to keep their dogs out of them. So, the real issue is probably policing and enforcement.
  17. DaveR I'm pretty sure no-one here is suggesting that dogs and children should have parity in society,if that is what you are objecting to? As an aside, it is the case that the unique human/dog bond is partly fuelled by a mutual oxytocin flow that is not disimilar to the biochemistry of human/baby bonding- though obviously NOT the same. But it does explain why many get so attached to their dogs. For the record, again, I don't have a problem with people being made to pick up poo, being made to control their dogs etc... I would have a problem with dogs being banned from parks- my fear is that this may be Southwark's ultimate agenda, and it is one I will resist until I am clear about Southwark's aims.
  18. joobjoob, Southwark have been offerd the services of trainers and also the opportunity to advertise training classes on their notice boards- they were not interested. I agree with you, more education is probably the way to go and it wouldn't cost Southwark a penny, since the trainers are free and people are also prepared to pay a small amount to attend a class. All Southwark need to do is allow a small space in the park to be used weekly for the purpose. A trainer used to do this on Peckham Rye, but the classes were discontinued....I'd love to know why.
  19. I think to have your baby knocked over by a strange puppy is appalling, if the owner went to a good training class they would have already been coached in avoiding precisely this problem. I am glad (the mother of the baby) that you do not want dogs banned from the park and glad you expressed your specific concerns in the survey. My worry about that survey is the way it has been designed so that by answering yes to the non-specific "are dogs an issue" question, Southwark can use this to justify more extreme measures than simply fining people that don't pick up poo- that is if they catch them in the act- but that's a practical aside. The specifics on what issue you have with dogs comes later and will not necessarily be directly related to the more general statement when the data is analysed. As I have said, much depends on what is really motivating Southwark to do the survey, whether it's simply some control or the first step towards banning dogs from parks. The problem is that a couple of incidents of getting poo on shoes or something else, can understandably enrage people- honestly I feel the same, but I just wonder if the anger colours the issue of frequency? I only say this because I am genuinely perturbed and just don't see that much poo in the parks around ED. I also use the parks for pursuits other than exercising my dog.
  20. Good points, Southwark have been offered the services of trainers but do not seem interested. Education would make the majority of owners much more aware and sensitive to the need for appropriate behaviour according to circumstances. Clearly if there are loads of people having a picnic, letting your dog off is not a great idea, unless they walk perfectly to heel and have a solid recall.
  21. AlexK, Muzzles won't tackle the issue of dog fouling- the bit that gets people really riled. Muzzles won't make much difference to people that simply dislike dogs and don't want them in the park. Aside from that, dogs that have been known to inflict serious damage on another dog, or to bite a human/child, should be muzzled anyway. We don't need dog control orders to do that. I do think a more concerted effort to educate owners would help, with some dedicated training- but Southwark is resistant to this happening on its property for some reason. I do agree with you that all dogs should be muzzle trained so that in exceptional circumstances and where necessary a muzzle can be used.
  22. Applespider, you make a very good point- park speed limits (is it 12mph)don't seem to be well enforced at all. It is tempting to mount an online survey now to ask if anyone has experienced any cyclist related issues, and see what happens. My issue would be that I often don't hear them coming behind me and feel that if I stepped out by only a few inches I'd be a gonner. BTW all for cycling, just using above as an example of the Southwark survey MO.
  23. chuff, I think Southwark have deliberately been unclear because the survey is a fishing expedition. First suggest that there is a problem of some kind, then ask people if they are aware of dog related issues in a dodgy survey. For every person that answers 'yes' bearing in mind that it might be something quite minor, Southwark can start to build stats that say x% of respondents say there are issues with dogs in our parks. If a similar survey was done with similar wording about any other sector of park users you could build a substantial number of seemingly anti people too. As you point out, we all have the odd issue with each other but we generally rub along.
  24. Mako, I don't think Southwark's intentions are clear. Control orders might be a first step, but if those don't work, for the reasons given ie enforcement and resources...what next? It is not unknown for control orders to be used to ban all dogs, once in place, who decides? Something of the thinking of Southwark may be apparent in the exceedingly dodgy survey design- hardly even-handed. As I have said, all of us dislike dog poo. It is not necessarily less offensive to me as a dog owner,than it is to you as a non-owner (that is an assumption and I am sure you'll correct me if I am wrong). For the person who said they hadn't seen an incident in 20 years I would imagine they are not referring to fouling but something more extreme. In fairness, Southwark do not specify what is meant by dog-related issues. However, I would add that having lived in the borough and ED for over 20 years it is not my experience there has been a rise in fouling either, but yes, there is fouling and it is regrettable.
  25. It's been said many time before, but none of us like dog poo, not even dog owners and the majority of dog owners do pick up. Aside from the quite understandable emotions that the subject triggers, what, on a practical level, would you like the average, repsonsible dog owner to do? Like you, we have no control over the anti-social minority. If we really think that patrols and fineas are going to work then ok, but I, as you will have read , am not convinced there are the resources available to properly police and enforce dog fouling laws. To ban all dogs from all parks would be highly punitive and detrimental to the responsible dog owner. I also think that a city sterilised of dogs, an animal we have kept as a pet for thousands of years, would be a loss. But I would think that.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...