I noticed a poster advertising the consultation on the gate to a children's play area, where dogs are not permitted. Hmm, targeting on those pre-disposed to greater restrictions perchance? I agree that the design of the survey is skewed, and will encourage those who simply don't like dogs (irrespective of fouling, "incidents" etc.) to respond. My partner and I own a 1 year old cockapoo puppy, and I like to think we are responsible owners. I wouldn't dream of leaving poo on the ground (I find it pretty disgusting too); we invested in a puppy training and socialisation course, and respect by-laws and restrictions. However, I increasingly feel like I'm committing a criminal act just by walking in the park. I have lost count of the number of occasions when I've been shouted at and spat at, when parents have encouraged their children to scream or shout at my dog - even when he is on his lead. Now, I just see this as intolerance plain and simple. Heaven knows where we would end up if we started banning things just because we don't like them. I, for instance, don't particularly like children. They are noisy, messy and often cause trouble (the number of children-related incidents I've seen in parks...). I can honestly say they ruin my day-to-day enjoyment of a community facility, and I can see the attraction of child-free zones in parks or areas where children should be kept on reins or in push-chairs. But I'm also tolerant, and respect the rights of others. Even (especially) when they are in the minority. We all, after all, have to rub along together and the world would be a terribly mundane place if we all liked the same things or insisted on uniformity. It's just a shame that so many others, often those who perceive themselves to be the most liberal and community-spirited, see the city as their own special personal domain. Also, some cyclists cause problems in parks. Some motorists cause all sorts of problems on the roads. Teenagers can be little monsters. People drinking in parks (yes, even those lovely middle class people enjoying a bottle or 3 of decent Gavi on a sunny afternoon) can be terribly antisocial. Whether you tolerate or endure these ne'erdowells, just imagine what sort of city we would end up living in if we simply banned these things. It should be everyone's responsibility to challenge wrong-doing when they witness it, rather than resorting to the Council to intervene. Quite apart from these arguments against further restrictions, simply restricting further or banning or prohibiting or whatever Southwark and the canine-haters really seem to want JUST WON'T WORK. Those who are already responsible will be punished and restricted. Those who are irresponsible will continue. Why can't Southwark invest some effort and resources into enforcing the restrictions that are already in place? Councils have significant powers to punish transgressors, and I for one would be more than happy to be able to walk my dog without fear that he'll be attacked by a aggressive beast roaming the street with a bunch of high teenagers. or, indeed, without fear that I'll tread on poo. Oh, and I'd like to point out that I'm a tax-payer. A high tax payer, actually, and I have just as much right to enjoy community facilities as anyone else.
