SE23.com - The Official Forum for Forest Hill & Honor Oak, London SE23
Online since 2002  -  10,000+ members

Home | SE23 Topics | Local Businesses | Wider Topics | Offered/Wanted/Lost/Found | Site Feedback | Advertising | Contact
Geddes Hairdressing & Barbering Studio One Armstrong & Co Solicitors


Post Reply  Post Topic 
Pages (2): « First [1] 2 Next > Last »
Dog control
Author Message
Snazy


Posts: 1,504
Joined: Jan 2008
Post: #1
27-04-2008 11:20 AM

[Moved from SE23 Topics > We should ban all dogs from the Horniman -admin]

OK my opinion lol

Brian, I would prefer to ban selfish dog OWNERS not the dogs themselves. Smile
I too am sick to death of dodging round the mounds, some of which my neighbours dogs deposit right outside my house !

Personally I am not one for dogs running free anywhere there are members of the public who may not wish to be approached by a dog, regardless of how cute or friendly. Some people are scared of dogs full stop.
I walk mine on the lead, and smile nicely when we meet other off the lead, but inside there is another message being screamed out (most of the time anyway)

People who cant physically control their dogs, should not have them. But for the majority who control and clean up after their dogs, I think it would be a crying shame to banish them from any park area.

Jane, bull terriers or crosses with said type, there are indeed a lot of them about, and sadly its down to what I call wanting a trophy dog. Same with some other breeds.
There are some excellent owners and examples of these dogs out there, but it seems that the majority are simply trophy (look at me) dogs.

I cant really talk as Tuvaaq certainly gets his fair share of attention, and even gets me recognised (eh Rob lol ) but he was bought for all the right reasons, and every step is taken to ensure he is no fuss or worry to anyone.

Find all posts by this user Reply
Snazy


Posts: 1,504
Joined: Jan 2008
Post: #2
27-04-2008 11:26 AM

I know this is not Hornimans, and only just over the border of Forest Hill into SE26, but thought you might like to see the Lewisham Council perspective on dog control.... this time in Mayow Park...

This reply follows a complaint from me regarding the number of uncontrolled dogs, and the risk to other park goers, their children and dogs...

Quote:
Thank you for your report regarding Mayow Park and the issues you are encountering in relation to out of control dogs. I do understand your concerns and I hope my response demonstrates we do take your issues seriously.

Glendale manage the parks on behalf of Lewisham Borough Council. In terms of enforcement we are led by current bylaws. Below is an extract for your information.

"48. No person shall in the ground walk, exercise or bring any dog in any part of the ground:
unless such dog is under proper control;
and in any event in such a manner as to cause danger or nuisance or give reasonable grounds for annoyance to other persons in the ground."

Unfortunately bylaws are very difficult when leading to prosecution due to its cost and evidence required. It is also very subjective when ascertaining whether a dog is under control or not.

I have cc'd Lewisham Council's Animal Welfare department who have patrolled the parks and raised awareness to dog owners of the impact of dog fouling and dogs under control. I am sure this park is on their list, although their resources are very limited. They have been very helpful when we have reported incidents.

You may be interested to know that Mayow Park enjoys a very active user group who have a lot of input into what they would like for the park. The user group meets quarterly and the next meet date is 18th June 2008.

This year could also see the introduction of new Dog Control Order Acts that will make certain areas Dog-Free zones and more power for enforcement officers with regards to dogs out of control. It may be a consideration for the Act to make the main field a Dog-Free zone or Dogs-on-Lead Area and this would be in conjuction with the user group.

Although the above may not solve your current issues I thank you for raising them and I hope you can continue to use and enjoy Mayow Park.

Find all posts by this user Reply
Perryman


Posts: 809
Joined: Dec 2006
Post: #3
27-04-2008 04:48 PM

Simple really - too many people wanting to use limited recreation facilities.

It is not unreasonable to run your dog over a park.
It not unreasonable to have children riding bikes, and skate boards etc in a park.
It is not unreasonable to want to play ball games in a park.

None of these things are necessarily very controlled, and the more people crammed in, the more the chance of unwanted interaction with others.

So more recreation space is required.
This means we do not sell off and build on existing park land - doh - as was planned with the park on Dartmouth Rd (and I believe Crystal Palace is being eaten into again.)

Golf courses and graveyards need to be very heavily taxed in cities as they use up a disproportionate area for the number of (live) people who access it.
Hopefully this would in time free up more recreation area.

Find all posts by this user Reply
brian


Posts: 2,002
Joined: Apr 2005
Post: #4
27-04-2008 06:16 PM

Perryman ( did you play for Spurs ) is correct. I believe all green areas should be protected at all costs. The area is already too populated. Houses that used to house 2 tend to have 5 or 6.
Not a great fan of doggies myself , they tend to dirty the area and some are potentially violent.
Also with world food shortages should we really be feeding food to out pets. Is this green
I am expecting an outburst from animal lovers.

Find all posts by this user Reply
Sherwood


Posts: 1,355
Joined: Mar 2005
Post: #5
27-04-2008 09:27 PM

We could also ban children as they often make a mess dropping their ice-cream cornets.

Find all posts by this user Reply
nevermodern


Posts: 653
Joined: Feb 2007
Post: #6
29-04-2008 05:52 PM

With regards to dogs as status symbols, i found this quite interesting:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk...446273.ece

Find all posts by this user Reply
blueyes


Posts: 8
Joined: Mar 2008
Post: #7
29-04-2008 07:30 PM

They definitely won't have pooper scoopers on them, they haven't got pockets in their tracksuits.
(maybe the hoodie could have another use now?)Rofl

These poor Staffies are used as ornaments. The so called "owners" traipse them around usually with inappropriate collars for the dog and give them a bad name.

Staffs are great friendly sociable dogs in the right conditions.

These people ruined our local swings in our park by allowing them to pull and bite at the tyres and ruin them - in the mistaken belief that it made the dogs "hard". Dogs need continuity not confusion.

Find all posts by this user Reply
Londondrz


Posts: 1,538
Joined: Apr 2006
Post: #8
30-04-2008 08:44 AM

I think we should ban them from the park and put them in the pub with the kids.Laugh

Find all posts by this user Reply
roz


Posts: 1,793
Joined: Mar 2005
Post: #9
30-04-2008 08:18 PM

There may be some responsible dog owners out there but they seem to be few and far between around here. One large dog ran down the street towards us the other day as I was walking up with my baby in the buggy. I wasn't sure whether the dog was running towards my child or just running, generally. It ran past so clearly had no intent of doing us harm but at best could well have knocked the buggy over. The owner was watching and just laughed. Dogs like those should not be let off the lead in public places and owners should be enforced to control their animals more.
This will probably upset a lot of people but with the exception of the 'friendlier' breeds, (labradors, collies) or those too small to inflict any serious damage on anything more than a table leg ( dachschunds, poodles), I think there needs to be either a ban on certain breeds or more enforced control. The recent case about the pub rottweilers killing a child on the premises is too horrific for words.
The US is obsessed with its guns and rights of gun owners, we in the UK are similarly obsessed with dogs and the rights of dog owners, many of whom keep the more scary breeds in order to present a certain image or to intimidate the public. We need to start putting more constraints on dog ownership in built up urban areas, not just banning them from certain parks.

Find all posts by this user Reply
Sherwood


Posts: 1,355
Joined: Mar 2005
Post: #10
30-04-2008 09:05 PM

Roz,

I think you will find that dogs are required to be kept on a lead on the pavement. But like so many laws it is not enforced.

Find all posts by this user Reply
Snazy


Posts: 1,504
Joined: Jan 2008
Post: #11
01-05-2008 11:09 AM

Sherwood Wrote:
Roz,

I think you will find that dogs are required to be kept on a lead on the pavement. But like so many laws it is not enforced.


Im not 100% on that one. I know the term "under control" is batted around a lot, but the definition of this is VERY unclear.

Roz, I totally understand your feelings on the matter, and it was parents and young children I was concerned about when I wrote to the parks people.

Brian, I think you will find that a lot of content of dog food would be deemed "unfit for human consumption" so its not really robbing humans of their grub Wink

There does however need to be better control over these people who want a dog but really cant be bothered looking after it properly or controlling them.

Find all posts by this user Reply
brian


Posts: 2,002
Joined: Apr 2005
Post: #12
01-06-2008 05:57 PM

Quite frankly in a crowded city dogs are a menace whereever they are. There is not enough space for the humans let alone agressive dogs.
In Crystal Palace Park today. Despite the signs dogs on lead they were running wild.
Dogs OK in country areas but in the city either an agressive addition for chavs or mollicoddled and spoilt .
I await abusive replies with interest

Find all posts by this user Reply
roz


Posts: 1,793
Joined: Mar 2005
Post: #13
01-06-2008 07:31 PM

Whatever happened to dog licences? Are they not required any more? If not these ought to be reinstated to pay for dog wardens and clean up costs. A couple of hundred a year seems reasonable.
Never mind handing over ?40k worth of lottery money to keep dog owners happy whilst most London kids never see a (clean) blade of grass.

Find all posts by this user Reply
brian


Posts: 2,002
Joined: Apr 2005
Post: #14
01-06-2008 07:44 PM

Yes Roz, I would say GBP 500.00 per year to cover the costs of fouling and nuisance. Old dog licence used to be 7/6d. 37.5 p your youngsters

Find all posts by this user Reply
vipes


Posts: 145
Joined: Oct 2006
Post: #15
01-06-2008 08:36 PM

brian Wrote:
Quite frankly in a crowded city dogs are a menace whereever they are. There is not enough space for the humans let alone agressive dogs.
In Crystal Palace Park today. Despite the signs dogs on lead they were running wild.
Dogs OK in country areas but in the city either an agressive addition for chavs or mollicoddled and spoilt .
I await abusive replies with interest


No abuse from this quarter Brian. An example of the latter mollycoddled type last week in the 'burbs. A deerhound a good foot taller than my 2 year old bounded over to him and knocked him spinning. The owner ambled over and just said, "he just loves children". I was thinking "what, for dinner". It's not a human it's a ****ing dog.

Find all posts by this user Reply
seeformiles


Posts: 269
Joined: Apr 2005
Post: #16
01-06-2008 09:21 PM

Dogs wouldn't be a problem if all owners picked up the mess and kept them on leads when requested to. I get depressed seeing every last bit of green space used as a dogs' toilet. Also what is it with this trend to leave plastic bags filled with dog poo hanging on fences? A nice present for someone else to deal with.

Find all posts by this user Reply
brian


Posts: 2,002
Joined: Apr 2005
Post: #17
02-06-2008 12:02 PM

Next door to me the residents have a large and growing dog which is confined at all times to back garden which is about 20 ft by 25 ft max.
Feel sorry for dog but also makes lots of noise

Find all posts by this user Reply
Perryman


Posts: 809
Joined: Dec 2006
Post: #18
03-06-2008 10:14 PM

This doggie bashing in SE23 seems to be mirroring Amsterdam council's proposals for Vondelpark, which also wants dogs kept on a tight leash at all times. But their aim is to open up the park to more diverse er sporting activities in the evening/night.

Of course probably not all SE23 dog oppressors are necessarily 'open air enthusiasts', who, sure (almost) certainly are not going to want any stray dogs around, but you have to wonder if there is a hidden agender here.

Find all posts by this user Reply
Londondrz


Posts: 1,538
Joined: Apr 2006
Post: #19
04-06-2008 12:56 PM

Nice steaming pile of poo outside our neighbours front door this morning, I would have loved to have caught the dog owner letting this happen, his or her nose would have been pushed into the offending poo.

Find all posts by this user Reply
Applespider


Posts: 283
Joined: Feb 2006
Post: #20
04-06-2008 04:23 PM

I'm not a dog-owner but I'll defend them since the majority of people walkings dogs that I see in this area seem to have them well under control and pick up any poo. I did see one guy with a husky-type in Dulwich Park about to leave the poo but I made a point of asking if he was going to clear it up and offered him an old carrier. Smile He did.

There are irresponsible people who own dogs and don't police their actions. There are irresponsible parents who don't teach their kids any discipline so we end up with teenagers roaming the streets and vandalising public property quite aside from spoiling all those quiet pubs :p.

Perhaps licenses for both dogs and kids? :p

Find all posts by this user Reply
Pages (2): « First [1] 2 Next > Last »

Friends of Blythe Hill Fields