Camden's Dog Proposal Consultation results ...

www.camden.gov.uk/ccm/content/transport-and-streets/clean-streets/results-of-dog-control-consultation-2007.en.

700 responses were received via email.

3% agreed with the Dog Control Order proposals 97% opposed the proposals 49% of all those in opposition opposed the 'dogs on lead'
proposal 18% stated their agreement with the 'dog fouling' proposal (of those who expressed an opinion! I'm sure that
everyone was actually in agreement.) Of the 6% that expressed an opinion on the number of dogs a
person can be in charge of, 61% were opposed to the limit of four
dogs. 39% were in favour.

Also, even according to their (very imperfect) questionnaire results
47% thought four dogs per person were too many BUT 49% thought
it too few or that there should be no restrictions.

I guess we just press on but at least now we know that we have to be
very specific about one thing - that it does seem that people with more
than even one dog are frowned on, despite the fact that all evidence
points to people with ONE dog being the cause of any problems.   Even
dog fouling!    Why is it always people with one dog I see studiously
ignoring their crapping dogs?    Maybe they really believe that "one
won't make any difference"?

35 years ago I had two dogs, a cross-bred black spaniel and an elderly
yellow labrador. Every Sunday I went to my friend Mary's for
lunch.   Mary's husband was Graham Giles, who many people may
remember as the original vet in Belsize Village. She had a large
lurcher and a little terrier rescued from a rubbish tip in Malta.
We were joined by our friends Barbi Lyons, whose obituary appeared in
the Ham & High recently and who had a whippet and a basset hound,
and Jude, who had a border collie.    While Mary, Barbi and
Jude prepared lunch I would put all seven dogs into my MGB (they would
file into the car in order and "assume their positions") and drive to
East Heath car park for a pre-prandial walk on the heath. In
those days the only professional dog walker I knew was a wonderful lady
called Margaret Sands, although I believe that there was a
somewhat eccentric old lady (who from my advanced years I now realise
wasn't in the least eccentric!) from Camden who had several dogs, some
of whom she pushed over the heath in a pram.    The
three of us were probably the only people, in those days, to regularly
walk several dogs at once and I can remember being photographed by a
group of Japanese tourists as I trudged across the hill after a
snowfall with a line of dogs following me.   (NB:
As I recall Margaret had been the Administrator at the London Clinic
and after she retired had lost her husband and her two dogs within a
short period of time.   Her friends had suggested that she
put an ad. in 'The Lady' offering to walk dogs for the good folk of
Hampstead and this is how her second profession began).

Nowadays there are quite a few professional dog walkers, a result
- I presume - of more dog-owners and more professional women who
don't have time to walk their own dogs.   (Sorry if this
sounds sexists, but it WAS generally the women who walked the family
dog - and still is as far as I can make out).

Over the past 35 years I have met all of my friends through the daily dog walks.
I have never had to put my dogs in kennels, and neither have any of my friends.
At the moment I have two dogs staying with me while their owners are on
holiday and en route to the heath for our walk I will collect a
friend's guide dog (she stopped walking her two years ago, aged
91!).   After the walk I will collect another friend's
elderly dachshund (she doesn't "do" walks) so that she can spend the
day with me while her owner is out of London.

I regularly see on the heath the following dogs which are owned by one
person: six Westies, six Maltese terriers, five dachshunds - and there
are many people
who have up to four or five rescue dogs (I wish I could afford to!).

The idea that one person cannot control a group of dogs is ludicrous
and I have yet to see or hear evidence from any quarter to back up
suggestions to the contrary.    Why, therefore, are
"the management" so hell-bent on targetting
this group of people by insisting that their activities need to be
curbed?     The cynic in me (oh, surely not!) has a
sneaky suspicion that on-the-spot-fines are the motivation behind this
move.   It would be a "nice little earner", particularly
since - as I understand it - there will be no means of appeal.

I absolutely sympathise with people who are unfamiliar with dogs and
may find the sight of a group of dogs with one person alarming, which
is precisely why my routes across the heath rarely involve main paths
and open areas. However, I see no reason why the views of a few
people who rarely visit the heath should be given precedence over the
views of those who visit the heath every single day without fail.
   Whatever next? Culling the bird population because
a few people are bird-phobic, regular tree-pruning and mowing to
appease the hay fever sufferers? My own phobia, as
someone who was beaten to a pulp by a deranged man when I was 15,
concerns (in my paranoia shady-looking) unaccompanied adult males.
   Should I campaign for them to be banned from the heath?

Every single report of dog attack has concerned a single dog, never a
group of dogs.   For the record these reports all seem to
emanate from the Gospel Oak corner of the heath and I do wonder why -
since the heath staff office is located there - so few people are
apprehended for having out-of-control dogs.    For
myself, despite the attractions of the cafe, I avoid this corner of the
heath, although I did venture there recently when the Corporation had
an "open day" as part of their Consultation.    Sure
enough, there was a Staffordshire bitch on heat - no collar but
apparently with two young girls - running around desperately trying to
avoid the attentions of several male dogs.   Canine feelings
were running high but no member of the Constabulary approached these
girls to suggest that bringing a bitch on heat (and not wearing a
collar with identity tag) was irresponsible behaviour.

On an entirely separate matter, has anyone noticed that the parakeets
are not quite as much in evidence as usual?   Any ideas as to
why this should be the case?

Report as inappropriate

Comments

23 May 2007 12:42

Rosie R

23 May 2007 12:42

Re the parakeets, it could be one of two things. They seem to disappear at this time of the year when they're breeding but should return by the end of June.
The other possibility is that there is a big debate going on at the moment about non-native species & the impact they're having on our native wildlife. There was talk about a controlled cull on the parakeets but it was opposed as there was no evidence to suggest they were depriving the native birds of food, nest sights etc. However, since then, it has all gone quiet & I cant find out whether a limited cull actually happened. The RSPB & BTO dont know either.