Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Owners to be required to put dogs on lead on Parkland Walk?
During a Twitter exchange over the past couple of days between @AbbiTownsend and myself, Abbi has raised the issue that owners may soon be required to keep their dogs on a lead on Parkland Walk.
Yesterday
harringayonline: Responsible dog ownership. Facets: dog exclusion zones, dogs on leads, removal of problem dogs, dog fouling#stanharrforum #consultation
harringayonline: @AbbiTownsend Not on their consultation finder -http://t.co/1xo1QiGk - might be clues in Dec minutes - http://t.co/zSPm3h40. Try yr Cllr!
9:22am, Jan 27 from Web
Today
AbbiTownsend: “@harringayonline Looks like council plan ban dogs off leads on @ParklandWalk@FriendsAllyPark @stoudgreeners http://t.co/Q2eoT11x.
9:39pm, Jan 27 from Twitter for iPad
harringayonline: @abbitownsend Probably too impatient, but not seeing that on the map. Can I borrow your patience? Any clues where I look?
9:55pm, Jan 27 from HootSuite
AbbiTownsend: @harringayonline Main report sections: 2.3, 5.9.3, 10 & a further 14 pages of green space in appendix 3!
10:05pm, Jan 27 from Twitter for iPad
AbbiTownsend: @harringayonline legally 'the public highway' includes public rights of way i.e. those paths that don't have tarmac on, like@ParklandWalk
10:10pm, Jan 27 from Twitter for iPad
harringayonline: @abbitownsend Ugh! Okeedokes will take a look. Thanks
10:15pm, Jan 27 from HootSuite
Tags for Forum Posts: consultation, dangerous dogs, dog control orders, dog on leads, dog walking, dogs
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Philip Wilton on
-
The council are now taking action to consult on the issue of dog control orders. These orders will give the council a wide range of powers ranging from banning dogs altogether to no restrictions at all. The theory behind this move is the belief that dogs are some form of mauling and fouling danger to the 'innocent public'. This is clearly nonsence as the owner of a badly behaved status dog will be given another law to disregard whilst the poodle puppy is denied the opportunity to run and socialise (and their owners invariably pick up the dog mess). The people most affected by these orders will be the ordinary responsible dog owner and not those people who choose to let their dog foul and damage open spaces (they dont care now and they wont care when the new restrictions are imposed)
Dog walkers use park space on a daily basis and form a social group that bond communities and make the park feel safer. The dog walkers of downhills park are a great example of this bonding: we use the park cafe keeping it open, pick up rubbish, report anything suspicious and participate in park life.
A group of over a 100 dog walkers and friends have now set up a facebook group called ROAR to keep in touch with each other about dog control orders - please join us.
-
Permalink Reply by mrs finch on
-
did a Facebook search for ROAR but could not find you--can you send a link??
-
Permalink Reply by jack63kids on
-
It's invariably the minority of dog owners who spoil things for everyone else. I've nothing against *any* the dogs themselves, they're just being dogs whether they're slobbering over me - he's just being friendly - sniffing around my ankles - he's just being friendly - crapping over the environment - what's your problem lady!?! - or trying to drag off a small child -words fail me on that one! The blinking owners are the ones that need to do something about it - like you and your troop of excellent dog owners are doing, Philip.
I wonder if bringing licensing back again with some form of training for dog owners ... It's probably impractical and too expensive for many, superfluous for most - but what else can be done? I'd love there to be a solution that doesn't mean everyone is severely restricted. If it's a choice between that and chancing someone losing their eye-sight - which can happen from parasites in some dog-mess - then I'm afraid I'd have to err on side of caution. I'm feeling for the council in having to make a decision on this one.
Please let us know if your ROAR group comes up with a better solution. I fear that you're right that the baduns will carry on regardless whatever the council does.
-
Permalink Reply by David Barry on
-
An interesting (to me anyway) point is that part of the Parkland Walk is in Islington. So presumably whether you are breaking the rules could depend on which side of the line you are.
-
-
I'd be in favour of more areas in public parks where dogs have to be kept on leads. Obviously this wont solve the problem of status dogs and thier irresponsible owners.
However it might do something about the many owners who when their dog is jumping and/or barking at young kids, who are clearly terrified and screaming, see no need control their dog, or do anything other than say 'dont worry he's friendly!'. I'd never know if this type of owner is part of the "most dog owners are responsible" group or not.
-
-
Hi Eddy
We as a group are keen to promote responsible dog ownership and I am sure that any dog owner would be horrified if they thought their dog was creating distress in other park users but I think the key word here is tolerance of all park users.
The other day a child ran into the back of me whilst trying to learn to ride her bike in the park: at this point I had two options either rant about keeping your child under control etc etc or accept that sometimes accidents happen and be nice. I now 'comically' jump out of the childs way and chat to the parent - wow talking to strangers in London!
Perhaps if a child is scared a friendly dog it is an opportunity for a parent to show their child that nature and animals are not to be feared.
-
-
The type of people who walk there dogs in the Park areas are almost always sensible, in control of their dogs, picking up their dog mess and just enjoying life and the facilities. Dogs are important to people with depression and other illnesses and can make the difference between declining health or recovery. Lets stop the killjoys using the trophy dog issue as an excuse to further reduce the quality of our lives.
-
-
I think one does have to accept there can be a conflict of interest here. I was brought up with dogs, some of them very large, in the country as it happens. When I took our family dog for a walk, and I have many happy memories of this, I only had him on a lead for his own protection from road traffic. However as soon as we got to a traffic free area, common where I lived -often traffic AND people free -I would let him run free.
However in congested areas people and dogs have to share the space. My daughter when aged five, was run at and knocked over, and hurt by a large dog, out of control in Waterlow park. Having no fear of dogs myself and being close by I was able to prevent what could have been a very serious incident by grabbing the dog by the collar, pulling him off my child, and twisting the collar so as to restrict the dogs breathing in order to distract it. (And distracted, but not hurt, it was.)
The owner far from being apologetic claimed that his dog was:-
1. Friendly
2. Being injured by me
(to which I responded to the effect that I could arrange an injury to the dog and no court would convict...)
My daughter was within a jaw closing of being scarred for life.
The problem is that the selfish, inconsiderate few, make life hard for the rest of us in SO many areas. It is so sad because "companion animals" are such an enhancement of the quality of life for so many people.
(I spend a lot of time, typing alone, and I always welcome a visit from a neighbour's cat who often drops around at about this time, and looks through the window with an astonished expression...)
-
-
here is the link
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
AbbiTownsend: @harringayonline have emailed council to ask when dog control orders open for public consultation but they haven't replied. Do you know?
10:14pm, Jan 26 from Twitter for iPad