Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Dogs in parks proposed restrictions
Are people aware that there is a bill being proposed to enforce dog owners to keep their dogs in a lead at all times in certain Harringey parks. Responsible dog owners will be penalised for the a actions of irresponsible dog owners. We need to be vigilant that this doesn't go through. There is a page on Facebook - Responsible Owners Against Restrictions
Tags for Forum Posts: consultation, dangerous dogs, dog control orders, dog on leads, dog walking, dogs
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by maggie on
-
When it comes to the risk of children being bitten then I think we do have to eliminate risk entirely not simply taking 'reasonable care to minimise risk'.
-
-
No, simply use a muzzle and then there would be no risk and no problem. The muzzle should preferably be on the dog.
-
-
Hi Billy,
I'm sure you wouldn't be scared of me or my dog if you met us. We're very lovable
My argument isn't about some sort of restriction but about using any such measures in proportion. Most parks have large dog free areas or dog on leads only areas already. I'm opposed to banning dogs from some parks altogether when there's no other alternative to exercise your dog freely (as stipulated in the Animal Welfare Act 2006). If there were two roughly equal sized parks just a stones throw apart and one had a total ban on dogs an the other didn't then such a ban might be workable but otherwise it is just not necessary. Like I said in my earlier post - at the times when I walk my dog there are never any children around.
I also used to be scared of the owners - especially teenage owners. That changed when I became a dog owner myself. My experience so far has been that guys with so called status dogs keep them either on the lead or if they do start running towards us to greet my dog they are very obedient and return to their owner as soon as they call them. The owners also usually cross the road when they know their own dogs are not friendly and they see me and my dog.
So I think quite a lot of our fear has to do with our perception of owners with such dogs. Maybe all park users should be educated how best to behave around each other. It's live and let live I'll say.
-
Permalink Reply by Alan Stanton on
-
Can I suggest that the issue of dog control is only one of many in balancing the different and sometimes competing interests of park users. Of course, I accept that it's an important issue and can play a key part in making some people unwilling to visit their local park.
Successful parks like most successful common areas of cities need what Jane Jacobs described as "intricate minglings of different uses". But the minglings in a park sometimes need to be managed, because it's all too easy for a particular group of people to scare off or drive out others. In this 2003 video from Vancouver local residents and Parks' staff met to talk about the impact on their park by groups of street drinkers, drug dealers and people leaving garbage.
-
-
Its not simply a case of irresponsible v responsible dog owners. When I see a dog running around I have no idea if it has a responsible owner or not. Being told by the owner that their dog is friendly is no help either, I've been bitten by a dog walking to heel who seemed perfectly under control until it struck.
I walk my little granddaughter in Finsbury park and I simply cannot take the risk of waiting to see if an unknown dog is going to be a threat, so unfortunately every time a dog passes or runs towards us I have to pick her up, its sad that we can't relax and enjoy the park without having to be vigilant. The only place my granddaughter is free to run and excersice without worrying about dogs is in the fenced play area. I feel that children should have more rights than dogs but I would have no objection to part of the park being fenced off as a dog exercise area. If dog owners object to having their dog on a lead then one answer would be to put a muzzle on their dog, the dog could then exercise without being a threat, or perceived as a threat, to others.
-
-
As the sister of someone who was seriously mauled by a dog as a baby, and the mother of a 3 year old I completely understand the concerns, but then again as the friend of a dog owner/walker/trainer I also understand that it is the owner/walker that is at fault here, that dogs form part of life and have done so for a pretty long time now and that they have to be exercised.
A park is a community space which needs to accommodate the needs of all those who use it (as long of course as they're acting within the law - I am not talking about loitering drunks or gangs intimidating people here). How about allocating times that dogs are allowed to be off their lead in the park? Then the parent can make the decision as to whether they want to take their child at that time or wait until a time when dogs are only allowed in on a lead (as mentioned even when they're off the lead the playgrounds are designated dog free areas at all times)?
-
Permalink Reply by John D on
-
Muzzles, time slots - resonable suggestions.
But who is going to enforce the regulations? Won't this just become yet another widely-ignored dead letter law, like smoking in company vehicles, using hand-held mobiles in a vehicle, dropping litter, 7.5 T restrictions, 20 mph restrictions, lights on bicycles, bicycles going on pavements and through red lights ?
The introduction of laws that are not enforced leads to contempt for ALL laws.
-
-
that is the problem, irrespective of what regulations are put in place, they mean nothing if they're not "policed"
-
-
John_D, you give a persuasive list of examples of unenforced regulations. But can I ask you to reconsider the general principle you seem to be suggesting: that the sole reason people obey laws is because there's a copper on a corner nearby who is likely to catch them; and this may lead to punishment.
Seems a bleak view of human behaviour. Is life along Wightman Road that solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short? Do you drop litter or fly-tip your waste when you're sure nobody is watching? If the street lights went out suddenly, would you begin "dipping" the handbags and pockets of elderly people?
Even putting aside ethics, altruism, civility, and some shared values as citizens and neighbours, isn't mutual self-interest a powerful motive for behaving decently to one another? - whether in a park, in the street or when buying and selling? Aren't most laws obeyed by most people without police permanently on every street corner?
-
-
Aren't most laws obeyed by most people without police permanently on every street corner ?
Not on the planet on which I live.
Not on Wightman Road
I did a survey one day with a video camera. 50% of the drivers who passed were exceeding the 20mph limit as shown by the flashing speed indicating device ( SID ).
I have a bleak view of human behaviour because the behaviour of a significant proportion of our population does not match your optimism.
-
-
yes no-one will enforce these laws and may lead to locals arguing at each other.
I have never seen anyone punished for feeding pigeons. I sometimes see massive amounts of bread dumped in local parks (probably by nearby shops who don't want to pay for commercial waste disposal) and smaller amounts left by well meaning people, however I've seen rats and foxes eating this bread, attracting these animals to our parks isn't a very good idea. I would suggest these are much more of a threat than domesticated dogs. No one cleans up after foxes and rats. No one spends time training and socializing them.
That said, I am not in favour of more laws that are ignored either, like most dog owners I would prefer sensible locals working together with respect.
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
