| |
Picking on soft targets
• I ALSO took part in the consultation and attended meetings where the issue of dog control orders was discussed (Where pedestrians tread carefully, February 27). As I pointed out to councillors at the time, the persistently offending dog owners will not be confronted by street environment officers. They will not be told to pick up after their dog or put it on a lead. The officers will not see it happen or be too intimidated to do anything about it.
Responsible dog owners – the majority – do not need dog control orders to make sure they pick up after their dog or keep it under control in a public place.
The Responsible Dog Ownership – Dog Control Orders page on the council website states “our officers will be able to stop dog owners they see breaking these rules, ask them to comply and issue them with an £80 [fine] if they don’t”.
So why are our footpaths still covered in as much faeces as they were when dog control orders were first introduced?
Unfortunately, what I said at the time has turned out to be true. It appears no level of funding or policing will ensure street environment officers are present when and where persistent miscreants permit their dogs to foul public places; or are able to deal with the aggression and intimidation involved in confronting these people.
The council appears to have been made aware of the deficits of its policy and has now gone “undercover”, as suggested by your letter writer. The officers are wearing plain clothes in parks and targeting those they can: the responsible dog owners, people who carry poo bags, ready and willing to pick up their dog’s faeces.
It appears that guidelines issued when the dog control orders were introduced are no longer being followed by the street environment officers when issuing fixed penalty notices. I have been told of a fine issued when the owner returned to pick up after their dog (with their own bag) after the faeces was shown to them by an officer and another where there was no faeces and the officer could not show evidence of it.
This variation of the stated procedures reflects a need for those officers to achieve results, justification for the time and money spent on this policy. It does not make our footpaths any cleaner!
The dog owners that I come in contact with are being unfairly maligned because of the few irresponsible owners. They should not be used as “soft targets” in a target-ridden agenda.
DALE BARTER
Amwell Veterinary Practice
Amwell Street, EC1
|
| |
|
 |
| |
| |
| |
