first mate

Cassius, You may have a point. In my experience there is always a bin handy somewhere in which to deposit the bag. I may have to carry the bag a little way but just view this as part of the responsibility of owning a dog. I've always assumed, I hope not incorrectly, that most people will not object to you putting the bag in bins parked out on the road, if you cannot find anything else. But, as I said, there is generally a council bin not too far from wherever you are.

SteveT The stuff on your bin may be fox doo. Foxes go everywhere, I find it in my front garden and back on a regular basis. They like to mark their territory, especially at this time of year. Plus it can look very like dog doo. I'm sure you are not really suggesting that a dog owner would deliberately smear excrement over your bin. Perhaps I have misinterpreted what you said? Anyhow, there is a dog close to where I live that regularly deposits on my street. It is an entire male, light tan, older labrador. It is always walked off lead and the owner/s (a mother and son) never pick up. I am waiting for an opportunity to have a word. I would also add that of the many, many dog owners I know this is the one and only person I know who does this and who walks their dog offlead. Not surprisingly, just this one dog produces a lot of mess, some of which I have picked up myself. If they ever read this forum perhaps they will be shamed into changing their ways.

Huggers, I agree. There is no good reason I can think of that a dog should ever be offlead on a public street, be it major or minor highway (unless its a guide dog). Dogs being dogs are far more likely to get into fisticuffs if they are "trapped" onlead and confronted by another dog offlead in a small space- which a path is. I don't want to stigmatise certain breeds but we have to agree that the most likely dog to be seen careering around the street offlead is the staffie/bull type, often male and often entire. The breed type, the gender and the un-neutered status of the dog all serve to increase the risk of a fight when offlead. It is also a fact that the majority of people who let their dogs offlead in this way are probably totally irresponsible in other aspects of dog ownership.

puzzled, As I said, strictly speaking an attack by a dog on another animal would be a civil offence, and there is legislation to cover this scenario as a civil offence. However, if in the course of the attack human witnesses felt themselves also to be at risk of attack by the dog then it falls under the Dangerous Dogs Act. The key here is that the dog does not necessarily have to actually bite the person. If they feel sufficiently frightened of the dog and believe they will be attacked and the dog is not under control, that is on a lead or muzzled, then they may have grounds to prosecute under the DDA. I have to admit that dogs on lead on the streets is a slightly grey area. It is a criminal offence for a dog to be out and about without a collar stating the owner's address. Under section 27 of the Road Traffic Act of 1988 councils can insist that dogs are kept on lead on designated highways. Thus every time an owner crosses a designated road with their dog offlead they are committing an offence. An offlead, unmuzzled dog that behaves in a threatening or aggressive mannner towards any human might be deemed out of control and culpable under the DDA. Again, the dog does not have to bite a threatening display would be enough.

Mark, Point taken but I'd hope that the community police would put the needs of the community ahead of a personal reaction to a throwaway (though rather silly) line from a forumite. I think the priorities discussed here stand despite my rather low remark.

ayresc, Quite. Perhaps these community wardens or toy police-people, or whatever they are, can be given the power to issue on the spot fines to those with dogs offlead on the streets, to those who don't pick up poo and, while we are at it, fine the litter louts who throw broken glass, gum and food detritus around etc..etc... A much better use of taxpayer money than funding those assorted wardens and clampers who prowl the streets looking to fine car owners for minor, or even imaginary infringements,of money-making parking laws.

ayresc, I'm sorry but with respect you seem to be slightly missing the point. Dogs offlead on the street are already illegal, therefore the "scrotes" to whom you refer are already in breach of the law- but they continue to break it do they not? Why not use existing leglisation to prosecute or fine offenders, thus pursuing the miscreants and leaving the law abiding majority alone?

Xlena, My commiserations to your friend and all the others who have had pets harmed in this way. I should add that other dogs have also been on the receiving end of such attacks. I do understand your anger and your desire to come up with a solution but must echo the views of others here in suggesting that your route will simply penalise the vast majority of responsible dog owners; those who behave irresponsibly will continue to do so. We know this is true because it is already illegal to walk a dog offlead on the street- it is a certain type that struts around with a dog offlead and they will not change by extending dog control orders- they are already breaking the law. Given the above and that it is already illegal to walk a dog offlead on the public highways etc.. I am not quite sure what extending dog control orders will achieve. I should add that it is already a civil offence under the Dog Act of 1871 if a dog is dangerous to people or to animals and is deemed out of proper control, that is off lead, wherever the offence happens. The dog can be subject to a destruction order and the owner may have to pay costs. Perhaps your organisation should look at taking legal action against the person in question. Though a civil matter the police were informed and you have the vet's report as evidence. The profile derived from a successful case plus a hefty financial penalty to said owner would, in my view, be appropriate justice and much more of a deterrent.

curlykaren, I was sufficiently startled by the vitriol that came my way, for no good reason I may add, that I spoke to the relevant authorities about it. I was taken aback that a group of girls should be so rude and overbearing and saddened that en masse they seemed to have a real hatred of dogs. I think it is doubtful that the whole lot of them have been attacked by dogs so can only conclude that they have learned the dislike. I too see more and more children who run and scream at the mere sight of a dog, not only in the park but in the street, where the dog is clearly on a lead- I note that the accompanying adult often seems to share the child's dislike.

I was ordered by some Harris girls to leave the park once, on the basis that they did not like any dogs. If my dog had been kicked by one of these youngsters I would have taken the matter to the school and the parks authorities pronto.

earlsam, please could your inspection address the problem of litter in general, including but not limited to: gum, broken glass, chicken bones and other food waste, and dog poo.

ian_b Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > dog poo > dog poo > dog poo > > its everywhere. you'll see plenty on your > walkabout, on the paths and all over the rye if > you go there too. owners with no social > conscience. they're supposed to bag it, right? so > many dont bother. BAD FORM. Agree that because of the few who don't bag it is a problem, but you imply that there are many that don't- what is your evidence? Remember dogs go at least twice a day, it would only take one or two offenders to create a significant amount of dog poo in the area. As I keep saying, those who show selfish beahviour in this area are as likely to show it in others, I have a big problem about broken glass, gum and chicken bones that seem to be everywhere too.

stillthinking108 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I agree with what too few people have said on > here, that the article is entirely true. I moved > to the area only 4 or 5 months ago, just up from > Nunhead Green, by the cememtery. Nunhead seems to > be full of Irish and African people. Peckham Rye > is a great mix of cultures, my personal favorite > is the 'Irish-Jamaican Butchers'. But the first > time I walked into Dulwich, I saw less and less > Irish people, less and less African or Jamaican > people, and more and more middle class white mums > who seemed to be engaged in some kind of maternal > arms race, its as though the fetish of oversized > 4x4s has now spilled over into the world of > pushchairs. Why is a place "full of" of Irish, African and Jamaican people preferable to one with "more" middle class white people. Surely if one celebrates diversity to say an area "full of" of any particular group is preferable to another is contradictory?

As a dog owner I agree that people need to take the time to properly train their dogs so that they don't go running up to people/children they don't know and jump all over them. Dog aggressive Staff types are likely to be more of a menace to other dogs than people and we all wish they were not in the hands of the irresponsible owners that make them the way they are. Unfortunately there are those who dislike all dogs and who would like to see dogs banned from parks or kept on a lead at all times. The problem with this is that the majority of law abiding council tax payers, with harmless, well trained pets will be heavily penalised and those who don't give a darn will continue to exercise their dogs off lead and probably get away with it too. The same minority that let their dogs defecate everywhere and don't pick up and let their dogs wander the streets offlead. I would hazard a guess that such types also disregard speed limits, litter the streets with broken glass, chicken bones and gum and generally care little for the wellbeing of the community.

Catalyst, I tend to agree with you. Rather the same as drivers who habitually speed despite penalties and fines. In the case of Dog Control Orders it is the majority of law abiding dog owners that are punished. The "foulers" will just carry on oblivious.

cate, sorry I can't help. I have not seen the dog in question myself. The original poster, doglover, describes it as looking like a small, grey dingo. I have not seen a dog that fits the description but wanted to get the post back on the main forum area because forewarned...and all that. Sorry to hear about your dog.

Yesterday Doglover posted the following. It was lounged but I am posting it in the main section again because it is useful info for dog owners. Beware of a greyish dog that looks a bit like a small dingo and is wearing a harness. It attacked my dog this morning in PRP. I had seen it earlier worrying another dog in the flower gardens at the entrance, then it ran off - no sign of its owner. When I saw it again, it was over the far side of the lower end of the park with a woman and another dog. I could see it watching my dog so we turned to walk in the opposite direction. But it galloped over, knocked my 16-year-old dog off her feet and then carried on worrying her until I managed to grab her to calm her down. The owner was a good 50 metres away and did nothing to intervene, but did hold on to the dog as we walked away. Still, I saw it again running around on its own near the Sexby Garden. The owner is clearly unable to control it or can't be bothered. So do take care of your four-legged friends. I wouldn't want your dog to go through want mine did.

Beware of a greyish dog that looks a bit like a small dingo and is wearing a harness. It attacked my dog this morning in PRP. I had seen it earlier worrying another dog in the flower gardens at the entrance, then it ran off - no sign of its owner. When I saw it again, it was over the far side of the lower end of the park with a woman and another dog. I could see it watching my dog so we turned to walk in the opposite direction. But it galloped over, knocked my 16-year-old dog off her feet and then carried on worrying her until I managed to grab her to calm her down. The owner was a good 50 metres away and did nothing to intervene, but did hold on to the dog as we walked away. Still, I saw it again running around on its own near the Sexby Garden. The owner is clearly unable to control it or can't be bothered. So do take care of your four-legged friends. I wouldn't want your dog to go through want mine did. This was posted by Doglover yesterday. It got lounged. I'm posting it in the main section again because it will be useful for dog owners to take note if they have not done so already.

DogLover Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Beware of a greyish dog that looks a bit like a > small dingo and is wearing a harness. It attacked > my dog this morning in PRP. > > I had seen it earlier worrying another dog in the > flower gardens at the entrance, then it ran off - > no sign of its owner. When I saw it again, it was > over the far side of the lower end of the park > with a woman and another dog. I could see it > watching my dog so we turned to walk in the > opposite direction. But it galloped over, knocked > my 16-year-old dog off her feet and then carried > on worrying her until I managed to grab her to > calm her down. > > The owner was a good 50 metres away and did > nothing to intervene, but did hold on to the dog > as we walked away. Still, I saw it again running > around on its own near the Sexby Garden. The > owner is clearly unable to control it or can't be > bothered. > > So do take care of your four-legged friends. I > wouldn't want your dog to go through want mine > did.

Scott, That is awful. Unfortunately the staff owner may use the excuse that the pug owners got bitten because they unwisely intervened in a dog fight. It's another golden rule that you don't intervene in a dog fight because there is every chance you will get bitten. However, if it was my dog I am sure I would, particularly with a bull breed/ "staff" type, for the simple reason that we all know they are being bred and trained for dog fighting and a minority of idiot owners encourage this behaviour. Some weirdos just get a buzz out of seeing their dog attack other dogs. Some simply don't know enough about the pitfalls of these dog types and get a staff type without doing their homework. Unfortunately, quite a number of "staff" owners fall into the trap of thinking that because the breed is generally good with children and humans, it will be the same with other dogs- not so. Also many so-called staffs are not purebred and have pitbull or other less reliable breeds mixed in. Finally, so many people won't neuter their male "staffs". There is always a price to pay for keeping an entire male, it is a fact of nature that they will be more dog aggressive (other entire males that is) and more likely to fight. So aside from all the other breed characteristics vis av vis other dogs, keeping the males intact is really loading the dice in the wrong direction. I do hope the owner of the dangerous dog is suitably punished and that the owners of the pug are okay too. A painful and traumatic experience.

Sandperson, as a kid it was instilled in me from a very early age to avoid dogs you don't know and to never touch a dog until you have asked its owner if you can, and if it is safe to so. You are right not to let your toddler approach dogs on his/her own.

I feel threatened by bull breeds if I don't know the dog and, more importantly, I don't know the owner. But that is because I am a dog owner myself and my greatest concern would be for the safety of my dog. I would have no concerns for my own safety. In the wrong hands any dog can be a menace but some breeds have much more power than others. Staffs, if they are purebred, and have not been beaten and kicked into becoming aggressive towards humans by their human owners, are amongst the most reliable breeds with people. With other dogs, however, they can be highly aggressive, any responsible staff owner knows they have to be much more vigilant around other dogs. Many will be okay, but with some the job they were bred for, fighting and bull baiting, can come to the fore with disastrous consequences because they are so powerful. Few dogs, like people, are born psychotic- a few are made that way by being abused or by very bad breeding. But, as I have already indicated, that is not a breed specific trait. People and children who treat dogs sensibly and with a degree of respect, are unlikely to ever come to harm from the average pooch.

PR, Yes, I agree. It's probably worth reminding ourselves that anyone can be dodgy in this area too, not just older men. The most recent child abuse allegations to hit the press concerned two women working in child care.

PR, I'm with you on this. You don't have to be a parent to understand the power of the bond with a child. The human imagination allows us enough insight to understand things beyond our direct experience. The notion that non child bearing adults "just don't understand" is somewhat patronising and narrow minded, it is also rather undermining of those who adopt.

All park users dislike rubbish. Dog turds should be picked up by the owners, just as drinking straws, crisp packets etc should be picked up after consumption of food/drink- I've seen a proliferation of these recently. There is also a problem with broken glass. I've had to report this to park wardens three times now. Twice loads of broken glass has appeared near the dog free area under discussion. The glass was scattered around in the grass and could have caused damage to a child or a dog. There are also a number of deep holes in the same area into which tins have been sunken (not sure why but they are like holes you'd get on a golf course)any dog running at full pelt could catch its paw and end up with a broken leg.