first mate

Long ago ED was quite working class and then became the faintest of faintly bohemian (Tony Blair just voted in, Grace and Favour and Blue Mountain opened, lots of independent shops, bric a brac places etc..) but swifly morphed into nappy valley as new property hungry mummies and daddies swept in from Putney, Battersea etc.. Now it is totally MOR and as the chains continue to move in I think it could end up utterly suburban and boring and soooo heterosexual. Bellenden now is a bit what ED used to be like, back in the day.

What time of the morning is the dog barking and for how long. If, for instance, a dog is let out at 7am and barks for 5-10 minutes the council would not view this as excessive. Anti bark devices can be harmful, not only to the dog but to other animals.

Didn't Labour Councillors make some sort of pledge to tackle rail services locally? Cannot remember if this extended to bus services too? Either way, what exactly are they now doing re rail services? Even more important if local bus services are being decimated.

This sounds awful and the owners should be held accountable. In the dog's defence, if its intent was to truly attack none of you would be able to deter it and would be badly injured. It does sound a bit like really out of control attempts to interact with people in a very inappropriate way. Young dogs can be very nippy and it can be scary and hurt, especially powerful bully breeds. The dog should not have been off lead. All that said, there is no excuse where the owners are concerned, and even the biggest dog lover might be scared by this sort of uncontrolled behaviour. Ideally, the owners would be educated or the dog found a responsible home with owners that know what they are doing. The owners you describe sound clueless. I hope this does not curtail your enjoyment of parks in future or your view of all dogs. I also meant to add I hope the police intervene as this sort of inappropriate behaviour is a real risk to small children, the frail or elderly and almost certainly to other dogs. se22cat Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > A "puppie" by his retarded owners - it looked like > an all black dog, very muscular, wearing a > shoulder mounted grip, possible staff mix (am no > expert on dogs) a fat, seemingly drunken pair of > unpleasant Irish in their 60's repeatedly jumped > up at a young lady in her mid 20's just over an > hour ago in Goose Green up by the church, then > went for my wife. > > The dog tried to bit her after jumping up at her > chest, leaving her with a scratch, then ran at me, > I managed to push it away then it came for us > again as I confronted the two morons who had no > control over this dangerous animal as it was > obviously too strong for them, they appeared > drunk, it was untrained and they simply didn't > care. > > I reported it to the Police as soon as we got > home, got a crime reference number. > > If you see this dog and it's scumbag owners, I'd > urge you to vacate the park asap especially if you > have children. > > It'd be for the best for the dog along with it's > owners to be destroyed.

Thank DuncanW. JohnL, legalalien kindly explained that it was likely this was not wholly sinister, in that the request was so the company did not have to go through the rigamarole of applying for a licence each year. That said, I think there is more control and accountability if they have to, which it seems they now will, if DuncanW is correct in what he has heard.

So that website would have been the source for various articles, I am not involved with FPR but imagine they have the best interests of the park at heart. It would be good to know that those amendments and withdrawals have definitely been made how did you find out about them? DuncanW Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > first mate Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > I have quoted one of a number of online > articles, > > and do not know their source for the 'recovery' > > aspect. > > > > This year, when the event organiser requested > an > > in perpetuity licence for, I think, up to 4 > events > > a year, Cllr Hamvas objected. I have looked but > > cannot find what the new licence covers. Do you > > know for sure that what they wanted was turned > > down? > > > Have you? All of the quotes you used are on the > Friends of Peckham Rye website - > http://www.peckhamryepark.org/news > They don't quote any source or evidence for this > claim either. > > > The application was amended withdrawing the 'in > perpetuity' aspect + some other amendments to > reflect concerns that had been raised. The > Licensing Authority then withdrew their > representations against. TBF I don't think this > info is on Southwark's website yet, but it was > communicated by email to parties who have > expressed interest.

The reasonable solution, for which there is already existing legislation including control orders, is in the form of PSPOS. Dogs should be kept on a short lead on all paved areas and certain planted areas, if they are not they can be ordered to be or fined for non-compliance. Wholesale bans will not work as dogs and their owners are probably the most regular and intensive all year round park users. Peer pressure and a degree of self- policingfrom fellow dog owners and dog walkers might help.

I have quoted one of a number of online articles, and do not know their source for the 'recovery' aspect. This year, when the event organiser requested an in perpetuity licence for, I think, up to 4 events a year, Cllr Hamvas objected. I have looked but cannot find what the new licence covers. Do you know for sure that what they wanted was turned down?

Because the flood alleviation works are not being carried out this year, the GALA Music Festival which was to have taken place on a new site on the Common will now take place in the Park on the site used previously across the road from the Harris Boys School. HP I don't know but would not be surprised if organisers have also been granted right to hold other events, as requested. I could envisage a scenario where a section of the park is sectioned off for the whole summer.As I said, the area sectioned off this year is definitely bigger than it was last time. From one of many reports online: "The event is scheduled for 2nd-4th June, spanning the Queen?s Jubilee Bank holiday weekend. The site will be blocked off for some 19 days between 23rd May and 10th June. The noise levels will be worst for those living in the neighbourhoods around the south side of the Park, though the music can be heard as far away as Telegraph Hill. The noise will particularly affect anyone in neighbourhoods around the south of the Park who is planning a street or outdoor party to celebrate the Jubilee. Areas of the Park used for the 2021 GALA event have yet to recover. If the weather during the 19 day period that GALA is to occupy the site is wet, the damage could be considerable and long-lasting."

Anyway, it's now permanent. Southwark have waved it through. I'd imagine it'll grow. I'd love to know what Southwark makes and what the money is spent on.

It looks as though the footprint of the event is larger than last year?

Rockets, you don't understand, now we know the data is unreliable we cannot be certain that traffic has increased. LTNs are a great idea because we have to do something to try to reduce traffic. Just because they have not reduced traffic on this road yet it does not mean they never will. We just have to give it all time to 'bed in'. Am I right?

Jazzer, 'my point' was in response to another poster who stated Southwark did not have much sway over Harris schools- while this is true, at the time, when JB was our councillor, he (and by extension Southwark) was closely involved in getting a number of school sites acquired because there was a stated massive requirement for as many schools as possible in the borough. Clearly, if schools cannot fill their classes they will cease to be viable. The point stands that, it seems, Southwark have not done a great job of understanding intake requirements for the borough. jazzer Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > And your point is????????????????? > > If it's a dig at James, he's no longer a > councillor, so a wasted dig. > > first mate Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > James Barber was instrumental in helping Harris > > acquire two sites (Harris boys opposite the > > Peckham Rye and Harris primary on site of old > > police station, Lordship Lane) and getting > Charter > > the lion's share of the hospital site. > > Sally Eva Wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > ----- > > > sweetgirl Wrote: > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > ----- > > > > I?d like to see what James barber has to > say > > on > > > > this matter, after all he was one of the > > > persons > > > > involved in making Harris primary happen > when > > > it > > > > clearly wasn?t needed! > > > > > > > > It?s unbelievable what councils like to > waste > > > > money on! > > > > > > I'm not sure how much input the council has > > over > > > the Harris academy in Peckham. It describes > > itself > > > as "an education charity run by teachers" and > > has > > > 31 schools in London and Essex > > > > > > https://www.harrisfederation.org.uk/80/welcome-fro > > > > > > m-the-chief-executive

It sounds as though his leg injury would make him vulnerable to predators if sent back. Perhaps the female could be captured and reunited with him at the sanctuary, once the goslings are able to fend for themselves.

James Barber was instrumental in helping Harris acquire two sites (Harris boys opposite the Peckham Rye and Harris primary on site of old police station, Lordship Lane) and getting Charter the lion's share of the hospital site. Sally Eva Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > sweetgirl Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > I?d like to see what James barber has to say on > > this matter, after all he was one of the > persons > > involved in making Harris primary happen when > it > > clearly wasn?t needed! > > > > It?s unbelievable what councils like to waste > > money on! > > I'm not sure how much input the council has over > the Harris academy in Peckham. It describes itself > as "an education charity run by teachers" and has > 31 schools in London and Essex > https://www.harrisfederation.org.uk/80/welcome-fro > m-the-chief-executive

Indeed, we were told it was vital there were more schools and much energy was put into getting a number built and opened and now we learn Southwark is looking at closing schools. sweetgirl Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I?d like to see what James barber has to say on > this matter, after all he was one of the persons > involved in making Harris primary happen when it > clearly wasn?t needed! > > It?s unbelievable what councils like to waste > money on!

All the more so by a labour administration supposedly committed to greener neighbourhoods.

I'm not though suggesting you stop posting, telling you what you should or shouldn't post or saying your response is 'daft'. I'd imagine the 'right to whinge' also falls under freedom of speech? Waseley Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It's a whingy thread FM. And a little > hypocritical for you to talk about internet police > where you are criticising my freedom of speech. > The internet police would simply censor posts. > Now if the thread was titled recommendations for > filling stations that would be helpful. Sadly > social media is an outlet for people saying what > they don't like rather than a constructive debate.

Thread policing again. Not daft at all. Useful for others to know about.

Once the ED forum is closed how will this info be shared?

Look forward to hearing more. Could it be a koi carp? Any chance of a photo? alice Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Does anyone know what that huge fish is in Peckham > park just under the bridge. It barely moves and is > partly above the surface.

They can, but in the first few days of leaving the nest they are really vulnerable. I think their main defence is simply freezing and hope they won't be seen. Movement will give them away and most cats will catch them if they want to. Agree with Jenijen though, corvids and other predatory birds are a further problem and let's not forget foxes. diable rouge Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Fledglings can jump though, well, Great Tits > certainly can, have watched them numerous times > jumping up onto low branches and then making their > way up the branches to safer territory...

Great, see you around on other threads.

I know it is awful. I had wondered if owners might keep cats indoors until fledglings are flying and off the ground. It is those couple of weeks when they are on the ground and being fed by parents they are most vulnerable. sspringer Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > https://www.nationalgeographic.co.uk/animals/2020/ > 09/the-232-animals-in-this-photo-were-killed-by-ho > use-cats-in-just-one-year

Waseley, absolutely no requirement for you to continue reading or participating in this thread, so curious why you feel the need to close it? I suspect it will continue for some time. Waseley Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I think that we have reached an understanding from > both sides, that the issue is too much traffic, > and the main reason being that many drivers are > not prepared to change their habits, eg cutting > out unnecessary journeys, lift sharing or > switching to other modes. Where we disagree is how > this is best achieved, in particular the role of > LTNs and if and where they should be applied. I > doubt whether there is much more we can debate so > perhaps time for the thread to end. Not that I > have the authority to do so! Sweet dreams all.