Jump to content

Recommended Posts

My vet has just sent me an advice email re fireworks and nervous pets which included this link to a desensitisation video on youtube: 

'Desensitisation gently helps pets feel less scared by introducing them to worrying sounds slowly. Playing our firework sounds video in the background is a safe way to help your pets get used to the noises.'

Normally I think one starts with the volume low and slowly increase in managed stages in response to your pet's progress.

 

  • Like 1

That's great advice. I'm going to try that - I think over the years, we've definitely found it easier but it;s still unsettling.

We listen to Classic fm and give the dogs Kalms which you can buy in the chemist and are herbal and the same ingredient as the vet's version, just a fraction of the price.

  • 3 weeks later...
49 minutes ago, first mate said:

Anyone know what the special occasion is?

It's usually a combination of "nearly Halloween", "nearly Bonfire Night", "weekend" and "dickheads".

You can adjust the sliding scale on each of those factors most nights for the next 3-4 weeks.

  • Haha 4
  • Agree 2

Don't know why but it seems like there have been impromptu fireworks since early September. At one point I even wondered if there was a shooting range or something like that over Dulwich Hamlet way- the direction where the firework sounds seem to be coming from? Is there some kind of new, fireworks craze going on and where are people getting them, out of season?

As the days shorten having evening fireworks for e.g. birthday parties becomes more realistic, the idea that fireworks is only about Guy Fawkes day or New Year's Eve is not a rule. I personally do not like fireworks, but other do, and I would see no reason to stop other's pleasure. I am sure the local Puritans will object, and there are issues about disturbing wild life with unexpected noise. But I'm in favour of simple pleasures. And many do like fireworks. 

The issue for me is about reducing damage to animals, whether wild or domestic, as well as to those humans that also suffer as a result.

The sad thing is that there is a compromise available in the form of low noise fireworks- it is the apparent addiction to imposing loud bangs and other scary sounds that I find so strange. 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 4

Went to a fireworks display maybe 20 years ago at the Crystal Palace, it wasn't bonfire night, can't remember why it was being held, Capital Radio were there.

There were people hanging from a crane, classical music, and quiet fireworks,  It was lovely, still dramatic with the colours but no loud bangs.

Not sure why this hasn't become the norm.  

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2
10 hours ago, Dulwichway said:

It's firework season now up until early Jan 2026. Starting with celebrating the failure of terrorist Guy Fawkes on November 5th! BOOM!

Yes, except round here is started in early September, through October, in all that means fireworks season is now 5 months of the year.  Again, what is the attraction in startling random bangs. Why do people think this is okay?

  • Haha 1

Ohh dear.  Fireworks can be great fun.  Where I used to live the kids would have firework wars/games.  Watching them was more enjoyable than watching  TV. (Which you could hardly hear due to the pops and bangs).  It's not like anyone/anything could stop them. I would still prefer organised public displays that are affordable.   And I agree that fireworks cause problems for wild life, pets and people.   It seems to be one of those things that just happens so we have to put up with it.  But it is still not as problematic here as in other areas in London - that's for sure.

If it was limited to a couple of days a year, so we all knew, that would be fine. In the last few years (and it is a recent thing) you get random fireworks going off any time after dusk for half the year. It does more than cause problems for pets and wildlife- it can mean lasting damage and massive expense and hassle for pet owners. All because some get a buzz out of loud bangs.

Edited by first mate
  • Agree 2
34 minutes ago, Happyme5 said:

I totally agree it just seems that it a thing nowadays.  It must be due to how fireworks are sold. 

In part, it’s largely down to people not actually caring about anyone or anything else apart from their own gratification (btw, there are better ways to get a dopamine fix)

  • Agree 2

Does anyone know what time tonight's events, the second night of the new phenomenon of Halloween Fireworks, end?

These do sound too major to be anything but large- scale organised events and they are loud, very loud. So anyone, for their own reasons, that dislikes or objects to this level of noise for the next x amount of hours, really has no choice in the matter! Could those addicted to loud bangs possibly have a kind of silent disco setup with the bangs sent through headphones, so the rest of us could be spared?

Edited by first mate

Fireworks in this area do feel totally incessant at this time of year, almost every evening there is terrible noise. I feel great concern for wildlife, pets (I have a senior cat who hates them), as well as people who struggle with PTSD etc. Last year I even had people setting them off in front of my home. Tonight and yesterday evening have been particularly bad. Is there anything we can do as a community to prevent this? What action can we take? Surely we shouldn’t be expected to just put up with it every year for weeks on end! 

On 31/10/2025 at 21:23, Spartacus said:

They said on the news this evening that organised displays start tonight and go on all week up to next Sunday 

10 nights !

Used to be only 1 or 2 

The problem this year is that 5th November falls on a Wednesday. So some places will be bringing their "bonfire night" forward to Saturday 1st and some will be knocking it back to Saturday 8th and there'll probably be a few that just go with Wednesday 5th anyway.

If you're doing a public display, having it on a weekend gets more crowds.

Which basically means a solid week of fireworks.

  • Agree 2

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • The is very low water pressure in the middle of Friern Road this morning.
    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
    • What does the area with the blue dotted lines and the crossed out water drop mean? No water in this area? So many leaks in the area.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...