|
|
 |
| |
Dogs need off-lead exercise
• THE police are already in possession of the powers necessary to curb the behaviour of irresponsible dog-owners. (Dog owners face curbs under control orders, Feb 22).
You truly have to ask yourself why these powers have not been used.
It has begun to look as though a great many in law enforcement, at all levels, have lost the stomach to deal with hardcore lawbreakers.
Quite simply, their mettle is bred out. The new legislation is an example of this. It is important enough to severely infringe the civil liberties of the law abiding majority, but not important enough to seriously crack down on dangerous dogs and their far more dangerous owners – that would involve expensive surveillance operations and a continual police presence, neither of which is going to happen.
It truly is very much easier to do nothing, and to introduce new and unnecessary legislation to mask the fact nothing is being done.
Dog licensing should be reintroduced. And the police should heighten their efforts to deal with dangerous dogs.
All, and I mean all, that should be required of a responsible, law-abiding dog-owner is that their animal is under control, and that they pick up after it. This simple common sense is enough.
Tarquin Kyle
Oppidans Road, NW3
• I HAVE a small Papillon Hearing Dog, Pippa, who is fully qualified and alerts me to sounds in the flat such as the doorbell, cooker timer, phone, smoke alarm and jumps on the bed to wake me up.
I live on the second floor in a terrace house and have no access to a garden.
I am 75 years old in April and take my four-year-old dog to Grange Park for exercise.
Unfortunately the very small fenced off area for dogs has railings down the whole of one side and my dog can get through them with ease. Consequently my dog will not be able to use it and being elderly I cannot give her the exercise she needs.
My friends all say how different I am since I got her, I have no family, and she has made a big difference to my life. My dog is an assistant dog and I need her and I do not see why she should be penalised by not being allowed off the lead.
I have been told of a hearing dog getting an exemption in a borough that insists on dogs being kept on a lead in a park. Will Camden agree to allowing assistant dogs exemptions?
Miss ELAINE TUNBORG
Birchington Rd, NW6
• CAMDEN Council seems to be enmeshed in one of its periodic anti-dog campaigns. I do not know who councillors think they represent but we dog owners do not think it is us.
Some of my local dog-owning acquaintances are muttering darkly about the British National Party.
I presume none of the mainstream parties wish to push voters in this direction but they might start thinking a little more instead about fundamental British values, of which dog owning is one.
Robert Senecal
Burton St, WC1
• CAMDEN Council announced its draconian proposal to ban all dogs from public places that are not on a lead in the public notices section of the CNJ.
In an audacious abuse of power, a small, vocal, dog-hating minority within the council are attempting to force this legislation through.
And what a horrible and vindictive piece of legislation it is.
There are many single elderly people in Camden for whom a dog provides, not only a well-documented cure for the stresses and ills of life, but also a loyal friend.
For this companionship the dogs expect little more than to be loved and to be allowed to exercise off the lead.
I implore you all to contact the Camden Council bullies and oppose this heavy-handed measure.
Ian Martin
Oakeshott Avenue, N6
• THE Dog Control Order, as proposed by the London Borough of Camden, could well lead to more problems than solutions when it comes to responsible dog ownership.
In instigating a knee-jerk reaction in response to recently reinvoked concerns for public safety around dogs, The Mayhew Animal Home believes that Camden has put forward a proposal that will confuse Camden dog owners, punish those that are acting responsibly, and ultimately cause many dogs to suffer unnecessarily.
The key area of the proposition that will cause the most disruption and potential problems is the dogs on leads section.
This states that dogs will have to be kept on leads at all times on “any land which is open to the air and to which the public are entitled or permitted to have access within the London Borough of Camden”. At The Mayhew Animal Home, we believe that every dog needs at least one hour off-lead exercise daily for smaller breeds and two to three hours for more active breeds.
By severely restricting the open air exercise of dogs throughout Camden (the 10 proposed Dog Exercise Areas are simply not sufficient when it comes to size of space that the average dog needs for exercise, let alone for the number of dogs across the borough), the London Borough of Camden could find itself with more, not fewer, dogs exhibiting signs of stress-related aggression or ill-health.
As one of the busiest and most effective animal sanctuaries in London, and the only one in north London, The Mayhew already takes in many dogs who display behavioural problems as a result of irresponsible dog ownership, such as restricting a dog’s exercise.
Therefore we ask the London Borough of Camden to reconsider their position on the open air exercise of dogs and to look to addressing the issues in a way that works with responsible dog owners to find the best solution, instead of against them.
Caroline Yates
Acting General Manager
The Mayhew Animal Home, NW10
|
 |
|
|
|
