|
|
 |
| |
Warning: We’re about to lose our dog-free parks
• THE Tribune has reported that dog-free gardens face being opened up for dog exercising (Parents in backlash over plans to let dogs in parks, March 21). Readers should know the list of affected gardens is longer than the one in the article and includes Arlington Square, Battishill Street Gardens, Canonbury Square, Compton Terrace Gardens, Gibson Square, Lonsdale Square and Thornhill Square. In fact, there will be no dog-free gardens left in Islington. Dogs will only be excluded from children’s play areas with play equipment.
As a mother of two children under four, I believe it is vitally important for children’s health and development that they have space to run about, use their imagination and learn about nature, as well as having play equipment to play on. The council is proposing to remove that vital resource from children.
As most people know, contact with dog faeces can make children very ill and cause blindness. Even if the vast majority of dog owners clear up after their pets there is still going to be some residue that can be harmful.
We live in a time when dangerous dogs are a national concern that frequently makes the headlines, and when there are also national concerns about childhood obesity and lack of exercise. So how can the council possibly be proposing to allow dogs into the few spaces that our borough has where children can safely run about?
The vast majority of green space in the borough is already open for dog exercising. Child-friendly gardens provide a really valuable amenity for families, but the proposal will effectively turn these gardens from “dog-free” to “child-free” – in the borough with the least green space in the capital – with no adequate or open consultation.
I urge readers to help us to protect our gardens for children and make their views heard by the council’s deadline of April 11. The consultation document can be found at www.islington.gov.uk/
online_survey/dogs.htm
VICTORIA PETERS
Arlington Square, N1
• YOUR local park or square will very likely be about to start admitting off-the-lead dogs, even if it is currently dog free, under Islington Council’s “Responsible Dog Owner” consultation – and yet very few people seem to know about it.
I spent much of the weekend talking to people in my local greenspace, Arlington Square, which is currently dog free but would not be under the intended new rules.
Almost all the people I spoke to were strongly opposed to the council’s plans. But out of the 30-plus people I cornered, at least 90 per cent were not aware of the proposed changes. Had I not spoken to them, they could not have objected to them.
There are several reasons for this. The title “Responsible Dog Owner” consultation is disgracefully misleading and makes no mention of the proposed massive change of use to greenspace that the council intends.
Nor is there any explicit reference to the proposed change in dog-access in any of the council literature on the subject. To work out that the council intends to make the changes to dog-access you would have to download and decipher a map buried at the bottom of the council’s internet consultation page.
It seems the council has fallen a long way short of its own strategy, which states that “Consultation involves consultees being given a fair and proper opportunity to understand fully the matters about which they are being consulted”.
Further, I have not seen anywhere an adequate explanation for why the council is proposing the changes to the dog-access rules. Surely, the only proper reason would be that the council believes dog owners need more space to exercise their dogs.
In the case of Arlington Square, even this reason would not hold up, as dog walkers already have ample space to exercise their dogs in nearby Wilton Square, Union Square, Shoreditch Park, Rosemary Gardens and on the canal towpath.
The only hint I have found of what the council perceives the rationale to be is in Liberal Democrat deputy council leader Terry Stacy’s statement in the Tribune on March 21, where he says “it’s important to apply the same ‘logic’ to all [greenspace] sites”. Why?
The only reason I can think of is to ease his and the council’s bureaucratic load rather than to do what he and the council are supposed to be doing, which is improving life for Islington residents.
I shall be lodging a formal complaint to the council about the way in which this consultation has been conducted, and I would urge other like-minded readers to do the same.
CATHERINE RAGAN
Coleman Fields, N1
• I BELIEVE there is a reasonable argument to be made that would enable a legal challenge to be made to the “Responsible Dog Ownership” consultation.
At no point does the consultation questionnaire specifically say that areas listed are to become open to dogs. Only by downloading a set of 16 separate ward maps (which were not posted out with the original questionnaire), can we check whether an area is coded red for “proposed dog exclusion area” or green for “Greenspace parks and open spaces”. Then you have to deduce that what is mean by “Greenspace parks and open spaces” is that the council intends to open this area to the exercising of dogs off the lead.
Consultation involves consultees being given a “fair and proper opportunity to understand fully the matters about which they are being consulted”. I maintain that putting a sign up outside my park saying: “How should we deal with irresponsible dog owners? Give us your views on dog fouling, keeping dogs under control and excluding dogs from sports and play areas” does not in any way inform me that I am being consulted about whether my park should be open to the exercising of dogs off the lead.
Furthermore, this consultation is in breach of the council’s own standards set out in its consultation strategy.
A simple way around this matter would be to reclassify all the small green spaces that are currently closed to dogs as “community gardens”. This would significantly reduce the cost of policing the council policy, as it is much easier to tell someone to leave an area that is clearly labeled “no dogs” than it is to wait around for their dog to be a nuisance and then try to get £80 off them.
It would keep our ornamental planting from being dug up; it would allow our children somewhere where they can run on grass without danger; it would allow picnickers somewhere to go without being pestered; and it would continue to allow dog owners (and I am one) to use the areas they currently use (which is all dog owners want anyway).
KAY LEEDHAM - GREEN
Waterloo Terrace, N1
• ANIMALS, and particularly domestic pets, are an important part of our local and natural environment. Dog control and fouling become environmental issues for inner-city areas when open space is at a premium.
Islington has less open green space than any other London borough and the nearest parks are in adjoining boroughs. Our open spaces range in size from Highbury Fields (a largely unfenced 30 acres divided by a road) to small areas of half an acre or less.
The situation is particularly acute in St Peters ward. The narrow canal towpath is the only local space available for dog walking. This is not always a comfortable place to be as walkers and speeding cyclists jostle for space – especially for a woman alone. I am by necessity forced to drive my dogs to a park in another borough, which makes environmental nonsense.
I only recently became aware of the council’s current consultation on the proposed introduction of a range of measures to tackle the problems of dog control and fouling caused by irresponsible owners. These include on-the-spot fines of up to £80. It is important that all dog owners make an input by April 12 at dogs.consultation@islington.gov.uk
However, fines alone will not work without practical support to encourage responsible dog ownership. The suggestions below (based on experiences from other boroughs) will form part of my response:
• The current number of bins, for litter and dog waste, must be increased for our streets and all local spaces, no matter how small.
• Patrolling dog wardens and community police should distribute pooper bags.
• Supplies of pooper bags should be available at all dog waste bins.
• Local shops, vets and pet shops would also be useful outlets for distribution.
• Publicity posters to inform and support these initiatives. I was unaware, for example, that I could also use litter bins to dispose of bagged dog waste.
• School talks on responsible dog ownership.
• Money raised from fines should be ring-fenced to support these initiatives.
The challenge for densely-populated, inner-city areas is in balancing the protection and retention of limited green spaces, trees and animal life (including domestic pets) with increasing pressure for housing development.
Islington councillors carry heavy responsibilities for our future environment. They must avoid the temptation of short-term and knee-jerk decision-making and listen and work with local people.
If they make the wrong decisions Islington will inevitably become a concrete jungle, and our children’s only relationship with animals and nature will be from television and zoos.
KATIE ROWAN
Rheidol Terrace N1
|
 |
|
| |
| Your Comments : |
| |
| |
| |
|
|
|
