Jump to content

Ashton residents complain about ‘disgusting’ state of Lancaster Canal


Alan de Enfield

Featured Posts

23 hours ago, haggis said:

Dog licences are a good idea but how do make sure dog owners pay to have one? That is partly why they were scrapped all those years ago. It is now a legal requirement for dogs to be microchipped and wear tags but there is no way of reinforcing it. The number of lost/stolen /found dogs who have no means of identification is staggering. As happened before with dog licences, only responsible dog owners would buy one .

 

 

Dog licences in those days were ridiculously low hence the reason for scrapping them. If they charged a proper licence fee such as £50+ a year that would go a long way to funding the policing of it. People pay hundreds or even thousands of pounds to buy a dog so they can afford £50 a year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Grassman said:

 

 

Dog licences in those days were ridiculously low hence the reason for scrapping them. If they charged a proper licence fee such as £50+ a year that would go a long way to funding the policing of it. People pay hundreds or even thousands of pounds to buy a dog so they can afford £50 a year.

Very true but as I have said before, how would it be policed? No point in having a dog (or any other kind) of licence if it can't be policed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 23/03/2022 at 08:05, Grassman said:

Dog poo DNA testing is the only way of catching the culprits. Several local authorities began doing this in 2015/16 and it needs to be rolled out nationally.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-england-london-35378499

 

Make dog DNA testing compulsory. Bring back the dog licence requirement for say between £30-£50 pa and impose a £50+ fine for the culprits, and it would probably be self financing.

Anybody caught without a dog licence has the confiscated and not returned to them until they pay a £100 fine.

 

It wouldn't completely solve the problem and would pose some difficult issues, particularly setting it all up, but it would make the siuation a heck of a lot better. 

 

 

 

Personally I would go further and make dog training compulsory.

 

I would licence the owner rather than the dog, so you could only get a dog when you had demonstrated a certain level of understanding about dogs and what as an owner your responsibilities are.

 

Would also work with a children too, given some recent horrific examples of parenting in the news.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 24/03/2022 at 11:37, haggis said:

Very true but as I have said before, how would it be policed? No point in having a dog (or any other kind) of licence if it can't be policed. 

 

Give park keepers or council dog patrols a chip reading device and make it law that owners present their dogs for scanning if stopped. Issue a heavy fine for any owner with an unchipped/unlicensed dog, or if they cannot be identified confiscate the dog until they comply. 

 

DNA test the poo. Some councils already do this and have successfully prosecuted people. They've found that it has shown a significant improvement in the situation in their area. Currently people have to be caught in the act which is obviously very difficult, but with this method the culprits can be identified and dealt with retrospectively. If my local council did this and lent me a device I would happily volunteer to patrol our local towpaths and parks doing it.

 

Granted it would cost a bit to set all of this up, but like most investments the benefits would come in due course, and it would probably be self financing eventually or pretty close to it. And as has already been proved, it will significantly reduce the amount of discarded dog poos.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Grassman said:

 

Give park keepers or council dog patrols a chip reading device and make it law that owners present their dogs for scanning if stopped. Issue a heavy fine for any owner with an unchipped/unlicensed dog, or if they cannot be identified confiscate the dog until they comply. 

 

DNA test the poo. Some councils already do this and have successfully prosecuted people. They've found that it has shown a significant improvement in the situation in their area. Currently people have to be caught in the act which is obviously very difficult, but with this method the culprits can be identified and dealt with retrospectively. If my local council did this and lent me a device I would happily volunteer to patrol our local towpaths and parks doing it.

 

Granted it would cost a bit to set all of this up, but like most investments the benefits would come in due course, and it would probably be self financing eventually or pretty close to it. And as has already been proved, it will significantly reduce the amount of discarded dog poos.

Where are these park keepers and dog patrols of which you speak? Can't remember that last time we had the luxury of such posts in my area. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, haggis said:

Where are these park keepers and dog patrols of which you speak? Can't remember that last time we had the luxury of such posts in my area. 

If they were there they would need stab vests, body cams and  patrol in pairs.

  • Greenie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 26/03/2022 at 09:41, haggis said:

Where are these park keepers and dog patrols of which you speak? Can't remember that last time we had the luxury of such posts in my area. 

 

There are some about, usually employed by the local authority or contracted by them, but not many and this is mainly because currently it's so hard to prove unless they are caught in the act.  Some councils take the issue more seriously than others. The idea of a more realistic dog licence fee rather than the old 37p one, plus the issuing of hefty fines, would in theory finance the operations or at least go a long way towards doing so.

 

I also think they would attract volunteers like currently happens with litter picking, because so many people abhor the dog poo fouling issue and would love to see the perpetrators (dog owners) punished. I'd be first in the queue of volunteers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Grassman said:

 

There are some about, usually employed by the local authority or contracted by them, but not many and this is mainly because currently it's so hard to prove unless they are caught in the act.  Some councils take the issue more seriously than others. The idea of a more realistic dog licence fee rather than the old 37p one, plus the issuing of hefty fines, would in theory finance the operations or at least go a long way towards doing so.

 

I also think they would attract volunteers like currently happens with litter picking, because so many people abhor the dog poo fouling issue and would love to see the perpetrators (dog owners) punished. I'd be first in the queue of volunteers.

The problem with volunteer wardens is that they either have no authority or behave like pocket hitlers. Either way, dealing with people who are by definition acting antisocially is like to lead to violence,  especially as the perpetrator has a weapon to hand to attack with. I suspect "once bitten, twice shy" will get rid of most volunteers within a week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

The problem with volunteer wardens is that they either have no authority or behave like pocket hitlers. Either way, dealing with people who are by definition acting antisocially is like to lead to violence,  especially as the perpetrator has a weapon to hand to attack with. I suspect "once bitten, twice shy" will get rid of most volunteers within a week.

I was just about to say the same, volunteers are great, volunteers with authority are not great.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But there would be no confrontation with this method unlike how it's done currently where people are caught in the act. The DNA testing of the poo would be taken retrospectively not at the time. The DNA would identify the dog owner and a fixed penalty fine would be sent to them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Grassman said:

But there would be no confrontation with this method unlike how it's done currently where people are caught in the act. The DNA testing of the poo would be taken retrospectively not at the time. The DNA would identify the dog owner and a fixed penalty fine would be sent to them. 

This has been mentioned a few times, linking dogs poo to the owner via DNA. I presume it is the dogs DNA in which case how is the DNA of the dogs in the area obtained? I don't think a vet will have a record of a dogs DNA.  Similarly if it is the owners DNA. Can't see how this would work but I don't think the NHS would welcome requests for folks DNA so that it could be checked against dog poo. 

I am obviously missing something and I just can't se how this would work. can someone enlighten me please? It has been puzzling me since it was fisrt mentioned!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, haggis said:

This has been mentioned a few times, linking dogs poo to the owner via DNA. I presume it is the dogs DNA in which case how is the DNA of the dogs in the area obtained? I don't think a vet will have a record of a dogs DNA.  Similarly if it is the owners DNA. Can't see how this would work but I don't think the NHS would welcome requests for folks DNA so that it could be checked against dog poo. 

I am obviously missing something and I just can't se how this would work. can someone enlighten me please? It has been puzzling me since it was fisrt mentioned!

I suspect as part of the chipping process the DNA of the dog is recorded against the chip records, so test poo and search chip database...

It's a job I suppose  :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Police and other public services are always complaining about the delays and costs of DNA testing for more legitimate purposes, so that would be a non starter. Dog mess has always been a problem and the provision of bins has polarised this because they are not emptied consistently. Like many public services, litter collection has cost significantly more for a poorer service and generally we have no answer to this as the charges are levied with impunity. And don't mention we have the ballot box option because everyone in public employ has the same outlook. The overly bureaucratic behemoths will always save money at the sharp end whilst maintaining their empires.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, tree monkey said:

I suspect as part of the chipping process the DNA of the dog is recorded against the chip records, so test poo and search chip database...

It's a job I suppose  :)

Which is fine, but antisocial people have unchipped dogs, and loads are out of date. People move.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

According to several recent reports (how accurate I don't know) volunteers are already taking action by spreading poisoned meat on beaches and in parks. The only real answer to dog mess is fewer dogs.

How nasty to kill dogs because the owners are lazy b****** , 

  • Greenie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, haggis said:

How nasty to kill dogs because the owners are lazy b****** , 

And so the circular argument starts again. Nasty it may be, but it solves the problem, if only because the threat makes most owners keep their dogs on a lead rather than running off and doing their thing wherever they like. Unfortunately, the majority of dog owners, however much they deny it, are lazy ****ers. The evidence is all around us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, tree monkey said:

I suspect as part of the chipping process the DNA of the dog is recorded against the chip records, so test poo and search chip database...

It's a job I suppose  :)

No it isn't . As responsible dog owners all of our dogs and cats are chipped as a matter of course and no dna sample/ record has ever been made. Its hard enough updating when the animal dies. So suspect many details will be out of date anyway.

As always there is no silver bullet, education and enforcement need to go together along with initiatives like more poo bins and making bags available. We encourage local people to make and keep stocked up, poo bag dispensers (old pop bottles). Particularly where there is a problem.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, jonathanA said:

No it isn't . As responsible dog owners all of our dogs and cats are chipped as a matter of course and no dna sample/ record has ever been made. Its hard enough updating when the animal dies. So suspect many details will be out of date anyway.

As always there is no silver bullet, education and enforcement need to go together along with initiatives like more poo bins and making bags available. We encourage local people to make and keep stocked up, poo bag dispensers (old pop bottles). Particularly where there is a problem.

 

My answer was in reply to the question of how it might be done, not a this is how it's done, I should have made it clearer I suppose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Arthur Marshall said:

According to several recent reports (how accurate I don't know) volunteers are already taking action by spreading poisoned meat on beaches and in parks. The only real answer to dog mess is fewer dogs.

I am a dog owner and have been for decades. The answer to fewer dogs is compulsory speying and a crack down on breeders who are only in it for the money. I worked in Spain as a volunteer with abandoned dogs and some of the dogs came back time and time again as their owners were clueless about looking after dogs. here I meet people on a regular basis with dogs imported from Greece, Romania, Spain etc some of which  are seriously ill and die within months because the importers dont care . There appears to be little or no control over this issue......its a ' free-market' problem that has caused it...lack of regulation,lack of oversight and those if us with dogs that do not cause problems are tarred with same brush which is highly unfair

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, tree monkey said:

My answer was in reply to the question of how it might be done, not a this is how it's done, I should have made it clearer I suppose.

Fairy snuff

I read it as you saying  thats how it was done. 😀  

 

I know sometimes you can get free chipping via charities like the PDSA but suspect the additional cost of dna sampling and the upkeep of the database would make it unattractive to even responsible owners and of course the problem ones wouldn't do it anyway....

 

 

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.