Dog owners face £50 fixed penalty if they don't clean up

[nbt]

I'm out in the countryside every weekend (and during the week when I can mak it) thanks  Dave , *nothing* smells quite as bad as dog poo, and TBH most other animals don't poo on paths

[Dave]

I also disagree with your feeling that it's ok to leave dog muck on footpaths and bridleways. Quite apart from the possibility of disesase, it stinks

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, nbt, but the countryside is full of cows, horses, sheep, rabbits, foxes, badgers etc etc, and they all poo everywhere and it stinks!  Anyone who has a problem with that would be well advised to stay in the suburbs.   

[wolfman]

Now this really is the "NANNY" state

Cat and dog owners are to be told to provide "entertainment" and "mental stimulation" for their pets under new government advice.
The code of practice also includes advice on diet and providing "somewhere suitable to go to the toilet".
It says owners should watch for signs of stress and advises on introducing cats to dogs without the fur flying.
Owners will not be fined for breaking the rules but failure to comply may be used in animal cruelty prosecutions.
The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) said it wanted to remind pet owners of their responsibilities under the 2006 Animal Welfare Act.
The 26 page document on cat welfare begins with a warning to owners: "It is your responsibility to read the complete Code of Practice to fully understand your cat's welfare needs and what the law requires you to do."
Hot car warning
The document, which will be published as a leaflet and on Defra's website after an eight week consultation period, says owners must provide their pets with a "suitable place to live" including "somewhere suitable to go to the toilet". It also advises providing a separate litter tray for each cat.
And it adds: "Cats need opportunities to climb and jump, such as a simple 'platform' type bed or safe access to shelves and the tops of cupboards.
"Cats that are not very tame, such as some farm cats, may prefer to live outdoors in more basic shelter but you still need to look after them."
The guidelines warn owners they could face prosecution for cruelty for leaving animals in hot cars.
And they give a detailed description of what constitutes normal behaviour - such as scratching and clawing - and tells owners to "watch your cat closely for signs of stress or changes in behaviour".
"Dogs should be introduced to cats very carefully; the dog should be held safely on a lead at first so that it cannot chase the cat," it adds.
On diet, it advises fresh food every day but warns "an obese cat is an unhealthy cat" adding "it is a good idea in a 'greedy' cat to have the measured food divided up into a number of meals per day".
Play advice
And it tells owners to provide suitable toys and "entertainment" for their cats.
"You should ensure that your cat has enough mental stimulation for you and from its environment to avoid boredom and frustration.
"It is your responsibility to provide opportunities for your cat to satisfy all of its behavioural needs, such as play and companionship."
But, the guide adds, cats are solitary creatures and the most common cause of stress is "coming into close contact with other cats they do not like".
Dog owners, by contrast, are given detailed instructions on ensuring their pets do not become lonely or isolated as "dogs are a social species and need the company of people, dogs or other animals".
There are similar guidelines for horse owners under the proposals, which are subject to an eight week consultation period. The proposed leaflet also includes the relevant sections of animal welfare legislation.
Environment Secretary Hilary Benn said: "These three new codes of practice will outline the responsibilities under the Animal Welfare Act and give practical advice on how to fulfil them.
"This means no one will be able to claim ignorance as an excuse for mistreating any animal."

from BBC online.

[nbt]

I guess it all comes down to nanny state versus parental responsibility!   

I would agree, except that in current times a lot of people seem to have abandoned the idea of personal responsibilty in favour of assuming that as they pay taxes, someone else will do "it" - whatever "it" happens to be. I also disagree with your feeling that it's ok to leave dog muck on footpaths and bridleways. Quite apart from the possibility of disesase, it stinks and is horrible, people who have dogs should clean up after tham and people who don't should have it smeared across their face, they'd soon learn to clean up.

[Dave]

My view is that this is a classic example of the kind of issue which should not be addressed by national legislation at all, but should be left to local authorities to deal with through by-laws.   This is because the circumstances vary so much between urban and rural areas. 

Obviously in towns and cities, dog owners should be expected to clear up after their dogs on pavements, and in parks, playgrounds and sports fields.

But trying to impose this in rural areas, on country lanes and on muddy footpaths and bridleways, is ridiculous, a complete waste of money, and very difficult to enforce. 

As far as children picking up eye infections is concerned, the link to encams (above) shows that this is confined almost entirely to toddlers (under fives), who may touch dog faeces and then put their fingers in their mouths.  Hence the importance of keeping parks, playgrounds etc clean.   But in the country parents need to supervise their young children much more closely - the countryside is not a safe place for unsupervised toddlers, for all sorts of reasons. 

I guess it all comes down to nanny state versus parental responsibility!   

[wolfman]

I can't quite make up my mind whether Dave is for or against this legislation.  I think if I had children I certainly wouldn't want them to catch anything whatsoever from dog faeces

[heather]

well wolfman this has run a bit further than you thought it would ha ha ha

[Dave]

This is the relevant page on dog fouling from the ENCAMS website:  http://www.encams.org/advice/main2.asp?pageid=40.

I can't find Wolfman's figure of 16,000 people a year.  On this page it tells of 'approximately 100 cases diagnosed each year, with 50 having serious eye damage. Nearly all were children, who had contracted the disease as toddlers.'

The difference between 100 and 16,000 may be because the vast majority of cases of Toxocara Canis remain undiagnosed, as it normally has no apparent symptoms and clears itself up in time.

[wolfman]

Prosecutions - April 2004 to March 2005
• A total of 544 prosecutions were taken and 44 prosecutions were still pending
from April 2004 to March 2005, equating to an average of 4.0 and 0.4
prosecutions per authority respectively (or 4.4 overall).
• The number of prosecutions ranged from 0 in some authorities to 114 in one
authority

Fixed penalty notices – April 2004 to March 2005
• There were 2,408 fixed penalty notices issued, of which 1,729 (72%) were paid.
• This equated to an average of 20 fixed penalty notices issued per authority.
• Figures ranged from no notices (in 21 authorities) to one authority issuing 405.
• Extrapolating this data provides an estimate that over 7,000 fixed penalty notices
were issued by local authorities in England during this time period.

Source ENCAMS  http://www.encams.org/home/index.asp?nav=top

Encams  runs the “keep Britain tidy campaign”

ENCAMS estimate that:-

There are 7.4 million dogs in the UK
Dogs produce 1000 tons of faeces everyday
16000 people a year get  Toxocariasis which can cause blindness
754 people have been prosecuted over the last 3yrs
Councils have received 226.000 complaints.

[nbt]

Given thast horses are vegetarian I would be very surprised if they were subject to the samel level of regulation as dogs. As meat eaters, dog muck is far smellier than horse muck

[Dave]

> Presumably it means 'public footpath', but if so, why not use the normal term?

I would imagine that it's because "public footpath" has a specific legal meaning, whereas the term used covers other things such as pavements (i.e at the side of the of the road) and paths in places such a parks which are legally not public footpaths.

Should have thought of that - thanks nbt!

Is the canal towpath included in the regulations?.

What are the rules about horse poo ?

Following nbt's plausible theory, a canal towpath is a 'public walk', so it's included.

As for horse poo, I don't think there are any rules, but given the obsessively fastidious health and safety culture of these times, it won't be long before we see horses wearing huge nappies!   

[alan@marple]

Is the canal towpath included in the regulations?.

What really gets me annoyed  are the number of people who walk in front of the dog,  not on a lead, especially in the Lockside area, hoping that if the dog poos they can act as if they  did not know.

What are the rules about horse poo ?

[nbt]

> Presumably it means 'public footpath', but if so, why not use the normal term?

I would imagine that it's because "public footpath" has a specific legal meaning, whereas the term used covers other things such as pavements (i.e at the side of the of the road) and paths in places such a parks which are legally not public footpaths.

[wolfman]

Toxocariasis!

[andy+kirsty]

What really annoys me, is that we I used to live in the old bit of marple where the visitors (and their money) go, there were loads of dog bins, and many with free bags, now I live in another part of marple which is used by its residents and a handful of people who dare to use the middle wood way for fear of siking knee deep into the mud you have to walk miles and miles before you reach a propper bin. I have asked our local councillers for an answer many times, but to no avail.