Three Rivers District Council are asking for views on a proposal to introduce the Public Spaces Protection Order (PSPO) that will seek to replace and extend existing powers relating to dog fouling and dog control in public places.
A Public Spaces Protection Order (or PSPO) is a new power introduced by the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014.
The power allows councils to prohibit specified things being done in the restricted area and/or require specified things to be done by persons carrying out specified activities in that area.
The following are questions taken from their short online survey.
The Council is proposing that a person in charge of a dog must keep it on a lead in the area surrounding the cafe at the Aquadrome. Using the scale below, how strongly do you agree or disagree with this proposal?
How strongly do you agree or disagree that ‘keeping dogs on leads‘ should be extended to include other public spaces?
The Council is proposing to exclude (prohibit) a person in charge of a dog from entering enclosed/fenced children’s play areas, picnic areas and grazed land with their dog. Using the scale below, how strongly do you agree or disagree with this proposal?
The Council is proposing to restrict the number of dogs permitted to be walked by any one person, in all places where the public have access, to a maximum of 4. Using the scale below, how strongly do you agree or disagree with this proposal?
The Order will not apply to persons requiring the need of a recognised Assistance Dog.
A person who fails to comply with the terms of the Order may be liable to a £75 Fixed Penalty Notice, or upon summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding Level 3 on the standard scale (currently £1000).
Anybody wishing to complete the short survey can do so by following this link:
https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/PSPOTRDC15
Three Rivers have responded to dog owners’ concern about the survey and possible implications with this post on their website…
Hi, Can I explain this please? The proposal is not for dogs on leads throughout the district, just the area immediately surrounding the cafe at the Aquadrome. The proposal for dogs on leads if directed is district wide but will only apply to people who are allowing their dogs to be a nuisance to other members of the community. It will only be used if appropriate. The exclusion at grazed area is the fenced off fields at Chorleywood House Estate where sheep are grazed – this is because there have ben many incidents where dog owners have allowed their dogs to harass the sheep causing severe injuries and death. DEFRA’s guidelines say maximum 6 dogs but local authorities can restrict. This is to enable us to tackle irresponsible dog owners only. Responsible dog owners will not be affected by this. Unfortunately for some reason the draft order showing the maps where the dog on lead and exclusion sites are has not been put on the website, just the survey. I will get this rectified on Monday so everyone can see exactly what the proposal is. The majority of dog owners are responsible but there is a minority who are not, current legislation does not cover these situations but these orders will help us to do so. Hope this helps a bit to clarify things.
In response to the 3RDC post Janet Newman comments : This message from the Council seems to be inaccurate at best and frankly deliberately misleading at worst.
The Council say “The proposal is not for dogs on leads throughout the district, just the area immediately surrounding the cafe at the Aquadrome” but Question 3 specifically talks about “other places” and question 4 even asks for suggestions!!!
My view and a real danger is they will put this in other places if they get enough support or someone suggests somewhere else and they like the sound of it eg. Chorleywood Common!!
They say the grazed land is just the sheep in CW House then why was I told specifically it related to the cows on Chorleywood Common? I was even told that there has been a lot of opposition to this from local residents? Are they being straight with us?
Defra says 6 but local authorities can restrict “This is to enable us to tackle irresponsible dog owners only” Then leave alone responsible professional dog walkers!!! Also surely local authorities still have to show some evidence that justifies a change from Defra guidelines? And the new Act says what we are doing must be “unreasonable”.
Further I wrote to the Council some time ago and asked this question:
” the questionnaire says public place and is not specific as to where orders are being considered or is it every open public space ie even footpaths”
Their response was as follows:
” Yes it means every park and open space in the district. It was intended to mean just parks etc. but they may want to include pavements and footpaths after they see the consultation results and residents comments”
Again this means if enough people suggest a place or in fact if only one person suggests it they can decide they like the idea and do it , giving us no warning of it at all!!! Qu’s 3-4, 5,6 and 7 apply.
6 Comments