dogs and environmental wardens (merged)

Puerto bella · Post by **Puerto bella** » 08 Aug 2007, 21:05

Had a lovely afternoon promenading with mini Pb, friend and her tot. Had a bit of a play on the beach quite happily, no dogs in sight and then as if by magic a huge untethered bull mastif appears, no humans with it, roaming along the Dalriada end. It spoilt our fun no end and put you on edge.

A while later a v.tatooed 'fightin talk type of skinny man and an overly tanned lady with large gypsy earrings appeared and led it off.

Why oh why is it every time we are on the beach there is a dog incident? These were by no means the sort of folk you could say 'keep your dog under control' to either.

Sandra · Post by **Sandra** » 08 Aug 2007, 21:38

scary

Puerto bella · Post by **Puerto bella** » 08 Aug 2007, 21:46

I know the earrings and the tan were actually scarier than the dog! It was bad taste central on the beach today. There were even topless sunbathers and men promenading in speedos - we had a good giggle at the budgie smugglers! Did put us off our 99's a bit though. We decided they must have been 'Borats' on their hols in Porty. You'd think it was Bondi the way folk were getting it all out.

Stray NO.666 · Post by **Stray NO.666** » 12 Aug 2007, 14:56

Well PB if its a dog ur lookin for come into the dog and cat home and ill be happy to show you around!

Unfortunately my dog is a bit of a nutter on the beach but mostly with other dogs n he only wants to play with them.....ive had alot of problems with him since i rescued him altho if its busy we wont let him off his lead or we'll go up to Roslyn Glen or else where! And iam one of the well behaved people who pick up poo infact i pick up poo all day at work aswell!

Black Mamba · Post by **Black Mamba** » 11 Sep 2007, 18:12

sample808 wrote:since the introduction of environmental wardens i have yet to see any impact on the amount of dog mess on the beach and prom.

what i think would be great would be to get doggie bins and a roll of bags at each second or third lampost so that anyone can take responsibilty for clearing up

BeachBum · Post by **BeachBum** » 24 Nov 2007, 21:19

sample808 wrote:since the introduction of environmental wardens i have yet to see any impact on the amount of dog mess on the beach and prom.

I know this quote is from a fairly old original post but dogs mess is really getting on my nerves the now, my street is a right mess!

As a Council worker involved with preperation of evidence for Court use I can be used as a proffessional witness so if i see anyone in my street fouling im going to report it to the wardens and my testimony alone is adequate for them to be warned/fined.

This week ive decided to make a point and im going to request information from the Council under FOI to find out how many warnings have been issued, how many fines have been issued, how many people have been reported to the Fiscal for non payment of fine.

Unfortunatly the stats are likly to cover East Edinburgh rather than just porty, but might get lucky and have the information provided by ward as is sometimes the case.

portocat · Post by **portocat** » 18 May 2009, 13:35

[admin: topic merged]

Hello

Has anyone else noticed a general increase in dog fouling in the area? While I appreciate that lots of owners are responsible and pick up after their pets it is a shame that some owners don't pick up and leave the mess behind for people to potentially step in. Having two small children I am especially concerned about this.

I have read that in some countries DNA testing along with a dog DNA register is being used to identify the owners responsible, in an attempt to discourage this antisocial behaviour. I think this is something that government/local councils should adopt in this country.

If anyone else feels strongly about this, please sign the following petition.

http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/StopDogFouling

thanks for reading!

SoupDragon · Post by **SoupDragon** » 18 May 2009, 13:54

Yes. I've noticed a fair bit more around Straiton Place and Bath St.
Most owners a very responsible and pick up after their dogs but as I've mained before therea re a few dogs allowed to run loose or the owners don't keep an eye on where the dog has gone or what it's doing

Eck · Post by **Eck** » 19 May 2009, 12:34

You're right, most owners are responsible. However, I cannot believe in the current climate that anyone would consider a DNA database for dog fowling. For a start DNA cannot be taken directly from faeces, it would have to contain some blood or skin cells for a profile to be created. The costs of creating a canine database and also testing all of the faeces would be monumental considering the problem. I agree that it is not pleasant to stand in it, however, usually people state that you can go blind if dog faeces gets near the eyes. There has only ever been one case in Britain which was attributed to dog faeces where someone went blind. Due to this fact, it is now thought that the dog faeces may have been incorrectly diagnosed as the cause of the blindness.

Whilst I again accept that it is not nice, I think that a DNA database is using a sledgehammer to crack a walnut. I also think that the costs of this would be enormous, considering that the police will not always send away items which may contain DNA profiles due to costs for 'minor' crimes.

SoupDragon · Post by **SoupDragon** » 19 May 2009, 13:29

I'm sure that if human DNA can be typed from less than a gram of faeces the same would be true for dogs.
Yeah the costs involved may be a deciding factor if the database was not set up but I'd hope that the threat of prosecution may make folk clear up.
Possibly charge the offending owners for the cost of analysis? ( though I'd be in favour of rubbing their noses in it )

Eck · Post by **Eck** » 19 May 2009, 13:50

DNA cannot be taken from faeces. The faeces must contain the DNA in the way of blood or skin cells. This would also, only give you the DNA of the offending dog rather than the owner. Then the problem would be that if there were no witnesses to the actual 'offence', the police would have to prove who was walking the dog at that time. This could prove problematic with large families and some dog walkers tend to take their pets on the same walks, so you would then have to prove how long the faeces had been lying there to prove who was walking it at that time!

A lot of work and money.

portocat · Post by **portocat** » 19 May 2009, 15:57

If dogs cannot be identified through DNA testing of their faeces, then explain this story on reuters from sept 08 where it is reported that a suburb of Tev Aviv in Israel is currently piloting this very scheme..

http://uk.reuters.com/article/lifestyle ... 2520080916

or this Australian company advertising Dog DNA kits, which it says (scroll to bottom of the site) can be used for this very thing...

http://www.gtg.com.au/animaldnatesting/ ... 80.150.180
I rest my case.

Yes, I do agree that it would be costly, and is probably unlikely to ever be adopted by the UK councils/goverment, but you have got to try, and I am only suggesting this as a way to clean up the country for the benefit of everyone living in it (obviously lazy dog owners would be the exception to that!)

seashell · Post by **seashell** » 19 May 2009, 16:17

To obtain DNA you need cells from the organism. If these are present in faeces, you will get a result. All you then need is a database showing every dog in the country and who owns it. A few million pounds should set that up.

One other thing - you also need to prove that the evidence could not have been tampered with between the dog "depositing" it and the sample being sent to the lab. More expense there, I fear.

No - I don't like dog mess. And I don't own a dog. But isn't this a bit of an extreme reaction?

SoupDragon · Post by **SoupDragon** » 19 May 2009, 17:39

Faeces usually contains cells from the wall of the bowel which slough off as food/digestive material passes through.
As PCR ( polymerase chain reaction ) and lab techniques have improved smaller and smaller samples are needed for identification.
The bylaw/law could be worded so that the owner of the dog was responsible no matter who walked the dog.
Heavy handed maybe but given the erosion of a lot of civil liberties it seems it would be possible to do.
I'd think making the streets cleaner is as possible as storing every email or text sent

portocat · Post by **portocat** » 19 May 2009, 18:20

Yes, I agree with soupdragon - the owner should take responsibility regardless of the walker. It makes sense for the owner to accept full responsibility for their pet including in this area. After all, a dog is not just for Christmas.

People may think this approach is heavy handed, but the alternative is that these people, who obviously have no respect for other people out walking, continue to let their pets foul all over our pavements, pathways and beach.

Last week, someone had actually let their dog poo in the entrance way to Spring Gardens, the care home on the prom, within the gates. I was really shocked that someone could have that lack of care for fellow people, they would leave a big pile of dog mess right in the middle of a private path where people, including the very elderly, would be walking.

seashell · Post by **seashell** » 19 May 2009, 18:34

SoupDragon wrote:As PCR ( polymerase chain reaction ) and lab techniques have improved smaller and smaller samples are needed for identification.
I'd think making the streets cleaner is as possible as storing every email or text sent

PCR is rather controversial, isn't it? I seem to recall a case being thrown out because of the size of the original sample and the use of PCR - I think it occurred in the US. And obtaining DNA from *any* sample is both time-consuming and expensive. Plus, you are never guaranteed a result.

I quite agree that dog fouling is disgusting. Maybe we should tackle street cleanliness in general and have the streets washed clean every night by special machines?? That way, everyone would benefit. And it would be a lot cheaper, with guaranteed results.

portocat · Post by **portocat** » 19 May 2009, 20:02

Surely everyone would benefit from preventative measures, such as encouraging dog owners to pick up in the first place. Best to get to the root of the problem. From a cost point of view I am sure that once the goverment stops using taxpayers money to pay for moats and swimming pools in MPs private residences being cleaned and so on, there would be plenty spare cash to fund this scheme.

If anyone reading this thinks that dog poo on the street is antisocial then join in and sign the petition at top of the thread! If you don't mind it then fair enough, but I am sure there must be lots of other people like me who think it is pretty gross.

The environmental wardens for this area welcome any info about who is responsible by the way, if anyone out there spots any dog fouling in action!

Eck · Post by **Eck** » 19 May 2009, 20:07

portocat wrote:If dogs cannot be identified through DNA testing of their faeces, then explain this story on reuters from sept 08 where it is reported that a suburb of Tev Aviv in Israel is currently piloting this very scheme..

http://uk.reuters.com/article/lifestyle ... 2520080916

or this Australian company advertising Dog DNA kits, which it says (scroll to bottom of the site) can be used for this very thing...

http://www.gtg.com.au/animaldnatesting/ ... 80.150.180
I rest my case.

Yes, I do agree that it would be costly, and is probably unlikely to ever be adopted by the UK councils/goverment, but you have got to try, and I am only suggesting this as a way to clean up the country for the benefit of everyone living in it (obviously lazy dog owners would be the exception to that!)

As you can see from the other posts, dogs or humans cannot be identified from the faeces alone. The faeces has to contain cells or blood from the animal. As has been said, this can occur when any animal is passing it's waste through, however, it's not the faeces that contains the DNA profile.

If you see someone letting their dog foul I would and ask them to pick it up. They know the law and so do you. If they refuse then you can easily call the cops or the council and watch where they go. A dog owner will have to return to their house/flat/car at some point as they cannot walk the dog forever. It wold be just the same if you saw someone stealing something, you could discreetly follow them and call the police.

Eck · Post by **Eck** » 19 May 2009, 20:16

portocat wrote:Surely everyone would benefit from preventative measures, such as encouraging dog owners to pick up in the first place. Best to get to the root of the problem. From a cost point of view I am sure that once the goverment stops using taxpayers money to pay for moats and swimming pools in MPs private residences being cleaned and so on, there would be plenty spare cash to fund this scheme.

If anyone reading this thinks that dog poo on the street is antisocial then join in and sign the petition at top of the thread! If you don't mind it then fair enough, but I am sure there must be lots of other people like me who think it is pretty gross.

The environmental wardens for this area welcome any info about who is responsible by the way, if anyone out there spots any dog fouling in action!

I just don't think that it is financially feasible. The thing is, dog fouling is not serious crime, and the punishment for such is a relatively small financial penalty. The police do not send off things for DNA testing for all crimes, it's usually just serious ones. The financial penalties are not likely to cover any significant costs of the database and therefore it's really a non starter. The other alternative is to make the fines steeper, however, that would just make a mockery of the justice system when you see people guilty of an assault being fined £50 and people whose dog fouls get fined £100.

Whilst I agree with what you are trying to do, I would suggest another approach rather than the Canine DNA database.

portocat · Post by **portocat** » 19 May 2009, 20:20

This is a great threat about dog poo. From reading this there seems to be quite a few people out there who agree that the issue of dog mess is something that needs to be tackled, and I see that someone also suggested the DNA idea!

Come on Porty, lets do something about this!
http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/StopDogFouling/

portocat · Post by **portocat** » 19 May 2009, 20:25

I do stop people if I see them walking away without picking up. I have done it twice, both times I had to virtually run after the person shouting after them to try to get their attention while they pretty much legged it off with me chasing them with my buggy and 2 kids, not much fun. I would do it again though if I saw someone again. I have also informed the council about someone as I knew where they stayed and they had a visit following that from a warden.

So I am trying my hardest to do my bit to keep porty nice and clean.

Eck · Post by **Eck** » 19 May 2009, 20:42

Cats, foxs and birds also foul in public. Are there no petitions to start Feline or Avian DNA databases.

portocat · Post by **portocat** » 19 May 2009, 20:51

I don't mind standing in bird poo.

Eck · Post by **Eck** » 19 May 2009, 20:56

portocat wrote:I don't mind standing in bird poo.

What about if one Ker-aps on you whilst walking under a lamp post, or along Porty High St after the kids have dumped all of their rubbish and went back to school?

If people are finding 'dog' mess in one area on a regular occurrence, it may be down to someone leaving their bin out and a fox scavenging for food. If a fox knows where it can get food easily, it will return to the same place over and over again.

Cats also cover up their mess, but they don't get the hassle that dogs get. Would people be happy if I threw some grass over my dogs poo and left it lying?

seashell · Post by **seashell** » 19 May 2009, 21:41

Eck wrote:[I just don't think that it is financially feasible. The thing is, dog fouling is not serious crime, and the punishment for such is a relatively small financial penalty. The police do not send off things for DNA testing for all crimes, it's usually just serious ones. The financial penalties are not likely to cover any significant costs of the database and therefore it's really a non starter. The other alternative is to make the fines steeper, however, that would just make a mockery of the justice system when you see people guilty of an assault being fined £50 and people whose dog fouls get fined £100.

Whilst I agree with what you are trying to do, I would suggest another approach rather than the Canine DNA database.

I agree completely. Dog mess isn't nice and of course people should pick it up - but let's keep things in proportion here.

Epykat · Post by **Epykat** » 20 May 2009, 11:16

Yes, people should pick it up and most responsible dog owners do. However, it also helps if you look where you're walking and teach your children to do the same and then you at least wouldn't stand in it.

Eck · Post by **Eck** » 20 May 2009, 11:25

What I would agree with is people who buy a dog should attend at least 8 classes of training with their dog.

We socialised our dog from 12 weeks old and we continue to train him. I don't see a problem of making people attend these classes which will help train the owner and get the dog used to other people and dogs. The classes wouldn't have to be a 2 month block, but as long as they had completed it within 6 months of getting the puppy/dog, then they would be issued with a certificate.

If after having attended the classes the owner is caught letting his/her dog foul then their right to own a dog should be considered. If this happens regularly, possibly 3 strike rule, then they should not be allowed to own a dog until they can prove that they are capable of doing it. The legislation is there for pets to be removed from owners, however, it's very underused in my opinion.

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 20 May 2009, 11:46

Dog shit isn't nice but it is natural. If people didn't own dogs, there would still be dogs and they would shit. As epy says: most owners are responsible and I think a continuation of good practice is enough to keep the problem in check. The other suggestions are too extreme.

I do not own a dog.

Eck · Post by **Eck** » 20 May 2009, 11:56

Porty wrote:Dog shit isn't nice but it is natural. If people didn't own dogs, there would still be dogs and they would shit. As epy says: most owners are responsible and I think a continuation of good practice is enough to keep the problem in check. The other suggestions are too extreme.

I do not own a dog.

I don't think that asking owners to attend classes is too extreme. Many responsible owners already do this anyway. By attending these classes makes the dogs more social and the owners can learn quite a lot about their pet as well as how to stop them from running and jumping at kids.

portocat · Post by **portocat** » 20 May 2009, 12:01

My kids aren't at school yet they are both toddlers, and the oldest one is pretty vigilant at spotting dog poo. I have been doing my best to raise their awareness of this so we can avoid stepping in it if at all possible. It totally puts me off using the beach with them though as I just don't fancy having to clean dog mess off their hands after they have been playing in the sand. If all my petition does is raise awareness and discussion on the topic then in my view that has to be a bonus.

Epykat · Post by **Epykat** » 20 May 2009, 17:16

But you're petition doesn't just want to raise awareness and create discussion - it is demanding a DNA register for all dogs owned in the country. All this will do is put people off giving homes to animals who have just as much right to be on this planet as you do but who instead will end up being kept in cages or put to sleep because they can't find owners.

A MINORITY of dog owners don't clean up after their dogs - just like A MINORITY of parents don't control their children. We don't demand that every child born is put on a DNA register just in case they commit a minor midemeanour at some point in the future.

Pets give a lot of pleasure to a lot of people - why should they be penalised for that? So, not everybody likes dogs. So, not everybody likes children. Each to their own. Live and let live. A bit of dog poo isn't the end of the world.

Sandra · Post by **Sandra** » 20 May 2009, 19:51

Brillant, well said Epykat

StarVanMan · Post by **StarVanMan** » 20 May 2009, 23:11

It doesnt really matter whether you think dogs are equals with young children, or not.

The problem is at a practical level. Sufficient numbers of dog owners do behave in ways (not picking up the poo, letting pets bound up to small children) that frequently make using beach with young children difficult.

Are there threads on talk porty about the problems caused by toddlers eg cluttering up the prom? They might be a little bit annoying to some people but they just dont limit other people's (or even dogs') freedoms and enjoyment to the same extent as owners who don't control their dogs do. (a possible lost apostrophe there).

I'd like to see sections of the beach dog free, others dog friendly. Perhaps summer only.

Eck · Post by **Eck** » 21 May 2009, 10:29

Young children are one thing, however, I would suggest that there are far more children (under 16) who are much more danger to anyone than a dog. And whilst I do bear in mind the unfortunate child in Dalkeith, I also have to balance that out with the amount of crime that is committed by under 16's in the Edinburgh area. Only the other week was it announced that a handful of children were responsible for a massive amount of crimes including carrying weapons.

I would say that these youths are a bigger threat to your safety on the beach, or anywhere for that matter, than a little bit of dog poo.

People need to put things in perspective. Why aren't you starting a petition to make parent more accountable for their children, you know, the ones that will actually stab, rob, punch you.

I've seen far more better behaved dogs than I have children, that's for sure. The same could also be said for some adults!

Grunk · Post by **Grunk** » 21 May 2009, 11:46

I think you'll find that it's usually (not always) the errant children that grow up to own poorly controlled dogs as well as becoming the people who don't pick up poo or have any regard towards society. Society which often supports them.
They in turn bring up their children to have poor social ethics.

Talk Porty ~ Portobello

dogs and environmental wardens (merged)

What is it about us?

Re: dogs and environmental wardens

Re: dogs and environmental wardens

Dog Fouling