Brighton park dog ban idea is ruffling feathers (From The Argus)

Yes, ban them from that inner area of Queen's Park as before. I liked not having to worry about dogs worrying ducks, toddlers, picnics etc. I especially liked not having worry about sitting somewhere that a dog's pooed on.

There seemed to be a fair balance before; getting rid of the dog-free areas can be seen as an experiment that hasn't worked out. Simple.

Do us all a favour. Get rid of the filthy animals from everywhere! Yappers, Crappers and Snappers yuk!

1.No one has ever proposed a 'ban' of dog's in Queens Park as the Argus and Paul Mendlesohn's petition suggest.
2.The total for a retention of the division into dog free and dog friendly is 2,029 as Geoffrey Theobald announced. Not the 1,901 as The Argus suggests.
3.The Dogs v Ducks banner is misleading as we have only one duck
left on the pond, it's mate having been killed by a dog last August, whilst all wild ducks were finally driven off by Herring Gull predation a couple of years ago.
Dogs would certainly threaten the aquatic habitat as well as nesting waterbirds but the threat to bio-diversity goes beyond this. There are a range of animals, birds and amphibians which which have colonised the area because it has been dog free for 30 years.

I wish dogs had to be kept on leads on the seafront/promenade they are just left to run free barging past frail old folk, bounding up to terrified toddlers and running across the cycle lane sending children and adults on bikes crashing to the floor.
Then they crap on the sea front and grass and while it is removed by most owners, some don't pick it up and there is often poo remnants left where kids and families picnic.
Worthing and Lancing are the worst areas along the coast. Absolutely awash with dog shi*. I was surprised by the amount of poo. Perhaps it's time to bring back the licence fee to fund more dog wardens and bins and special dog areas.

Are you freakin' kidding me?!!

"Frail old pensioners at risk from dogs"...?

"annoying to people on the sea-front"...?

TRY GETTING RID OF YOUR HORRIBLE BRATTY CHILDREN - THE WORLD (NEVER MIND A SMALL PATCH OF GRASS) WOULD BE A BETTER, NICER PLACE!!!!

Honestly - talk about two-faced people!! Never heard os something called 'tolerance'....?

I don't have any kids, but thanks to the owner who left dog shi* on the promenade which I walked through in the dark and trod through my house and carpets and up the stairs.
There is nothng like hand scrubbing carpets by hand while gagging at the smell of excrement.

Oh while we're at it, can we ban all cats too. Dog-owners are legally obliged to pick up dog poo, but cats...oh that's ok. They can poo anywhere they want because they are cats.
-
Why?
-
I am fed up of cutting my small patch of grass with a flymo and getting cat poo all over my trousers. I know it's cat poo because I've watched them do it.
-
Am I sounding a little mental?

James Wallin has done a great disservice to this issue by writing the piece above.
.
The issue is NOT about banning dogs from Queens Park - it is about the REINSTATEMENT of the dog-free area.
.
Coun Theobold should be congratulated for letting democracy prevail (at least in allowing this to go to consultation). The original decision to eliminate the dog-free area was not well handled.
.
There is absolutely no need for people to add comments to this article screaming about total bans or slavish 'tolerance'. This issue is about re-establishing a very good compromise that worked well for decades.

Cats rule, dogs drool...

While we're at it can we ban chewing gum? It's all over the pavement. Litter - now there's something that bugs the crap out of me. What is wrong with you people? You hoover like crazy to keep the carpets in your flats, houses and bungalows spotless, yet as soon as you go out the door, it's throw away this, chuck that down there, lob this over here... People visiting this country must think we're the biggest bunch of lazy slobs in the whole wide world.

Spitting?
I was walking through the North Laine yesterday and people, mainly tourists, were sat outside enjoying the sun and lunch, when a bearded tattoed pig of a man coughed up and then spat across the road in front of everyone.
Now isn't that delightful.

A well-tested,(30 years), situation is apparently arbitrarily changed without any consultation. A petition supporting segregation be re-imposed, is handed in & the majority are in favour. Why the need for consultation? Does Mr Theobald have any vested interest in employing consultants in these times of financial stricture? As a resident who lives 50 yards from Queens Park, I was never consulted on the lifting of the restrictions. What is so different now? Why waste further resources launching a consultation on a sensible measure which has sat comfortably with most& had general support for 30 years? Is this a case of fat cats ignoring the Public & the patent evidence to line the pockets of their mates with money that could be better spent elsewhere?

I write as a resident of Queen's Park, a former dog owner and now grandparent to a toddler. My dog used to run every day in Queen's Park. I was happy to let her do so, knowing there were no small children she could knock over in her rush to chase a ball. My granddaughter's face is now the same height as that of a large dog. A warning snap could rip her face apart. In today's paper, Mr Savelli says his dog is well-behaved but not all dogs are. And we can't tell by looking at them what they will be like.

At the moment, nearly all dog owners walk their dogs in the former dog area of the park and don't bring them into the rest of it. If they do, I shan't take my granddaughter to the park any more and she will miss it. I feel it is too much of a risk.

Last week, some dog owners commented that they didn't come into conflict with poeple over their dogs. Of course not. People who are worried about dogs simply don't go where dogs are. Queen's Park has, up to now, been an oasis for those who, for one reason or another, don't want dogs around them. We can picnic on the grass without the possibility that a dog will **** it's leg up nearby, or run off with the sandwiches. We can let our children roll in the grass, certain that they won't get dog dirt on them. St Luke's primary school can run its egg and spoon race, knowing dogs won't interfere with the fun.

I don't want dogs banned from the park, but it seems very selfish of dog owners to want to take their animals all over and leave nowhere but the playground for the likes of me and my granddaughter.

Spain is moving to a ban on bullfighting everywhere. Let us just ban everything and live our lives in the cyberworld!

you people need to get your priorities straight.

so a petition finds in favour of banning dogs. does that mean all decisions should always be based on what the majority wants? Theres a lot of Sun readers out there who have some view in the majority...

Or are we to be a more modern society, made up of tolerant, REASONABLE citizens. Owners already have to pick up excrement for YOU. Now on a daily basis, how many people are YOU rude or inconsiderate to? Do you hold the door open for people? Practise decent manners? Or are you a 4x4 owner? A smoker? A parent of a darling little chav or brat? Are you intolerant of immigrants? etc etc etc.

On a daily basis I guarantee the behaviour of the majority of citizens of Brighton are WAY more irritating and hideous to other (reasonable) fellow citizens than the consequences of a few dog owners, who have already been told they cant walk their pets most places, have to pick up after them (how many of YOU throw most of your litter on the street, or pollute with your cars, or your vacuous illiterate or racist / sexist comments?)

IT'S TIME TO RE-ALIGN WHAT IS IMPORTANT / REASONABLE AND WHAT IS NOT.

This whole town is full of hysterical, inconsiderate semi-crazy morons. Now you want to enforce your insanity on others, 'cos your in the majority. Brings to mind the famous poem "Come bombs fall on Brighton, Hove (and while we're at it) Worthing."

David523 people are not tolerant of people refusing to share their space responsibly or following laws. That applies to dogs, cyclists, pedestrians, motorists etc
It's not complicated. It's not hysterical, it's common sense.
We don't want cyclists on pavements, or dog mess in public areas.
I don't want dog owners abusing me (and threatening me with violence) when their pets run into the cycle lane because they are not on a lead.
It's a transport route.
And no David, I am not rude to people even when I am threatened or sworn at, I am not racist or a smoker, or a parent. I am a very boring, law abiding person.
I just want to go about my business, minding my own business without getting dog's business on my shoes or getting knocked off my bike while riding on a legal route.
It would be polite if we followed laws and general good manners.

So many people in this comments thread should have their internet access removed. They're reducing the IQ of the whole world wide web.

Well said TheInsider...

Dog Exclusion zones have been introduced across the UK for good reason. Brunswick Square is an excellent example or where one was needed. This (once private) garden was designated as a Dog Exclusion Zone last year, after a lengthy consultation process, to protect the many people that use the garden from not only unleashed and unsupervised dogs, but from the parasites in dog faeces that can cause blindness, especially in young children. Indeed in the early 1990s, before the railings were reinstated around the Square, the soil was formally tested and found to be so seriously riddled with toxocariasis that enclosing the garden and banning dogs was considered an obvious course of action. The bye-law introduced back then was officially repealed when the new Dog Exclusion Zone came into effect.

However, dog owners seem to think that even in areas where their pets are not welcome it is some excuse to explain that they clear up after their dogs, but it is relevant to note that EVEN WHEN they do, the residue left can still harness the offending parasites and cause illness and even blindness.
As the Dog Exclusion Zones are for the most part public gardens and playgrounds enjoyed by many young members of our community the frequent and blatant disregard for the rules concerning dogs are a perpetual annoyance for residents and others alike. Despite the exclusion zones being clearly signposted across the city, many less responsible dog owners still feel it is OK to exercise their dogs despite the rationale laid out above and even when the offence they are committing carries a fine of up to £1000.

So a polite message to those dog owners who do still exercise their dogs in places like Brunswick Square and other playgrounds and gardens across our city, and to those who let their dogs run wild in areas where they should be kept on a lead:

Please show some respect, abide by the signposted rules and take your dogs elsewhere – there are plenty of alternative venues. Or perhaps you wouldn't mind it if I let my dog run up your path and allowed it to defecate on your doorstep, with or without my plastic bag to scrape away most of it.

David523 wrote:
you people need to get your priorities straight. so a petition finds in favour of banning dogs. does that mean all decisions should always be based on what the majority wants? Theres a lot of Sun readers out there who have some view in the majority... Or are we to be a more modern society, made up of tolerant, REASONABLE citizens. Owners already have to pick up excrement for YOU. Now on a daily basis, how many people are YOU rude or inconsiderate to? Do you hold the door open for people? Practise decent manners? Or are you a 4x4 owner? A smoker? A parent of a darling little chav or brat? Are you intolerant of immigrants? etc etc etc. On a daily basis I guarantee the behaviour of the majority of citizens of Brighton are WAY more irritating and hideous to other (reasonable) fellow citizens than the consequences of a few dog owners, who have already been told they cant walk their pets most places, have to pick up after them (how many of YOU throw most of your litter on the street, or pollute with your cars, or your vacuous illiterate or racist / sexist comments?) IT'S TIME TO RE-ALIGN WHAT IS IMPORTANT / REASONABLE AND WHAT IS NOT. This whole town is full of hysterical, inconsiderate semi-crazy morons. Now you want to enforce your insanity on others, 'cos your in the majority. Brings to mind the famous poem "Come bombs fall on Brighton, Hove (and while we're at it) Worthing."

Dear God - where did that rant come from ??
.
As I pointed out above, this is not about a ban but a compromise. It is only about a reinstatement of the dog-free area. Dogs and their owners would still be able to use a very large part of the park.
.
By the way, your rant with a couple of words changed could be turned right back on yourself...

Tribaleye: "...after a lengthy consultation process, to protect the many people that use the garden from not only unleashed and unsupervised dogs, but from the parasites in dog faeces that can cause blindness, especially in young children... so seriously riddled with toxocariasis...the residue left can still harness the offending parasites and cause illness and even blindness..."

Get real.
I've lived with dogs, and been around dog owners, my entire life. Not once, have I ever met anyone who has ever got 'toxocariasis' from stepping on a dog turd. Nor have I ever, in my ENTIRE life met anyone who knows of anyone to have caught 'toxicariasis' from a dog turd either. NOT EVER (and I've worked with the blind!)
On the other hand, not only have I had to have tetnus shots from the times I've trodden on broken glass, but I know more than a few who have had the same unfortunate experience (INCLUDING KIDS) -not to mention the 4 occasions my dog' s paw pads have been slashed...
Well, you never hear the 'anti-dog brigade' ever banging on about that!

I don't use Queens Park, so 'to ban or not to ban' thankfully doesn't effect me. I'm just sick to the back teeth of hearing the 'blindness' argument used as justification for banning dogs from any particular area -especially in the face of far greater threats... such as broken glass which effects young, old, and dogs alike.

PS.
I pick up after mine.

Lilleveller wrote ... "I pick up after mine"

I should hope so too, it is a legal requirement. Do you think it is OK then to let dogs into playgrounds and areas designated as Dog Free? I presume you are not one of the many selectively illiterate dog owners who ignore the signs posted on many a gate in the town and take their dogs in irrespective, with the "I've got a bag so what of it" mentality?

As you are so keen to illustrate how responsible you are, but not necessarily how law abiding you might or might not otherwise be when it comes to dog exclusion zones ... I also take it your dog has been de-wormed:

" Definition: Toxicariasis is a parasitic infection that is caused by roundworms that infect dogs and cats. The life cycle includes: 1) roundworm larvae in dirt; 2) dog or cat eats the larvae; 3) worms travel to intestines; 4) mother can pass infection to offspring; and 5) larvae excreted in faeces. So, what does this have to do with kids? Plenty, because children love to play in dirt and sand pits, where animals often eliminate waste. Kids can get infected with toxicariasis, and symptoms can include fever, coughing or wheezing, skin rash and even problems with vision. Treatment includes steroids to relieve symptoms and anti-parasitic drugs. Parents and child care providers alike need to exercise extreme caution in having kids play in dirt or areas where animals extrete waste, keep sand pits covered when kids are not playing in it, and teaching kids to always wash their hands carefully after playing outside and to not put their dirty hands in their mouth. Pet-owners can lessen the chance of a pet getting toxicariasis by having kittens and puppies wormed."

(http://childcare.ab
out.com/od/healthglo
ssary/g/Toxicariasis
.htm).

"Sick to the back teeth" is not an appropriate response when you are commenting on something that is deemed by most health-care professionals to be a real threat to the health of children.

Someone wrote: "However, dog owners seem to think that even in areas where their pets are not welcome it is some excuse to explain that they clear up after their dogs, but it is relevant to note that EVEN WHEN they do, the residue left can still harness the offending parasites and cause illness and even blindness."

I also understand that if a person infected with malaria spits their chewing gum out on the street, and a person with bare feet steps on that gum within 90 seconds of said malaria suffer spitting it out, and that person who steps on the gum also happens to have blood type O, and was born during the months of either June or September and there was a fool moon in the sky at the time of said birth, and also has at least 27 hairs in each nostril but no more than 63, this person could incubate a disease which would inflict ingrown toenails on said unfortunate person for the rest of their lives. Life is so bloody hazardous huh?

tribaleye wrote:
Lilleveller wrote ... "I pick up after mine"

I should hope so too, it is a legal requirement. Do you think it is OK then to let dogs into playgrounds and areas designated as Dog Free? I presume you are not one of the many selectively illiterate dog owners who ignore the signs posted on many a gate in the town and take their dogs in irrespective, with the "I've got a bag so what of it" mentality?

As you are so keen to illustrate how responsible you are, but not necessarily how law abiding you might or might not otherwise be when it comes to dog exclusion zones ... I also take it your dog has been de-wormed:

" Definition: Toxicariasis is a parasitic infection that is caused by roundworms that infect dogs and cats. The life cycle includes: 1) roundworm larvae in dirt; 2) dog or cat eats the larvae; 3) worms travel to intestines; 4) mother can pass infection to offspring; and 5) larvae excreted in faeces. So, what does this have to do with kids? Plenty, because children love to play in dirt and sand pits, where animals often eliminate waste. Kids can get infected with toxicariasis, and symptoms can include fever, coughing or wheezing, skin rash and even problems with vision. Treatment includes steroids to relieve symptoms and anti-parasitic drugs. Parents and child care providers alike need to exercise extreme caution in having kids play in dirt or areas where animals extrete waste, keep sand pits covered when kids are not playing in it, and teaching kids to always wash their hands carefully after playing outside and to not put their dirty hands in their mouth. Pet-owners can lessen the chance of a pet getting toxicariasis by having kittens and puppies wormed."

(http://childcare.ab

out.com/od/healthglo

ssary/g/Toxicariasis

.htm).

"Sick to the back teeth" is not an appropriate response when you are commenting on something that is deemed by most health-care professionals to be a real threat to the health of children.

Bird Flu, Mad Cow Disease, Foot n Mouth, Flesh Eating diseases, terrorists on the Palace Pier... and now, TOXOCARIASIS!

Now lets put this in proper perspective:

"Toxocariasis is a rare condition, with an average of 10 cases occurring each year in England...With treatment, the outlook for toxocariasis is very good. Treatment involves taking medication designed to kill the parasites. Most people will quickly make a full recovery and will not experience any long-term complications.
Due to advances in treatment, the potential risk of blindness is now a very rare complication of toxocariasis." (NHS CKS website)

Argument over -you sanctimonious windbag.

lilleveller wrote:

tribaleye wrote:
Lilleveller wrote ... "I pick up after mine"

I should hope so too, it is a legal requirement. Do you think it is OK then to let dogs into playgrounds and areas designated as Dog Free? I presume you are not one of the many selectively illiterate dog owners who ignore the signs posted on many a gate in the town and take their dogs in irrespective, with the "I've got a bag so what of it" mentality?

As you are so keen to illustrate how responsible you are, but not necessarily how law abiding you might or might not otherwise be when it comes to dog exclusion zones ... I also take it your dog has been de-wormed:

" Definition: Toxicariasis is a parasitic infection that is caused by roundworms that infect dogs and cats. The life cycle includes: 1) roundworm larvae in dirt; 2) dog or cat eats the larvae; 3) worms travel to intestines; 4) mother can pass infection to offspring; and 5) larvae excreted in faeces. So, what does this have to do with kids? Plenty, because children love to play in dirt and sand pits, where animals often eliminate waste. Kids can get infected with toxicariasis, and symptoms can include fever, coughing or wheezing, skin rash and even problems with vision. Treatment includes steroids to relieve symptoms and anti-parasitic drugs. Parents and child care providers alike need to exercise extreme caution in having kids play in dirt or areas where animals extrete waste, keep sand pits covered when kids are not playing in it, and teaching kids to always wash their hands carefully after playing outside and to not put their dirty hands in their mouth. Pet-owners can lessen the chance of a pet getting toxicariasis by having kittens and puppies wormed."

(http://childcare.ab


out.com/od/healthglo


ssary/g/Toxicariasis


.htm).

"Sick to the back teeth" is not an appropriate response when you are commenting on something that is deemed by most health-care professionals to be a real threat to the health of children.

Bird Flu, Mad Cow Disease, Foot n Mouth, Flesh Eating diseases, terrorists on the Palace Pier... and now, TOXOCARIASIS!

Now lets put this in proper perspective:

"Toxocariasis is a rare condition, with an average of 10 cases occurring each year in England...With treatment, the outlook for toxocariasis is very good. Treatment involves taking medication designed to kill the parasites. Most people will quickly make a full recovery and will not experience any long-term complications.
Due to advances in treatment, the potential risk of blindness is now a very rare complication of toxocariasis." (NHS CKS website)

Argument over -you sanctimonious windbag.

Whatever lilleveller, bn2 6Hr, catch the sanctimony in this: abide by the rules & keep your dog out of areas where it is ILLEGAL to take them or face the consequences. I for one don't want your or anyone else's dog faeces in my child's or anyone else's child's mouth. How simple is that to understand ?! Your comments seem to suggest that you don't.

acoustic wrote:
Do us all a favour. Get rid of the filthy animals from everywhere! Yappers, Crappers and Snappers yuk!

Are you named "Acoustic because you like the sound of your own voice???..
Hopefully, every dog in the world will now attempt to bite you, but the majority will successfully bite you, HA-HA....