(now Lead
PSPO UPDATE :
March 2021 : The limit was uplifted from 3 to 6 dogs per person thanks to the campaign Lisa Taylor and I headed up. All our supporters were fantastic and we got over 900 signatures on the Consultation Survey that WFDC issued. The numbers were rubbished by the Deputy Leader of the Council (now Leader) because she didn't like the fact that some people were from outside the area and the then Leader of the Council even said at the end "I hope this doesn't mean we will see more dog walkers coming to our area". ARE THEY MAD ? The Hound Pound is very important to the economy of our area. We have learned a lot from this campaign and will be in a better position when we have to go through it all again in 3 years time.....yes, folks - they didn't rescind the Dog Limit PSPO so they will be looking to renew it in 3 years time. Our National fight to get the Government to look at and reform PSPOs goes on. The Manifesto Group and the Joint Commission for Human Rights as well as Dogs Today and the Kennel Club have taken up the cause and we are hoping nationally recognised groups will make a difference at the top. Thank you again to our supporters,apart from the two who said a lot to make themselves look good in public but were no where to be seen when they thought they might incur the displeasure of local Councillors who they " might need the help from in the future" - yep, those were the words used. If you feel that you can't express a perfectly reasonable view to a Councillor then it is an indictment of our system and/or an indictment of your own personal approach to the world.
8th March 2021 : we have cleared the hurdle of Overview and Scrutiny who have recommended to Cabinet to increase the limit from 3 dogs to 6 dogs. We would have preferred no limit at all as we still believe the PSPO doesn't follow LGA/Home Office Guidelines and is unevidenced, disproportionate and inappropriate. I have compiled a FACT CHECKED table as there were many misconceptions and opinions put forward by Councillors that I feel should be corrected. Councillors should not offer opinions or unsubstantiated theories when they are elected to act on behalf of residents. Opinions are not facts and if we go down that route we are on a very dangerous road. Some of the worst leaders in the world have offered opinions not facts. If you would like a copy of the FACT CHECKED TABLE, please let me know via email. [email protected]
We are taking our campaign national and have launched a Petition which we are hoping to present to Parliament but we need 100,000 signatures. If everyone who signed the local petition signed this one and 10 people they each know signed it and shared it with 5 people they know - we'd reach our target. Send them the Petition link and the video link. These PSPOs seek to marginalise, criminalise and victimising whole groups of people (not just dog owners) who have done nothing wrong. Preserve the law of our land.
The link is https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/552758
There is a video which explains more on my Facebook Page. With thanks to Randle Stonier of www.dogbusinessschool.co.uk for writing, producing and narrating the video. Uploaded to vimeo too https://vimeo.com/467124086: https://www.facebook.com/linda.mckenzie.543/videos/3308132055888477
On Wednesday 16th September Lisa presented our petition to the Cabinet Members meeting. She was amazing and despite the fact that we didn't get the limit on the number of dogs taken out of the PSPO, we are determined to keep the campaign going. We are setting up a Facebook Group and an email group so that we can keep everyone up to date and make all the information available to everyone. We will also welcome ideas for our continuing campaign and offers of help with things like sending emails to Councillors and organisations and putting up posters (with permission please, no fly posting please !!). There will be a review by Council in 6 months time and we need to have made sure we have done everything in our power in the meantime so we are ready for that review. Please let me know you would like to join us.
2nd September 2020 : All Councillors, Cabinet Members and Council Officers have been sent a bullet point email together with a link to the podcast interview in time for the first of their September Council Meetings so that they have all our objections and challenges in one document. Lisa Taylor, co-author of the Petition has got a 3 minute time slot to present our Petition to the Cabinet meeting on 16th September. We hope we have not left any stone unturned in our quest to do our best for the dogs in this area who belong to multi-dog homes and for the professional dog walkers, home boarding and daycare businesses. We would still like everyone to sign and share the Petition please. Your support is invaluable.
17th August : The Petition has been sent to WFDC using the procedure outlines on their website. Emails have gone out again to all Councillors asking for information that has not been forthcoming or has been muddled from any Councillor that has bothered to reply. Some say "done deal, review in 6 months", some say "not yet implemented and has to go to Full Council meeting in September", some pass the buck !! Every email we send is now going to WFDC Solicitors too.
Emails are going out to our supporters who wrote to their local Councillors in the first instance because of the "corporate" response that we are getting from those who have taken the time to reply. They are effectively saying there will be a Review in March but until then, the implementation goes ahead. We would like to know what prompted the discussion of the PSPO in the first place, what procedures were followed to get it debated and approved, what evidence was taken into account and what their aim is. We would also like to know what form the Review will take, what procedures will be followed, what evidence will be taken into account and who will discuss and debate the Review. The PSPO process seems to be very woolly and we don't get straight answers and yet these people are elected by us to represent the community but they don't seem to want to be answerable to the communities they serve. The PSPO Team are also preparing our bid to have our Petition put before the next Council meetings which is our right and we are consulting the procedures that are published so that we give ourselves the best chance possible. We are also endeavouring to contact owners of 3+ dogs for the next stage. If you own 3+ dogs or you know someone who does, can you please get in touch. There are very few of you out there according to official statistics and yet you are being targetted by WFDC.......we want to help you
We are writing to challenge the new PSPO’s WFDC are introducing in October 2020. Specifically the PSPO on limiting the number of dogs any one person can walk.
Public Spaces Protection Orders Guidance for councils produced by Local Government Association make a number of recommendations and for the purposes of our objections we will note the Guidance and our relevant points underneath and reference is also made in our challenge to the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014: Anti-social behaviour powers Statutory guidance for frontline professionals
1. PSPO’s are aimed at ensuring public spaces can be enjoyed free from anti-social behaviour:
There was no evidence offered at the WFDC meeting on 2nd July that walking more than 3 dogs is anti-social behaviour and the only document produced at that meeting was from The Dogs Trust which stated research from 2010 shows that 95% of dog owners have up to 3 dogs and therefore the number of dogs taken out onto land by one individual would not normally be expected to exceed 4 dogs. West Mercia Police reported that they had received no calls regarding incidents under the Dog Control order.
2. The Act gives councils the authority to draft and implement PSPO’s in response to the particular issues affecting their communities, provided certain criteria and legal tests are met. We do not believe the criteria and legal tests have been met in this case:
The Act requires that activities have had a detrimental effect on the quality of life of those in the locality, or it is likely that activities will take place and that they will have a detrimental effect. No evidence was provided at the WFDC Council meeting on 2nd July that proved a detrimental effect or likely detrimental effect. Two anecdotal examples of one dog injuring another dog were offered and the Police stated that no such incidents have been reported. The Home Office’s Statutory Guidance and the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014: Anti-social behaviour powers Statutory guidance for frontline professionals reiterates that PSPO’s should be used responsibly and proportionately and only in response to issues that cause anti-social behaviour and only where necessary to protect the public. None of these conditions have been met by this PSPO. There is no evidence that walking more than 3 dogs causes anti-social behaviour and there is no evidence that walking less than 3 dogs protects the public.
3. The Guidance requires an Authority to determine the extent of the geographical area covered by an Order and identifying what is proportionate and restricting activities only where necessary. The Guidance states it may be difficult to demonstrate that the statutory criteria under section 59 have been met across an entire broad geographical area; evidence about the extent of the anti-social behaviour within a locality should be used to inform appropriate boundaries:.
Introducing a blanket PSPO across the whole of the WFDC geographical area is not proportionate and restricting the activities of walking 3 plus dogs is not necessary as no evidence was offered as to why this limit is required.
4. The Guidance states that it may be difficult to demonstrate that the statutory criteria under section 59 have been met across an entire broad geographical area; evidence about the extent of the anti-social behaviour within a locality should be used to inform appropriate boundaries:
The PSPO seeks to impose restrictions across the whole of the WFDC directly managed land including (but not limited to) park, nature reserves, public land and pavements & highways and therefore are in breach of Section 59.
5. The Guidance also states that under the Animal Welfare Act 2006, owners have to provide for their animal’s welfare, which includes exercising them and this should be observed when looking at PSPO’s. In determining the area covered by restrictions, councils should therefore consider how to accommodate the need for owners to exercise their animals. The Home Office states that the area which the PSPO will cover must be clearly defined. Mapping out areas where certain behaviours are permitted may also be helpful; for instance identifying specific park areas where dogs can be exercised off lead and with no limits on numbers:
Owners of more than 3 dogs will be disadvantaged by this PSPO as in order to meet their obligations under the Animal Welfare Act, will have to walk their dogs in smaller groups. WFDC are clearly in breach of this Home Office statutory requirement as no alternatives for exercising more than 3 dogs at any one time were offered.
6. Councils should also consult dog law and welfare experts, for example, vets or animal welfare officers and organisations affected by restrictions before seeking a PSPO:
There is no evidence that WFDC consulted any dog law, welfare experts, vets or animal welfare offices/organisations and therefore are in breach of the Guidelines.
The Dogs Trust wrote to the Council after being made aware of the proposed PSPO’s. In this letter The Dogs Trust stated that research from 2010 shows that 95% of dog owners have up to 3 dogs and that therefore the number of dogs taken out onto land by one individual would not normally be expected to exceed 4 dogs. WFDC have arbitrarily decided on the figure of 3 dogs. The PDSA Paw Report 2018 found that 89% of veterinary professionals believe that the welfare of dogs will suffer if owners are banned from walking their dogs in public places or if dogs are required to be kept on leads in these spaces. Therefore dismissing the only professional advice that was offered and penalising the 5% of dog owners who own 3 or more dogs is disproportionate and targets the minority.
7. The Guidance states that local areas will need to satisfy themselves that the legislative requirements are met before an Order can be introduced, and obtaining clear evidence to support this is important:
No clear evidence was provided at WFDC’s 2nd July meeting to support this PSPO and therefore, the legislative requirements have not been met.
In conclusion, we believe that proportionality and reasonableness have not been satisfied. In addition, there will be a considerable detrimental impact to owners of 3 or more dogs across the whole of the WFDC directly managed geographical area and the case for introducing this PSPO has not been clearly evidenced or proven by WFDC.
We are therefore calling on WFDC to rescind the PSPO relating to the limit of how many dogs can be walked by one person in the whole of the geographical area directly managed by WFDC.
Lisa Taylor and Linda McKenzie
PSPO UPDATE :
March 2021 : The limit was uplifted from 3 to 6 dogs per person thanks to the campaign Lisa Taylor and I headed up. All our supporters were fantastic and we got over 900 signatures on the Consultation Survey that WFDC issued. The numbers were rubbished by the Deputy Leader of the Council (now Leader) because she didn't like the fact that some people were from outside the area and the then Leader of the Council even said at the end "I hope this doesn't mean we will see more dog walkers coming to our area". ARE THEY MAD ? The Hound Pound is very important to the economy of our area. We have learned a lot from this campaign and will be in a better position when we have to go through it all again in 3 years time.....yes, folks - they didn't rescind the Dog Limit PSPO so they will be looking to renew it in 3 years time. Our National fight to get the Government to look at and reform PSPOs goes on. The Manifesto Group and the Joint Commission for Human Rights as well as Dogs Today and the Kennel Club have taken up the cause and we are hoping nationally recognised groups will make a difference at the top. Thank you again to our supporters,apart from the two who said a lot to make themselves look good in public but were no where to be seen when they thought they might incur the displeasure of local Councillors who they " might need the help from in the future" - yep, those were the words used. If you feel that you can't express a perfectly reasonable view to a Councillor then it is an indictment of our system and/or an indictment of your own personal approach to the world.
8th March 2021 : we have cleared the hurdle of Overview and Scrutiny who have recommended to Cabinet to increase the limit from 3 dogs to 6 dogs. We would have preferred no limit at all as we still believe the PSPO doesn't follow LGA/Home Office Guidelines and is unevidenced, disproportionate and inappropriate. I have compiled a FACT CHECKED table as there were many misconceptions and opinions put forward by Councillors that I feel should be corrected. Councillors should not offer opinions or unsubstantiated theories when they are elected to act on behalf of residents. Opinions are not facts and if we go down that route we are on a very dangerous road. Some of the worst leaders in the world have offered opinions not facts. If you would like a copy of the FACT CHECKED TABLE, please let me know via email. [email protected]
We are taking our campaign national and have launched a Petition which we are hoping to present to Parliament but we need 100,000 signatures. If everyone who signed the local petition signed this one and 10 people they each know signed it and shared it with 5 people they know - we'd reach our target. Send them the Petition link and the video link. These PSPOs seek to marginalise, criminalise and victimising whole groups of people (not just dog owners) who have done nothing wrong. Preserve the law of our land.
The link is https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/552758
There is a video which explains more on my Facebook Page. With thanks to Randle Stonier of www.dogbusinessschool.co.uk for writing, producing and narrating the video. Uploaded to vimeo too https://vimeo.com/467124086: https://www.facebook.com/linda.mckenzie.543/videos/3308132055888477
On Wednesday 16th September Lisa presented our petition to the Cabinet Members meeting. She was amazing and despite the fact that we didn't get the limit on the number of dogs taken out of the PSPO, we are determined to keep the campaign going. We are setting up a Facebook Group and an email group so that we can keep everyone up to date and make all the information available to everyone. We will also welcome ideas for our continuing campaign and offers of help with things like sending emails to Councillors and organisations and putting up posters (with permission please, no fly posting please !!). There will be a review by Council in 6 months time and we need to have made sure we have done everything in our power in the meantime so we are ready for that review. Please let me know you would like to join us.
2nd September 2020 : All Councillors, Cabinet Members and Council Officers have been sent a bullet point email together with a link to the podcast interview in time for the first of their September Council Meetings so that they have all our objections and challenges in one document. Lisa Taylor, co-author of the Petition has got a 3 minute time slot to present our Petition to the Cabinet meeting on 16th September. We hope we have not left any stone unturned in our quest to do our best for the dogs in this area who belong to multi-dog homes and for the professional dog walkers, home boarding and daycare businesses. We would still like everyone to sign and share the Petition please. Your support is invaluable.
17th August : The Petition has been sent to WFDC using the procedure outlines on their website. Emails have gone out again to all Councillors asking for information that has not been forthcoming or has been muddled from any Councillor that has bothered to reply. Some say "done deal, review in 6 months", some say "not yet implemented and has to go to Full Council meeting in September", some pass the buck !! Every email we send is now going to WFDC Solicitors too.
Emails are going out to our supporters who wrote to their local Councillors in the first instance because of the "corporate" response that we are getting from those who have taken the time to reply. They are effectively saying there will be a Review in March but until then, the implementation goes ahead. We would like to know what prompted the discussion of the PSPO in the first place, what procedures were followed to get it debated and approved, what evidence was taken into account and what their aim is. We would also like to know what form the Review will take, what procedures will be followed, what evidence will be taken into account and who will discuss and debate the Review. The PSPO process seems to be very woolly and we don't get straight answers and yet these people are elected by us to represent the community but they don't seem to want to be answerable to the communities they serve. The PSPO Team are also preparing our bid to have our Petition put before the next Council meetings which is our right and we are consulting the procedures that are published so that we give ourselves the best chance possible. We are also endeavouring to contact owners of 3+ dogs for the next stage. If you own 3+ dogs or you know someone who does, can you please get in touch. There are very few of you out there according to official statistics and yet you are being targetted by WFDC.......we want to help you
We are writing to challenge the new PSPO’s WFDC are introducing in October 2020. Specifically the PSPO on limiting the number of dogs any one person can walk.
Public Spaces Protection Orders Guidance for councils produced by Local Government Association make a number of recommendations and for the purposes of our objections we will note the Guidance and our relevant points underneath and reference is also made in our challenge to the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014: Anti-social behaviour powers Statutory guidance for frontline professionals
1. PSPO’s are aimed at ensuring public spaces can be enjoyed free from anti-social behaviour:
There was no evidence offered at the WFDC meeting on 2nd July that walking more than 3 dogs is anti-social behaviour and the only document produced at that meeting was from The Dogs Trust which stated research from 2010 shows that 95% of dog owners have up to 3 dogs and therefore the number of dogs taken out onto land by one individual would not normally be expected to exceed 4 dogs. West Mercia Police reported that they had received no calls regarding incidents under the Dog Control order.
2. The Act gives councils the authority to draft and implement PSPO’s in response to the particular issues affecting their communities, provided certain criteria and legal tests are met. We do not believe the criteria and legal tests have been met in this case:
The Act requires that activities have had a detrimental effect on the quality of life of those in the locality, or it is likely that activities will take place and that they will have a detrimental effect. No evidence was provided at the WFDC Council meeting on 2nd July that proved a detrimental effect or likely detrimental effect. Two anecdotal examples of one dog injuring another dog were offered and the Police stated that no such incidents have been reported. The Home Office’s Statutory Guidance and the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014: Anti-social behaviour powers Statutory guidance for frontline professionals reiterates that PSPO’s should be used responsibly and proportionately and only in response to issues that cause anti-social behaviour and only where necessary to protect the public. None of these conditions have been met by this PSPO. There is no evidence that walking more than 3 dogs causes anti-social behaviour and there is no evidence that walking less than 3 dogs protects the public.
3. The Guidance requires an Authority to determine the extent of the geographical area covered by an Order and identifying what is proportionate and restricting activities only where necessary. The Guidance states it may be difficult to demonstrate that the statutory criteria under section 59 have been met across an entire broad geographical area; evidence about the extent of the anti-social behaviour within a locality should be used to inform appropriate boundaries:.
Introducing a blanket PSPO across the whole of the WFDC geographical area is not proportionate and restricting the activities of walking 3 plus dogs is not necessary as no evidence was offered as to why this limit is required.
4. The Guidance states that it may be difficult to demonstrate that the statutory criteria under section 59 have been met across an entire broad geographical area; evidence about the extent of the anti-social behaviour within a locality should be used to inform appropriate boundaries:
The PSPO seeks to impose restrictions across the whole of the WFDC directly managed land including (but not limited to) park, nature reserves, public land and pavements & highways and therefore are in breach of Section 59.
5. The Guidance also states that under the Animal Welfare Act 2006, owners have to provide for their animal’s welfare, which includes exercising them and this should be observed when looking at PSPO’s. In determining the area covered by restrictions, councils should therefore consider how to accommodate the need for owners to exercise their animals. The Home Office states that the area which the PSPO will cover must be clearly defined. Mapping out areas where certain behaviours are permitted may also be helpful; for instance identifying specific park areas where dogs can be exercised off lead and with no limits on numbers:
Owners of more than 3 dogs will be disadvantaged by this PSPO as in order to meet their obligations under the Animal Welfare Act, will have to walk their dogs in smaller groups. WFDC are clearly in breach of this Home Office statutory requirement as no alternatives for exercising more than 3 dogs at any one time were offered.
6. Councils should also consult dog law and welfare experts, for example, vets or animal welfare officers and organisations affected by restrictions before seeking a PSPO:
There is no evidence that WFDC consulted any dog law, welfare experts, vets or animal welfare offices/organisations and therefore are in breach of the Guidelines.
The Dogs Trust wrote to the Council after being made aware of the proposed PSPO’s. In this letter The Dogs Trust stated that research from 2010 shows that 95% of dog owners have up to 3 dogs and that therefore the number of dogs taken out onto land by one individual would not normally be expected to exceed 4 dogs. WFDC have arbitrarily decided on the figure of 3 dogs. The PDSA Paw Report 2018 found that 89% of veterinary professionals believe that the welfare of dogs will suffer if owners are banned from walking their dogs in public places or if dogs are required to be kept on leads in these spaces. Therefore dismissing the only professional advice that was offered and penalising the 5% of dog owners who own 3 or more dogs is disproportionate and targets the minority.
7. The Guidance states that local areas will need to satisfy themselves that the legislative requirements are met before an Order can be introduced, and obtaining clear evidence to support this is important:
No clear evidence was provided at WFDC’s 2nd July meeting to support this PSPO and therefore, the legislative requirements have not been met.
In conclusion, we believe that proportionality and reasonableness have not been satisfied. In addition, there will be a considerable detrimental impact to owners of 3 or more dogs across the whole of the WFDC directly managed geographical area and the case for introducing this PSPO has not been clearly evidenced or proven by WFDC.
We are therefore calling on WFDC to rescind the PSPO relating to the limit of how many dogs can be walked by one person in the whole of the geographical area directly managed by WFDC.
Lisa Taylor and Linda McKenzie