Cheshire East Council has today opened a public consultation to seek residents' views around the introduction of a Public Space Protection Order (PSPO) to tackle dog fouling and dog control across the borough.
The PSPO is being proposed to enable the council to combat dog fouling more-effectively and introduce certain dog control requirements.
The PSPO would allow the council to:
- Ban dog fouling in all public places within Cheshire East borough;
- Allow authorised officers to tell a dog owner/walker to put and keep their dog on a lead if necessary, for example, if their dog was showing aggressive behaviour;
- Issue a Fixed Penalty Notice (FPN) of up to £100 and failure to pay the FPN may lead to prosecution and a potential maximum fine of £1,000, as would more serious breaches of the PSPO.
Cheshire East Council has a statutory duty to keep land clear of litter and refuse (including dog fouling) and a duty of care for dealing with waste. They also have a duty to take action against irresponsible individuals who fail to clear up after their dogs on land which is open to the public. Not only is dog mess highly unpleasant, it is also a hazard to health – particularly to children.
A spokesperson for Cheshire East Council said "Introducing the PSPO would allow the council to replace and extend the existing dog controls and byelaws. This will give a consistent approach across the borough to dog fouling as well as introduce dog control requirements, to encourage responsible dog ownership, to ensure that everyone is able to enjoy our open areas, country parks and public spaces safely."
The consultation will run for four weeks from today (Tuesday, 12th September) until October 10th, 2017. Before bringing the PSPO into effect, the council will consider the responses to this public consultation.
If the PSPO is brought into effect, the council would publicise this ahead of the implementation date.
Click here to complete the Dog fouling and control PSPO survey.
Comments
Here's what readers have had to say so far. Why not add your thoughts below.
If you are truly worried about children meeting health hazards, try wild rabbits, foxes and birds!
No doubt we'll have people trying to get dogs banned here, there and everywhere. I wonder how those people might feel about having rabbits, foxes and birds shot ?
1. Yes of course I pick up any 'mess' left by my dog and I also pick up any feral 'mess' that I see. Most of the dog walkers do.
We also pick up the broken bottles etc. that the brain-damaged vandals leave arounf the bandstand in the park.
2. Why 'ridiculous? I bet there will be people using this 'matter' to attack dog-walking in the park.
3. If you think that my comment about rabbits, birds, foxes is ridiculous, try consulting 'Google' on the dideases that wild animals carry.
Good Morning Helen,
I agree with you. Not to mention the paper bags, broken bottles etc. etc.
Perhaps the problem with the ginnel is that it is not owned by the local Authority and so the local Authority perhaps have no legal need to clean it up.
In the past, a Parish Council employee was, from time to time, asked to work there.
Also the 'pay-back' people from the Courts have been directed to the ginnel to clean it up. Perhaps they could be asked again? I seem to recall that contact is via the probationary service?
yes it is privately owned, or at least it was back when I was on the P.C.and looked into such things. Yes i do know who owned it but no I'm not naming anyone in case I am now wrong.
The Linesman wasn't thus responsible. I can't recal, its been a while, exactly what his job description includes; you can perhaps find out from the present Chair of the P.C.?
1. since Helen used the word Linesdman, I saw fit to use the same term; I like to see myself as a gentleman!
2. allthough some lengthsmen tended a village, I believe that the original job description was to be responsible for a specified length of highway between villages (yes, I'm just showing off now!).
3. its fun but perhaps we might ask to see the job description of A.E's lengthsman (the last time I looked, it was indeed a man, in A.E.)