A clampdown on anti-social behaviour involving dogs could be reinstated by the Isle of Wight Council later this week.
Earlier this year Island Echo exclusively revealed that the local authority had let its Public Spaces Protection Orders (PSPOs) expire. The PSPOs include regulations relating to dog fouling, beaches, cemeteries, children’s playgrounds, public highways, St Helens Duver and rights of way.
Following a consultation attracting 1,098 online survey responses and 18 written submissions, the cabinet is due to reach a decision on whether to reinstate the orders at its Thursday meeting.
County Hall’s report, signed by Natasha Dix, service director for waste, environment and planning, and cabinet member Lora Peacey-Wilcox, recommended a reinstatement.
The document said:
“The power to grant Public Space Protection Orders (PSPOs) was given to local authorities in the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014.
“The PSPO provisions are designed to address anti-social behaviour and nuisance issues that are having or are likely to have a detrimental effect on the local community.
“Failure to implement the orders effectively may lead to the continuation of nuisance or anti-social behaviour.
Article continues below this advertisement “A consultation period between September 9, 2024, and October 27, 2024, has been implemented and results of the feedback analysed”.
Under County Hall’s dog fouling order, people in charge of dogs must remove faeces from any public land. Relevant places include open spaces, parks and the highway network. 100% of consultation responses received by the council were in support of the dog fouling PSPO.
The ‘dogs on beaches’ order excludes dogs from selected beaches between 1st May and 30th September. As well as deciding on approval, Cabinet members will consider adding a time element: if for example dogs should be excluded between 09:00 and 18:00. In total, 58% of consultees supported the beaches order compared to 42% who disagreed.
The ‘dogs in cemeteries’ order requires dogs to be on leads in Island cemeteries. On this, 97% agreed, while 3% opposed it.
A ‘dogs in fenced children’s playgrounds’ restriction bans dogs from fenced children’s play areas. On this, 96% were in favour and 4% opposed it.
The ‘dog control on public highway’ order requires dogs to be on leads at all times when on roads, pavements and verges. On this, 96% supported the regulation and 4% were opposed.
The St Helens Duver PSPO orders dogs to be kept on leads on parts of the St Helens Duver revetment and car park between 1st May and 30th September. On this, 81% were in support and 19% opposed it.
An order relating to rights of way requires dogs to be on leads when passing through livestock. This received 98% support with 2% being opposed.
That’s all well and good, but how is this going to be enforced?
Its hard enough enforcing traffic laws, where the vehicles are registered mainly, will DNA tests be carried out on the poop pile only to find out its actually human?
The cowboys running the island couldn’t run a bath
between them, yet alone enforce this.
Problems I see on the island on a daily basis
Speeding
Parking on Pavements and Double Yellow Lines
Dogs not on leads
Dog owners not cleaning up dogs mess
Smell of drugs
Etc etc
This Council are more concerned booking
motorists if they park a few minutes more
than they should
EASY MONEY
Perhaps they can enlarge this to imnclude certain groups of people wh seem to use the beach as their personal refuse tip.
I responded to the consultation as the owner of two dogs. I support the aims of the Orders and certainly have no problem complying with them. Two things are worth noting, however, just for the record. The first is that these Orders lapsed due to incompetence at the Council, not from any dispute between people who like or dislike dogs. Secondly, there has been no increase in cases reported in the press of dogs causing a problem since the Orders lapsed. I suspect that responsible dog owners behave in a manner which ensures their dogs do not cause any nuisance in any form and those who do not are unlikely to comply with the Orders anyway. Since there is no resource to enforce the Orders, it rather begs the question what purpose do they serve?