(Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Peter Jackson)
Cabinet received a report from the Chief Officer – Housing & Property that sought approval for the adoption of four Public Space Protection Orders (Dog Controls) for a period of 3 years.
The options, options analysis, including risk assessment and officer preferred option, were set out in the report as follows:
Option 1: Adopt the PSPOs as proposed in the consultation, with no amendments
Advantages:
· Reflects the majority of representation made during the public consultation
· Enables less able-bodied people to continue to exercise dogs off leads on the flat hard surfaces of ‘cycle ways’
· More consistent and less confusing enforcement
· More rapid, effective and efficient enforcement
Disadvantages:
· None identified
Risks:
· The decision concerning dogs on leads would not reflect the views of all consultees
Option 2: Do not adopt the PSPOs (Dog Control)
Advantages:
· Saving on staff time to implement new Dog Control Orders, and advertising for signage costs.
Disadvantages:
· Confusion from discontinuation of existing enforcement.
· Going against majority of consultees
· Return to a system of enforcement which is unclear and inconsistent
· Unnecessary expense and complications in having to prosecute for offences instead of issuing fixed penalty notices available under option 1 leading to delays, lower efficiency and cost-effectiveness
· The extent of land within the district on which regulatory dog controls apply would remain limited.
Risks:
· The decision not to introduce available dog-related regulatory measures for public protection would lead to criticism, particularly given the strength of public feeling about aspects of irresponsible dog ownership.
The officer preferred option is Option 1 to adopt the PSPOs (Dog Control) as consulted on. This option addresses needs for public protection, supports enforcement and most closely reflects the majority of public comment arising from the consultation.
From 2012 there has been a Dog Control Orders and since 2017 PSPO’s, which have encouraged dog owners to take responsibility for their dogs appropriately. This has also given authorised officers appropriate powers should the owners choose not to. If there was no consequence for such offending then dog related problems will likely increase and thereby have a detrimental effect on the quality of life of those in the district, justifying the restrictions imposed by the Public Space Protection Orders (Dog Control).
Councillor Peter Jackson proposed, seconded by Councillor Ainscough:-
“That the recommendations, as set out in the report, be approved.”
Councillors then voted:-
Resolved unanimously:
(1) That the four Public Space Protection Orders (Dog Control) be made, to include provisions set out in this report.
(2) That authority be delegated to the Chief Officer – Housing and Property to designate in writing authorised officers for the purposes of issuing fixed penalty fines.
Officer responsible for effecting the decision:
Chief Officer – Housing & Property
Reasons for making the decision:
The decision is consistent with the Council Plan : Keeping our district’s neighbourhoods, parks, beaches and open space clean, well-maintained and safe.
Adoption of the original Dog Control Orders has led to more straightforward and effective dog control and enforcement in the district. There continues to be considerable public support for enforcement, as confirmed by comments received in the recent consultation, but this is balanced with a fair approach towards responsible dog owners.