This has been cross posted

Please read the attached link. and download the document if you wish to
make your views known.

http://www.rother.gov.uk/index.cfm?articleid=898&detailid=2697</a>

Rother council have currently started a consultation with their
constituents. The control order will affect dog owners as per the following;

(a) Dog faeces to be removed.

(b) Dogs to be kept on a short (one metre) lead in all areas except
those specified in Schedule A.

(c) Dogs to be prohibited from areas specified in Schedule B.

(d) A person is to take no more than 3 dogs onto the land.

Obviously any responsible owner will agree with item A, but the other
three are restrictions on our rights which should not be implemented.
Rother council is in East Sussex, but it should not stop anyone making
their views known. This is a civic knee-jerk reaction to the recent
media coverage of dog attacks and should not be allowed to pass without
challenge. Other councils are sure to follow like sheep.

Please cross-post!

Anna

Without knowing the area it is very difficult to make any judgement on this :) It could be perfectly reasonable, but then may not be so - it's difficult to tell :)

Daisy

As Daisy has said it is difficult to make judgment without knowing the area. :) There are places where this, to me, would be reasonable. I have 3 dogs, but have been known to take more out at one time in the past. In certain areas, under control, I don't see a problem. But in other areas, no matter how controlled your own dogs are, even having more than 1 dog could be a problem.

This is a civic knee-jerk reaction to the recent
media coverage of dog attacks and should not be allowed to pass without
challenge. Other councils are sure to follow like sheep.

Yes it seems it is, they write that this is to keep people safe. Safe from what exactly, man eating lions?!

We had a similar thing going on in the New Forest and a great organisation called New Forest Dog was set up and has
now become a strong voice for keeping dogs off the lead in the forest. The reason for proposed keeping dogs on lead
was in fact a continuation of the foot and mouth problem, but it's amazing how the powers that be will leap onto something
like that and dog walkers loose their freedom of having dogs off the lead.

Is it me? I can't see where to sign or download anything?

Lindsay
x

>This is a civic knee-jerk reaction to the recent

media coverage of dog attacks and should not be allowed to pass without
challenge.
Possibly, but as it is unclear from your post or the link what areas we are talking about it may be an attempt to improve the picking up of faeces.  Is it public park areas they are talking about?  In which case it is not unusual to have areas where leads are required and areas where they are permitted free running, which seems to be allowed according to the link, and can, obviously, limit the areas where the authority will need to spend public money clearing up the faeces left by irresponsible owners.