I AM pleased that the press coverage of the proposed Dogs on Leads Order has resulted in the public voicing their opinion overwhelmingly against them. However, I am disappointed that spokespeople for the district council have not once mentioned that the
I AM pleased that the press coverage of the proposed Dogs on Leads Order has resulted in the public voicing their opinion overwhelmingly against them.
However, I am disappointed that spokespeople for the district council have not once mentioned that the orders are at the proposal stage and are meant to be subject to public consultation.
It would seem that officers of the council have already decided the outcome, irrespective of the letters of objection they have received from us, who pay their wages. Not exactly democratic.
Will they be publishing the results of the "consultation"?
PAULA LONGFORD, Avenue Road, St Neots
* Editor's note: An allusion to the consultation was originally included in Chris Allan's letter (September 26) but it was shortened for the sake of brevity, and has been referred to on several occasions in The Hunts Post previously.
* LIKE many other people, my husband and I have very busy working lives that prohibit most forms of exercise (such as going to a gym).
However, we do have a dog and she is our exercise - twice a day no matter what the weather for on average 30 minutes each outing we walk the dog. If we cannot walk her in green and/or open spaces, how are we to get our exercise?
We and she need fresh air to clean our lungs of the muck created by cars and lorries and we get this from green and/or open spaces.
These places are constantly destroyed by the thoughtless behaviour of a few young people who throw bottles and break them, leaving broken glass for dogs and people to injure themselves.
They also throw fast food wrappers on the ground, along with snack packets, sweet papers, discarded food and heaven knows what other sorts of rubbish (don't get me started on the mess smokers leave behind them).
It is these people who need controlling more than dogs.
Dogs do not throw rubbish around or damage their environment and laugh about it - they are far less hassle than the majority of children and yet they are constantly discriminated against.
The majority of dogs are taught discipline and good behaviour (ours is very well behaved).
It is a pity parents cannot teach their children the same things. Maybe then there would be less hooliganism.
After all, it is parents' responsibility to teach their children right from wrong (our children were) and they should know this before they start school and not leave it to overworked and harassed teachers.
Social responsibility begins at home not school.
Irresponsible dog-owners make me really cross because they damage the reputation of all dog owners. They deserve all the punishments they can be given.
However, in my observations it is the same young people who throw rubbish about who don't see the need to clear up after any dog they are walking - it's too icky for them - as well as the few older people who just can't be bothered.
And does anyone complain about the mess horses leave? Their mess can be more dangerous than dog mess, and yet it lies around in mountains with no complaints.
Keeping designated play areas for children where dogs aren't allowed is a good idea, as too is keeping dogs on leads in certain areas (such as wildlife areas) but banning dogs from all green and/or open spaces is not a good idea and may even be against my human rights as a dog walker to enjoy these places.
Mrs EDWINA MATTOCK, Warboys