A council report proposing a four-tier strategy to deal with dog fouling in the streets of Douglas has been met with ridicule by Douglas councillors.
The report proposed a range of responses depending on how a so-called dog fouling hot spot was rated on a one to four scale.
The excrement action plan suggested responses which included stencilled warnings on pavements in ‘level one’ areas. Full forces of enforcement, including uniformed wardens (not wearing high visibility clothing) and possible CCTV were to be mobilised for the most faeces-afflicted level four hot spots.
Speaking against the proposal, council leader David Christian said it was more important simply to put wardens in the street to enforce fixed penalties against offenders.
‘Our wardens need to be out there and doing something about it. If they are overstretched because they are managing car parks then something needs to be done about it. This is about staffing because we are not getting the money from the Department of Infrastructure. It’s in the same areas and it’s the same people, because the majority of dog owners are fine. And shoving the bags in the hedge is also unacceptable.
‘Householders who end up having to clear it up are not interested in levels one, two, three and four,’ he said.
‘This is going to take someone weeks to administer. Please take this report back and confine it to the bin.’
Councillor David Ashford was of a similar opinion.
‘This report contains zone after zone and hot spot after hot spot. We need some fines and prosecutions, not someone trying to decide what category hot spot it is. What next? Do we do the same for littering?’ he said.
Councillor Karen Angela said if she could pick up after two great danes it should not be beyond the capability of other people to show similar consideration.
Counciller Catherine Turner was a lone voice in support of the report and the sole councillor who did not vote to reject the proposal.
‘I want to defend the staff who drafted this. It gives staff a framework to focus on. Dog pooh, parking, energy bills and government not listening are the key things the public raise as problems.
‘The proposal tries to make staff focus energy where it is needed. It’s unfair to criticise it so harshly and no-one should be sneering about it.’ she said.
Councillor Ann Corlett, deputising for Environmental Services Committee chairman Ritchie McNicholl, told councillors she was happy to reconsider the proposal.
Councillors voted overwhelmingly for the proposal to be taken back to committee for reconsideration, with Councillor Turner sounding the only note of dissent.
Source: IOM Today
