Coprophobia

BC regular Tyrwhitt Michael has been the victim of over-zealous dog-poo stencillers and has been in touch with the Council to understand why anyone thinks festooning our streets with pictures of crapping canines is a good idea.

The Council reply suggests that the implementation of this policy has strayed far from the original intention. Here's where the Council say the stencils should be sprayed:

"The graffiti team are instructed to apply stencils in areas that are not directly intrusive to individual properties, i.e. corners of the affected street or at locations in-between properties, next to lampposts and pillar boxes. They have been instructed not to apply stencils directly outside the gates of properties."

In fact, they are being sprayed every few metres on many roads, directly outside people's front gates.

The Council's guidelines make far more sense than the blanket bombing of bowwow bowel movements that our pavements are currently subjected to.

As for their efficacy, the Council offers this supporting data:

"Although we do not have any current data, we did see a drop in dog fouling following their introduction 9 years ago. This year we will be monitoring the levels of dog fouling in order that we can assess the effectiveness of the Dog Control Orders when they come into force."

Which is hardly convincing, given how unpleasant the "solution" is. If they can be proven to work, we'd give them our grudging support, with one crucial caveat - by all means keep the squatting dog and the "bag it, bin it" slogan, but please lose the turd.

26 comments:

Comment said...

They are revolting, particuarly the animated 'steaming'.

Brockley Jon said...

You think the poo is bad in Brockley, you should take a walk out Erith way - as I did the other day (although why you'd want to, I cannot say). But trust me, the poo is prolific over there. Staffies and Rottweilers rule the pavements. Need I say more.

Sue said...

I understand from the Ladywell Safer Neighbourhood Team that the police are also stencilling them where they find a dog fouling problem, which may account for some of the divergence from the Council's policy on location etc.

I think Nick's suggestion (via e-mail) of a dog with the 'bag it, bin' it slogan as opposed to steaming poo, would be an improvement (I also have a dog and steaming poo stencil right outside my house).

However, what I'm hoping is that when the first fixed penalty notices under the new Dog Control Orders have been issued by our local police/park keepers/environmental enforcement officers they will be widely publicised. I think a few cases of irresponsible dog owners being fined for not clearing up after them in Hilly Fields etc might have more impact than the stencils.

The Cat Man said...

Do we actually have local park keepers? I thought these were all abandoned in favour of contracting out 'en masse' to the likes of big business.

Im pleased to see that my cats are allowed to poo everywhere.

Hugh said...

As I predicted, LBC will soon be allocating funds for the removal of many if not all of these stencilled eyesores.

Remind me what the extra 2% Council Tax is going on, someone.

Comment said...

To be honest, I think if people want to have a dog in an urban area, then they should be required to have a licence. A self financing system which funds a DNA database so that if fouling occurs, the specimen can be matched up and the owner directly fined. I belive this happens in Germany and it should happen here.

Hugh said...

Imagine the hourly rate LBC would agree to pay to the outsourced poop detectors.

Anonymous said...

I'd take an organic, biodegradable dogpoo over a bright yellow stencil from the "graffiti" team any day

Sue said...

@Cat Man. Yes, we do, but they are generally employed by Glendale, the contractor that runs most of LBL's parks, rather than the Council. Hilly Fields has a parkie who can often be seen wandering around picking up litter etc.

@Comment: agree with you re dog licences.

Henrietta said...

Every time my dog does I poo I just tell the warden I did it and that I'm using my SE4 artistic self-expression. Gets me off every time.

Hugh said...

In what sense?

Headhunter said...

Such a dirty mind.... Someone needs to stencil your forehead.

Headhunter said...

Weren't dog licences abolished in the 80s because they didn't work? The sort of people who have untrained Rotties and Pit Bulls which crap all over the pavement are the same sort of people who fail to pay the dog licence fee. So it ends up a tax on the responsible.

Comment said...

The answer is no licence, no dog. You have the right to have a dog on the condition you are a responsible owner.

Gengis K said...

Dog licences were abolished because they cost more to administer than was collected - 37.5p or 7/6 in old money.

I think we should introduce an annual £50 one with automatic extermination of any dogs found to be unlicened.

Oh and shoot the owners as well.......

Headhunter said...

It would be very costly to administer as you point out and then add on the policing costs. The police can hardly catch all the muggers and drug dealers in SE London, do you really think they have time and resources to go round checking if dogs are licensed?

As I said, responsible owners woudl pay up and irresponsible owners wouldn't so it would have absolutely no effect other than to tax responsible owners.

Anonymous said...

Some of the worst elements of society are the ones that leave their dogs shitting inside all day, and you'll never be able to spot those.

Comment said...

A self financing licence system would price the licence to accommodate all associated costs required to administer the system.

Breeders would need to pay also. The dog would be micro chipped it's beneficial for the owner should the animal get lost (as you could pop a GPS honing system in there too for swift reunification - I jest).

As for a dog stuck in the house all day the RSPCA deal with that.

The Cat Man said...

Lets not talk about Glendales shall we?

I'm still awaiting for them to explain why 60-70% of the flowers planted on the Mantle road flowerbeds died within 2 weeks or why a large pile of surplus bedding was dumped in the middle of them.

They made the area look sh*te, not dog poo!

I wonder how much money they wasted? a couple of thousand perhaps?

The Cat Man said...

I thought about a GPS system for my cats (one of which went missing recently) sadly, they are too large for cats. :o(

Monkeyboy said...

an airgun and/or butt plug.... I'll let the readers decide which to use on the owner and which on the dog.

Gensie said...

How about both on both

Monkeyboy said...

OK..I'll handle the air gun if you try and insert the butt plug in the staffy/pitbull cross.

Headhunter said...

Both on the owner. Not the dog's fault, all down to the owner...

Anonymous said...

In another borough a man was fined for allowing his dog to attack a tree.

It's common thing these days to owners encourage their dogs to hang by their teeth from the lower branches of trees.

How about a stencil for that sort of thing, maybe a tree with a pair of dentures in the branches?

max said...

Some time ago I did suggest to the Council officer that's in charge of parks to run a campaign advising dog owners that splinters from trees can cause infections to dogs' gums and this can result in dogs loosing teeth. I think this is an argument that dog owners are likely to take into account.

Please support BC by clicking here when you shop with Amazon

Brockley Central Label Cloud