Agenda item - Member Involvement

To consider the following matters raised by councillors:

(a)       Petitions: to receive any petitions submitted to the full Council or at the meeting itself;

(b)       Written Questions: to consider any written questions;

(c)       Letters: to consider any letters;

(d)       Notices of Motion: to consider any Notices of Motion referred from Council or submitted directly to the Committee.

23(a)  Petitions

23.1    There were none.

23.(b) Member Questions

23.3    The Chair, Councillor Deane noted that two questions had been received, one from Councillor Appich and one from Councillor O’Quinn. The Chair explained that although the questions did not fall within the Committees remit she had agreed to permit those questions to be asked at this Committee and for both Councillors to ask them subsequently at the Environment Committee which was the correct forum. Both Councillors welcomed this stating that they would be happy to do so. Councillor O’Quinn stated that she wanted to raise this matter at this Committee as she considered that there was an anomaly, these highlighted that, responsibilities for this were unclear and in consequence issues arising could fail to be adequately addressed, Councillors O’Quinn and Appich wished to draw attention to that. Councillor Appich concurred in that view.

          Question – Councillor O’Quinn – Complaints About Dog Attacks

23.4    Councillor O’Quinn put the following question:

          “Over the last 5 years there were 450 complaints made to the council of dog-on-dog attacks and no action was taken – fines etc.  What is the council doing about this situation?”

23.5    The Chair gave the following response:

“It is right to say that there have been no Community Protection Notices (CPNs) issued with regard to dog-on-dog attacks, but it is not correct to conclude from this that no actions have been taken. The Animal Warden Service has taken formal enforcement action in relation to dog-on-dog attacks.

A recent ombudsman enquiry into a complaint about the council’s decision not to issue a CPN concluded in December 2020 that the council applied the wrong thresholds when considering whether to issue a CPN. The council did not bring in the policy to use CPN powers in relation to dog related enquiries until 2018 and these procedures have now been revised following the recommendations in the ombudsman’s report. In more complex cases or where the incident is of a serious nature, CPNs will be considered along with other enforcement tools, such as the Dogs Act 1871 and the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 as amended. The CPN procedure will be considered in cases of low level dog-on-dog attacks and when a dog owner habitually allows their dog to stray and is subsequently collected as a stray by the Animal Wardens.

There are a number of issues that have frustrated the Council when investigating cases. In the majority of cases (approx. 60%) the identity of the owner of the offending dog is not known by the complainant. In addition, in many cases complainants have not given sufficient evidence to support action. Where dogs and owners are identified the service offers advice and guidance to owners to avoid further incidents this approach has proved successful, it is very rare that there are any repeat incidents. Such cases are of course followed up.

          Over the last 5 years, in the most serious of cases we have laid 2 complaints on a lead and muzzled. And one offender had their dog put to sleep of their own volition.” Under the Dogs Act 1871 and obtained control orders on the dogs involved. We have made formal agreements with a further 3 offenders, with an additional case pending, to abide by control measures as agreed with the Councils solicitors. We have had one offender accept our advice to keep her dog.

23.6    Councillor O’Quinn was invited to put a supplementary question if she had one.

          Question – Councillor Appich – The Number of Stray Dogs Picked up Over the Last Eighteen Months

23.7    Councillor Appich put the following question:

          “I am trying to find out how many strays have been picked up over the last 18 months, and whether there has been a change since the start of the pandemic. I’d also like to know how many have gone to kennels, how many rehomed and how many sent to rescue centres.”

23.8    The Chair gave the following response:

          “Over the last 18months there have been:

          Total strays dealt with 92

          Placed in kennels 46

          Sent to rescue for rehoming 22

In addition to the figures given, you or the Animal Welfare team had collected less and anecdotally, the word from many rescue centres was that dogs which would have been placed with them directly from the public or abandoned and found, were now being sold by the owners because prices for dogs had increased enormously and the demand now exceeded the supply. As there had been fewer strays during the pandemic, this could also be because more people were at home with their animals and so noticed them more.”

23.9    Councillor Appich was invited to ask a further question if she had one.

23.10  RESOLVED – That the questions and the responses given to them be noted and received. Councillors Appich and O’Quinn confirmed that they would put their questions at TECC Committee as well having highlighted these issues at this Committee.

23(c)  Letters

23.11 There were none.

23(d)  Notices of Motion

23.12  There were none.