Agenda item

To consider a report by the Senior Community Safety Enforcement Officer (copy enclosed) which provides details of historical, current and future methods of prevention and detection of dog fouling, and seeks the Committee’s views on matters relating to enforcement action with regards to dog fouling

11.00 a.m.

A copy of a report by the Head of Planning, Regeneration and Regulatory Services which detailed the effectiveness of enforcement action regarding dog fouling within Denbighshire, had been circulated with the papers for the meeting.

 

Copies of Appendices were circulated at the meeting, together with, documents relating to:-

 

The Public Realm and Environment Crime Working Group held on the 5^th November, 2008 and 26^th January, 2009.

A report to Environment Scrutiny Committee dated 15^th October, 2009

A letter from the Chair of the Environment Scrutiny Committee to the Chief Constable dated the 30th December, 2008.

 

The report provided information on historical, current and future methods of prevention and detection of dog fouling in Denbighshire.              Dog Fouling remained the single most complained about public nuisance in Denbighshire.  This type of crime was categorised as “Environmental Crime”, and the offence was dealt with under the provisions of the Dogs Act 1996 and the Environmental Protection and Clean Neighbourhood Act 2005.  It was explained that employees of the Authority and Police Community Support Officers (PCSOs) were authorised to issue Fixed Penalty Notices (FPNs).

 

The Head of Planning, Regeneration and Regulatory Services outlined the following salient points contained in the report:-

 

-   issuing of Fixed Penalty Notices as an alternative to prosecution, payment and prosecution procedures.

-          a ‘robust enforcement regime’ had been adopted by Denbighshire County Council’s Public Protection Service since 2008.

-          details of Enforcement Activities between 2008 and the current date.

-          methods employed by Community Safety Enforcement in Denbighshire in preventing and detecting offences dog fouling.

-          criteria for classification of stray dogs and details of the Dog Walking Charter.

-          use of publicity and CCTV and the investigation of offences.

-          lack of participation of Police and PCSOs in issuing FPNs

-          communication with the public and encouragement and the use schools   pupils to educate parents and the general public with respect to the dangers of dogs fouling

-          requests to have dog foul cleared and audits to establish the need for bins and signage.

-          engagement of private contractors through employment agencies.

-          the conclusions drawn through experience of dealing with the problem of dog fouling.

 

The Committee viewed a video of a case study undertaken in the Marine Lake area of Rhyl which highlighted the operational aspects of the work undertaken by officers and the effectiveness of surveillance work and evidence gathering leading to the issue of a FPN.

 

The officers provided the following responses to matters raised by members:

                             

-          the issue of replacing and updating dog fouling signs would be addressed.

-          agreed to examine the possibility of treating areas where dog fouling had occurred with an appropriate spray substance.

-          officers agreed to approach North Wales Police with respect to having a greater emphasis placed on PCSOs issuing FPNs as a method of preventing and reducing crime

-          confirmation was provided that Denbighshire had employed contractors to issue Fixed Penalty Notices, but that this approach seemed to have been more effective in relation to litter enforcement than incidences of dog fouling

-          details were outlined of the collaborative working between Conwy and Denbighshire, with Denbighshire being the Lead Authority.

-          the need to expand on the imitative undertaken at Bodnant School, Prestatyn

-          the problems and legal implications which could arise if bans were implemented on the use of school playing fields, and if dog control orders were introduced.

 

The officers provided details pertaining to the issuing and distribution of dog waste bags and provision of dog waste bins in identified hot spot areas.  Members were informed that the provision of dog waste bins came under the remit of the Head of Environment and that there were issues regarding the collection of hazardous waste.  Complaints in respect of dog fouling incidents would be received and tracked via the Customer Relationship Management (CRM) System.

 

In response to concerns raised by Councillor T.R. Hughes, the Committee supported the view that a clear stance was required in respect of this matter, taking into consideration any financial implications.

 

In reply to a question from Councillor J. Butterfield, that the wardens at Brickfields Pond and Nature Reserve area in Rhyl be authorised to issue Fixed Penalty Notices, it was explained this would be a matter for consideration and agreement by the respective officers.

 

Members requested further information pertaining to statistics on the number of dog fouling incidents reported to the Street Cleaning Team during 2011/12, the number cleaned up within 5 days of receipt of complaint, the number not responded to and the reasons why and how the respective figures compare to previous years.

 

The Senior Community Safety Enforcement Officer agreed that the following issues highlighted would be raised at the next CSP meeting:-

 

·        examine the possibility of Enforcement Officers periodically wearing polo shirts/jackets/tabards which would identify them as enforcement officers and act as a deterrent for dog owners not clearing up after their dogs.

·        signage in areas across the County be reviewed to ensure that the information on them was up to date.

·        the importance of PCSOs issuing fixed penalty notices for dog fouling as this helped to keep neighbourhoods neat and tidy and mitigate the risk of other environmental crime and anti-social behaviour.

 

The Head of Planning, Regeneration and Regulatory Services referred to the conclusions, and the following recommendations contained in the report:-

 

·        the continuation of the issuing of Fixed Penalty Notices.

·        emphasis to be placed on intelligence led activity to seek sufficient evidence to justify prosecution and therefore offering an alternative punishment to a Fixed Penalty Notice.

·        sustained utilisation of CCTV to obtain evidence of offending.

·        a review the level of training of officers to ensure that the investigative skills in respect of the offender’s identity and standards of proof were improved.

·        review the conditions and requirements of contractors and enforcement officers when dealing in particular with the standards of proof and offenders identity.

·        a greater emphasis on education in schools and the community, with members of the community accepting responsibility for enforcement regimes.

·        consideration be given for the creation of Dog Walkers Charters and similar Charters with the Local Authority, Housing Associations, businesses and public groups.

·        improved communication with the media to report on prosecutions, operations and initiatives.

 

Following further discussion, it was:-

 

RESOLVED – that the Committee:-

 

(a)   receive the report.

(b)   support the recommendations as set out in paragraph 4.5 of the report.

(c)   requests that the Senior Community Safety Enforcement Officer informs the next Community Safety Partnership (CSP) meeting of the concerns raised by Members,

(d)   supported the view that a clear stance should be adopted with regard to the matter of dog fouling offences, taking into consideration any financial implications; and

(e)   that a workshop be arranged for all councillors and relevant Heads of Service in the autumn with a view to adopting and progressing a corporate approach to dealing with the problem of dog fouling in the county