Dog owners again
Comments
-
i realise the ever rising numbers of 'dog vans' but i didnt know we (non doggers) were extinct yet?
We certainly seem to be in the minority, at least off season. I don't have a problem with this, by the way, most owners are responsible. I don't think the OP accurately portrays the situation on sites.
1 -
Since the OP has subsequently acknowledged that it was only a minority involved the solution seems clear - tackle that minority. The idea of outright bans, charges or ghetto areas solving the problem is ludicrous (IMHO).
Incidentally, can you imagine the furore if I started a thread titled "Bloody children again" because I'd seen one or two misbehaving or "Bloody motorhomers again" because a couple had been seen using the ordinary taps to fill their water tanks rather that the MHSP? Let's just get things in perspective - there will always be a tiny minority who abuse the rules - wardens should feel confident that they have the backing of HQ in tackling that minority rather than us having to put up with these broad brush compaints on CT.
7 -
not sure anyone suggested a 'ghetto' did they...
some sites have 'adult only' areas (the Morris Leisure site at Ludlow for one) but this doesnt mean those parked there are 'bloody families', its just resonding to different customers' requirements and some, no doubt, appreciate the fact that families can enjoy the site yet not disturb those who prefer it a bit quieter..
similarly with dogs....like it or not...dogs (and their owners) have different rourines and priorities to those that dont (i had a springer for 12 years so i know the differences) so i dont think that having an area which is (perhaps) 'dog free' is any sort of issue...
the club is still inclusive, still 'welcomes dogs' but in the same way that ML manages the 'adults only' part of their sites, the club could do the same..
i dont remember anyone at ML beating a drum over non inclusivity and 'ghettos'...
3 -
Ghetto is a bit of emotive word BB. However, I understand what you mean.
However, surely such an approach would limit choice. Once the dog area, family area, or non dog area is fully booked, you would have to look elsewhere. Whereas previously there would not have been a problem,
0 -
Steve....twas not i that posted the G word....
"The idea of outright bans, charges or ghetto areas solving the problem is ludicrous (IMHO)."
twas mr Moulesey's 'emotive' choice of wording i was responding to...
0 -
"Let's just get things in perspective - there will always be a tiny minority who abuse the rules - wardens should feel confident that they have the backing of HQ in tackling that minority rather than us having to put up with these broad brush compaints on CT."
----------------------------------------------------------
Strangely enough, for once I have to agree with Moulesy. Head office should fully back up the Wardens. The Wardens would then have the courage to robustly deal with those who disregard the CMC on-site rules.
K
4 -
I used to agree with Steve on the limitation of pitch in that once the allocated pitches for dogs or no dogs had gone then you would have to put up with it or go elsewhere. I would prefer wardens to be fully empowered and supported in dealing with transgressions
After many years of circular dog arguments on CT I've changed my mind. I'm leaning towards areas where dogs are allowed and areas where they are not. We travel with dogs for less than half of our trips but I would prefer to be in the area where dogs are allowed for various reasons completely unrelated to the presence of dogs. Perhaps others feel the same. How many people aren't bothered either way?
1 -
Jay, i dont know how many might take up the option but its one id like to see being offered...
personally speaking, if there were an adult only area (or not) then id use it.
if there were a dog free are (or not) id use that too..
not anti kid or anti dog, but just feel (for us) theres more chance of a 'quieter' break (especially when the weather is good and more folk are about on the site)....
2 -
BB I think that before creating dog free or child free areas the 'problem' has to be fully understood and I doubt this club is capable of it.
My instinct is that the majority of non dog owners aren't bothered by the presence of dogs and will only notice if there's a poorly controlled dog in their presence. There are some non dog owners who do not wish to come across dogs in any part of their lives. A dog free area, which may not be particularly large may be more appropriate.
I'm not getting into discussion of adult only areas on club sites. It's not comparable
3 -
It reads like a good idea, and I would hope that it would work. However......we got the very last pitch at Barnard Castle one evening, yep, right next to path into a brilliant dog walk, huge meadow with mown tracks (thumbs up to Club on this one). Great for us, our Labs loved it, I did a walk while OH got us sorted. As I came back, put our dogs into MH, then I sat on step having a cuppa. Next door Van door opened, out popped two small dogs, both immediately tethered. Neighbour said hello, we got chatting as you do, all nice, he then went back in, leaving dogs tethered outside. Didn't bother me, they were quiet, but I did notice one do it's business on grass at back of van. Hour later, before I went in, neighbour came back out, so I just mentioned that one of dogs had had an accident behind his van, just to let him know as he hadn't seen it. Wham! The eyes glazed, the shutters went up on Mr Nice, and I was then accused of "waiting around and watching his dogs". I wasn't intimidated, but I did ask him why he hadn't just stepped into field 5 metres away to walk them properly, as any decent, clean, caring dog owner would. All I had done was let him know something on his pitch needed picking up, but he tried to make me out the villain!
So you see. It's a mindset change a step too far for a few dog owners. Even if there is a great dog walk a few paces away, even if they are able bodied enough to walk their dog, even if the Club requests visitors to walk their dogs off site, there are still one or two idle, dirty, uncaring anti socials around, who don't think good behaviour applies to them. Siting them close to dog walk will not make a difference to anyone like this. I happen to think Club should ban such people, after a warning if it's repeated.
But they are a minority, most dog owners know better, and care.
4 -
This Club will not bring in any dog limitations, restrictions, charges or separations -because Club members with dogs are the regular bread and butter income for Club sites outside school holidays. The replies to Fisherman's post show the numbers who do have dogs. There are just so many. It's one of the reasons I don't go to Club sites any more.
2 -
Despite being a dog owner, two spaniels, I can offer no defence for the actions of others. It’s getting out of hand and the Club ought to act.
Moreton at Christmas and New Year - numerous owners allowing their dogs to roam free. Infuriating when they bolt over to bother your dogs that are correctly tethered. What’s the matter with these people, they know their animals should be on leads or tethered but they choose to not bother, only acting and occasionally apologising, when they ***eventually*** realise their dog has gone walkabout and is bothering their neighbours.
At Moreton, I won’t run my two in the dog field. There are too many dog eggs on the floor which result in them getting it in their fur. Not nice.
Chatsworth a couple of weeks ago. Same thing... people arriving and their dogs immediately allowed to roam around before the owners have even got the caravan steadies down!
Do I tell the wardens, nope, maybe I should. I do give a ‘look’ when the owners retrieve their animals off my pitch but informing the wardens, I worry it could lead to me and the wife feeling like we’re in the centre of an ‘atmosphere’, resulting in us failing to enjoy our time away.
6 -
And don't confuse someone walking a dog on a lead on the site as exercising them. We will often have a stroll around a new site with the 2 dogs on leads (The rules say we can't leave them in the caravan I believe) to see what the rest of it is like or if there is anyone else there we have met before.
As a former dog owner I don't confuse walking around site with exercising. A very few dog owners seem to confuse the two.
Not sure that the rules state that dogs cannot be left unattended.
Personally I have no problem with dogs on site. Some dogs are a delight!
0 -
It's not a problem we are fully aware of, because we avoid Club Sites in busy periods, we prefer peace and quiet and lots of space. One of the advantages of small private sites and CLs is that the owners set their stall out regarding acceptable behaviour, and if it isn't complied with, off the miscreants are sent.
Club is a bit too vague in what it accepts to be honest. Accidents will happen, but not that often if owners are sensible. Out on a tight lead, brisk walk away from pitches on road, and keep moving until on dog walk or off site. Older dog? Put into car, drive off site. Same if owner can't walk far, into car, drive off. No one else inconvenienced then. But just tethering dogs out, without a walk, or slowly shuffling around Site with dog on a long lead is inviting issues.
5 -
TTDA
Just read your last 2 posts and must say how refreshing to have a balanced view from a genuine responsible owner. The view and approach you take if copied would end all conflict on the forum if not on site. Yes there will be differences of opinion, but you set a great example both on this forum and also clearly on site.
All you state in your last post has been said before, but not received very well as it has been perceived to have been from anti-dog brigade.
1 -
I agree with K's statement above. But ask a warden what current policy is on enforcement of any site rules that don't involve H&S. You might find head office has told them to back off and not to confront customers for a number of reasons.
0 -
What i find quite difficult to understand is , how those who complain about the problems of loose dogs?, and the amount of not picked up poo! find these problems? as we have been members a few years! and have yet to notice the "numerous"owners of dogs who seem to frequent the cc sites visited by some posters,,we have seen a very few times where "owners?" have been less than thoughtful to others when on site,but that happens every where ,but then lets not let that get in the way of those who just want to jump on the moan about anything bandwagon
2 -
I think you’re right, Via. I’ve heard similar rumblings from wardens.
It would be good to have some input here from one of our posting wardens.
2 -
Most of the sites I go now charge for dogs, and guess what less dogs, this club is now defined by the silver topped dog owners who never see anything untoward, I stand with fish.
5 -
We have not as yet used many CCC sites, but will be using a few more this year.
We did use Salisbury last year and it seems they have similar problems as there was a big sign up on the door of the block we used warning dog owners of consequences should they allow their dog(s) to foul the site.
0 -
It is a fact of life that many members have dogs and probably one of the reasons they belong to the Club is because they know dogs are welcome. Even us non dog owners realise, or should do, that dogs will occasionally have the odd accident so I don't think we should get too hung up on that. From my own observations is that owners of large dogs seem to manage them better than those with small dogs. Perhaps it shows my ignorance but it seems that larger dogs are more likely to be walked a heel and on a shorter lead. Perhaps more attention is put into training larger dogs or perhaps they are more receptive in the first place? Smaller dogs seem to be walked on longer leads and as a result tend to wander over pitches and grass areas. Would not the simple answer be to have a rule that dogs on Club sites are always on short leads and and always walked along site roads until they get to the dog walk or off site? I think to emphasise this a small leaflet detailing this could be given out on arrival. I seem to recall this was the case some years ago. I don't think it is practical to set aside pitches for different categories of members. We somehow need to get across to the small number of people who don't apply the rules the importance of doing so and encourage them to act within those rules.
David
4 -
What about the birds, rabbits and other assorted wildlife that crap at random; especially the pigeons that target my caravan roof. What is the club doing about those.
On a more serious note one of the reasons we took up caravanning was to be able to take our dog with us on holiday.
3 -
First of all the club need to know who has got a dog or dogs, followed by an appropriate conversation and better worded leaflet on arrival about conduct with dogs on site. Those of us who are responsible will have to put up with the lecture?
However it won't stop those who have never behaved in a responsible way either on site or at home. Neither will they stop by request from fellow pitch users. The nuisance to others factor has to come into play at some point.
People complain about too many notices on sites, but maybe a few reminders?
We stayed at Banchory, Silverbank last year and were confronted with someone who let their dogs out on the central grass area in front of our van each morning, out of sight the dogs used the owners van and aquaroll etc as marking spots, what more can I say?!
3
