Agenda item

A notice has been published in accordance with Regulation 10(1)(b) of the Local Authorities (Executive Arrangements) (Meetings and Access to Information) (England) Regulations 2012 that the matter is key decision being considered under the General Exception procedure.

Report attached.

In accordance with the Local Authorities (Executive Arrangements) (Meetings and Access to Information (England) Regulations 2012, a notice had been published on 7^th September 2021 under the General Exception Procedure confirming that Councillor Jenny Molineux, Chair of the Communities and Wellbeing Overview and Scrutiny Committee had been informed that the following key decision was to be made by Cabinet on 15^th September 2021 without publishing details of the decision at least 28 days before the meeting.

Councillor Paul Cox provided a report seeking approval to the making of a Public Spaces Protection Order (PSPO) pursuant to section 59 of the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 (“The Act”) relating to dog control within the Borough of Hyndburn.

Councillor P Cox highlighted the main elements of the report, including the relevant legislation and reasons for use of a PSPO, consultations undertaken and additional areas identified for inclusion in the PSPO (namely Borough sports pitches and the Rose Garden in Haworth Park).

Councillor Munsif Dad BEM JP, commented that he had discussed dogs being exercised in cemeteries with Councillor P Cox.  This was a particularly sensitive issue in relation to the Muslim burial plots.  He acknowledged that the majority of dog walkers using the cemeteries did behave responsibly by keeping their dogs on leads, but a minority allowed their dogs to roam free, which had led to fouling on graves.  This was unacceptable to all sections of the community.  Councillor Dad hoped that his concerns would be addressed.

Councillor Marlene Haworth, Leader of the Conservative Group, welcomed the report, which was widely supported by the Opposition Group.  She expressed disappointment at irresponsible dog owners.  She had witnessed at least three people today in Haworth Park whose dogs were not on leads.  She expressed a hope that compliance with the PSPO could be monitored effectively.  Councillor Harrison commented that the restrictions in Haworth Park applied only to the Rose Garden, as this was used for weddings.  Councillor P Cox indicated that the Council employed a dog warden (in-house), but that the relied heavily on intelligence from members of the public.  Residents should send their observations in to the Council.  Dog walkers tended to be creatures of habit, following a set route a set times of the day, so irresponsible owners should be easy to identify.  Any infractions would attract a fixed penalty.

Approval of the report was considered to be a key decision.

Reasons for Decision

Legislation relating to Dog Control had changed in 2014 with the introduction of the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014.  The Act superseded The Clean Neighbourhoods and Environment Act 2005 in relation to dog control.

The Act required local authorities to use PSPOs instead of dog control orders.  To make a PSPO a local authority had to be satisfied that activities carried on in a public place had, or were likely to have, a detrimental effect on the quality of life of those in the locality (s 59 (2) of the Act) and that those activities were unreasonable, likely to persist or continue and justified the making of the PSPO.

Officers had taken the view that the statutory conditions were met because:

(i)       There were ongoing concerns about dog fouling in the Borough;

(ii)      There had been issues for users of play facilities and bowling greens with dogs running around disrupting their activities, jumping up at people and fouling in these areas;

(iii)     There had been issues and continued to be issues with dogs off leads running in townships causing disruption for shoppers and dogs running into the highway;

(iv)     There were ongoing concerns about dogs not on leads being able to run onto graves and foul in the boroughs cemeteries; and

(v)      There were concerns about dogs off leads fouling, disrupting users and attacking other dogs at Churchfield House in Great Harwood.

In addition, nominated sports pitches and the Rose Garden in Haworth Park had been added to the areas covered by the proposed PSPO.  This was because there had been complaints from sports pitch users about dog fouling on sports pitches where children and adults were going to participate in football or rugby, caused by dogs not being on leads and the owners not knowing the dog had fouled.  Also, due to the fact that the Rose Garden in Haworth Park was used for weddings and art events there had been complaints about dogs off leads running around disrupting activities and fouling, which had created an unpleasant environment for such activities.

PSPO’s were live for a maximum of three years and at that point could be extended and varied if necessary, for them to remain in force.

Section 60(2) of the Act permitted local authorities to extend the period during which an existing PSPO had effect if it was satisfied on reasonable grounds that the restrictions in that PSPO were still required.

A consultation exercise had been undertaken during June of 2021.  Key stakeholders such as the Police & Crime Commissioner’s Office, Dogs Trust and user groups such as Sports Teams and local ‘Friends Of’ groups had been informed of the consultation to ensure those most invested had a chance to comment.  A summary of the results is as set out in the table below:

As part of the consultation, an online survey had been available for Borough residents to indicate which of the proposals for inclusion within the PSPO they were for or against.  A total of 257 responses had been received via the online survey.  The results were available in Appendix 2 of the report.

Within the consultation document there was a space available on the online survey for anyone wishing to make a specific point or comment about the proposals.  A total of 104 responses had been received via the online survey.  A copy of those responses was provided in Appendix 3 of the report.

During the consultation a request had been made by the Lancashire Wildlife Trust to include Foxhill Bank Local Nature Reserve (LNR) within the PSPO to require users to keep their dogs on leads when within the LNR.  This requirement would be considered for the next consultation in three years time.

While the PSPO restricted how dog walkers could exercise their dogs in specified areas, the Borough’s eleven major parks and many other open spaces throughout Hyndburn were available for dog walkers to exercise their dogs without restrictions.

Alternative Options considered and Reasons for Rejection

Not to make a Public Space Protection Order relating to dog control in Hyndburn pursuant to Section 59 of the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing  Act 2014.  This had been rejected as evidence and experience showed that practical measures, like a PSPO helped balance the needs of dog owners with the wider use of public spaces.

Resolved                                 (1)   That Cabinet agrees to make a PSPO having taken into consideration the outcome of the consultation exercise.

(2)   That Cabinet agrees to make a PSPO being satisfied that the conditions in section 59(2) and (3) of the Act have been met.  Those conditions being:

(i)      Activities carried on in a public place within the authority’s area have had a detrimental effect on the quality of those in the locality;

(ii)     It is likely that activities will be carried on in a public place within that area and they will have such an effect;

(iii)    Is or is likely to be persistent or of a continuing nature;

(iv)    Is or is likely to be such as to make the activities unreasonable; and

(v)     Justifies the restriction imposed.

(3)   That Cabinet agrees to make a PSPO which imposes the following requirements (for a detailed list of the different sites outlined below refer to Appendix 1):

(i)      The exclusion of dogs from Council owned children’s play facilities;

(ii)     The exclusion of dogs from designated Council owned bowling greens;

(iii)    The requirement that the owner or person in charge of a dog having to clear up after their dog if the dog fouls on any open land in the Borough to which the dog has access;

(iv)    The requirement for dogs to be kept on leads within Hyndburn’s main townships;

(v)     The requirement for dogs to be kept on leads in the Borough’s cemeteries;

(vi)    The requirement for dogs to be kept on leads on Council owned sports pitches;

(vii)   The requirement for dogs to be kept on leads within the grounds of Churchfield House in Great Harwood; and

(viii)  The requirement for dogs to be kept on leads within the Rose Garden in Haworth Park.

(4)   That Cabinet agree on the level of any Fixed Penalty Notices (FPN) issued for contravening a PSPO (recommended at £80 with no discount) and delegate authority to the Executive Director (Environment) to amend the level of FPN in the future in consultation with the relevant portfolio holder and the Executive Director (Legal and Democratic Services).