www.ukbutterflies.co.uk

Was trapping overnight at a National Trust woodland and saw s**t in a bag at the bottom of a tree, almost stepped in it too, lucky I saw it in vegetation, ugh.

Yep this is becoming a real problem as s**t in bags adorning trees is possibly worse than the stuff lying around on the floor.

At my local nature reserve (Attenborough) some folks use sticks to flick the stuff off the paths into the vegetation at the side of the paths. Nicely disguised it becomes easily trodden or knelt on by the unwary lepster wishing to photograph something in said vegetation.

So please all you sensible dog walkers out there please bag it and bin it. If there is no bin take it home and do not allow yourselves to become tarnished by those who are happy to let there pooch deposit and leave it. You will have more sway with other dog walkers than an irate wildlife enthusiast covered in dog s**t.

Why clean up after your dog if you're going to leave it hanging from a tree???

Exactly. One dog walker I tackled was only concerned that kids could accidentally play in/near the mess (and perhaps pick up illnesses) and just couldn't take on board that there are other issues such as the disgusting sight of it hanging on a fence.

I have never been a dog owner but I would have thought it would be easy enough to "play golf" and whack the mess deep into the undergrowth rather than leave it on the path or hanging from a tree/fence.

Jack

Not all dog owners are bad people but I do believe that dogs should not be allowed on reserves
We went to Heddons mouth in Devon last July for the High Browns
The butterflies favourite nectaring patch of brambles seemed to be a popular spot for the bags of dog poo to be dumped
I managed to collect them and left them in a pile on the path to try to shame the irresponsible dog walkers to change their behavior

I do find most dog owners to be OK but its the bad few that are the problem
Pete

...High Browns...The butterflies favourite nectaring patch of brambles seemed to be a popular spot for the bags of dog poo to be dumped

I suppose it is not impossible that the HBFs are actually attracted to the smell. Purple Emperors certainly feast on the most unmentionable matter as also I believe do Heath Fritillaries.

Jack

As do Commas and Adonis Blues of course...

LCPete wrote: I do find most dog owners to be OK but its the bad few that are the problem
Pete

A bit like photographers, eh Felix

I know that this is going to upset some people but in general, dog owners do not give a monkey's about wildlife and the countryside. Most of these sites (Denbies for example) are treated like public parks. The dogs are nearly always off their leads and often come bounding up to you chasing off the insect you'd spent ages carefully stalking for a photo. What rankles is their owners seem oblivious to it all. Dog owners think everyone must love their dog and being a 'loveable' dog it should be allowed to behave in anyway that it wants to (perhaps a reflection of their owners?) I've lost count of the number of times I've been out on a wildlife trek, enjoying the countryside, minding my own business and had the experience soured by a dog and its owner.
And much more seriously as Felix rightly points out, the amount of 'fertilizer' that is going onto these soils will hasten the increase of invasive plant species and the demise of the fragile habitat. I am sure that this (sad) increase in dog ownership and the impact this is having on the environment is carefully being monitored. However it takes a brave man to stand up and cast the first stone to such a strong lobby, a lobby which on the whole has little knowledge or regard for wildlife.

Having not written such opinions on this website before I apologise in advance if I have gone beyond what is acceptable and if moderator intervention is required.

I add a study from the University of Portsmouth published by Natural England to the mix.
The psychology of dog-owners, as a group, is an interesting topic, and one that tends to get their hackles-up!
http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/Images ... 6-7785.pdf
N
From
5.0 ANALYSIS OF DATA
of the above:
Responsibility for the dogs
"The consequence of beliefs concerning the physical and psychological benefits of
owning a dog, leads walkers to have to positive attitudes toward their own dogs in
particular, and dogs as a species in general. These attitudes have an impact on how
walkers behave. Dogs play such a significant role in their lives, and they hold such
great affection and regard for their dogs, that ‘bad’ behaviour is often justified or
merely excused. The tendency to make such excuses or justifications appears to
be two-fold.
First, all participants ultimately believed that their dogs were good-natured and
generally ‘good’ dogs. This underlying belief seemed to create confusion therefore
when a dog might be seen as exhibiting ‘bad behaviour’ (behaviour that caused
some sort of nuisance to another user or to wildlife/livestock/property). Since the
dog is ultimately a ‘good’ dog, people seek to justify the behaviour. In all cases of
what might be considered less acceptable behaviour by dogs, participants were
quick to offer explanations for their behaviour and attempt to justify such behaviour.
For example, many were quick to point out that other walkers, cyclists and/or
joggers often responded ‘inappropriately’ to dogs that approached them and
showed a general lack of understanding about how to behave around dogs. Others
would point out that the dog was young, or a rescue dog that had been treated
badly before, or that it was essentially good natured and only wanting to play.
Second, all participants expressed very strongly how much benefit their dogs
brought to their lives. There seems to be a feeling, therefore, that the negative
aspects of their dogs’ behaviour are cancelled out by these positive benefits and
therefore the dogs should be forgiven for acting badly. In this sense, we need to find
some way to address this phenomenon if we want dog walkers to behave
differently. We feel that a key issue relates to ultimate responsibility for a dog’s
behaviour. In general, there did not seem to be recognition that dog walkers are
always responsible for the behaviour of the dog in their charge."

Fact: There are too many irresponsible dog owners, and they can be the cause of 'nuisance', for whatever reason. I propose an annual license fee of £150 per dog, to fund dog's spoil bins, and any cleaning that irresponsible owners might incur. This government should see the worth of this measure, as they are making the rest of us (across the board) pay dearly.

Philzoid wrote:I've lost count of the number of times I've been out on a wildlife trek, enjoying the countryside, minding my own business and had the experience soured by a dog and its owner.

I have to echo that, I'm afraid. Too many examples of being barked at, growled at, snapped at, jumped at, slobbered over and in some cases scared stiff. I was accosted in various ways no less than three times in the space of 20 minutes this afternoon, and not a word from any of the owners.

And some of the excuses I've heard... "he always does that to people carrying newspapers, dear. You should have kept it out of sight" has to be the best.

My personal view, utterly selfish I know, is that dog owners should only be able to exercise their pets freely in areas specifically designated for the purpose. Such areas exist - there is a designated meadow at Osterley Park for example. Everywhere else, they should be fully restrained, if not actually banned.

That data analysis of owner psychology is fascinating.

Dave

millerd wrote:[
My personal view, utterly selfish I know, is that dog owners should only be able to exercise their pets freely in areas specifically designated for the purpose. Such areas exist - there is a designated meadow at Osterley Park for example. Everywhere else, they should be fully restrained, if not actually banned.
Dave

Given the analysis of the issues from that report, it would seem the only way to deal with this is to set-aside areas where dog-walkers can let their dogs off a lead. That way, they can continue to hold their beliefs and socialise, without coming into conflict with the non dog-owning public, since dogs would have to be on leads or banned from sensitive areas elsewhere....

The story has been told before but is worth repeating.

I was on Devil’s Dyke Newmarket when two boisterous Golden Labradors came bounding round from behind a bush, one jumped up at me (”being friendly”) and hit me fair and square in the you-know-where. I more or less collapsed in pain. The owner then appeared.

“Your dog just hit me in the b*llocks” (my choice of words was instinctive but quite deliberate)

Reply: “Don’t be such a w*nker!”

I no longer go to Devil’s Dyke despite it having what is probably the best Dingy Skipper colony in east of England.

Jack

Sorry to hear that Jack.

Well said Zonda. My sentiments also. I actually like dogs and responsible dog owners. I can't stand the irresponsible owners and there are a lot of them out there. Bring back a dog licence as Zonda says and restrict dogs to doggy walking areas and let the owners tread in their dogs mess as I stated earlier in this thread.