17 dogs to be pts after barking complaint

I just saw this on fb, this sanctuary is out in the wilds with just one nearby detached house and the comments were alluding to someone having a grudge.It does seem strange the council are acting over one complaint but if the complainant is vocal enough and has clout Ive no doubt it could happen.

I do hope these dogs can be saved, those poor old ladies have devoted their lives to this sanctuary.
 
Well that story Im sure will get them the funds to put fencing in.
Shame if not- it seems very unfair.
It wonder when the complainant moved in- my guess after the sanctuary was up and running. Its like when people buy a house by pub or school and then complain about the noise. Annoys me- sure a legal eagle could find a loop hole in the case.
 
We had neighbours, in rented old farmhouse,70 yards away complain about noisy young dog got fed up about it text back what do you expect living next to a livestock farm, weaned calves pressure washers soon lambing sheep, they have moved!
 
The other thing that might work is a petition - like that prat who complained about the cockerel in the village he had just moved into. But the community got up a petition for the cockerel and guess who moved!

If the case is as reported then its very very sad. And if they've been in that house for 64 years then its caveat emptor for the newly-arrived. They should have done their homework before buying.

Reminds me of a new arrival of this village, who moaned loud and long to me at a village do about how he was driven wild by the church bells and the sounds of the pub's skittle alley. I heard him out and then said "if I was an estate agent and you came to me saying you wanted a house within 50 yards of a 6-bell church (whose bells have been ringing for 900 years) and 50 yards of a pub with a skittle alley that's been going for 30 years, I'd be hard put to find you one. But you went and managed it OK?" Sadly he is no longer a member of this community - he's probably living next the sanctuary!
 
If they set up something like just giving I'm sure they would raise enough funds through social media wouldn't they? I really hope that in ths case the DM has a chance to do good.
 
Tinselface said:
That does add more to it doesn't it, sounds like there may be somewhere else the dogs can go?

Still, any press helps rehome! :)
Click to expand...

Some rather nasty comments especially when it sounds like the neighbour was there long before the dogs rather than the usual " I want to live in the countryside as long as it sounds like the town" move in brigade.

Sanctuary or hoarder? - it's a fine line.
 
Spring Feather said:
Weird. When looked at this place on Google earth it shows a number of neighbours close to the house and just over the fields a short way is a huge housing estate.
Click to expand...

My brother lives in that huge housing estate, and to be honest I don't think you'd hear Mill House from there anymore than you'd hear any noise from the farms in an around the valley. :) I didn't even realise there were other houses on the road in question 'til I checked Google earth, and I don't live particularly far away either! Although I guess the closest one isn't Mayfield rd, but just across.

I doubt who was there first is entirely relevant here, sounds like both parties have been there for decades and noise has gotten worse recently. Seems a real shame. :(
 
I tweeted Beverly Cuddy (from Dogs Today Magazine) who has publicised this on the Dogs Today Facebook account and has shared this fundraising page:

http://www.everyclick.com/millhouseanimalsanctuary/info

I do find it a bit unbelievable however than a single complaint could cause the destruction of all these dogs - often noise complaints need to be monitored with sound equipment etc before complaint can be taken further..?
 
Read the statement on the charity's website.
The procedures have been followed and the order was made in October but the place is still taking dogs in.
There has not been a destruction order on any of the dogs.

I would like to know how the place can be costing £3,000 a week to run.
"have been issued with a council noise abatement order which they say they cannot afford to comply with. It means they must find homes for their 17 dogs or have them destroyed.
They fear they may even be forced to close Mill House Animal Sanctuary, which is also home to 10 cows, 10 ponies, seven pigs, five sheep, five llamas and three goats."

I could board (commercially) all of their animals and have plenty spare to live on on for much less than £156,000 per year.

Daily Fail at it's finest. How many of us in rescue would rehome multiple animals to people past retirement age?
 
Taking all the articles into account I think that:
- Chappie who complained (who has lived there for decades) did so because the charity often took in more dogs than they were meant to and they were howling through the night. Chappie who complained has not asked for the dogs to be destroyed, he just wants a good night's sleep. Fairy snuff?
- Council have monitored the situation, agreed that the noise is excessive, and have told the charity what they need to do to make the sanctuary quieter for the neighbours (ie put up a sound proof fence). The council have not ordered destruction of the dogs
- The charity have said that they cannot afford to comply with the council's demands and have said that they will have to destroy the dogs.

If the charity want to raise money for a sound proof fence, fairy snuff and more grease to their elbow, but I'm a bit concerned that the chap who complained has been blamed and also named in the press. Neither he nor the council have ordered destruction of the dogs.
 
Rose Folly said:
The other thing that might work is a petition - like that prat who complained about the cockerel in the village he had just moved into. But the community got up a petition for the cockerel and guess who moved!

If the case is as reported then its very very sad. And if they've been in that house for 64 years then its caveat emptor for the newly-arrived. They should have done their homework before buying.

Reminds me of a new arrival of this village, who moaned loud and long to me at a village do about how he was driven wild by the church bells and the sounds of the pub's skittle alley. I heard him out and then said "if I was an estate agent and you came to me saying you wanted a house within 50 yards of a 6-bell church (whose bells have been ringing for 900 years) and 50 yards of a pub with a skittle alley that's been going for 30 years, I'd be hard put to find you one. But you went and managed it OK?" Sadly he is no longer a member of this community - he's probably living next the sanctuary!
Click to expand...

Words fail me here, except to say that this endemic erosion of pragmatism and tolerance seems to be a feature of 'new Britain'. Our friends family have farmed in their area since 1650 and have the biggest herd in Worcestershire and the biggest herd of rare breeds cattle in the midlands (700)
They have battled through the threat of foot and mouth. They have battled with the elements over the past few years. They have had the threat of blue tongue in the herd and have had to cope with the bureaucracy of farming, defra, health and safety, plus TB the animals every five minutes for nothing.

They have done all this, and continue to do so with rye smiles and optimism as the hardest working husband and wife team that I know of.

Even when down, they have always had a smile and a joke for visitors and friends, and i know sometimes they have been very close to the wall.

The only time however I have ever seem either of them look doubtful or worried has been when they have had problems with their 'new' neighbors.

A man moves in next door to the farm, spends 500.000 on it, installs paddocks, and then complains about cattle impeding he's progress on the lane outside. No amount of apologies from my friends will do. The man tells my friends that he wants to 'kill them both' and then informs the council and also of the mud on the lane. This guy has been used to getting his own way in a different world and place, so when the council fail to take appropriate action as he see's it, he visits any and all local neighbors to 'get a petition together of hate'

luckily, he's objections are met with incredulity by the locals who understand 'give and take' in these matters.

A 'jogger' is chased by their dogs, who do not bite, or attack, or jump, or maul, but woof and return back to the farm. Apart from the jogger a scene played out for time immemorial. The joggers first port of call is the police.

The only time that i have seen my friends look seriously worried is when i talked to them last, and she said to me..."Steve, their turning Robins farm into houses, 18 there's going to be, and down the road they've got planning for twelve more!"

Another enclave of suburban living in the country, and yet more problems. These people like the idea of the country, but are not used to having to give and take and are used to getting their own way. It makes me sick when a farmers dogs are treated with contempt and derision by baby carrier mothers and thermos mug wielding partners telling them to "Go away" in a country lane.

A way of life is being eroded here, a culture is being destroyed and it is ours and as precious as anybodies elsewhere. So why do we allow this emasculation of our countryside, common sense seems to have all but evaporated. I hope that this bloke is treated with the contempt that he deserves and i hope that hes local authority have the guts to say, enough is enough.
 
stevemac said:
A 'jogger' is chased by their dogs, who do not bite, or attack, or jump, or maul, but woof and return back to the farm. Apart from the jogger a scene played out for time immemorial. The joggers first port of call is the police
.....
Another enclave of suburban living in the country, and yet more problems. These people like the idea of the country, but are not used to having to give and take and are used to getting their own way. It makes me sick when a farmers dogs are treated with contempt and derision by baby carrier mothers and thermos mug wielding partners telling them to "Go away" in a country lane.
.
Click to expand...

Another way of looking at this could be to say that joggers, or walkers, peaceably going about their business, should be able to do so, without being (in their view) threatened by the local landowner's dogs.

Nobodies way of life (assuming laws abid by etc. etc.) is morally superior to another's.
 
Inthemud said:
Another way of looking at this could be to say that joggers, or walkers, peaceably going about their business, should be able to do so, without being (in their view) threatened by the local landowner's dogs.

Nobodies way of life (assuming laws abid by etc. etc.) is morally superior to another's.
Click to expand...

If you had read my post carefully you might have noticed I was making an observation on the lack of give and take there seems to be.
Mr friends farm has the misfortune to be divided by a lane.
There have always been loose dogs at the farm, and in our rural areas there are noisy cockerels, noisy harvesters round the clock, drying machines around the clock, slow tractors, church bells. all of these things are seen as an impingement by some and should be stopped therefore. Are you saying that you agree with this trend then?. If you read my piece again you will see that i was talking about give and take.
I would not move next door to an abattoir and then complain about it's existence and deliberately block trailers arriving there. But that's what is happening at Lentwardine.

I'm sure you would say that these are different and divisible things, but there not, they are about intolerance and a malaise of intellect. If I want a lesson in law, I will ask a lawyer. thank you.
 
Oh my goodness:eek:! I live a few minutes away from this santuary and often walk the dogs from here! I had no idea asbout this! They do struggle finacially and the ponies, in my opinion, do not get the best care while they're at the santuary (dirty stables, matted coats), but it's a damn better life than what they'd have otherwise and it's only temporary until they find them a better home. On the whole I think they do try to do good, but I think maybe their hearts rule their heads more than they should do:(.

As for the dogs, yes they bark. Whenever a visitor comes to collect/drop off a dog for walking, but it's no more than your average animal sanctuary and quite frankly what do you expect from an animal sanctuary!

Sadly I cannot offer a home to a dog (well I could, but I'm not sure what my parents would say about it!). :(
 
stevemac said:
If you had read my post carefully you might have noticed I was making an observation on the lack of give and take there seems to be.
Mr friends farm has the misfortune to be divided by a lane.
There have always been loose dogs at the farm, and in our rural areas there are noisy cockerels, noisy harvesters round the clock, drying machines around the clock, slow tractors, church bells. all of these things are seen as an impingement by some and should be stopped therefore. Are you saying that you agree with this trend then?. If you read my piece again you will see that i was talking about give and take.
I would not move next door to an abattoir and then complain about it's existence and deliberately block trailers arriving there. But that's what is happening at Lentwardine.

I'm sure you would say that these are different and divisible things, but there not, they are about intolerance and a malaise of intellect. If I want a lesson in law, I will ask a lawyer. thank you.
Click to expand...

I read your post very carefully thank you.

I would not usually comment on such a post, but was moved to do so, by the attitude of intolerance that it gave off, whilst so condemning a similar attitude in others.

There is a big difference between "accidental nuisance" caused by the necessities of rural life and letting one's dogs be out of control enough to scare or impede people going about their lawful business.

Give and take is very important in any community. So is mutual respect.
 
Just to add a slightly different perspective to this..this afternoon one of the sanctuary's dogs has attacked and nearly killed my DR instructor's young field spaniel. The spaniel was sitting at their leg near a local park. The dog attacked it without any warning or provocation. There were many witnesses,most of whom helped trying to prise the spaniel from the dog(boxer/mastiff type cross). The man who'd been walking it sustained bad cuts to his hands and arms in his efforts. It was not muzzled. It has done this before. A girl I know had her JR attacked a little while ago-vet said worst injuries they'd ever seen&thought it would die. Pics of JR's wounds were taken to put in a Vet journal,as were so severe. There are many other locally reported incidents. The sanctuary have flatly denied responsibility,yet in both cases above admitted 'dog was sposed to be muzzled'. They let members of public take random dogs out for walks-this is a v.popular area with walkers,cyclists&families-they often give NO info on the dog to these (often non-doggy) people and just send them out. I know a (non-doggy)mum who has taken them out for exercise with her kids(9&6yrs)&stopped,because the dogs often lunged at other dogs on the footpaths,sent kids flying,dragged her kids etc and she said it was irresponsible and she felt an accident waiting to happen. Police are involved. I'm afraid though well meaning,the sanctuary needs to either pull it's socks up or downsize-this lack of moral or legal responsibility to other people and their animals is not acceptable.
 
In addition,there are many locally reported incidents over recent years of their rescued colts escaping and pursuing people innocently hacking past. I know of one lady whose horse bolted home at this and then was v nervous to hack out for many months(&would not pass the sanctuary). Last year,a colt jumped out (fields v inadequately fenced-ponies can either squeeze under,or hop over,in places) and latched onto the tail of a friend's 16.3 ID (with its teeth!!) and he had to get off,shoo it off and herd it back to the sanctuary. I don't doubt their intentions are good but..there comes a time when intervention may be necessary to ensure the wellbeing/best interests of their charges,as well as the general public....
 
My family live close to the sanctuary and a couple of years ago when we were visiting they thought it would be an idea to take my kids there so they could see the animals - to be honest I thought that the animals seemed to be kept in cramped and dirty conditions and we left pretty quickly.

I wasnt sure if the place was a sanctuary or a collector who allowed visitors- I am sure that they have the best intentions but to be honest the place did smack of a good idea that had got out of hand.
 
EstherYoung said:
Taking all the articles into account I think that:
- Chappie who complained (who has lived there for decades) did so because the charity often took in more dogs than they were meant to and they were howling through the night. Chappie who complained has not asked for the dogs to be destroyed, he just wants a good night's sleep. Fairy snuff?
- Council have monitored the situation, agreed that the noise is excessive, and have told the charity what they need to do to make the sanctuary quieter for the neighbours (ie put up a sound proof fence). The council have not ordered destruction of the dogs
- The charity have said that they cannot afford to comply with the council's demands and have said that they will have to destroy the dogs.

If the charity want to raise money for a sound proof fence, fairy snuff and more grease to their elbow, but I'm a bit concerned that the chap who complained has been blamed and also named in the press. Neither he nor the council have ordered destruction of the dogs.
Click to expand...


Exactly this....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top