27 minutes ago, pattayadgw said:

Obviously Aroon just wants to <deleted> of farang even more........ how about getting rid of the soi dogs that own the beach there... typical short sighted local govt. official who should have been voted out years ago

This is why.  That and the mauling and generalaggession and fouling by dogs off the leash that expats bring to the beach. Every beach :

I've just rewatched that and it seems these 2 jokers did not interact with any one of their 8 dogs before after or during their visit to Nai harn.

12 hours ago, ChipButty said:

I live 3 km from that beach so do I qualify?

Did you note I said 2 people who posted live On Phuket?

The city I come from in Australia has about 10 designated dog beaches separate from the popular swimming beaches. The council provides washing and watering facilities as well as poop bags and bin disposals in the carparks. Dogs are prohibited from the main swimming beaches.

Phuket couldn't provide as many dog beaches as this, but there must be places where dogs can exercise away from swimmers. I've seen places on the shallow eastern side where people take their animals.

Of course that would require a local authority to become proactive.

In the past dogs were not allowed there. People ignored, brought dogs into the beach with besides making some people feel uncomfortable also leads to poo left behind. Then it was allowed, same consequences, soon people will start to ignore that, and take dogs anyway.

 

Same circle of events.

9 hours ago, Old Croc said:

The city I come from in Australia has about 10 designated dog beaches separate from the popular swimming beaches. The council provides washing and watering facilities as well as poop bags and bin disposals in the carparks. Dogs are prohibited from the main swimming beaches.

Phuket couldn't provide as many dog beaches as this, but there must be places where dogs can exercise away from swimmers. I've seen places on the shallow eastern side where people take their animals.

Of course that would require a local authority to become proactive.

I don't see why the general public have to accommodate dogs. It's a luxury for the owner of that dog and they should be able to provide ample places for it to runaround. Why should the dog less population put up with dogs and their mess? 

 

I find dog owners are like cigar smokers. Couldnt care less about those around them. 

No one got the memo. There were plenty of Thais and foreigners with their dogs at the beach, both on and off lead on Friday.  

56 minutes ago, steelepulse said:

No one got the memo. There were plenty of Thais and foreigners with their dogs at the beach, both on and off lead on Friday.  

As per the op, where it is explained that this will be discussed next week.

On 9/5/2020 at 9:41 AM, Old Croc said:

This article isn't about stray dogs, it's about one owner who failed to train, nor restrain, his animals to the extent that they attacked someone. Read the article, the stray dogs there are not the problem, they know where they fit in to that society.

Perhaps the idea to punish, or cull, all of a species for the transgressions of a very few should apply to humans as well.

 

IMO, many times the difference is marginal. Some dogs are full on strays, some dogs the owner negligent, and dogs are like part-time strays. The end result is almost the same. Both sorts can be a menace under certain circumstances.

 

We just dealt with such a situation, as I was partially responsible. Dogs exiled to shelter, as issues with the neighbors and passerby were mounting. I'm not sure whether "our" pack was better or worse than the stray dog pack they managed to turf out. People were complaining about both. More vocally and pointedly at us, IMO, because we were present.

 

I fully get the owners' responsibility thing, which was why we took this path. What I'm saying is that when it comes to damage done, or how menacing the dogs are, doubt it plays a huge part. 

2 hours ago, hansgruber said:

 don't see why the general public have to accommodate dogs. It's a luxury for the owner of that dog and they should be able to provide ample places for it to runaround. Why should the dog less population put up with dogs and their mess? 

 

I find dog owners are like cigar smokers. Couldnt care less about those around them. 

Effectively you're stating all beaches are off limits for dog exercise, because private citizens have no control over access to beaches. The dog beach solution in use elsewhere ensures "dog less" people are able to function without the mess.

What other non- human entities would you ban or remove from public funding and public places you regard as just yours? Those pesky dolphins, birds?

 

The cigar analogy is ludicrous.