The First UK Briard Website Forum Index
Home  •  Search  •  Memberlist  •  Usergroups   •  Register  •  Profile  •  Log in to check your private messages  •  Log inFAQ
 one pet per family View next topic
View previous topic
Post new topicReply to topic
Author Message
stew
Friend in Training
Friend in Training


Joined: 05 Mar 2006
Posts: 19
Location: nottingham

PostPosted: Sat Sep 08, 2007 8:35 am Reply with quoteBack to top

hi to all
nottingham city council has proposed to limit all tenants to one dog or cat per family i will attempt to upload said proposal and petition site .
Bookmark & Share © Add This
Del.icio.us Digg
Reddit Google
Furl StumbleUpon
Live Technorati
Ask Yahoo MyWeb
Facebook More...
Care2 PetitionSite
petitionsite home · browse · my petitionsite · create
AddThis Social Bookmarking Widget
Remove section 3.14 of City Council Tenancy agreement restricting pet ownership
Target:
Nottingham City Council
Created by:
Michelle Morgan

The current wording of section 3.14 states that you can only keep one cat OR one dog (two with written permission) and that you must have direct access to a private garden.

The purpose of this petition is to demonstrate to the Council the strength of public feeling in relation to this particular element of the proposed tenancy agreement.

We the undersigned feel section 3.14 is discriminatory. Why should neighbours that own their houses be able to keep more cats and dogs than council tenants? We demand that tenants be treated as equals to homeowners and not as second class citizens.

The financial implications to the pet industry will be far reaching. For example; Manufacturers, vets, groomers, trainers etc will lose trade. Pet shops, supermarkets and market stalls will lose trade. This will affect local employment.

The benefits of keeping these types of pets are well documented. They help with reduction of blood pressure, comfort, companionship and overall well being.

Therefore we call for section 3.14 to be removed and consultation with local groups, the Kennel Club and other interested parties be sought.

The current wording of section 3.14 states that you can only keep one cat OR one dog (two with written permission) and that you must have direct access to a private garden.

The purpose of this petition is to demonstrate to the Council the strength of public feeling in relation to this particular element of the proposed tenancy agreement.

We the undersigned feel section 3.14 is discriminatory. Why should neighbours that own their houses be able to keep more cats and dogs than council tenants? We demand that tenants be treated as equals to homeowners and not as second class citizens.

The financial implications to the pet industry will be far reaching. For example; Manufacturers, vets, groomers, trainers etc will lose trade. Pet shops, supermarkets and market stalls will lose trade. This will affect local employment.

The benefits of keeping these types of pets are well documented. They help with reduction of blood pressure, comfort, companionship and overall well being.

Therefore we call for section 3.14 to be removed and consultation with local groups, the Kennel Club and other interested parties be sought.
petition overview | letter
signature
goal: 1000




116
signatures
sign petition
Not stewart? log out
Thank you! You signed at 1:10 AM PDT, Sep 8, 2007
You can do more! Show me more petitions »
We signed the "Remove section 3.14 of City Council Tenancy agreement restricting pet ownership" petition!
# 116:
Sep 8, 2007, Stewart Watson , United Kingdom
lets limit council tenants to one child,lets make tenants go to bed at 9p.m. lets not allow them more than one car per family need i say more

# 115:
Sep 7, 2007, Anonymous , United Kingdom

# 114:
Sep 7, 2007, William Nicholl , United Kingdom
What will this country prevent us from doing next ?

# 113:
Sep 7, 2007, Dinda Evans , California

# 112:
Sep 7, 2007, B Ranson , United Kingdom

# 111:
Sep 7, 2007, Alison Richardson , United Kingdom
stop this utter rubbish now the Berling wall was took down or so i thought.

# 110:
Sep 7, 2007, Ian Wheeler , United Kingdom
haven't these people got better things to do than waste Tax payers money on ridiculous ideas like this !!!

# 109:
Sep 7, 2007, Sandra Shirley , United Kingdom
This is the most stupid thing I have known,the idiots with the unlawful wont comply with the law let alone this rule.

# 108:
Sep 7, 2007, Anonymous , United Kingdom

# 107:
Sep 7, 2007, Nicola Miller , United Kingdom
Mid Suffolk District Council are doing similar. Why should the sins of the few be visited on the many? Michelle, if you are reading this, we should join forces. Please contact my email address as we could help each other in the fight against these injustices.

# 106:
Sep 7, 2007, Christine Williams , United Kingdom

# 105:
Sep 7, 2007, Mandy Vincent , United Kingdom

# 104:
Sep 7, 2007, June Bearman , United Kingdom

# 103:
Sep 7, 2007, Raymond Samuels , United Kingdom
Responsible owners are the key to responsible pet ownership.; With 4 dogs and 2 cats, we have no problems with pet ownership. If only children were brought up on the same principles, with responsible parents, there would be far fewer problems in today's society.

# 102:
Sep 7, 2007, Lila BRAHIMI , France

# 101:
Sep 7, 2007, Anonymous , United Kingdom

# 100:
Sep 7, 2007, Susan Francis , United Kingdom
Sue Francis

# 99:
Sep 7, 2007, Anonymous , United Kingdom

# 98:
Sep 7, 2007, Anonymous , United Kingdom

# 97:
Sep 7, 2007, Mary Morris , Canada
What you are doing is morely wrong. Asking people to give up "family Members".

# 96:
Sep 7, 2007, Anita Stephenson , United Kingdom

# 95:
Sep 7, 2007, Christopher Hibbs , United Kingdom

# 94:
Sep 7, 2007, Tina Wilson , United Kingdom
Of course if my Kevin (Yorkshire Terrier) decided to run for parliment he could change the law. The stupid time is he is allowed to run in an election!!!

# 93:
Sep 7, 2007, Carol Widdowson , United Kingdom

# 92:
Sep 7, 2007, Germain PUERTA , France

# 91:
Sep 7, 2007, Nigel Smith , United Kingdom

# 90:
Sep 7, 2007, Anonymous , United Kingdom

# 89:
Sep 7, 2007, Courtney Boeck , Michigan

# 88:
Sep 7, 2007, Beverlee Bullough , Canada

# 87:
Sep 7, 2007, Jemma Harrison , United Kingdom

# 86:
Sep 7, 2007, Anonymous , United Kingdom
I do not agree with this at all, these animals are company for the elderly why dont you start doing something productive with your time / money and sort out some of the state of the buildings these people have to live! get your priorities sorted!!!

# 85:
Sep 7, 2007, Lisa Li , United Kingdom
Stupid idea.

# 84:
Sep 7, 2007, Laurina Blankenspoor , United Kingdom

# 83:
Sep 7, 2007, Severine Stockling, , France

# 82:
Sep 7, 2007, Joules Noble , United Kingdom
This is absolutely ridiculous, how dare somebody take it on themselves to decide that we should not be allowed to own more than 1 dog or cat. Most people respect and love their pets and in doing so get the loyalty and love back, this is especially important if you are old, disabled or infirm in any way. Why dont authorities try tackling serious problems we are all encountering in this day and age like crime etc but NO it is too easy to pick on innocent people!!!!! We are always hearing about charity funded places where unwanted dogs and cats are taken and which are full to the brim, what is going to happen if this policy does get enforced? THIS COUNTRY IS GOING TO THE DOGS!!!!!!!

# 81:
Sep 7, 2007, Laura Stephenson , United Kingdom
I can see the point in comcentrating on limiting pets when there are gangs of youths on the strerts terrorising people! GET A CLUE!!!!!!!

# 80:
Sep 7, 2007, Terri Ybarbo , Texas

# 79:
Sep 7, 2007, Vikki Brown , United Kingdom

# 78:
Sep 7, 2007, Linda Smith , United Kingdom
My pets are my family, why should I be told how many I am capable of looking after.

# 77:
Sep 7, 2007, Kathleen Greenwood , United Kingdom

# 76:
Sep 7, 2007, Dawn Molineux , United Kingdom
Who are you to tell responsible people how to live our lives. Try sorting out the bigger problems before pointing your finger on the dog lovers in the world. You will find we have a lot more compassion than the council that want to take our basic rights away.

# 75:
Sep 7, 2007, Ken Smith , United Kingdom
Very sad day for the freedom of choice that we as British people are yet again being denied our human rights to decide what we want to do in our on homes and country as a whole. If allowed to continue we will be living in a Comminist country before long with no rights at all. The Council who was voted in by the people of this town need to remember who pays their wages. (tail wagging the dog)

# 74:
Sep 7, 2007, Anonymous , United Kingdom

# 73:
Sep 6, 2007, Dawn Rose , United Kingdom

# 72:
Sep 6, 2007, Matt DeLuca , Oklahoma
If we let tenants have more than one cat or dog, it will SAVE THE LIVES OF MORE CATS AND DOGS!! Cats and dogs are family. Nobody should tell us to limit our number of family members.

# 71:
Sep 6, 2007, Anonymous , Maine

# 70:
Sep 6, 2007, Kelly Garbato , Missouri
Dogs are pack animals; in most cases, it's cruel to limit a guardian to one companion animal, as canine needs the company of other dogs!

# 69:
Sep 6, 2007, Anonymous , Massachusetts

# 68:
Sep 6, 2007, Janet Jay , United Kingdom
Where will this stop?. Unbelievable

# 67:
Sep 6, 2007, Brianna Fritchey , South Carolina
It is our responsibility to care for the creatures we share this world with. Because of overbreeding, it has become impossible to solve the pet overpopulation crisis while only keeping one pet. There are more than enough responsible people that can take care of varying numbers of animals. If you're not allowing people to care for animals, you might as well walk the streets killing any homeless animal you see.

# 66:
Sep 6, 2007, Dee Newcombe , United Kingdom

# 65:
Sep 6, 2007, Wendy Bell , United Kingdom
how ridiculous. some people cannot look after one child. It is the carer, that is the problem. Not every council house tenent.

# 64:
Sep 6, 2007, Sue Hall , United Kingdom
were will it end ,certainly not with being told how many pets you can have ...will kids ever come into it? we will end up with loads of homeless animals ....and loneley people

# 63:
Sep 6, 2007, Denise Didsbury , United Kingdom
I think it is disgusting that you can not have more than one dog or cat. If the pets are being well cared for and not causing anyone any problems, why should you only be allowed one pet?

# 62:
Sep 6, 2007, Sharon Fullerton , United Kingdom
On top of everything already mentioned, this rule would reduce the amount of foster homes for pets in need and could possibly lead to more animals being destroyed purely because they had nowhere to go. Please reconsider this clause.

# 61:
Sep 6, 2007, Jess Moon Senour , California

# 60:
Sep 6, 2007, * Zentura , Wyoming

# 59:
Sep 6, 2007, Jennifer Dietz , Florida

# 58:
Sep 6, 2007, Linda Downton , United Kingdom

# 57:
Sep 6, 2007, Angela Brock , Florida

# 56:
Sep 6, 2007, Denise Bagwell , Tennessee

# 55:
Sep 6, 2007, Ober Chloe , France

# 54:
Sep 6, 2007, Olaya Garcia , Spain

# 53:
Sep 6, 2007, Gabriela Patino , Mexico

# 52:
Sep 6, 2007, Marcin Sztwiertnia , Poland

# 51:
Sep 6, 2007, John Day , United Kingdom
Can't let them get away with this. Were will it stop?

* View Signatures:
* |<
* <
* 116
* 50
* >
* >|

Petitionsite Home · Browse · My Petitionsite · Create · FAQs · Contact Care2 · About Care2







close this window


if not done properly can paul advise cheers to all

_________________
_____________________

stew_mal
nouvion hercules-molly
View user's profileSend private messageSend e-mail
stew
Friend in Training
Friend in Training


Joined: 05 Mar 2006
Posts: 19
Location: nottingham

PostPosted: Sat Sep 08, 2007 8:47 am Reply with quoteBack to top

i think this will work better for viewing

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/remove-section-314-of-city-council-tenancy-agreement-restricting-pet-ownership

_________________
_____________________

stew_mal
nouvion hercules-molly
View user's profileSend private messageSend e-mail
Display posts from previous:      
Post new topicReply to topic


 Jump to:   



View next topic
View previous topic
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum