All-day dog ban at three Cornish beaches faces challenge from owners
Campaigners fighting 24-hour summertime beach dog bans in a Cornish resort are planning to launch a judicial review against the town council.
St Ives Dog Owners Group (DOG) opposes the new dog bans due to be implemented this year, which will see dogs barred from Porthmeor, Porthminster and Porthgwidden beaches for the summer months.
The group is planning to challenge St Ives Town Council's decision to implement the bans from May 1 and has sent the council a formal pre-action protocol letter for a judicial review.
Campaigner Barbara Nolan said: "We could not just stand by and let this happen.
Free DT333 System Phone with all New NCP Panasonic Business...View details
Make Sure Your Business In Cornwall Chooses The Correct Business Telephone System At The Most Competitive Price.
Approved Panasonic Telecommunications Installer.
Terms: Terms: Please Quote This Genuine Offer When Booking An Appointment With Your Telecommunication Engineer. We Also Offer A Demonstration Of The Proposed System Please Ask For This Free Service
Contact: 01726 213808
Valid until: Monday, March 31 2014
"This ban will be introduced on the say-so of a few and against a groundswell of opinion. We are worried about the loss of amenity to local people and to those with disabilities who will find it difficult to access Bamaluz or Lambeth Walk beaches, which would be available to dog-walkers all year round, but have poor access."
St Ives mayor Ron Tulley confirmed the council had received the letter and it was seeking legal advice.
It is the latest twist in a debate which has raged in the town for months.
The council held a consultation last year on the proposals, to which nearly 1,000 people responded, with more than two-thirds of them saying they would oppose a ban.
Despite this, last November, the local authority voted to do away with the current rules that allow dog-walkers onto key bathing beaches before 8am and after 7pm in the summer.
Mrs Nolan said the legal challenge focused on two issues: firstly, that the council reached its decision without considering relevant equality legislation and secondly, that it did not consider the financial impact of the decision.