Folks, go make a nice big cup of tea or coffee…this is going to be a long one.
Let’s go right back to the start….
This petition was sparked by a social media post on the Edinburgh based “I Love Morningside” Facebook group, on the 23rd of January 2024. That post is still there for all to read, although the admin of the group has disabled comments.
You will see a screenshot included with this post, which was written in the comments of the initial Facebook post, by the bereaved father of the three-year-old child. His name is Paul.
In the screenshot, you can see Paul commenting “I would not want to stop anyone from visiting a grave. I know how important it is. I have already stated here that I have no problem with dogs accompanying someone to a grave (with dog on a short lead) and assistance dogs. It’s the people taking their dogs into cemeteries to exercise them that I have a problem with”.
So, there we go – Day One of this story, and Paul is clearly stating his position. He does not want a “total ban”, he is stating in black & white, for all to see, that exceptions should be made for dogs with mourners and assistance dogs.
At this point in time, although I was aware of the tragic events of 2020, I had never met or spoken with Paul. At the time of writing this update, 9th February 2024, I have still not met Paul face to face. (although we plan to remedy that in the coming week).
Later that same day, 23rd January 2024, I private messaged Paul on Facebook Messenger, after being incredibly moved by his post. I could sense the stress and anxiety he was feeling from his Facebook post, and I wanted to help in any way I could.
Many supportive comments in Paul’s post (the majority seemingly from dog owners) encouraged him to start a petition and pledged to sign this. Paul however replied that
a) he was not sure how to do this and
b) was not sure he was up to the task, given his fragile mental health, caused by the issue.
This is where my offer of help solidifies into action – I am retired now, however I worked in IT for 35 years. I can get a petition up and running.
Our petition here launched on 30th January 2024.
One day after it was live, a potential signatory private messaged me to point out “you have not included anything about dogs with mourners or assistance dogs?”.
My first reaction was “but everyone knows Paul fully supports that? – he said so on Facebook”. (see screenshot)
My mistake – a genuine oversight. We have NEVER advocated for a total ban on dogs in cemeteries. I just assumed people realised that.
Should I have included that caveat explicitly in the petition text from launch – absolutely.
I immediately added, less than 24 hours after the petition was launched, front and centre, right at the top of the petition, in upper case bold characters “PLEASE NOTE - WE REALISE EXCEPTIONS SHOULD BE MADE FOR DOGS ACCOMPANYING MOURNERS & ASSISTANCE DOGS. THEY MUST HOWEVER BE KEPT ON SHORT LEADS”
That statement is still there, for all to see, and we will honour it in any future talks with Edinburgh Councillors, MP’s, and MSP’s (we are currently talking to all three).
Phew - existing position clarified, and off we go….
One day after our petition launched, a counter petition was launched. You can read this counter petition (and updates) here:
https://www.change.org/EdinburghCemetriesForAll
Paul and I have absolutely no issue with a counter petition being launched, in fact we expected it and welcome it, in the spirit of free speech, democracy and all stakeholders having a vehicle for making their voice heard.
What we do have an issue with is misleading statements, misinformation and having our integrity called into question.
When people are considering signing a petition, they need to make an informed decision. Facts need to be presented as truthfully as possible, even if that means a clarification being added, after a potential signatories query.
The following “update” on the counter petition, regarding the addition of the clarification text re our already stated stance on dogs with mourners and assistance dogs, states:
“Whilst this is definitely progress it was a reaction to this petition and there is no guarantee if they take their petition forward that this wording will remain a part of it should this petition close. For context, before making their (sic) petition they stated dogs with mourners and assistance dogs should be allowed in the cemetery but then did not put this in their petition initially - therefore I feel it cannot be relied upon that this wording will remain”.
It was not “a reaction” to their petition. It was highlighted by a concerned supporter. We added the wording for clarification, and it will 100% remain a part of our stance in discussions with Edinburgh Councillors, MP’s, and MSP’s.
It is an insult to our integrity to suggest otherwise.
You can read this full update post here:
https://www.change.org/p/halt-the-petitioned-ban-on-dogs-in-edinburgh-cemeteries/u/32302640
Bearing in mind our stated stance on mourners with dogs, and assistance dogs – let’s examine some of the statements made in the main body of text on the counter petition:
"I have been visiting my family in our local cemetery for over four decades. Throughout these years, a faithful canine companion has often accompanied either myself or myself (sic) and other family members. These dogs are not just pets; they provide emotional support and serve as a living connection to the loved ones we visit - something that was desired by those who have passed away"
We could not agree more - Paul has fully supported the inclusion of dogs with mourners (and assistance dogs) from Day One, when he made his initial post on Facebook (see screenshot) and we clearly state this at the top of our petition, front & centre, in bold uppercase lettering.
"In all these years, I have witnessed very few incidents related to dogs, with occasional dog fouling being the only issue. The proposed ban on dogs in cemeteries seems to be based on reasons that do not reflect the reality of most visitors' experiences"
Paul visits his sons grave every day, sometimes more than once. He has witnessed dog fouling on many instances and has supplied photographic evidence to Edinburgh Council of not only fouling, but damage to mementos on his sons grave. This is not “occasional”, and we have the evidence to back that up.
There is no "proposed ban on dogs".
For the second time… we clearly state at the top of our petition, front & centre, in bold uppercase lettering that exceptions should be made for dogs with mourners and assistance dogs.
"I feel given the sensitive nature of the issue people are only hearing one small side as some are too intimidated to give their views. I want to ensure all voices are heard."
As stated above, we have no issue with a counter petition and other voices being heard. We are a bit perplexed about the use of the word “intimidation” though?
There was one opposing comment on the counter petition (due to the way Change works, that person had to “sign” the counter petition to be able to leave a comment), however despite the comment using forceful language (nothing we have not all heard before), it was nowhere near "intimidation" - it was someone expressing their view strongly.
Of course, you can't read that comment for yourself and judge, because the counter petition author has deleted it.
What you can do is go to this thread on “Next Door”, started by the counter petition author. Again, there is no “intimidation” apparent in the comments, however the author felt the need to turn off comments yesterday.
We will leave it to you to judge why the author felt the need to do this.
“Cemeteries are tranquil spaces where people come to remember and connect with their departed loved ones. They should be respectfully shared by all - including our four-legged friends who often play an important role in our grieving and healing process.”
For the third time… we clearly state at the top of our petition, front & centre, in bold uppercase lettering that exceptions should be made for dogs with mourners and assistance dogs.
“Edinburgh is known as the city of Greyfriar's (sic) Bobby, the faithful dog who stayed with his owner until his own sad death - showing how faithful and loving dogs can be. How can we love and promote such a heartfelt well known and loved story yet not allow dogs into cemeteries?”
Again, nobody is talking about mourners being declined access...and even old Bobby would fall into this category. However, I don't think there are any recent cases of a lone dog going into a cemetery to lie on his masters grave.
For the fourth time… we clearly state at the top of our petition, front & centre, in bold uppercase lettering that exceptions should be made for dogs with mourners and assistance dogs.
“The proposed ban would not only affect me but also many others who find solace in visiting their loved ones with their supportive companions at their side.”
For the fifth time… we clearly state at the top of our petition, front & centre, in bold uppercase lettering that exceptions should be made for dogs with mourners and assistance dogs.
“Further many people may visit the cemetery for the beauty and solace it provides - something that is often lacking in this big city.”
One thing I never thought I would hear someone saying about Edinburgh is "it is lacking in beauty and solace”.
Morningside Park is literally next door to Morningside Cemetery, 30 seconds away. The Hermitage, Braidburn Valley Park and Blackford Hill and Pond are a short walk away.
“They may or may not be visiting loved ones but requiring a space to get away from it all or even to work through personal troubles - dogs can also be a real healer and they may have a furry companion along with them for this reason.”
For the sixth time… we clearly state at the top of our petition, front & centre, in bold uppercase lettering that exceptions should be made for dogs with mourners and assistance dogs.
If you want to "get away from it all" with your dog, there are plenty of beautiful green spaces in Edinburgh to do that.
“There are already rules in place regarding dogs being on the lead and dog fouling, this petition does not go against these rules we are asking for these to continue and not to have a total ban.”
The only person talking about a "total ban" is the author of the counter petition.
Again, for the seventh time… we clearly state at the top of our petition, front & centre, in bold uppercase lettering that exceptions should be made for dogs with mourners and assistance dogs.
“Let's stand together against this unjustified restriction which threatens to disrupt a long-standing tradition and could potentially cause distress among many regular visitors.”
Nobody is "threatening to disrupt a long-standing tradition" or “cause distress among many regular visitors”
For the eighth time… we clearly state at the top of our petition, front & centre, in bold uppercase lettering that exceptions should be made for dogs with mourners and assistance dogs.
“Please sign this petition if you believe that dogs should continue being allowed into Edinburgh's cemeteries under responsible ownership conditions.”
The phrase "dogs should continue being allowed into Edinburgh's cemeteries" suggests a total ban.
We are not advocating a total ban. We never have.
For the ninth (and hopefully last) time… we clearly state at the top of our petition, front & centre, in bold uppercase lettering that exceptions should be made for dogs with mourners and assistance dogs.
I have politely asked the author of the counter petition to revisit and edit the main text of their petition, to accurately reflect our stance re dogs with mourners and assistance dogs.
They have refused to do this.
Thank you for reading.
Andy & Paul