*Added after uploading - please note after we have uploaded an update we do re-read and make corrections to mistakes and missed out or ambiguous information for a while following the updates - we do not drastically change content and if we were to we would say*
Hi all
Many thanks to our new and continuing signers, sharers and surprise donators.
Your support means a huge amount to us at cemeteries4all and to all who follow current rules and are respectful, responsible people with dogs who wish to continue to use cemeteries for all the accepted reasons that people without dogs do.
It is less than a month till the meeting where councillors will discuss the rules in relation to dogs in cemeteries - if you don't believe dogs should be banned (with excemptions) please:
- Keep sharing this petition - research has shown that people need to see a petition many times before signing
- Write to your local councillor
- Write to members of the comittee on the board that decides these rules.
- Give a written or spoken despotition to the comittee yourself.
- Vote on the Scotsman article
As always you can contact us at:
cemeteries4all@yahoo.com
Other contact details can be found at the end of this update.
Since yesterday's update there have been some changes and some quite disconcerting information shared by the other petition.
Yesterday we commented on their post titled: "This Person Thinks Edinburgh Council's Cemetery Management Rules Don't Apply to Them..."
Following this (as in after not as in because) the other petition changed the title to: "This Person Thinks The Revised Cemetery Management Rules At Morningside Don't Apply To Them..."
They also changed some of their content and quoted this text, today stating it was from one of eight signs in the cemetery:
"STOP - Do you plan to exercise your dog in this cemetery? Please read the below signage and remember - short leads only
Those needing fully exercised should be taken to an appropriate green space such as Morningside Park, Craiglockhart Hill, or Braidburn Valley Park"
Hang on (we thought) revised rules? A short lead? What's going on?
In today's update they have called this "trial cemetery rules" - so we have gone from revised to trial rules in Morningside cemetery in one day with no explanation for this change.
Incidentally, this is the cemetery where we visit our grandad and we haven't been able to visit in quite some time due to anxiety in relation to verbal altercations and photographs being taken. We follow current rules as accessible on the council website (we were unaware of these trial rules as we haven't been able to visit to see any new sinage - if it indeed exists) and just want to visit our grandad without potentially being followed, photographed or our image put online. Given rules are now unclear in this cemetery (more on this later) how are we suppossed to avoid such intrusive behaviour?
Don't know about anyone else but we had not heard of such a trial and can't find anything on it on the council website, the bereavement website, council facebook or X (twitter) - perhaps we missed it.
We contacted our local councillor to find out and recieved the following response:
"I can confirm that the Cemetery Rules have not changed since 2022 and state that dogs in cemeteries should be kept on a lead and that cemeteries should not be utilised for commercial dog walking."
OK - does this mean there's not a trial or that there is but this statement doesn't cover it? Or does it mean council services have started a trial and not consulted the councillors who make such rules? Are the two not working together on this issue? Do they know what each other are doing?
We do not know yet but are looking into it. Did you know of this trial? Were you consulted on it and what the rules would be? How do you feel about it? Feel free to let us know at:
cemeteries4all@yahoo.com
What we do know is the other petition have stated there is a trial going on and taken photos of signs which state the information quoted above.
If this indeed a trial how valid is it actually going to be when (we think) there has been little communication around it and the signs don't state they are new rules or a trial.
Will any findings from this trial be actually be comparable to other cemeteries when we know that cemeteries tend to have different issues and some don't appear to have issues with dogs?
What is the aim of this trial? To see if dogs walkers will follow new rules? To see the best way of disseminating information to dog walkers to encourage them to follow rules? To make it look like dog walkers don't follow rules by introducing new ambiguous rules before rules are suppossed to be reviewed so they don't believe they are real?
Given it is such a hotly contested subject, there is a 6 month rule about changing rules which covered cemetery rules being changed and cemetery rules are suppossed to be changed via a comittee meeting (set for 8th August) how likely is it that people will believe these are genuine official signs?
These signs do not appear to state they are new rules or a trial - how likely is it people will believe they are genuine and will they follow these signs if they do not believe they are genuine?
Were people actually informed about or consulted on this or were signs merely put up?
Have decent baseline measures been taken by a party independent of this debate on behvaiours to have something to measure this trial by?
If this is a genuine trial then we hope it is not taken as any evidence for future proposals given it appears to have been set up to fail through lack of communication and other issues.
We are also concerned that even though it is a trial effectively rules may have been changed without due process. How were these rules decided and by whom? Was public opinion or any evidence used in the making of these rules?
Does this set a precedent for the meeting in August - will both sides actually be fairly heard and issues weighed up with due consideration?
Furthermore, one of our concerns re signage in cemeteries is that there are so many signs often containing a lot of text that people won't read them and can't feasibly be expected to. Was this taken into account or are there now 12 (?) wordy signs for people to attempt to read.
It is not only informing and consulting people about a trial that is potentially problematic nor it is that that there may be too much information for a person to sensibly read it is also about language use.
The language lacks definition and is open to interpretation thus can lead to confusion re what rules actually are and people inadvertently not following them or accusing others of not following them when they may be.
"Do you plan to exercise your dog..." "Short lead only" "...dog needing fully exercised..."
What is a short/long lead? 1 meter, 2, 3? Does it depend on breed of dog, person's arm length, person's height? All three? None of these?
Who knows, what to one person is a long lead to another is reasonable.
Training leads can be 30 metres long, in comparison to a two meter lead the training lead is the long one and the 2 metre lead is a short one but some would argue 2 meters is long - it needs to be clearly defined so people can ensure they keep to rules and people accusing of people of breaking the rules can ensure they are correct.
What is "exercising" and "fully exercised".
To us a "fully exercised" dog has been off lead free to wander, sniff and play usually for a prolonged period of time - this is covered by the off lead rule so why not say off lead? Obviously some dogs can't be off lead to to medical, social, anxiety or other conditions but then they would be following on lead rules. Does fully exercised mean something else other than running around expending energy?
Maybe a 10 mile walk....would someone do that in a cemetery and if they did it with their dog on a short lead would it be an issue? If a human decided to walk 10 miles round the cemetery alone or with a friend would that be an issue?
Again, without a clear definition we could be breaking a rule and not knowing it, yes is may seem common sense but one person's common sense isn't the same as another's.
What does exercise mean and should dogs not be allowed to do this in a cemetery?
To us exercise could mean a short peaceful walk, such as, in a cemetery to visit loved ones, to visit historical graves, to enjoy the nature in cemeteries. There are many reasons someone may walk (exercise) in a cemetery what is the issue if their dog is well behaved, on a lead, controlled not to urinate on a gravestone (not actually in current rule only the trial rules) and any dog poo is picked up? Is the dog actually exercising or is it just the human? If the dog is exercising why is such controlled exercise not allowed? Or it it? - confused? We are.
Obviously exercise could also mean doing a tough mudder challenge or marathon but we'd be against this in a cemetery as it is against the ethos of cemeteries as respectful peaceful places - we'd be against this regardless of whether someone had a dog and whether that dog was on or off a long or short lead.
We very much appreciate that council services and some councillors are trying their best in a time of great stress and financial difficulties, however, this is a very sensitive topic for everyone involved which involves the need for good clear communication with carefully thought out and planned interventions or else any interventions or rule changes will be bound to fail or neglect key stakeholders - you and everyone living in Edinburgh.
So today's interesting puzzle brought to you by both petitions is is there a trial going on in Morningside cemetery? Is the trial valid? Do people know about it and can people be fairly judged for not doing something that is not clearly defined or communicated and they may believe is fake? Can something with so many issues be taken as an example for consideration when it comes to deciding rules? What is wrong with a well behaved on lead dog walking in a cemetery - is this exercise, full exercise or neither?
We have written to councillors and if we hear anything back will let you know.
It should be noted that at the time of writing the other petition has not acknowledged they changed the title or content of their post discussed yesterday. They have not apologised to readers for potentially misleading them and they have not apologised to the lone woman they falsely accused of breaking Edinburgh Council Cemetery rules. This is a petition trusted by people to fight for their cause.
In today's update the other petition did cite some other information in relation to the photographs they have been taking in Edinburgh cemeteries but we can discuss that tomorrow - we have written a lot for today.
Thank you for reading, especially if you made it this far - let's keep the pressure on and ensure cemeteries4all x
List of your local Councillors:
https://democracy.edinburgh.gov.uk/mgMemberIndex.aspx?FN=WARD&VW=LIST&PIC=0
List of who is due to be at the committee meeting including committee members:
https://democracy.edinburgh.gov.uk/mgMeetingAttendance.aspx?ID=7281
Website where further information will be posted in relation to the meetings, we understand around a week before the meeting:
https://democracy.edinburgh.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=139&MId=7281
The Scotsman article where you can place your vote (it is not binding in any way):