Hi all
Many thanks to our new and continuing signers, sharers and surprise donators.
On Thursday night/Friday morning we reached our 1000 signers milestone!!
Thank you all! The gap is slowly closing but the other petition is still ahead - let's see if we can get closer to their numbers.
This petition isn't the only way you can help prevent a ban on dogs (with exemptions) in our Edinburgh Council cemeteries.
It less than a month till officials meet and we see if this becomes reality - if you don't believe dogs should be banned (with exemptions) 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.
Apologises for no update yesterday, we were very busy and not feeling great.
Today's photo - taken with care not to distress, upset, infringe on feelings of safety or mourning or publically identify any individual - shows New Calton burial ground (cemetery).
We visit this cemetery to visit ancestors who have a family plot there - we visit with our dog who we take for PTSD related anxiety - this wouldn't be allowed under the ban (with exemptions).
Our understanding is this is one of Edinburgh's historical cemeteries, even if not there do not appear to have been new burials/internment of ashes for many decades.
From what we have seen the cemetery is most used by people taking a short cut from Regent Road to Parliament/Holyrood/the Royal Mile - obviously it is difficult to prove this without approaching people and asking (we do not feel this would be appropriate) but given they often follow the path straight through without looking at graves we feel is a fair assumption.
We do see the occasional people looking at graves but we have no idea if this for mourning, ancestral or historical interest reasons.
We have seen the occassional dog on lead following current rules and indeed following unwritten rules to do with respect such as not allowing them to urinate on gravestones. This is the positive within rules accepted use we see in this cemetery.
The negative, problematic and/or possibly illegal, use we have seen in this cemetery includes litter dropping, especially of alcohol cans (which were most likely drunk in the cemetery) and we have seen 2 human poos here with accompanying used tissue or wet wipe. It should be noted this is usually one of the cleaner cemeteries we visit.
This is the first time we have seen something of this magnitude and have to say even in person it is difficult to ascertain what it is about nevermind by photo. Was it a one night party? Someone camping for a few days? A random rubbish dump? We don't know.
What we do know is there were many items that made us concerned about health and safety. There were hundreds of needle caps, used cookers, used water (for injecting) ampoules and hundreds of needle, syringe and cooker wrappers. There were also shaving razors and razor heads lying around. There was evidence of a campfire like fire and a bbq.
Less concerning items includes clothing, shoes, bags, general rubbish, children's toys, a sleeping bad and a broken tent. Not to mention other items - there was so much that could be noted.
We have no idea how long these items have been here but given the lack of needles we feel it has been long enough to have possibly been reported and the needles cleaned up - unless they were taken away by somone else, such as those who used them, but this would be hundreds.
To us this is highly concerning and we hope it is a not a new regular feature of this cemetery, however, for us this reminds us of other cemeteries where behaviours such as drug use were so extensive they made people feel unsafe and avoid them during the day - this changed with the introduction of friends groups and increased footfall from people with dogs.
On a positive note re this incident it is good to see that harm reduction services may be getting used.
Relating to this issue, yesterday our mother was reminiscing about how we were not allowed into Morningside cemetery by ourselves due to gangs who would damage headstones and be abusive to visitors as well as the issue of used needles. What people see today in Morningside cemetery is an incredibly different story where the cemetery is safe to use during the day and into the evening (we can't comment on nightime) in relation to such behaviours.
As said before we would rather meet a well behaved on lead dog than get a needlestick injury or meet people injecting whose behaviour may be fine but has the potential to be unpredictable and possibly abusive in some manner....plus it's just unpleasant, for some traumatic, to see.
We feel that before banning (with or without exemptions) dog walkers who bring a much needed protective footfall to cemetries the councillors and comittee need to seriously think about if such behaviours would increase, is it worth the risk and a balamced sensible decision?
Such behaviours (IV drug use) are actually illegal and dangerous for those doing them as well those they may affect. Should we not concentrate on unlawful behaviour that can cause potential serious harm than a minority who break rules which whilst unpleasant and possibly distressing to some causes no health or safety risks to anyone?
Maybe that's just us.
With regards to recent discussions about photographs and trial rules in Morningside cemetery, we have written to officials and are awaiting their replies, we understand councillors are on summer recess, so they may take a while to reply.
Please feel free to write to them yourselves if you have concerns on either of these aspects.
To reply to the other petition stating it is "frankly ludicrous" that we did not know of such trial rules we thoroughly agree - this trial was not well publiscised and if people do not know can they reasonably be expected to follow such rules?
As stated in our last post we have many concerns re these trial rules and would ask councillors to ignore any data in relation to what we view as an invalid unreliable trial.
We ourselves did see posts by the other petition (who we must note are not an official source and at times are unreliable changing information after publication with no acknowledgement) regarding trial signage and education and we had discussions with council services in relation to this. We understood such signs and education were in relation to emphasising current official rules not introducing unofficial non binding new trial rules.
Nowhere was it suggested to us there were trial rules until the other day in a postby the other petition. If the council had discussed this we would have asked if they had consulted a researcher (or similar) who could advise on ensuring a valid trial which would be fair to all.
As it stands we feel this trial has been set up to fail and show people with dogs in a bad light.
Our final point on this for tonight is we understand the official current rules that are still in effect in other cemeteries were never revoked from this cemetery.
Therefore this cemetery actually has two sets of rules governing it - ill publicised ambiguous trial rules and official rules which have been in effect for two years and were not to to be changed until June 2024 after consideration by the comittee who we know are first discussing this on the 8th August. Which do you think is more likely to be followed?
It should be noted that of the 5 photographs shared by the other petition this week 4 people with dogs followed official current rules and only 1 went against these rules. Could we say based on these photos that around 4 in 5 (80%) follow current rules?
Is 80% compliance with rules actually not very good? Does an 80% compliance rate justify a change in rules?
As a final final point this cemetery has had many different signs since January and has mutiple signs at one time. How much reading are people expected to do when visiting a cemetery? To us these new trial rules look incredibly similar to previous signs - are people not reading and following them as they don't recognise them as new signs and think they are just signs they have read before? Do all of the people seeing thse signs read English and if they do are they written in a font most can read on paper most can read from?
Just to note we fully support people following these trial rules as they may be used as evidence to ban dogs (with or without exemptions - that's up to the council) in our cemeteries despite our opinion it is an invalid trial.
As stated we await replies from councillors re this.
We are also still to discuss the issue of photographs in light of the information recently shared by the other petition - part of this delay is giving officials time to reply but it may come to the point when we feel they have had reasonable time and dicuss this anyway.
Sorry it was another long one - you all know i have dyslexia and struggle to write concisely plus there is so much to talk about.
Let's keep working together to keep cemetries4all respectful, responsible users.
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):