"Alan" wrote in message
news snip
If it is an offence to allow a dog to foul, without the owner clearing
it up, why is socially acceptable to allow a cat to do the same with no
responsibility on the owner to clear the mess?

English law.
Means that a dog had to be licenced. (;icence abolished in 1987) but the law
still stands,
owner is held responsible (in law) for animals behaviour.
Car hits a dog - must be reported to police.
Dog fouls path - owner is liable
Dog roams free - Council have a duty to trap it and penalise the owner.

English law defines a cat as a wild animal.
Therefore there is no legal responsibility from the owner.

Social acceptance is a whole different thing.
It was socially acceptable to send children to work in coal mines.
It was socially unacceptable to be seen drunk in public.

Now society has changed.
Acceptance has changed.

I mark my garden as a childrens play area, and in small print I point out
that
any animal caught fouling the area will be subjected to the full weight of
the law.
This means that cats will be trapped and shipped off to the cats protection
league.
Dogs to the local dog rehoming service. Stray/loose dogs are reported to the
council dog warden.
In six years the number of stray dogs on the estate has dropped from over a
dozen
living wild to the occasional animal which has obviously broken free for the
day.

IMNHO there is no such thing as a proven deterrent.

Dave