Barking from puppy farm causes outcry by villagers
A PUPPY farm situated in a village near Ashbourne has caused years of sleepless nights, residents claim.
The Hulland Ward-based business has been the subject of complaints over noise for years, a council report has detailed.
Last week, those complaints came to a head again when plans from farm owner Richard Bowler – for an acoustic fence designed to limit noise from the site – were debated by Derbyshire Dales District Council.
Councillors chose to refuse the plans, against the recommendations of their own officers. There are only a small number of residents who live directly next to the site - at Four Lane Ends Farm in Gibfield Lane – but the disturbance they have suffered has been significant and persistent, parish councils have said on their behalf.
The site has permission to keep up to 50 dogs at any one time. A noise abatement notice – enforcement from the council – was served on the farm in 2016 due to the significant noise complaints and the owners were told to put measures in place.
Residents and parish councillors say these were not, leading to many more complaints and calls for enforcement action over the years since the notice.
They say the acoustic fence plan, which has already been put in place, is not sufficient and call for a strict reduction in the maximum number of dogs allowed on the site at any one time.
Council officers say the fence was put up “out of the blue” and they had previously called for cladding to the kennel buildings.
A statement from Atlow Parish Council says: “It is critical to understand the noise nuisance from dogs at Four Lane Ends Puppy Farm has always been sporadic and unpredictable. It may occur for several hours, days or even several weeks, sometimes with barking starting early in the morning and going on until late at night. There are also periods of days, weeks and even months with little or no noise.
“While many Atlow, Hognaston and Hulland residents report hearing the barking – and have been especially irritated by it while they have been at home more during the pandemic – the most severe disturbance is caused to the residents of two houses in Atlow.
“On many occasions in the last nine years that the noise has been severe, a group of the nearest neighbours have been caused serious nuisance, stress and loss of amenity this is still happening.”
At this week’s meeting, Atlow parish councillor, Cllr Suzanna Stuart-monteith, said the planning process involving the puppy farm has “gone so badly wrong”.
Hognaston Parish Council says it has received a complaint about noise from the puppy farm this year, but the district council says it has not received any since November 2019.
Local residents say they have emailed and phoned the district council to lodge numerous complaints, but officers say they have not received any.
At last week’s meeting, Hognaston parish councillor, Cllr Dawn Lewis, said the noise assessment equipment used to monitor noise levels was installed away from the farm not in the centre of the site, claiming the results cannot be called accurate.
During the meeting, resident Robert Hutchinson, 89, said: “I am asking for some peace and quiet in my old age.
“I speak on behalf of myself, my wife and many residents who have experienced the barking.
“Please, please, let’s resolve this so we can have some peace and quiet, and so we can enjoy our home and all that it offers.”
Mr Hutchinson asked why the abatement notice had not been enforced and called for a reduction in dogs allowed on the site.
Council officers put forward an agreement to allow 35 adult dogs on the site at once, with puppies intended for sale not included in the overall number reduced from 50. The meeting was told that police and the RSPCA had carried out a spotcheck to assess the welfare of the dogs being kept there, but they did not find any concerns.
Cllr Garry Purdy, leader of the authority, said the issue around the puppy farm had been a “long-running saga” and that “tempers are rising” while residents “continue to suffer”.
He said he was not convinced that the measures in place were right and was concerned at the apparent lack of complaints records.
Cllr Purdy also said that the applicant should not be given another chance and that this time around the authority should side with the residents and parish councils.
Meanwhile, Cllr Peter Slack said there were numerous other kennels in the district and they had not triggered complaints to the council, unlike the one in question in Hulland Ward.
He said: “We’ve tried for so many years to get this right and it isn’t.”
Cllr Robert Archer and
Cllr
Neil Buttle contested that noise disturbance from dogs barking was different to noise from traffic and needed to be addressed.
Cllr Richard Fitzherbert said it had taken 15 months to get to the stage where the situation could be debated and council officers and the applicant had an agreed way forward.
Cllr Peter O’brien said the application should be refused, claiming a noise assessment of the site was not independent, the noise mitigation does not reduce disturbance to a sufficient level, and that the measures requested (cladding on the kennels) should be carried out instead of the acoustic fence.
The applicant did not choose to speak during the meeting or submit a statement to be read at the meeting and could not be reached for comment.
Please, please, let’s resolve this so we can have some peace so we can enjoy our home.
Robert Hutchinson