Should dogs be banned from Nature reserves, SSSIs and other wildlife rich areas?

[Ukwildlifeo]

Reading a story about a photographer slowly stalking some wildlife for a photo, only to have it scared off by a dog reminded me of the many times this has happened to me. This has occurred mostly in parks where dog walking has to be expected but I can remember a few occasions where this has happened in Nature reserves such as Stodmarsh NNR and KWT Oare Marshes.
Now photography aside, this can't be good for the wildlife, constant disturbance will interrupt breeding and feeding, and in winter especially can waste energy. There are cases of dogs killing swans and other waterfowl, deer fawns and spooking deer into roads.

The RSPB and the WWT do not allow dogs on most (possibly all?) of their reserves, should Natural England and the Wildlife trusts do the same? And should other Local nature reserves ban dogs too?

[AshLee]

I voted yes, although I would have voted that they be allowed in these areas on a lead.

However, a reserve we visit regularly has this policy but it is ignored. A ban would be ignored too. And sadly we encounter quite a few problems with dogs, which could be avoided by enforcing the rules. I cannot see a solution to this problem.

[Beekeeper]

Well i voted no as i think that as long is the dog is well behaved and under control there should be no problem.

I used to take my little dog to nature reserves and other sensitive sites but all he cared about was water, so as long as there was a river handy, he would keep himself entertained for hours, any wildlife that passed by would go un-noticed.

Ian

[Kayleigh]

I voted yes, a nature reserve should be dog free.
I walk my dog in fields and country lanes that obviously does contain wildlife but she is kept on a lead and is under control at all times.
A nature reserve is somewhere for nature lovers to go and relax, take pics get the opportunity to see things you wouldn't normally get to see as wildlife is more used to humans in some reserves.
I dont want out of control dogs running a muck everywhere because morons dont control their dogs.
Its a fact now most dog owners have the same sort of mentality that its someone else's problem just like the way they treat their kids maybe you should ban them too as out of control kids are just as bad..

Oh! dear showing my age now the grumpy old woman is starting to show..

[earthdragon64]

It's a tough one, I voted for 'Some Wildlife Rich Areas', as I feel it depends on the wildlife, and dog owners in question. Sites with rare, ground nesting wildlife are obviously more vulnerable than sites which only have more common species present. The RSPB Loch Ruthven site which has most of the UK's breeding population of Slavonian Grebes is a site where dogs should not be allowed, for example.

Having said that, if dogs are under control at ALL times and absolutely never are allowed to stray from the path, whether loose or on leads, then it shouldn't be a problem. However, how many dogs that are allowed to run loose are actually that much under control?

Unfortunately responsible dog owners who keep their dogs on a lead and under control, can be penalised because of the actions of the irresponsible minority who let their dogs run amok.

I really feel it is time that pet ownership was only allowed after obtaining some kind of licence that is only issued after testing of suitability and training, but that's probably a whole other thread.

[Susie]

I voted no even though I am not a dog owner at the moment. I think dogs on leads should be allowed (although perhaps the proviso that they stick to main paths needs to adopted).

[sunnydale]

I voted yes but having thought about it, it's actually the thoughtless dog owners that I'd like to see banned

A dog can only do damage if it is allowed to and I've witnessed a few things that have really made me angry

For example...Dippers nest along a few stretches of Lathkill Dale Nature Reserve during the breeding season and signs are put up asking owners to keep their dogs out of the water.
But do they listen?? No. Instead, they let their dogs off the lead and have a good laugh when waterfowl fly up, absolutely terrified when a huge lump of fur with four legs lands in the water!

Why do owners think it's OK to lob sticks, rings, balls etc into rivers, canals and lakes for their dogs to fetch, without a second thought for the wildlife??
I've heard that dogs are partially responsible for the decline in Water Voles in some of the Derbyshire Dales but I don't know how true that is.
I've seen dogs trampling reeds and vegetation to get into the water, so they must cause a fair amount of disturbance to any creatures living along the river banks.

On one occasion, I watched a dog trample a small group of Orchids that were just coming into flower and I just felt so angry - not with the dog....but with the owner for allowing it to happen!
Another thing I've witnessed is dog pooh being flicked into the water with a stick! Easier for the owner than taking it home, I guess!
Just utterly disgusting and so unfair in my opinion.


Tracey

P.S. I have absolutely nothing against dogs. I'd like one myself one day.
I just know that I would never let my dog wreak havoc in a Nature Reserve etc.

[Stinky Bob]

I voted "just some wildlife rich area's", I live in a AONB and a SSSI, I have a dog and we both traispe around these local area's daily, however I class my self as a responsible dog owner. I find ramblers can in general cause more issue's mainly and this is my own personal experience, because they believe they have a god given right to be where they are and where they want to go.

[fairplay]

Beekeeper, (Ian)
I hope I read your post right, but surely you must realise, that allowing your dog to 'entertain' itself in the water 'for hours' is in itself going to disturb the wildlife which you say passes by unnoticed, unnoticed that is until you and your dog go away because it is hiding up in safety.

So many dog owners simply do not understand what a threat their dog is to wildlife. A few years ago, I had spent over an hour sat quietly beside a small river near an old rail line - now footpath, at 5am in the morning, specifically to try to observe the otters and water voles that I knew were in the area.
Either side of the footpath was an RSPB nature reserve (North Warren)

Around 5.45 am, just as the bird life was getting used to my presence, I was startled to hear something big running towards my direction - DOGS !!!
They jumped straight into the water and put everything up. Where it was shallow, they ran through the water into the reedbeds where the RSPB had successfully got the Bittern to come back after an absence of many years.

I was furious, furthermore, there was no sign of the owner of these 2 dogs.
Then I heard talking, it was the owner slowly walking towards me in the distance on her mobile phone. I had no idea where the dogs had disappeared to and neither had she.
As she drew close I asked "Are these your dogs" ? pointing to the reedbeds.
She ignored me completely, this made me more annoyed, so I raised my voice, telling her that she is in a nature reserve and her dogs are out of control disturbing the wildlife. She dug her heels in by seeming to pretend I just didn't exist, still talking, so I stood in her way and repeated myself to her face.

"Do you mind, I am on the phone" she said. (no emergency, just normal chit-chat) I had to restrain myself from ripping the phone from her hand and throwing it in the water.
The rest is just too upsetting to talk about, but afterwards I phoned up the warden who seemed to be annoyed that I had a confrontation with the public.
Anyway, this woman now takes her dogs to newly restored heathland which is classed as 'Open Access' and blatantly ignores the law by allowing her dogs to run all over the place out of sight.

If farmers are allowed to shoot dogs which threaten their stock, then wardens should be allowed to shoot dogs which threaten the wildlife.
Of course, this would never work because of the possible risk to the public, but this law should be introduced all the same to bring home to irresponsible dog owners that people are sick to the teeth of their beloved cute/friendly /playful dogs causing untold damage to the wildlife.
This has been going on for far too long and will only get worse as the population expands and the wilderness get's smaller.

Neil.

[Picidae]

I voted a resounding 'yes' and have many examples of why I think that should be the case much along the lines many have already mentioned.

Thankfully, talks are under way between the RSPB and my local Council for the RSPB to take over the management of my local patch Reserve, which at the moment has a real dog 'problem' despite there being signs everywhere asking people to keep them on a lead in some areas and under close control in others. Hopefully this will result in proper 'wardening' of the site. Most dog owners are responsible but it only takes a few to trash Little Terns nesting or flush waders off their winter feeding etc. Unfortunately, I've come to the conclusion only a total ban in sensitive wildlife habitat/on reserves at least will work. Some people will always ignore the 'dogs on lead/under control' signs but generally won't ignore ''no dogs allowed'' signs! (Btw I love dogs, have had them for years and always kept them under control/on a lead even when there were no signs requesting it if I thought the habitat/time of year warranted it including an open access public area where I've found mauled ducks, and one time a fatally injured Little Egret that had had both it's legs bitten completely off as it tried to escape a pack of dogs... it took off bleeding profusely making a horrendous sound and then eventually crash landed in some bushes (hopefully it passed out first from loss of blood) in an area I had no access to and was unable to rescue it -- still gives me nightmares that one)