Dogs on leads on Nature Reserves, your thoughts.

[darrenm]

Having worked on quite a few Nature Reserves in the last few years have come across the constant problem of Dog Walkers who persist in ignoring the rules of the site and highly visible signs of keeping Dogs on leads whilst they are visiting these sites. I must point out i adore dogs and that i am not a dog hater or a dog owner-hater.


Part of my job for the last three summers has been to patrol a large Coastal Nature Reserve on a regular basis throughout the day to ask people in a polite manner to comply with the rules of the site and keep dogs on leads at all times and to please keep the dog off the public accses area of the beach during the summer months. At times this is very rewarding when you explain why and the importance of the rules and the reasons behind them but at other times it can be very frustrating, if not down right dangerous.


I have explained to people about ground nesting birds, the damage a dog can do to vulnerable wild mammal populations and to fragile and very complex habitats and most people are very understanding and comply with requests However there are a few that totally ignore your requests, get very abusive and aggressive or put the dog on the lead for a while and then when they think you are out of sight let the dog back off the lead to let it roam at will.

On another thread i commented on recently about a friend who is trying to manage a fairly new local Nature Reserve mostly on his own a lot of the time and is now under an extreme amount of pressure trying to get dog owners to comply with the sites rules and coming up with considerable resistance and even sabotage when it comes to trying to implement site rules. He is now at a stage where he feels that a lot of what he is trying to do for both for the Wildlife and visiting people on the site is being undermined by a few that persist in ignoring site rules or even going out of their way to openly challenge them. I have suggested he tries to call a public meeting and includes a lot of the local dog owners so he can explain why the rules exist and the importance of them but at present he is too busy and does not have the time to call one.

The point of this thread is not to stir up ill feelings between dog owners and those trying to manage Nature Reserves for both Wildlife and People but to see if any answers to this very old situation can be found.

I also feel that total Dog Bans can just alienate people who you want onboard and supporting you.

Your thoughts?

[Ukwildlifeo]

Bit of long post but here is an example of problems with getting dog owners to follow rules. (Please note I do not dislike dogs - im definitely a dog person rather than a cat person! ):

I work in a country park which used to have a few dog free areas clearly signed so folks could picnic in peace and 1 for education purposes where we could teach in peace. Of course it didn't apply to some dog owners but at least most observed some of the areas. However the moment a sign was ripped down on the entrance to a field that was dog free they were straight in there and were quick to point out there was no sign if you pointed out it was still dog free.

Now due to changes in the park these fields are no longer dog free and the only publicly accessible area that is dog free is the playground which is clearly marked with big signs at the entrances. And still the rangers have to ask people to take their dogs out, some of which object because the sign shows and alsatian and their dog is a different breed.

Due to the issues with people ignoring signs and dog poo everywhere dog could (and wern't supposed to) go, we picked a new education area out the way and small, in a place so people wouldn't bother going in there....in theory. We put up signs explaining it was a education area a work was taking place there and blocked off one end to make it a dead end but people still walked in their dogs in there and I caught one chap send his dogs into a pond just big enough for them to fit in. Didn't seem concerned about the effect of disturbing the plants and bottom mud on wildlife or their claws damaging the liner.
When then built a dead hedge across most of one end with plastic temporary plastic fencing on poles across part of it to get in and out. I watched a few times as dogs jumped over and then the owner someway behind came along pulled up the fence and then just dropped it on the floor or they came in in through a no entry signed fenced and just trod the fence down and left it.
In the end we have had to make closed off to everyone and fenced it off entirely. But still some folks are letting their dogs run under the fence so we will have to add sheep fencing wire to the fence just to make sure that we have a safe area to teach small children without the dangers of dog poo and large dogs scaring or pushing them over.

The end point being that no matter what you do some dog owners will object and insist its their right to walk their dog where ever they want and the only way to be sure to stop them is to close the area to everyone or fence it of and control the entry, like some some RSPB reserves. A sad fact.

[Deb London]

If I ever come into lots of money (I wish ) I would pay for the fencing of as many areas in reserves as the authorities would allow. Whilst this is totally fanciful, it would give me enormous pleasure if it where possible. It's not only dogs, it's people with litter, sharp tools (and tongues), and also animals like deer can do lots of damage. It's not necessary to fence the whole area, dogs can have areas to roam free too. And these areas can have CCTV and great big notices to say that owners that do not clean up after their dogs will be prosecuted.

[larachmor]

Originally Posted by Ukwildlifeo

The end point being that no matter what you do some dog owners will object and insist its their right to walk their dog where ever they want and the only way to be sure to stop them is to close the area to everyone or fence it of and control the entry, like some some RSPB reserves. A sad fact.

Our local woods, as a breeding area for capercaillie, is a designated SPA (Special Protected Area). Even here, in common with nearby Loch Garten and other RSPB reserves, you cannot compel dog-owners to keep their dogs on leads. They are required to keep their dogs "on a lead or under close control."
Therein lies the problem - with such woolly phraseology as "under close control" how on earth can you enforce sufficient protection in areas that are recognised as special wildlife areas.
The law should be strengthened and spelt out in simple terms - Nature reserves and other similarly designated areas should be allowed to ban dogs all together. That however is extremely unlikely, in which case the very minimum should require dogs to be on leads at all times - and nothing less.

[solus]

Originally Posted by larachmor

That however is extremely unlikely, in which case the very minimum should require dogs to be on leads at all times - and nothing less.

SHORT leads - not those extending things that let the dogs go more or less anywhere! Like most other things in life it seems it is the minority who give everyone else a bad name and any bans/rules imposed will not, of course, ever apply to that minority who will continue to do as they please.

[STYRBJORN]

If, and this a purely theoretical idea, some naughty person were put snares out where the tripehounds run, it might deter the owners of said beasts. The snares would, in this hypothetical case, be on running lines, have proper stops and meet legal requirements for non-harmful trapping. The naughty person might even, in this unlikely scenario, remove the snares at night. The aforementioned tripe hounds would not be hurt, still less harmed, but their owners might get tired of, ah, retrieving their beastly beasts. You would, of course, have signs giving proper warning to the effect that some naughty person was engaging in this legal but naughty practice.

Actually, you might not even need to put snares down. A sign saying that poachers had been snaring, and asking dog owners to take special care of poochikins would probably do the trick.

Ric

[UB4 gardener]

I Like your thinking Ric.
CHris

[maccyd82]

A pond at the edge of a recreation area near me used to have problems with dogs going in, kids throwing stuff in, disturbing the water and eroding the banks.

A fence was put round it (dogs could still fit underneath if they wanted to)with signs saying the area had been colonised by blue-green algae which can cause harm to dogs including respiratory problems and even death. Since the signs have been up the vegetation around the pond has begun to restablish. I wonder if there actually was any algae..... or perhaps Im just being cynical!

[healfdan]

Dogs on leads, in theory sounds good but in practice only the nice people comply. In fact short of a total ban there is no simple answer. I spent over 30 years faced with the problem of dog owners and the disturbance caused to the habitats and wildlife we were trying to protect. We did have a minor success with the problem of dog walkers, who at one stage were bringing as many as 30 dogs on site and these under the control of just two or three handlers. After a lengthy process our Bye law relating to dog walking was changed to limit the number of dogs walked by one person to four. As has already been mentioned many dog owners do their best to comply with information signs identifying breeding sites and areas undergoing sensitive management but more than a few just could not care less. I am convinced that for a large section of the dog owning community, the dog is more than just a pet it is revered and can do no wrong. Dog related incidents outweighed all other types of incidents and ranged from intimidation, attacks resulting in people being badly bitten, arguements and assaults between dog owners or innocent members of the public, wildlife chased and often killed (mainly water birds) and interference with sporting events.
There were some minor successes to this constant battle, when occasionally word circulated that a dog had been poisoned from somthing we had supposedly used. The best story, that we did not comment on and allowed to do the rounds, was when a lady found an old fertiliser sack, which incidentally did not belong to us, with the letters NPK on it. (Nitrogen, Phospate and Potassium) Word got round that poison was being used which had accounted for three dogs showing symptoms of poisoning, according to a local vet. The local press ever eager for a story reported every gorey detail and kept the story going for two weeks and the number of dog walkers dropped by about 50% for quite a few weeks. .

[Deb London]

In a local park there was a notice a few years back that someone had been (if memory serves) leaving meat with sharp objects in it. They thought the crime was aimed to dogs and their owners. Seems not everyone is a great fan of dogs.