On Dogs in Parks: A Comment on the GGNRA Plan to Restrict Dog Access

Today, February 18, 2014, is the LAST DAY to comment on the Golden Gate National Recreation Area's plan to restrict dog access on the federal lands it manages in the Bay Area. 

I hope people will comment, however they may feel about the issue.  Comments can be submitted here  http://www.nps.gov/goga/parkmgmt/dog-management.htm

Here is my own comment:

"As a passionate environmentalist and an advocate for public safety in public places, I understand and share the concerns that both park managers and members of the public have about off-leash dogs in parks. However, harsh regulatory restrictions are the wrong tool to deal with these issues. Cultural change through education would be a far more constructive approach, and one that would provide much greater benefit to the parks over the long term.

Dog people are park people. Many of the strongest stewards and advocates for public parks are those who enjoy them in the company of their dogs. Denying access to the large and rapidly growing segment of the public for whom off- leash dog play is an essential part of their park experience may offer some short-term conservation and even safety benefits. But it is the wrong thing to do, and will ultimately do damage by cutting off essential public support for the parks.

A much better way to approach this problem would be to reach out to dog owners to engage them in helping to change the culture of dog ownership, to emphasize the necessity of effective voice control and cleaning up after one's dog. If the behaviors of concern - such as allowing dogs to approach people who do not want them near and chasing wildlife, as well as failing to clean up after them - are frowned upon by dog walkers themselves, and are reported to rangers and/or sanctioned by direct comments to the offenders, then people who are trying to do the right thing will change their behavior. 

Granted, these changes that will not happen overnight, but they will happen, and ultimately they will be far more sustainable as well as more appropriate than the current proposal to simply exclude so many innocent park users. 

For many dog owners, especially the growing numbers of childless people and empty-nesters, their dog is a member of their family. Denying such families the ability to use the parks for the simple pleasures of off leash play - such as throwing and chasing a stick - is not only unnecessary and wrong, but is ultimately not in the best interest of the parks or the public.

Please reconsider, and join with responsible dog owners in developing a more just and sustainable compromise approach that combines reasonable restriction on the places and times of dog access with education about the importance of improved control and clean up.  Such an approach will help build rather than diminish public support for parks as a social priority.

Thank you for considering this comment,

Rochelle Nason"