Login / RegisterVancouver park board vice-chair Aaron Jasper seeking “equitable distribution” of city's off-leash dog areas
When Vancouver park board vice-chair Aaron Jasper told staff in 2011 to “roll up their sleeves” and re-examine the city’s “flawed policy” pertaining to off-leash areas for dogs, he said he was basing it on his own microcosm experience at Nelson Park in the West End.
“What we recognize is, look, we can’t exclude dogs and dog owners from this park, but we’ve got to find a way that they can come down, and everyone else can come down and feel that they can be safe and enjoy the space,” Jasper told the Straight in a phone interview. “Nelson Park was the first fenced-off park area that we had in the city.”
That was 2006, the two-term Vision Vancouver commissioner noted. Fast forward to 2012, and park board staff have sent notice that they are seeking input on its new draft guidelines to enable off-leash areas to “work for everyone”, according to a June 5 release sent by park-board communications coordinator Daria Wojnarski.
“New draft guidelines have been developed to help improve the Park Board’s network of dog off-leash areas,” states the media release. “They are based on principles endorsed by the Board and public comment to date, and include fencing, rules, location, design and signage. The draft guidelines are posted in a City of Vancouver online discussion forum 'Talk dog off-leash areas' where residents can converse with others and provide feedback over the next month.”
The current policy is “staggered” off-leash hours, according to Jasper.
“The park will be off-leash for a couple of hours and then it’s on-leash, and then it’s off-leash,” he said. “There is a lot of conflict between different user groups. And so, last summer I had directed staff to come back to us, and let’s get some draft principles, some ideas, all of it around the core idea that off-leash areas should be fenced off, or should have a physical separation from the rest of the park greenspace area. They’ve done that and they’ve gone out and gotten some feedback on some of the principles. They’ve fine-tuned it. We’re looking for some further feedback on what they’ve come up with.”
Staff will review comments and report back to the board in early summer. Further public consultation will take place on improvements to existing or new off-leash areas.
Improvements will start later this year, according to the park board release.
However, (and I can assure you of this from personal experience) pickup sports games will occupy the allocated area during "dog hours" and despite the fact that adult field sports require a permit (which I would assume they do not have unless the city is willfully setting up conflict) I have yet to EVER see enforcement of the rules.
This is a discriminatory cash grab, and throught their flawed (lack of) policy - the city fosters a culture of non-compliance.
You treat us like outlaws and we will behave like outlaws
As to jonny .'s comments about dog waste: urine is actually free of pathogens and if fecal matter is collected, any remnants are soon to naturally biodegrade into the earth.. The real source of contamination (beyond the human shit, needles, broken glass and litter that contaminate our parks) is e.coli from AVIAN SOURCES. This is a verifiable fact, should you call Coastal Health - who monitor our beach/water e.coli counts more than 80% of e.coli is from avian sources.
Perhaps we should cull all the birds to satiate the hand-wringing hygine obsessives seeking a sanitized and homoginized park experience (not you jonny . - I get where you are coming from)
cue the knee, jerk response:
It doesn't benefit ME, so why should I have to pay:
Newsflash, triple-P.. we all pay for and accommodate other people's "personal choices"
- more car infrastructure to pay for people's personal choice to drive
- more bike infrastructure to pay for people's personal choice to ride
- more school/playground infrastructure to pay for people's personal choice to have kids
- more healthcare to pay for people's personal choice to overeat crappy food
- more park infrastructure to pay for people's personal choice to have a plot in a "public garden"
tennis courts, jogging paths, ice rinks, swimming pools, safe injection sites, drug-users unions, boater safety programs, fireworks shows - I don't use 'em, why should I have to accommodate them - why MEEEE!
Get over yourself already. Dog-owners pay taxes and contribute to society just like you do, you selfish whiner
"Get over yourself already. Dog-owners pay taxes and contribute to society just like you do, you selfish whiner"
So what ?
We all pay taxes. Does that mean that I should expect the city to accomodate my passion for auto racing ? Should I expect a taxpayer funded race track to be built to accomodate me because I "pay taxes" ?
What about those people in society that get more benefit from the tax system than they pay in ? How do they fit into your benefit allocation scheme ?
So how does the fact that dog owners pay taxes entitle dog owners to any more right to the public space than any else who does not have a dog who pays taxes ?
As far as my being selfish, you will see that I made no argument for dogs being in parks; I have no problem with that if managed properly.
The problem I do have with dog owners, much like smokers, is how the rest of us are expected to accomodate their choices beyond what is reasonable.
Owning a dog in a city is a personal choice; it is not the equivalent of a public good, like a road/school/park/healthcare, where society shares the costs through taxation and shares the benefits.
If you want to own a dog in the city, where green space is limited, and where it can be hard to own or afford the type of accomodations that woudld be suitable for a dog, then you have to accept that will likely not be as easy as owning a dog in the country.
If you want to own a dog, fine. But if you live in the city, with limited personal green space, public green space which must be shared, and numerous other citizens who dont want to be forced to interact with your animal because you cant be an adult and accept the responsiblity of owning and controlling a dog in an urban environment - and expect the public to then accomodate you because you cant accomodate your animal within your lifestyle, private green space or your own living space -you are living in a fantasy world.
tennis courts, jogging paths, ice rinks, swimming pools, safe injection sites, drug-users unions, boater safety programs, fireworks shows - I don't use 'em, why should I have to accommodate them - why MEEEE!"
Let's go through the list, shall we ?
tennis courts, jogging paths, ice rinks, swimming pools
Well, if publicly funded, then you indirectly benefit from the savings to the the health care system that flow from healthy people not accessing the system. It is simply the reverse of unhealthy people costing the system more, and you indirectly, due to poor choices.
drug-users unions
Not publicly funded, so costs you nothing in terms of dollars or accomodation.
boater safety programs
The cost of fishing dead boaters out of the water to the public, in terms of search and rescue services, police, fire, EMT, etc is considerable, as is the health care costs associated with boating injuries. It is in your interest as a taxpayer to reduce these long term public costs.
safe injection sites
That the cost of Insite is recovered through savings in the public health system and policy system is well documented in numerous reports, from the federal government and third parties over the past eight years. Ergo, it indirectly saves you money whether you morally approve or not (a factor which is totally irrelevant in assessing the costs and benefits to the public)
Fireworks shows
Privately funded with the public viewing on public land. How in the hell do you have a problem with that ?
Sounds like every other politician in Canada... no news there.
And smokers, fat people, persons collecting EI, etc---there are plenty of people lapping up tax dollars. A couple of dog parks are the least of your worries.
But you know what? It's my problem. The dog is a luxury indulgence. It is not a person, it is not an essential, it is in fact a protein-gobbling parasite albeit one that I very much enjoy having around. I would no more expect my dog to be a priority to the city than my need for guitar lessons, beer, or any of my other purely selfish personal hobbies. I'm bloody grateful that we have ANY off leash dog parks.