While unrestrained dogs in public areas are always a risk, some Councils must also contend with strong demands for dog access to free-run areas of public open space as well dog-free areas. Balancing demands requires careful management.

We now look at some of the issues involved in planning access for dogs to public open space, why people donít comply with leash laws, and policy options open to councils.

How much access should dogs have?

In Harlock Jacksonís comprehensive review of issues associated with planning for public open space use by people with dogs, the need to integrate, rather than separate, dog exercise activity was emphasised.¹ The authors argued that the dogs, as well as owners and other park users, are enriched by participating together in public open space activities, and that councils should plan for such uses. (See: Harlock Jackson comments on open space planning for dogs)

When viewed in the context of overall community amenity, three levels of dog access can be seen:

ï no dogs allowed dog access compromised

ï leash laws apply integrative with people and dogs together (middle ground)

ï free-run areas people access compromised

There is a converse relationship here between dog owner freedoms and general community freedoms. It is a matter of judgment where the balance rests most comfortably for each local authority.

As we said earlier, keeping dogs leashed in the public realm is not unlike car drivers being required to keep on the left side of the road. Sure, applying the leash represents one degree of personal freedom surrendered by dog owners. But, if this means local authorities can start taking down the No Dogs Allowed signs, it is the dog owners who will benefit in the long run. Itís the middle ground.

Is planning for the future as well as the present?

One issue that is often forgotten is that planning is for the future as well as the present. If care is not taken, decisions made now may compromise future opportunities. When councils free up leash restraint rules simply because they are a bit difficult to enforce, the losers in the long run may well be all the dog owners who at some stage in the future find their dogs locked out altogether.

Do conditions suit the local area?

No two municipalities are ever going to be exactly the same with respect to acceptable conditions of open public space dog access. At least six things will have an impact on strategic decision-making:

1. differing regional demographics

2. differing public open space availability

3. differing open public space topography

4. differing public open space use patterns (people pressures)

5. changing use patterns (people pressure)

6. the status quo (use patterns previously considered the norm)

Deciding that leash laws will apply in most public parks is not the end of the open space access story.

Many owners who like to exercise their dogs in public open space currently choose not to comply with existing leash laws. In some places, off-leash public open space access is officially or tacitly approved. A range of reasons contribute to non-compliance with leash laws. (See: Why people donít comply with leash laws in public open space)

In the list of reasons for non-compliance, you will find all the types of inadvertent and deliberate non-compliance that we discussed in Chapter 5. We can also identify leash non-compliers as

ï active off-leashers

ï passive off-leashers

How can local authorities cater for the desires of the former group (active off-leashers) while at the same time dealing effectively with the carelessness of the latter group (passive off-leashers)? Itís not easy to decide where to place the emphasis in attempting to get the balance right. Neither is it easy to frame a regulatory process that is definitive, meaningful, reasonable, validatable, and enforceable.

The above list of reasons for restraint law non-compliance and summary of owner types provide a background for discussion. But we need more research to better qualify and quantify all the issues that are involved.

Meanwhile councils need to make decisions now. We donít offer any prescriptions but we do recommend that councils go out and seek the information they need to get their own best-fit answers for dog access in public open space areas. Of course councils have to operate within the constraints of the relevant statutes, and will have to move carefully when investigating community attitudes, but beyond that, a great deal of flexibility exists in how planning decisions relating to dog access are implemented.

We encourage councils to be particularly careful in planning for the future:

ï What will these parks be like in 15ñ20 years time?

ï Will every second person have a Rottweiler, a Bull Terrier, a Cattle Dog, or indeed, a Pit Bull by then?

ï What are the trends? What will we be dealing with then?

ï What legacy will our planning today be leaving for the future?

Of course, the best way for councils to get the best fit is to use information gleaned from the best sources. (See: Four different sources of information for open space planning )

Even though public opinion research is more complicated than it might seem, virtually all local authorities are able gather useful data provided they take advantage of expertise in their communities. The information collected can be used to evaluate various options for public open space, which may include a range of dog access arrangements. These are complex decisions to have to make, and they are best made after the planners are in full possession of the facts.

Public open space is a shared community resource. How can pet access in these places be arranged without too much of the dead hand of bureaucracy? How can people and dogs use the same resource most efficiently? How can people with dogs and people without them comfortably share the same space? Most importantly, how, in the future, can more dogs and more people continue the sharing when the space will still be the same?

We unreservedly recommend that the basic merit of leash restraint of dogs in public open space should not be overlooked. If you think ahead, leash laws are where we are going to be if people and their dogs are hoping to continue to share city parks for their recreation. We believe that leash-free areas should be considered the exception rather than the rule.

Having said that, we acknowledge that at present many high-use parks are leash-free by default. Councils simply find leash laws too difficult to enforce. Is it possible that leash laws might be less of a problem if they were better managed and handled with greater conviction? On the next page we look at compliance issues related to dogs-at-large.

1. Harlock Jackson Pty Ltd, Blackshaw JK, Marriott J. 1995. Public Open Space and Dogs: a design and management guide for open space professionals and local government. Melbourne: Petcare Information and Advisory Service.