DOG POLICY BYLAW 2019 REGIONAL SUBMISSIONS VOLUME 1 … · 2019. 6. 11. · 2108 Mia Jullig...

DOG POLICY BYLAW 2019 REGIONAL SUBMISSIONS

VOLUME 1 16 TO 4642

Submitter # First Name Last Name Organisation Local Board Volume16 Lucy Stallworthy Regional 135 Ella Gunness Regional 1117 Laura Adams Regional 1231 elise watson Regional 1380 Pippa Baalham Regional 1414 Kathryn Gilmore Regional 1469 Alicia Fu Regional 1606 Al MacDonald Regional 1735 Corne Scheepers Regional 1808 Jude Gordon Regional 1909 Karen Burns Regional 1979 Lynda Gulbransen Regional 11730 Helen Howard Regional 11910 jos van der werff Regional 11991 Marise Hahn Regional 12060 Max Weir Regional 12108 Mia Jullig Regional 12211 Bronwyn Ward Regional 12241 Megan Webby Regional 12287 Amber Dona Regional 12386 Kieran Straw Regional 12561 Trudi Donahoe Regional 12602 Annamaria Kessell Regional 12637 Lesley Coomer Regional 12689 Margaret Everitt Regional 12812 Hyde Posthuma Regional 12955 Joanna Hodson Regional 13062 Gabrielle Johnson Regional 13143 Max Robitzsch Bike Auckland Regional 13246 Steven May Regional 13317 Michele Fantl Regional 13337 Katie Rice Regional 13719 Laura Je Regional 13934 Erika Neilson Regional 13967 Carol Taylor Regional 13983 Mike O'Brien Regional 14038 Yasmin Bate Regional 14056 Teevao Pauli Regional 14240 Debbie Crichton Regional 14242 Helena King Regional 14244 Astrid Budden Regional 14269 Bellanca Almeida Regional 14286 Shu Rong Tan Regional 14292 James Stainton Regional 14294 Jillie Petersen Regional 14295 Jan Graham Regional 14296 Josephine Stanton Regional 14297 Laura Tremain Regional 14303 Elaine Mander Regional 14342 Brent Morrissey Regional 14364 Lu Dai Regional 14370 Richard Adams Regional 14371 Nikki Howarth Regional 14372 Rosemary Parcell Regional 14377 Terri Baxendale Regional 14402 Kate Burdekin Regional 14407 Amy Liu Regional 1

Submitter # First Name Last Name Organisation Local Board Volume4477 Carol Adams Regional 14520 Sue Burnett Regional 14642 Hugh Fendall Regional 1

Having trouble viewing this email? Click here .

From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dog Policy and Bylaw feedback_ID#19 Date: Monday, 1 April 2019 11:45:05 AM

Dog Policy and Bylaw 2019feedback

Submitter detailsDate received: 1 Apr 2019 11:43

Attachment:

Proposal 1

Remove the schdule of access rules from the Dog Management Bylaw 2012.

What is your opinion of this proposal?

Agree

Anything that enables the 'rules' to be changed more easily has to be good. Local Boards need tobe able to make updates/changes to the rules in their area without having to jump through hoops.

Proposal 2

All local board rules within Schedule 2 of the Auckland Council Policy on Dogs will be presented ina consistent format.

#16

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/xbxcqLv3R-lN09Z83A4MCQmailto:[email protected]:[email protected]


Agree

Anything that makes it easy for people to understand the rules has to be good.

If you think there are any local beaches or parks where the type of rule apllied will changethis proposal, please specify these below:

Proposal 3

Multiple dog ownership licence will only be required for urban residential properties where thereare more than two dogs at the property.


Agree

Consistency is good, need to have the same rules for everyone.

Proposal 4

Time and season rule

What is your preference for this proposal?

Other

Needs to be consistent across the region, with an allowance for local variation. However, howwould this be communicated? Would this create lots of issues and cost for signage? This would beconfusing for people when they go outside their local area. Maybe there needs to be an app sopeople can geolocate themselves and see the rules for that area.

If a standardised regional definition is applied, what is your view of the proposed definitionof 10am-7pm from the Staurday of Labour Weekend to 31 March?

Disagree

It would be better to just use dates - 1st October - 31s March. Or line it up with daylight savings.

If you'd like the time and season rule changed, what would you like to change it to?

Start time:

Finish time:

Start date: Daylight savings (late September)

Finish date: Daylight savings (early April)

Proposal 5A

Implement a standard lambing season rule to prohibit dogs from 1 July to 1 December in regionalpark that have stock.


Agree

Consistency is good.

Proposal 5B

#16

Glenfern Sanctuary

Dogs are prohibited from the sanctuary for the protection of wildlife.


Agree

Muriwai Regional Park

(a) On Muriwai Beach, dogs are allowed under control off leash at all times north of the surfertower

(b) Dogs are prohibited south of the surf tower to protect the gannet colony.


Agree

Long Bay Regional Park

(a) Dogs are prohibited north of Vaughn's stream

(b) Amending time and season rule applied to the beach south of Vaugn's stream

(c) Dogs are allowed under control on a leash in the small car parking area immediately east ofthe southern entrance to the park

(d) Except as provided in (a) - (c) above, dogs are prohibited from Long Bay Regional Park andassociated beaches.


Agree

Waitakere Regional Park - Whatipu

Dogs are prohibited west of Don McLean Road and south of Walker Ridge track.


Agree

Proposal 5C

Retain all other dog access rules in regional parks.


Agree

Proposal 6

Extend our ability to makes temporary changes to dog access rules to protect flora vulnerable todogs, such as kauri.


Agree

#16

Proposal 7

Owners of dogs classified as menacing due to behaviour will have the opportunity to have theirdog's classification reviewed.


Other

I cant comment on this as I don't have any knowledge of existing menacing dogs criteria/rules.What is the effect of having a menacing label? I'm not sure a dog obedience course would changea dogs behavior that much - it a dog is aggressive it always will be regardless of training. I'm surethe people with really aggressive dogs don't have them registered anyway and operate outside ofthe rules and regulations. Wouldn't it be better to license dog owners as well as the dogs? Maybea better incentive would be to make people with menacing dogs have to have a dog ownershiplicense - and as part of that they have to do the obedience training with their dogs.

Auckland Council

#16

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/RrJIsHycq3DtOe5IpndAXg


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject:Date: Monday, 1 April 2019 1:07:36 PM



Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

Im unsure why it is duplicated, was this intentional or an oversight? I would agree to removing itunless it has negative implications

Proposal 2


#35

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/S2kaQQSbEdRSogkRsFrphwmailto:[email protected]


Other

It will resolve confusion as I have many times needed to consult the council website to find therules for certain areas and even then it wasn't something I would remember. However, Im not sureI agree to all public spaces not listed having the default of dogs on leash - that I feel will not workand will most certainly not be obeyed so this must be flexible - at least dogs under control off leashor create a new description of 'full time on leash will be imposed if dogs are reported in this area'or similar


Proposal 3



Agree

Most definitely any issues with dogs generally arises in urban areas, less so on the city fringes

Proposal 4



Standardised regional definition

Yes this is definitely an issue having separate dog access times throughout the region, hugelyconfusing and bears no relevance, this should be amalgamated to one time throughout


Agree

Used to this date, no particular reason that I can see that it needs to change


Start time:

Finish time:

Start date:

Finish date:

Proposal 5A



Agree

Pure safety concerns for the live stock, yes definitely prohibit dogs during this time

#35

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Disagree

Is this a blanket restriction? So for example, are you proposing no dogs at all within any area ofLong Bay, for instance? Then I would definitely object as this is far too general, and that goes forall the parks mentioned.





Agree

This is a well delineated division that everyone can easy adher to







Agree

This makes sense, its been in place for a while so I think people are used to the timings andreasonings




Disagree

I'm not sure this is entirely necessay. I can the thought is to prevent anyone attempting to taketheir dogs to the reserve, but surely on leash on a track is causing no harm at all. People aregenerally quite obliging to stick to rules, the few that dont, well you can never prevent thosepeople in any circumstance

Proposal 5C

#35



Disagree

I know this is not very helpful, as at the moment I cannot think of the specific parks, but I feel a fewof them are too heavily regulated, where dogs are not even permitted in grassed areas, and thereare even fewer that allow off leash. The more restrictions that are applied, each time we gothrough this process, it will get to the stage that dogs will have little or no access anywhere. I havetalked with quite a lot of dog walkers, some whom have and will be attending/submitting officialstatements to this affect, that the greater percentage of dog owners feel they are being squeezedout

Proposal 6



Disagree

I dont trust this regulation wont be abused and a blanket ban on all native bush areas wont beimposed, purely because a kauri might be in the area

Proposal 7



Disagree

If a dog is a dangerous breed, it must be classified as such - no matter what. No obedience coursewill ever determine a dogs nature and reactiveness. The first course I attended, I left, due to theincompetence of the trainer - and the same with a dog day care centre I used, people are notskilled enough to be able to determine the danger level of a dog. Ive witnessed this myself andhad this discussion countless times about certain dog breeds. Im sorry but no, a dangerous breedshould be labelled as such full stop

Auckland Council

#35

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/fHlmhqO9Zx74sKiRUxfdYw


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject:Date: Monday, 1 April 2019 8:16:57 PM



Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

The dog rules at Long Bay beach are too confusing, as a marine reserve I believe it should be dogfree at all time. However, at the least the rules should follow the same as the other other beachesin the area (no dogs during the day). Currently dogs can be on the beach during the day on a lead,the problem is no one follows that so they’ll be 1000’s of people on the beach in summer andthere will be dogs running around being a pain, weeing on people bags, or even killing birds.

Proposal 2

#117

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/QnT6MC6JCZVIveaT9H0RHAmailto:[email protected]



Agree


Proposal 3



Agree

Proposal 4




It’s to confusing for rules to be followed on different beaches, one rule for all beaches is muchsimplistic.


Agree


Start time:

Finish time:

Start date:

Finish date:

Proposal 5A



Agree

There’s limited regionals parks but there are plenty of reserves where dogs can be walked.

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



#117

Agree





Agree







Disagree

The car parks are unnamed in the park, people will park where ever they want to and there will bedogs walking throughout the park. Dogs should be banned from Long Bay completely !




Agree

Proposal 5C



Disagree

Long Bay is the ONLY marine reserve in New Zealand that allows dogs, rules need to be stricternot more lenient!

Proposal 6



Agree

#117

Proposal 7



Agree

Auckland Council

#117

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/357HRfsgeGcuqsPBbqZ66g


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject:Date: Tuesday, 2 April 2019 3:05:00 PM



Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

Proposal 2



Agree

#231

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/pDtFErp5hRVpwXqHweQaiwmailto:[email protected]


Proposal 3



Agree

Proposal 4



Local variations


Disagree


Start time:

Finish time:

Start date:

Finish date:

Proposal 5A



Agree

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Disagree




#231


Disagree







Agree




Disagree

Proposal 5C



Agree

Proposal 6



Agree

Proposal 7



Disagree

#231

Auckland Council

#231

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/wUPOvZ_yDx0nrYEAkdgn0g


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject:Date: Wednesday, 3 April 2019 1:07:15 PM



Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Disagree

Proposal 2



Disagree

#380

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/gIuIMIOClMiTDUZtwBpGSwmailto:[email protected]


Proposal 3



Disagree

Proposal 4



Local variations


Disagree


Start time: 8.00am

Finish time: 6.00pm

Start date: 1 December

Finish date: 1 March

Proposal 5A



Agree

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Agree




#380


Agree







Agree




Agree

Proposal 5C



Agree

Proposal 6



Agree

Proposal 7



Agree

#380

Auckland Council

#380

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/GOYkKvPqFhDXrku2zU-icw





Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Other

Agree to removal of duplication, weary that simplifying change could mean that negative changecould more easily occur

Proposal 2


#414

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/aDZ5e-8USbF_W7i7dhJ2tQmailto:[email protected]


Agree


Proposal 3



Agree

Proposal 4





Disagree

5 or 6 pm. 7pm means you barely get enough time at the end of the day.


Start time: 10.00am

Finish time: 5.00pm



Proposal 5A



Agree

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Agree


#414




Agree







Agree




Disagree

On leash on walking track is not a threat to wildlife

Proposal 5C



Disagree

Proposal 6



Agree

Proposal 7



Other

#414

Agree that obedience training should be mandatory for any dog that has had menacing behaviour.However, would be weary to completely remove a label after only 12 months. Training of dogstakes hard work and consistency. Well trained dogs have off days and training needs to berevisited regulary to be reinforced. Perhaps consider extending the period to 24/ 36 months

Any other feedback:

Auckland Council

#414

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/m01NsrwD51LDQonKSRJYqg





Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

The duplication could create confusion.

Proposal 2



#469

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/RRnqqI4xEUW9IsPEo_1Ufwmailto:[email protected]

Agree

If one rule applies to all areas, it will be easier for the dog owners


NA

Proposal 3



Other

Depending on the situation. Some of the properties are suitable more dogs than others. Forexample, if the property is next to a rest home or a childcare centre, the property should be fullyfenced to reduce the risk to vulnerable people.

Proposal 4




One rule applies to all. easy


Agree


Start time:

Finish time:

Start date:

Finish date:

Proposal 5A



Agree

we need protect our native regional parks

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary

#469



Disagree

If the dogs are properly trained, they should not be a problem to the wildlife





Agree







Agree




Disagree

Proposal 5C



Agree

Proposal 6



Agree

#469

Proposal 7



Agree

Any other feedback:

Auckland Council

#469

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/PSm3hN8_GhqEF0WVFifqIA


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dog Policy and Bylaw feedback_ID#613 Date: Thursday, 4 April 2019 3:26:01 PM



Attachment:

Proposal 1



Agree

Sounds reasonable.

Proposal 2



#606

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/tBsiVxG5WKUYyfv0fCq0CQmailto:[email protected]:[email protected]

Agree

This should help streamline the rules and improve consistency, thus decreasing confusion aroundthe bylaws.


Proposal 3



Agree

Sounds like it makes sense. Though I would think dog licensing should be required no matter howmany dogs you have. The only issue with this proposal is that it may prove discriminatory againstpeople who would like multiple dogs but can not afford large properties.

Proposal 4



Local variations


Agree


Start time:

Finish time:

Start date:

Finish date:

Proposal 5A



Agree

It does make it easier. Only question would be whether different areas have different lambingseasons. I know for people going hiking, certain tracks are closed at different times depending onthe lambing season if a given farm.

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary


#606


Agree











Agree




Agree

Important to protect native wildlife

Proposal 5C



Proposal 6



Agree

Proposal 7


#606


Agree

Any other feedback:

Keep on barking! The task is ruff but you’re doing great!

Auckland Council

#606

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/uOozkaHiv9nHV7axOc5UGw


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject:

Friday, 5 April 2019 11:36:46 AM



Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

Proposal 2



Agree

#735

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/5RjiUVMsVosm2CYEWGqKlAmailto:[email protected]


Proposal 3



Agree

Proposal 4




Consistency will avoid misunderstandings and repercussions due to that.


Agree

It will give dog owners time to walk the dogs early in the morning and later at night which is idealas you do not want to take your dog into busy area.


Start time:

Finish time:

Start date:

Finish date:

Proposal 5A



Disagree

Will a dog on a leash pose a tread to the stock?

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Disagree

As long as the dog is on a leash the owner and his friend can enjoy the wild life without any thread

#735

to the wild life.





Agree







Agree




Agree

Proposal 5C



Agree

Proposal 6



Agree

Proposal 7


#735


Agree

Any other feedback:

Auckland Council

#735

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/L_mMCgS29I8TtLwF9FTysw


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject:Date: Friday, 5 April 2019 1:32:41 PM



Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Disagree

Needs to be area specific regards population numbers and use of areas that are remote.

Proposal 2



#808

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/o_0uubxOCEvJg1lsn8GgMwmailto:[email protected]

Disagree

Again. Has to be site specific. Huge difference between say Takapuna Beach and GlenbrookBeach.


Length of daylight hours. Evening hours are too late. 7pm in winter it is dark. The beach in remoteareas is are hardly used in Winter.

Proposal 3



Agree

Animal welfare

Proposal 4



Local variations



Disagree



Start time: 10.30am

Finish time: 4.00pm



Proposal 5A



Agree

Stock vulnerability

#808

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Agree

Wildlife vulnerability





Agree

Sensible










Proposal 5C



Proposal 6



Agree

#808

Proposal 7



Agree

Fair and as you state. AN OPPORTUNITY TO MODIFY BEHAVIOUR

Any other feedback:

Auckland Council

#808

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/8QGaCbKvqlORar6AXbn0aQ


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject:Date: Friday, 5 April 2019 7:12:55 PM



Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

Proposal 2



Agree

#909

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/5V88wgfNs9X86fFORwVYuwmailto:[email protected]


Proposal 3



Agree

Proposal 4



Local variations


Agree


Start time:

Finish time:

Start date:

Finish date:

Proposal 5A



Agree

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Agree




#909


Agree







Agree




Agree

Proposal 5C



Agree

Proposal 6



Agree

Proposal 7



Disagree

Any other feedback:

#909

Auckland Council

#909

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/pB0XEYBcJ85QakMyvFR0mg


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dog Policy and Bylaw feedback_ID#986 Date: Saturday, 6 April 2019 10:33:24 AM



Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Other

Proposal 2



Other

#979

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/w5uBoreZkgofWVMmwf3Jmgmailto:[email protected]:[email protected]


Proposal 3



Other

Proposal 4



Other


Other


Start time: Other

Finish time: Other

Start date: Other

Finish date: Other

Proposal 5A



Other

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Other




#979


Other







Other




Other

Proposal 5C



Other

Proposal 6



Other

Proposal 7



Other

Any other feedback:

I have chosen to mark other on all your proposals and suggestions BECAUSE In our country itdoesn’t matter where you live a MAJORITY always seems to win over a MINORITY I have hadissues with our own local council in Taumarunui and people that sit around tables don’t see the big

#979

picture or think outside the square or make rules and don’t even own a dog! If you are aresponsible dog owner have a fully fenced section, walk your dog on a lead, Carry a poo P bagyou should have more rights over those that don’t! I suggested to our council that if you havepreferred dog status you pay five dollars for a different coloured tag This identifies you as apreferred dog owner which allows you to take your dog anywhere. All dog registrations shouldcome with a little poo bag carrier which costs about $2 ( no excuses for not having abiodegradable poo bag) The solution is you have laws in place but do you ever see them carriedthrough? If your dog poos you don’t pick it up you get finned you encourage the public to take aphoto of you and your dog walking snap instant fine. With instant media today it is so easy toidentify a person who disobeyed the rules Often In our country it is the good people with that obeythe rules BUT dog owners that are penalised because of a few that don’t abide by the rules Be aproactive council and think outside the square how hard is it to simply have a different colour tagfor preferred dog owners and let the public know if you have that status you can take your doganywhere and the public should feel safe because they know it’s a safe dog. There will ALWAYSbe incidents It’s like the smacking Law A minority have one over a majority a smack never hurtanyone but beating and abuse still continues to go on in this country despite Parliments lawchange

Auckland Council

#979

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/J37-OrgmoWTaIz2P7SpZYA


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dogs feedback_ID#1,585 Date: Tuesday, 9 April 2019 5:49:04 PM



Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

Thin

Proposal 2



#1730

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/Qqrqy1TyzPUK7fyTU019tQmailto:[email protected]:[email protected]

Agree


Proposal 3



Proposal 4




Disagree


Start time: 11.00am

Finish time: 6.00pm



Proposal 5A



Agree

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Agree





#1730

Agree










Proposal 5C



Other

Proposal 6



Proposal 7



Any other feedback:

Auckland Council

#1730

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/XgC7-7R8YOifMqtCez_VMw


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dogs feedback_ID#1,769 Date: Tuesday, 9 April 2019 8:57:55 PM



Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

Proposal 2



Agree

#1910

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/_CuWkTapCZcCaqzW41-Xbwmailto:[email protected]:[email protected]


Proposal 3



Agree

Proposal 4





Disagree

10am - 6pm


Start time: 10.00am

Finish time: 6.00pm



Proposal 5A



Other

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Other



#1910



Other







Other




Other

Proposal 5C



Other

Proposal 6



Proposal 7



Any other feedback:

#1910

Auckland Council

#1910

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/-Zc7xlKuUgN9CiOYZQnxBw


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dogs feedback_Date: Wednesday, 10 April 2019 6:37:19 AM



Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

Proposal 2



Agree

#1991

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/B2TdYgzpcuo05kGTPV-gGQmailto:[email protected]


Proposal 3



Agree

Proposal 4



Other

Standardise time... but have times that dogs for dogs that are only "off leash" ie 7-9am & 7-9pm.The rest of the time have dogs that are on leash and under constant control and supervision oftheir owners.


Other

Standardise times... but have times that dogs for dogs that are only "off leash" ie 7-9am & 7-9pm.The rest of the time have dogs that are on leash and under constant control and supervision oftheir owners.


Start time:

Finish time:



Proposal 5A



Disagree

ON leash only during these times

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



#1991

Agree





Agree

It helps for it to be a clear marker







Agree




Agree

Proposal 5C



Agree

Proposal 6



Agree

Proposal 7

Owners of dogs classified as menacing due to behaviour will have the opportunity to have their

#1991

dog's classification reviewed.


Agree

Any other feedback:

Auckland Council

#1991

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/UbtzXp6byx2dXFbQg0iRpA


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dogs feedback_ID#1,911 Date: Wednesday, 10 April 2019 8:42:19 AM



Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

Proposal 2



Agree

#2060

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/iQMFQ-QlndTR1Odd_4Rg9Qmailto:[email protected]:[email protected]

It's confusing sometimes when I take my dog to a new beach sometimes and not knowing therules is a pain, and they are not always obvious in terms of signage.


Proposal 3



Agree

Proposal 4





Agree


Start time:

Finish time:

Start date:

Finish date:

Proposal 5A



Agree

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Agree


(a) On Muriwai Beach, dogs are allowed under control off leash at all times north of the surfer

#2060

tower



Agree







Agree




Agree

Proposal 5C



Agree

Proposal 6



Agree

Proposal 7



Agree

What does this actually mean? How will you enforce this?

#2060

Any other feedback:

It's sometimes the breeds which are the problem, and also the owners too. There are just thosebad egg people who like to intimidate with their dogs for their own amusement. I think you shouldalso consider banning various breeds from parks, beaches too. We hear stories/articles onlineabout small/medium dogs getting malled to death and nothing seems to change and the issue justgoes away. I think councils need to step this up and make these public areas safe for all animalsand people.

Auckland Council

#2060

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/IICx7VDzqzBEOK_F05jcNA

From:dogsbylawreview

Subject: Submission on the proposed changes to the dog by-law for the Auckland regionDate: Thursday, 4 April 2019 8:05:57 PM

Re the suggested changes to the existing by-law concerning dogs in the Auckland region:

As a dog owner and a mother of two young humans, as well as a rate payer, a scientist and aperson living on Waiheke Island, I wish to submit my objection to the proposed changes to theby-law.

Main points of concern:

1. The proposal that the timing for restricted beach access will be altered to a uniform timeacross the region, in most cases offering far fewer useful access hours for dogs and theirowners compared to the existing local rules.

Reason for objection: This is a terrible idea. This will make it even harder for families with dogs toget to enjoy the beach and get the kids out of the house. The idea with having a family dog isthat we spend time together, all of us, outside, away from screens as a family. That includes thedog. On a hot summer day, dogs cannot safely go outside unless they are allowed to cool off inthe water. If this rule is changed so that we cannot go to the beach until after 7 pm for the warmpart of the year, my entire family will miss out on having a lovely swim or a beach walk togetherafter school, since we are not about to go without the dog, and after 7 pm it is getting close tobedtime for school kids, not to mention too cold to enjoy going to the beach anyway. Yes, thereare “dog beaches” that we could use during the day but they are dog beaches for a reason; theyare muddy and stony and not at all where people would go if they had a choice. For us onWaiheke Island, they are also very much subject to tidal fluxes, meaning that for large portions ofthe month they are not even accessible at a reasonable hour. And that is just MY family. Toquote a meme that recently did the rounds on the internet, “All dogs are service dogs – most arejust freelancing”. There are people up and down the region, with and without kids, who dependon their dogs to get them out of the house for exercise, socialisation (dogs AND their owners)and mental health. With more restrictions in place, people will suffer. We need SENSIBLE rulesthat people can actually follow without having to sacrifice their own well-being as well as that oftheir dogs’.

2. The very fact that a uniform time across the region is suggested at all.

Reason for objection: This is also a terrible idea. The only tangible benefit from this is that it willbe easy for people to remember because things are uniformly BAD across the region. Thedownsides are however truly awful (see above). Furthermore, some regions will have beachgoers present many more hours of the day, and for a longer period of the year, than others.Places like Waiheke and other places further away from the central suburbs have far fewervisitors than beaches like Mission Bay and other popular city beaches, and there will be plenty ofevidence to show deserted beaches even mid-day all throughout March in these less populatedareas. It is outrageous to suggest that the same rules re timing would suit the entire Aucklandregion. It is clear that the Local Boards will have so much more insight re the local needs than theregion-wide Auckland Council, and are much more approachable for the people living locally. The

#2108

times and other details surrounding restrictions should be left to the Local Boards to decide,since the people on the boards live locally and are up to speed with what the community needs.

3. The change from a default “off-leash” in parks and beaches allowed unless otherwisestated, to a default “on-leash” unless otherwise stated.

Reason for objection: Again, a terrible idea with potentially awful consequences. If this comesinto play, dogs will need to be on leash in so many places where they are currently allowed to beexercised off the lead. The only way to preserve the level of freedom that we currently havewould be to have all those unrestricted parks and beaches individually converted to official dogparks/beaches, and this is obviously not going to happen. Dogs are not pot plants! They need tosocialise with their family as well as other dogs, and they need to be able to run free every day.The SPCA recommends that a dog is exercised for 1-2 hours per day, with as much as possible ofthat being off leash. The vast majority of dogs are more than safe enough to continue to runaround in parks and other areas where they are currently not banned from doing so. This is greatfor the dogs, and great for their owners, with undeniable benefits to human mental and physicalhealth. If dogs and their owners are suddenly restricted to a few designated dog parks, the levelof happiness and enjoyment associated with taking the dog out will go completely out of thewindow for the many dog owners who are not fortunate enough to live close to a designateddog park. This would have a severe negative impact not only on dogs but on people, as thiswould increase isolation and negatively impact people’s activity level. For many, taking the dogfor a walk is their main way of getting exercise. Make it harder than it already is, and peoplemight just not do it.

I strongly feel that the proposed changes is an ill-thought through reaction to a small number ofdog related incidents, and one which will do very little do address the real issues. The fewproblem dogs and their owners are unlikely to care about the rules, so in effect you will only bemaking life harder for all of the good people around the region who care about their dogs. Thenew rules would make it so much harder to be a good dog owner whilst in fact doing very littleto prevent further incidents. Please reconsider the proposed changes. Let the Local Boards givethe Auckland dog owners rules that we can live with, rules that make local sense, and we willbe happy to comply!

Very kind regards,

#2108


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dogs feedback_ID#Date: Wednesday, 10 April 2019 12:28:31 PM



Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

Proposal 2



Disagree

#2211

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/DB-66G8dbAopEPMZ_ZdZpQmailto:[email protected]:[email protected]

THis means that dogs must be on leash in pretty much all public places. Dogs need to socialiseand turning them into criminals won't achieve that. We need more places where dogs areintegrated into normal society.


Proposal 3



Other

people who have more than 2 dogs are disproportionally likely not to care about your rules. Howabout actually doing something about it where you identify more than 2 dogs at a property?

Proposal 4



Local variations

We need to maximise the time and space available for dogs while minimising conflicts.Christchurch has a great approach at Sumner beach where about 3/4 of the beach remains opento dogs off leash all summer but a large part (including the surf club/swim flags area) is dog freebetween 9am and 7pm (or about that). It works perfectly - people don't need to flout the rulesbecause they provide for reasonable access.



Start time:

Finish time:

Start date:

Finish date:

Proposal 5A



Disagree

No problem with dogs on leashes. Also be useful to know when there are actually stock there.Because stock are moved around there are long periods where some areas have no stock andcould be used by dogs.

Proposal 5B

#2211

Glenfern Sanctuary



Agree





Agree







don't know this area




Disagree

Unnecessary

Proposal 5C



Agree

Proposal 6



Disagree

#2211

i doubt that dogs are the main causer of kauri dieback spread

Proposal 7



Agree

You also need to review the rules around dogs that are deemed menacing because of how theylook. I find it amazing that an obedience course is sufficient to remove the classification for a dogthat HAS done something (and an obedience course won't remove a dog's prey drive by the way)but dogs that did nothing wrong continue to be marginalised. ALL the scientific research showsthat BSL does not work and many states and municipalities in the US and Canada are removingthis law. All it does is marginalise dogs that, like all dogs, need to be socialised, not pushed outinto the back yard. Your application of the law appears to be erratic, e.g. your staff don't evenknow what a pit bull is vs an American Pit Bull Terrier. Research shows that even shelter staff andvets cannot reliably identify a pit bull type by visual inspection, and bite statistics and experiencedo not support continuing with this laughable approach. Its time to penalise bad owners and notyour so called bad breeds.

Any other feedback:

Auckland Council

#2211

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/4qu_QHSVbF-HKnSr8ESRdQ


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dogs feedback_ID#2,051 Date: Wednesday, 10 April 2019 1:31:45 PM



Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

Proposal 2



Agree

#2241

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/EdqZnGAhU234FJuetwJYkgmailto:[email protected]:[email protected]


Proposal 3



Other

I am unsure of the guidelines. Definitely needs to be a case by case in regards to property sizeand size of dogs.

Proposal 4



Local variations


Agree


Start time:

Finish time:

Start date:

Finish date:

Proposal 5A



Agree

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Agree


(a) On Muriwai Beach, dogs are allowed under control off leash at all times north of the surfer

#2241

tower



Agree







Agree




Agree

Proposal 5C



Agree

Proposal 6



Agree

Proposal 7



Agree

Any other feedback:

#2241

Dogs should be classed as menacing by behaviour not by breed. Breed specific laws have beenproven as ineffectual overseas. It causes unnecessary bias against dogs for no reason other thanhow they look. It is completely unfounded and reactionary with no solid evidence to back it up.

Auckland Council

#2241

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/it46yqWNpSp5sTNR_reweQ


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dogs feedback_ID#Date: Wednesday, 10 April 2019 3:58:20 PM



Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Disagree

Proposal 2



Agree

#2287

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/t6MxIRzImd9UeymWO-7Cwgmailto:[email protected]:[email protected]


Proposal 3



Agree

Proposal 4





Agree


Start time:

Finish time

DOG POLICY BYLAW 2019 REGIONAL SUBMISSIONS VOLUME 1 … · 2019. 6. 11. · 2108 Mia Jullig...

Documents

Transcript of DOG POLICY BYLAW 2019 REGIONAL SUBMISSIONS VOLUME 1 … · 2019. 6. 11. · 2108 Mia Jullig...