Lakritz: What's happening in Bowmont Park is a doggone shame

Article content

If the city ends up reducing the off-leash areas in Bowmont Park, dog owners will have nobody to blame but themselves.

The city is currently soliciting public feedback on its proposals for the Silver Springs park, because of “damage to vegetation and fragmentation of habitat caused by the proliferation of informal trails,” and “river bank/riparian erosion due to flooding and foot/dog traffic,” according to the city’s website.

No surprises there, unfortunately. Visit this park any day and you will see dogs running off-leash in on-leash areas, including along the pathways, past signs that clearly state dogs must be on leash. You will see people and their dogs scrambling up and down those aforementioned informal trails, which are ugly scars cutting through trampled, damaged vegetation.

You will see plastic bags of poop tossed into the bushes — and for this, the city is partly to blame, because garbage containers are a rare commodity in the park. You will see dogs cavorting on the riverbank with their owners, churning it into a muddy, barren mess.

Actually, calling this place a park is too tame of a description. Bowmont is a gem, an oasis of wilderness right in the middle of a suburban neighbourhood, and it’s sad to see this gem tarnished.

At a recent open house at the Silver Springs Community Centre, the CBC reported that local resident and dog owner Anita Frederiksen said: “I’m concerned about the loss of some parts of the off-leash area … Dogs are crazy happy there.”

She can blame irresponsible dog owners for that. As is typical at off-leash parks around the city, the irresponsible ones ruin it for the rest, and their actions result in the inevitable restrictions the city puts in place. While dogs may be “crazy happy there,” preserving Bowmont Park’s environment comes first.

Here’s how the city describes the park: “One of the city’s most significant Natural Environment Parks. The 165-hectare park with its unique mix of native prairie and riverine cottonwood forest is unlike any other park in the city, one of our largest natural areas and a vital source of habitat for wildlife.”

Further, a “Natural Environment Park is predominantly natural in character and is set aside for the protection of natural habitats. Recreational use is encouraged but must be done in a manner that protects the natural integrity of the park.” Too bad that’s not happening.

I stopped by there the other day with my own dog. (Just because I think a dog’s happiness comes second to park preservation doesn’t mean I don’t like dogs. A certain border collie has a huge hold on my heart.) I asked some park users what they thought of the city’s plans.

“People think they are entitled to do whatever they like,” said a woman named Roxanne, who did not give her last name, and who was accompanied by a black and white shih tzu. “I don’t let my dog off leash because I worry the coyotes will get her; she’s so small. But I don’t see why people can’t enjoy the beauty of this place without letting their dogs churn up the riverbank. It’s nothing but muck down there.”

“Maybe the city should just put a big fence around the whole park. Look, but do not enter. My taxes pay for this place and it’s here for me to enjoy in my own way,” said Amy Marshall, who was jogging with her boyfriend and their golden retriever. “Otherwise, maybe the city should just tear it down and put up condos or something.”

“I don’t think dogs do too much harm,” said retiree Ken Lewis, who walks in the park a couple of times a week, but has no dog. “The park’s big. It’ll survive.”

So opinions ran the gamut from concern for the environment, to a sense of entitlement, and a laissez-faire apathy. Clearly, the city is not barking up the wrong tree in wanting to limit Bowmont’s off-leash areas. Enforcement of same wouldn’t be a bad idea, either.

Naomi Lakritz is a Herald columnist.