|
|
Comments from individual dog-walkers
|
I have been walking my dogs on the Peninsula mountains since I settled in Cape Town in 1977
The pleasure I receive in walking with my dogs is a hundredfold that of a walk elsewhere without them, consequently I seldom walk in the mountains to the East With the regrettable increase in attacks on hikers in recent years, I NEED to have my dogs with me, as opposed to simply wanting them with me. They may not be able to defend me, but they can certainly warn me - and suitably warned, the dogs and I together may be able to fend off muggers. (I always walk with a serious pepper-spray and a tazer) I have three dogs, one large, one small and one short. If we are only allowed 2 dogs/owner how do I decide which to leave behind? Three dogs can protect me better than one or two. It has been my experience that regular dog-walkers are environmentally aware and considerate where incidental walkers often are not. I feel that urgent action needs to be taken to provide poo-bins and boxes for plastic bags at all starts to hikes. The provision of conspicuous bins, together with suitably worded notices, will encourage dog owners to clean up after their dogs. I also feel that equally urgent action needs to be taken to encourage the public at large to behave and to clean up after themselves and their children. Litter is left by humans, not dogs. Faeces-soiled tissues/paper and diarrhoea-filled nappies are left in the pathways and water-courses by humans not dogs. I come across these constantly in Newlands Forest!! Children running amok amongst vegetation causes far more harm than the soft pads of a dogs paws! Dogs don't feel the urge to scrawl their names on trees, rocks, boardwalks and picnic-bandstands such as the one at the foot of Newlands Ravine. It is humans you need to keep out of Remote Wilderness areas far more than dogs, as it is environmentally uneducated humans who do the damage, not dogs! If the number of dogs is limited, so too should the number of children as incorrectly supervised children are far more destructive.
Pam Newby I wish to register my STRONG disapproval of the banning of dogs from the so-called "remote wilderness zones"(section 4.1.3): the presence of dogs can in no conceivable way detract from the experience of walking within earshot of the city sounds (on Devil's Peak you are always aware of the city - but perhaps the management who thought up this rule have not been on top of Devil's Peak and Karbonkelberg and Grootkop?!). And if you are so "remote" from the city then you need your dog with you for security, as there will definitely NOT be any security provided by TMNP! I would like to see a detailed map - the ones provided are not clear enough - on where exactly the banning of dogs starts in each of these "remote wilderness areas". Can I walk with my dog up the track to the radar station on Karbonkelberg? That area has been targeted by criminals, and would not be safe for a small group without a dog, nor could it be considered "wilderness" as you walk up a road to old buildings. Perhaps the "wilderness" area is only off to the southern side of the mountain? It would be nice to know. Also details of where the proposed forbidden areas start on the Twelve Apostles and Devil's Peak would be useful. Then we could make more meaningful comment. I walk in Silvermine often, and there are two signs that request people to put dogs on leads in the car park and next 100m. These are in very small print near the bottom of a large sign, but at least they are there. We need such signs (but in bigger print) at all car parks, as many dog walkers claim ignorance. And I can't blame them, as there is still no information on the Code of Conduct for Dogwalkers available when you buy a Wild Card - certainly if you buy the full Cape Cluster or All Cluster card. That was the case when I renewed my card in mid-December. Without signage there won't be compliance, and I understand that new signage is unlikely for at least another year. Not good enough.... Dr Corinne Merry I am opposed to the banning of dogs in ANY areas of the TMNP. Where is an updated Environmental Impact Study showing the adverse effect dogs may have on the environment??? The TMNP is an URBAN PARK. Dog walking is an URBAN requirement. Yet SANPark's policies steamroll public opposition in this issue. The Public Participation Process is undemocratic and biased towards an extreme conservationist minority. Put the Dog walkers issue to normal public vote. Scientifically all you need is a verified ID document. The majority of walkers in the areas being closed to dogs, and other areas that require ridiculous petty regulations, are in fact dog owners who wish to walk their dogs freely. Show me stats that prove otherwise. Most people who walk with dogs in the TMNP regard their presence as a major security factor. Walking with a dog is no different from walking without a dog. Why create a category for dog walking? Please do NOT make any more restrictive changes to the already draconian system. Chris Philips. We live in a time where access to "real" experiences is quite limited to us city-dwellers. We lament the fact that our children grow up addicted to TV, electronics and mass-media (and even drugs I suppose!), with all the consequences both physical and psychological that this implies. But this is in part happening because these things are all our children have access to! Owning a dog, caring for a dog, walking a dog: this is something one of the last things that is freely available to all of us who wish to make contact with a "real" experience, teach our children how to care for another living creature, get them out of the house and taking responsibility for their own and their dog's exercise, learning about birth and about death. We need an EMP that acknowledges this need within the community - imposing increased restrictions by identifying only particular areas where dogs are allowed is going to severely hamper people's ability to even entertain owning a dog: and this will be a great loss to our society. I have visited Paris a few times during the last 5 years. Paris is a dog-friendly city in that dogs are allowed in the metro trains, restaurants, parks, etc. But they couple this approach with a very visible campaign "J'aime mon quartier" (I love my neighbourhood) to encourage people to pick up their dogs' faeces after them - and indeed the campaign DOES seem to be working as you see people all the time out with their dogs using plastic bags to clean up. I think if we could do more to get people to think about the impact and encourage them to clean up it would help - I for one grew up with the idea that it is "bio-degradable" so it is OK, until it was explained to me the impact so now I pick up after my dog. Lisa Mitford Allow dogs on Karbonkelberg & Devils Peak There is a problem prohibiting dogs from Karbonkelberg. There are a large group of homeless people living on the wreck at Karbonkelberg and walking through the park daily to work or beg in Hout Bay. I once met up with about 20 of them on the contour path round the back of the mountain. That was a scary experience anyway, but without a dog it would have been much more so. The group appeared weary of my dog and kept far away from me. I would be very insecure about taking my wife walking there without the protection of a dog - as could otherwise easily be overpowered by such a large group. Unless the park is able to move these people out (preferable) I would argue we need dogs for protection if we go there. I therefore request dogs be allowed at least on the road which goes round the side of the mountain towards the wreck. Also, as far I am aware, the park has not managed to make Devils Peak safe from crime so argue the need to have dogs there for protection at least to walk up to the block house etc. Philip Rosenthal I walk regularly in Tokai forest and occasionally in Newlands forest, but I strongly feel that the entire mountain chain was for very many years the responsibility of the Cape Town municipality and large amounts a ratepayers money went into the establishment and upkeep of these areas. Incidentally I used to work for the City council Parks and Forest branch as it was then known and being on the stand-by roster I personally fought many fires in these areas. I feel that Sanparks is a "Johnny cum lately" and that they must take cognizance of the ratepayer's contribution and also the fact that these areas were used for far more than 30 years without the said ratepayers having to obtain permission or pay any entrance fee ( except for Cape Point Nature reserve) and therefore have a right to servitude on these areas. Servitude can only be rescinded by an act of parliament. Has anybody in the negotiations brought up this point ? I would also like to suggest that the many dog clubs be approached for support eg. "Cape province dog club" alone has approx 500 members, this could further strengthen your voice. Noel Greeff I have no objection to keeping mine on leads till past the helipad - in fact, I usually do. But I do hope that they are still allowed some freedom after that. After all, they don't light fires, jump cans and bottles or start fires! (I have 3 dogs - all elderly now (12+ human years) so I hope that all 3 will still be able to walk out their days with me.) A pity to ban them from Devil's Peak. I feel safe when they are with me and there have been a number of muggings in the past in that area. I might add that the new young rangers that I have met on DP have been charming - as have the workers on the paths for which I also congratulate the Park staff. Denise Moody Thank you for all your hard work, it is very much appreciated. I am a little concerned about the dogs being prohibited from the 12 Apostles. I live on the edge of the reserve in Camps Bay and walking the pipe track and other mountain roads is a beautiful and most convenient area to walk our dogs. Of course I also like to be accompanied by them for my personal safety. Is there anything I can do to avert this prohibition, pretty much all my neighbours walk there dogs there? Abby
I strongly support the idea of a dog walking route round the Silvermine dam on the side where there are no picnic sites. Can the old gravel road route not be opened as a path only. It was a very popular walk and should not interfere with other people or the area at large. Let me be frank - I have a "bird" hunting dog - so he is trained to look for guineafowl etc but also loves to chase a seagulls et al - and yes - he will catch a guinea etc if he CAN - but they are always far too wily. Fledglings could be an argument but he has only caught 1 in four years and it was a nest that was very exposed on a beach. However the point is that we have areas set aside for conservation! There are huge tracts of beach and coastal areas inaccessible to or unavailable to dog walkers. My point again: we live in a city - lets be practical about wildlife surviving here as well as they do in the wild - IT IS A CITY! Cities are for PEOPLE not wild animals. That is why we have other vast areas to protect fauna and flora. We could then turn the argument around and demand high rise development in a portion of a national park!! Same logic as TMNP in reverse! Would they accept that? As a family we have been very involved in protecting nature and especially black oystercatchers so my mindset is a conservation one BUT when do we as greenies turn against the radicals and become more right wing? It is surely when sanity does not prevail and I believe TMNP have this one RADICALLY wrong!! Sandy Jeffery I have been threatened with a R500 fine by "The Dog Nazis" at Noordhoek beach, who claim that my dog was harrassing the seagulls in the estuary. As a result i no longer take him there although it is his favourite place to walk. I suspectthat the harrasment is a strategy to discourage people from walking their dogs at Noordhk Beach. Steve Bolnick M.Sc. The sender says she found this message in a bottle on the beach . . . .
Please note that we are wild and free. We were so, long before humans walked the earth and we will be so, long after they have completed their unsustainable living project and rendered the earth unfit for their further habitation.
Send your comments on the EMP draft regulating dog-walking
to add your comments here on this website, copy them to pam@crag.org.za |
| Comment by Friends of the Dog Walkers | the full EMP draft |
| Web Master: Pam Newby (021) 447-2820 or 082-5646257 |