Sometimes the evidence changes my mind

I’ve had some good conversations with members of CRD DOGG Society about the People, Pets and Parks Plan, and I was clear with them that I think the plan needs some tweaking.

This is also an issue where my pragmatism comes in.

I used to walk my dogs off leash regularly. After becoming a mother, I also found myself walking three dogs while pushing little children in a stroller, and my perspective started to change.

At the same time, my involvement in fish, wildlife and habitat conservation has taught me more about wildlife disturbance, recreational pressure and the effect dogs can have on sensitive habitat. I personally keep my dogs leashed now because, in many environments, I believe it is the responsible thing for me to do.

I don’t want to make public-policy decisions based on emotion, pressure or whichever group is speaking the loudest. I want to understand the problem, look at the available evidence and science, listen to the people affected, understand the costs and trade-offs, and then decide.

Good decision-making should leave room for that. We shouldn't become so attached to a position that better information can no longer change it.

Conservation has to matter

This is particularly important in Saanich. We live within the Coastal Douglas-fir zone. The Coastal Douglas-fir Conservation Partnership identifies many ecosystems within this zone as globally rare and at risk, and Garry oak ecosystems are among Canada’s most endangered. Only a small fraction of original Garry oak landscapes remains intact.

The Province of British Columbia has also identified Coastal Douglas-fir ecosystems as a conservation priority and indicate that most of

these are also considered globally imperilled ecosystems. When we are talking about recreation in places like PKOLS (Mount Douglas Park), conservation therefore cannot be an afterthought.

But protecting sensitive habitat does not mean dogs should have nowhere to run. It means we need better options.

I believe Saanich should provide one or more proper large-sized dedicated off-leash dog parks. I would be interested in examining an appropriate area around Layritz, looking at a multi-use model like Cy Hampson Park in North Saanich, or working regionally

with the CRD to identify suitable land at places such as Elk/Beaver Lake Regional Park, nearby the old farming parcels adjacent to Jennings Lane. Another option is to consider part of the Royal Oak Golf Course grounds, which was recently acquired by the CRD.

The answer may not be more off-leash access at PKOLS (Mount Douglas Park). It may be creating better opportunities somewhere else.

My position on the PKOLS (Mount Douglas Park) fencing

I have also been vocal about the fencing installed at this park.

I don't like its appearance. Aesthetically, I would have preferred split rail, but I understand that split rail would have been considerably more expensive to construct and maintain and may not have provided the same ecological protection.

I would have preferred exploring agricultural style T-posts with appropriate wire fencing. It could accomplish the conservation objective at a lower cost and, in my opinion, blend more naturally into the landscape.

But this is where pragmatism matters: I would not tear out fencing taxpayers have already paid for simply because I would have chosen something different.

The money has been spent. Full fencing has been approved by Council and I believe needs to happen. Removing functional fencing, purchasing new materials and absorbing the loss on what was already installed would mean taxpayers effectively paying twice.

Maintain it. Use it for its useful life. When sections eventually become damaged beyond reasonable repair, reconsider the design and materials at that time.

Where I disagreed was with continuing the unfinished section using the same style simply for consistency. I would have preferred pausing before spending more money and asking whether agricultural-style fencing could accomplish the same conservation objective for less.

Pausing spending to postpone installation of the remaining portion of the fence would require a temporary on-leash requirement for the remainder of the trail. 

That's an important distinction: Don't waste what taxpayers have already paid for, but don't let a previous decision automatically dictate the next one.

What I suggested to CRD DOGG Society

My conversation with CRD DOGG Society wasn't only about what I thought Saanich should change. I also challenged them to think about what they could do differently. One idea I specifically raised was building what I would call social licence within the community.

I don't mean a formal licence. I mean earning trust and credibility by demonstrating that an organization contributes positively to the parks and communities it advocates within.

Start by growing the membership across the CRD. A larger membership creates a stronger collective voice, but it can also create fundraising capacity through memberships, donations and community fundraising.

Then create a strategic plan and put some of that money back into the community.

Start small. Sponsor filling the dog-waste bags receptacles at somewhere like PKOLS (Mount Douglas Park). Help fund educational signage and community awareness. Organize a park clean-up. Partner with a stewardship organization on habitat restoration. Contribute toward fencing protecting a sensitive area.

Then measure the results.

CRD DOGG Society could also say: Here is what our members contributed. Here is the project we delivered. And here is the difference it made.

That is how an advocacy organization builds credibility and social licence.

I was genuinely encouraged to see CRD DOGG Society launch a membership drive just four days after our conversation. Growing the organization was one of the ideas we had discussed, and I think it is a positive step.

Successful pilot projects in Saanich or neighbouring CRD municipalities would give CRD DOGG Society something tangible to bring back to elected officials when advocating for future dog recreation opportunities. Advocacy should demonstrate not only need, but responsibility.

Dog advocates and conservationists need to work together

I also think there is an opportunity here for a much healthier relationship between dog advocates, park stewards and conservation

organizations. There is far more to gain through respectful collaboration than ongoing conflict.

Imagine CRD DOGG Society approaching a stewardship organization and saying: We want dog owners to continue enjoying these spaces, but we also want to help protect them. What could we accomplish together?

That is the kind of conversation I want to see.

Dog owners have legitimate recreational needs. Conservation groups have legitimate concerns supported by ecological science and years of on-the-ground stewardship. Both deserve to be heard.

The question shouldn't be: Which side wins?

It should be:

1. What does the evidence tell us?
2. Which areas genuinely require protection?
3. Where can off-leash recreation responsibly occur? And,
4. What practical solutions allow us to accomplish both?

I want CRD DOGG Society at the table. I also want park stewards, conservation organizations, ecologists and the volunteers who spend countless hours protecting Saanich’s natural areas at that table.

And I expect everyone sitting there to listen to science-based evidence, treat one another respectfully and accept that compromise will sometimes be necessary.

We can do both

Conservation doesn't mean nobody gets to use nature. It means we use and enjoy natural resources while also taking responsibility for maintaining and restoring them so future generations can enjoy them too.

There are places where off-leash recreation makes sense. There are also places where protecting an exceptionally rare ecosystem needs to come first.

Dogs shouldn't automatically take priority over sensitive habitat. But conservation shouldn't become an excuse for failing to provide dog owners with reasonable alternatives either. Those alternatives may not always be at PKOLS. They may be somewhere else in Saanich, or developed through regional partnerships.

Good policy isn't about choosing a team. It's about looking at the evidence, understanding the consequences, spending public money responsibly and finding the most practical path forward.

I believe we can protect what makes Saanich special while creating better spaces for people and their dogs.

Vote for an approachable, reasonable Councillor. Please consider voting for Alli Deelstra.