I attended a public meeting tonight to discuss proposals for two leash-free dog parks in our area, one slated for Humber Bay Park and the other slated for the R.L. Clark filtration plant land adjacent to Col. Sam Smith Park. It looks to me that The City is trying very hard to accommodate all the interests here. They recognize an increase in the number of dogs and want to accommodate the dogs and their owners. They also recognize sensitivities around land use in our parks, wilderness areas, and the needs of other users.
These two proposals have been put forward for the City to consider and it looks like both are going to become reality. A third proposal for a more wilderness type area is under consideration for Marie Curtis Park.
Approximately 50 people attended the meeting. I was immediately disappointed that of all the dog owners I know in the area, I recognized very few at the meeting. Where were all the usual suspects? The City people gave a short presentation, outlining the proposals and then opened the floor for questions and comments from the crowd.
The parks will prohibit pit bulls, female dogs in heat, uncastrated male dogs, and dogs that have a muzzle order imposed upon them by the City. They will be open 6:00 a.m. – midnight.
There is no plan for lighting or fencing at R.L. Clark, and the leash-free site is for a small portion of the filtration plant land. Still, it will be a legal place where we can run our dogs and have them play. I wish the dog site was further west, on top of the hill, because there are few mosquitoes up there in the summer. A number of people at the meeting spoke in favour of fencing, including me. If we’re going to separate out a dog area, let’s set it up so that the dogs can play safely in a broad but confined space. I often take Memphis to other fenced dog parks and they work very well.
The Humber Bay site is right on the water, but the deal will be that dogs are restricted from the water. As many people said at the meeting, that just makes no sense and will only promote people contravening the by-law. The City people said restricting the dogs from the water was due to safety reasons, but nobody was buying into that. The City needs to rethink this.
Overall, I think the City is approaching the leash-free park proposals very well. I’m looking forward to having one down the street from Anchovy World Headquarters.
27th Street 
Unfortunately I was not able to attend the meeting on the off leash area (I do have a dog). My concern is about fencing in the area. Although I am not opposed to this, I am one of the many people who cross this field from 23 Street and the area to catch the bus at the loop, go to school, etc. Will there be gates so that this does not stop us from these activities? I don’t see the need for a fence if this is going to be a problem for the people who live in the area.
I’m not clear on exactly how far south the leash-free area runs. It could be that it starts north of the area where people cross.
I don’t want a dog park that will be a problem to residents either. I think the goal is to keep all interests as happy as possible with this initiative.
Thanks for your comment Chris.
I hope this works out for you all.
I feel a fence is imperative. Perhaps with a schedule where the dog walking access has hours and a gate. That way it could be a huge fenced area…and then available to everyone on non-dogwalking hours.
I hope you get a chance to see Robin Williams new stand up. He has an hilarious bit about coyotes.
What are non-dog-walking hours? The City is making arbitrary hours for the area to be open…6:00 am to midnight. The good thing about the spot is that it is disused by the general public. Few people go there. It would be good to have it bigger, but I would prefer a smaller leash-free area without severe hours limitations over a bigger area with shorter hours.
Around here, there is mad debate flying over a proposed fee to use dog parks. I understand that many municipalities do have dog park fees. Do they charge for use in Toronto?
No, but in some areas there are volunteer organizations that ask you to voluntarily become a member and kick in $10/year. These people do a lot of work to make the dog parks really nice.
Its great that your city is doing this. Not only does it provide a safe environment for dogs – it provides people who take kids to parks their area where kids (or the adults) won’t be getting poo all over them. I got so angry while walking in Wyoming – beautiful paths and parks, but piles and piles of dog poo, flies – right on the paths which is hard to get out of the deeply grooved soles of walking shoes. Not quite sure why folks didn’t take their poop a scoops and plastic bags on their walks. I think I will write a letter to the editor and suggest they create some dog parks, or at least section off areas for dogs to have their freedom to run and play and socialize. I love to watch Dog Whisperer on TV and it is important for dogs to have their “socialization” times and the dog parks would provide this for them Dogs are banned from our beaches down here – I don’t think we even have one area where a dog can run and play in the water – that is sad!
Don’t worry, when the time comes the parks will be properly fenced with lots of signage. Remember that in fact it is the insurance companies which secretly control the country. These are the folks who bring you speed limits, seatbelt laws, and the need to replace your furnace oil tank every 20 years even though an oil tank lasts 70 years. A fenced and signed area will pretty much remove much of the liability risks from the city and the insurance companies will be able to pad the coffers charging extra for insuring the dog park even though there would be virtually no risk to them.
Dog parks are great and you will be fortunate indeed if new ones come to pass. Sadly we dont have legal ones where I live but we do have several “turn a blind eye” areas that include Provincial Parks. The biggest issue with the semi-illegal ones is that even in the off season when parks are officially closed and the dogs take over there are lots of walkers and joggers who dont have dogs, dont like dogs, and complain to someone every time a dog comes near them. Fencing and signing an area neatly gets around that issue and prevents a pile of lawsuits. It would be the insurance folks who would be behind keeping the dogs out of the water and there is a good chance that this rule would have lots of nasty warning signs but not much in the way of enforcement.