Surrey needs to reassess its existing off-leash dog areas
A dive into the pros and cons of expanding these city canine community spaces
The City of Surrey currently has 19 off-leash dog areas. (Pexels/Matthias Zomer)
The City of Surrey recently collected feedback from the community on updating the strategy regarding off-leash dog areas for the next 10 years. Surrey currently has 19 off-leash areas and 200 active parks, according to the city’s website.
There are many advantages to having more off-leash areas in the city. They allow dogs to run freely, which is important for their physical well-being, and provide an opportunity for them to mingle with other dogs, which can help them understand cues to conduct themselves at home and improve their overall well-being, according to District Dogs.
Off-leash parks also serve as social hubs for dog owners, establishing a sense of community by providing opportunities for people to connect. These designated areas help limit the number of dogs roaming loose in non-designated areas, lowering the chance of accidents, injuries, or disputes between dogs and other park users.
On the flipside, there are also some downsides to off-leash dog areas. Establishing and maintaining these spaces requires funding and resources. Fencing, garbage disposal, and signs may all incur expenditures.
There is also the possibility of disputes arising. Not all dog owners are responsible, and off-leash areas can occasionally result in aggression between dogs and arguments between dog owners and other park visitors. Disobedient behaviour, unpicked dog waste, and noise are all potential issues.
Given the advantages and downsides, deciding whether Surrey needs more off-leash areas is tricky. If Surrey were to establish more off-leash areas, there would definitely be some benefits.
The city’s population is growing rapidly and is expected to top one million by the mid-2040s, Peace Arch News reported. As the population expands, so will the number of pet owners. More off-leash locations would meet this growing need, preventing current sites from becoming congested.
There is also the topic of differing neighbourhoods in Surrey with diverse needs. Extending off-leash spaces to more underprivileged regions of the city gives all citizens equal access. Increasing the amount of off-leash areas can also help avoid over-usage and maintain quality.
If Surrey decided to not establish more off-leash areas, then they would be able to focus more on quality instead of quantity, working to make the current spaces safer and more pleasurable for users. Money and resources, in this case, may be better spent on other community needs, such as improving public safety, renovating playgrounds, or establishing additional green areas for the general public.
Having more off-leash areas may also raise the risk of disputes, while maintaining the current number of areas may help mitigate such tensions.
Given the stated, my personal preference is for Surrey to thoroughly assess the present use and quality of existing off-leash sites. If these locations are routinely congested or in poor condition, then there is a need for additional off-leash areas. However, if the present facilities are adequate but require expansion, prioritizing quality over quantity may be the smarter decision.
Overall, the decision to increase off-leash spaces in Surrey should be founded on extensive community engagement, which the city seems to be doing through its feedback collection, planning, and a balanced approach to resource distribution.
Whether Surrey ends up adding new off-leash areas or improving existing ones, the objective should be to provide a safe, fun, and sustainable environment for both dogs and their owners.
