Are all Parks Departments this stupid?

[anthonty_debase]

Forgive me for this rant as it is not specifically photographic but does affect our ability to photograph wildlife in urban parks.

 

<p>

 

Near my home we have a wonderful wetlands park that probably can't be duplicated again due to development on the lake front. It is split in half by a highway. The west half is devleoped with wooden walkways and observation platforms that give the citizens a chance to observe and enjoy the wildlife. The east half is left alone with no public access except for an old service road on the perimeter. Now the parks department wants to build a walkway into the east half. Many of these birds won't go nearer to the walkways than 40-60 feet. That means a birdless swath 80-120 feet wide and at least 400 feet long will result from this new walkway. (OK, the crows and starlings will occupy the space. Anybody care to enter a crow photo in a contest?). Somehow the parks department won't acknowledge this. Of course, the DOG OWNING SCOFFLAWS allow their pets to violate the leash laws and run around the walkways scarring small children and the wildlife. This will undoubtedly continue on the new walkways.

 

<p>

 

Also, the department recently planted a flower garden in the west half of the park even though conservationtists have been lobbying for indigenous plants that will provide more habitat and food for the wildlife. But no, we get expensive to maintain flower gardens the look like hell except for a few weeks every year.

 

<p>

 

There is another larger wetlands park a bit farther from me. The County Parks Department has put a "leashless" dog run there. That does not bother me as I have no problems with pets. But the dog run is right next to the "wetlands preserve". You can guess what happens. The leashless dogs can't read the sign warning them to put on their leash and they dash into the preserve and disrupt bird watchers, hikers, anybody who doesn't want somebody elses pet jumping on them, and, of course, the wildlife. Worse, their SCOFFLAW owners, who presumably can read, often take their leashless dogs into the preserve as though the law doesn't apply to them.

 

<p>

 

Like many urban areas we have thousands of acres of traditional parks for every acre of "natural" parkland. One would think that this would provide the park departments with enough area to "develop", but, NO, they have to mess with the natural areas also. Are all Parks departments this goofy or is it just the ones in my area?

[garry_teeple]

I don't think that all recreation departments are that bad but I do believe that a lot of the people using our parks and wetlands really don't care about their great areas they have to roam around in. We are lucky here in mid Missouri to have an abundance of city parks, wetlands, and conservation areas to explore. I have had my experiences with these people and their pets, lucky enough to save my N90s from a wetland dunking as a dog knocked over my tripod. It seems as the population increases the proportion of these people increase also. I generally try to ignore them and hope they go away but sometimes I also try to reason with them. If that doesn't work I always report them in hopes that someone will take an interest in watching over our public area. This has worked very well here as we have responsible law enforcement that will actually walk the trails, sometimes with their family, and talk to these people and if necessary issue tickets. We all must be continue to protect these sensitive

environments.

[don_baccus]

For starters, I think all urban parks departments that have wildlife habitat areas have dog problems. Dog owners never believe their dogs do any harm. They easily believe their neighbor's dog does immeasurable harm, but their own dog, nah, never! Cat owners are the same but people don't run them in the parks.

 

<p>

 

Dog owners ignore "No Dog" signs just as much as "On Leash Only" signs, so I'm not sure that's the answer though it is one Portland Parks has tried in some areas. The Dog Lobby gets up in arms and packs meetings and whines and cries and blah blah blah every time, though.

 

<p>

 

In one "Dogs On Leash Only" area (run by ODF&W) I routinely get in the face of assholes who ignore it. Usually they're sneaking around with leashes to put on if the enforcement dude arrives. Once I had the pleasure of arguing with two women at high volume for about 15 minutes - they typical "my dog does no harm" bullshit - only to have them turn around with their leashless dogs, march off in a huff about 100 yards, right into the arms of the local State Police Officer. Who wrote them a ticket. I walked by with a big, shit-eating grin on my face and they were, of course, furious.

 

<p>

 

I don't think they ever came back...

 

<p>

 

Regarding walkways, they need screening. Tules and bullrushes get quite high and if the water level and boardwalk are low can be quite effective. Unfortunately, these things are usually built by rec people, not biologists, and the rec types don't know what they're doing.

[markci]

Hmmm...you couldn't be talking about Juanita Bay/Forbes Creek in Kirkland, WA, could you? I certainly have to wonder what kind of idiots are running things in this town. You didn't even mention the new fire station construction. I'm sure that'll have a wonderful environmental impact.

[jeff_hallett]

I know in much of Florida, dogs are not allowed in State parks but are in State recreation areas where the intent is allow the idiots to

run jet skis all over areas where fishing is allowed and picnikers

to trash the wetlands surrounding the tables. Most of them are

young irresponsible tourists who could give a shit less about the

environment or anything else.

The Parks and Rec areas can hire just so many people to police these areas and are lucky to have a degreed biologist on the premises. The

state provides little money or incentives for jobs in the Park system and are generally always understaffed and underbudgeted.

The qualified people either take corporate or university positions

and the rangers who are not dedicated to working their asses off, quit and take higher paying law enforcement jobs with opportunity for

advancement. The Marine Patrol has similar problems as does the

Game & Fish Commission. We photographers should probably be State

deputized to help these folks with the "asshole" problem mentioned

in an earlier post and possibly get some things done and save a few bucks in the process.

[jim_bridges2]

Well... the "State" Park where I regularly shoot is closed for the annual deer slaughter! These deer are almost pets 50 weeks out of the year, but the frist two weeks in December the park allows hunters to come into the park area and blast them (buck's, doe's and yearling's) to smithereens! It's really a very controlled operation, with wire stands, and the hunter's can't MOVE from these stands. They don't want these guy's walking around slaughterin' each other! I guess with no "real" predator's to keep the deer thinned out, this is the best way to control overpopulation, but I still get bowed-up about it! It just seems a shame it has to be done this way.

[george_rhodes]

Anthony,

 

<p>

 

How about a National Wildlife Refuge with a big housing development running all through it and roadways crisscrossing it, so that about 1/5 of the ENDANGERED SPECIES living in the refuge is road-killed annually? You probably think I'm not serious? WRONG! I'm speaking of the KEY DEER refuge on Big Pine Key. I live in Florida, just north of the Keys, so I know what I'm talking about. Luckily, the Key Deer are able to reproduce at about the same rate that they are being slaughtered by automobiles - roughly about 60 fawns per year. You see, in Florida there are those people who become very nervous if a tract of land larger than about an acre is left unpaved. They worry that in the event that a person would want to set foot on the land in the summer months, there would be no concrete structure there in which to have an air conditioner. That person might overheat. There is a huge elderly population down here from up there who worry about this sort of thing, even more than they worry that the 0ne acre tract of land isn't producing the amount of tax revenue that it could if a few apartment buildings were sitting on it. I do love my home state, but I wonder what the future holds.

[altaf]

I love my dog but i never let him run free unless its in a dog area, such as the one in central park where the only people he bothers is other dog owners. I see no problem with bringing my dog to a wildlife area as long as he isnt chasing anything around and is on his leash.

 

<p>

 

if you really want to keep the dogs away from your equipment buy a 100 ultrasonic emitter, the dog wont get within 100 ft of your camera :)

 

<p>

 

This way you can get the dog to stay away, withiout getting into a fight with teh dog owner, we are generally more protective of our dogs than our girlfriends.

 

<p>

 

al

[dan_smith]

For those who let their dogs run loose in our areas of the Western USA, losing the dog permanently is a normal risk. When the dog doesn't come back you never know whether a coyote, a kid with a .22 or another predator of some type nailed it. Happens even in wildlife refuges in the area. Or, a friendly carp fisherman with a hunting bow may launch on your mutt. In wildlife areas, keep the dogs at home or don't be surprised if they disappear.