A significant portion of our nature reserves are extremely popular places for people to exercise their dog and we have a number of dog-friendly reserves that allow them on leads… most dog owners are responsible and respect the rules, but with recurring instances of off-lead walking, not picking up and the resulting disturbance to wildlife and livestock, in our September E-Newsletter, we asked our community to share their thoughts:

Dogs on nature reserves - time for a new approach?

The subject proved extremely popular and emotive; we received over 400 individual emails in total – a record for the ‘have your say’ feature! 

To everybody who took time to contact us, thank you. We always appreciate hearing from you and value your opinions – unfortunately, due to the volume of emails this month, we were unable to send personalised responses to everyone. 

It is important to highlight that this is simply a community discussion piece, intended to engage and spark conversation. It is not a consultation on changing policy, which we do not currently have the resources to do. Regardless, there have been many fascinating and insightful points put across and we hope you find the below summarised outcomes insightful and interesting.

You can learn more about our dogs on reserves policies as well as which of our nature reserves do not permit dogs on our dogs on reserves webpage.

Visit the Dogs on Reserves Webpage

Complete or general ban: 22.8%

“Dogs (other than assistance dogs) have no place at all on nature reserves and there should be a complete ban on all Wildlife Trust BCN reserves.

The issue has become much worse since the surge in dog ownership during the pandemic, and needs to be tackled head-on. I regularly see dogs chasing wildlife, dog excrement is everywhere (especially near access points), and I have lost count of the number of times I have been threatened by dogs behaving aggressively.” 

- Julian H

These respondents expressed a clear preference for dogs to be excluded from nature reserves generally, apart from assistance dogs in some responses.

Typical reasoning included:

• nature reserves should prioritise wildlife rather than recreation;
• dogs can disturb wildlife even while on leads;
• current lead requirements are frequently ignored;
• there are alternative places to exercise dogs;
• a simple prohibition would be clearer than different rules at different sites.

Retain broad access: 2.8%

“As a dog owner I fully support allowing dogs on leads into nature reserves. I agree some owners do not adhere to rules and good practice but also humans, generally, do not all adhere to laws and good practice e.g. littering, driving offences, murder, terrorism but they are not banned in a blanket manner, they are punished when apprehended. Should responsible owners be punished for the faults of a few? By all means apprehend and punish wrong doers, I believe there is a national fine for dog fouling offences.” 

- Joan W

Only a small group clearly opposed further restrictions or favoured broad access, including off-lead access where owners believed their dogs were controlled.
Their main arguments were:

• responsible owners should not be penalised for the behaviour of a minority;
• dog walking provides exercise, companionship and mental-health benefits;
• dog walkers can be nature supporters, members and regular visitors;
• bans might deter visits, memberships and donations;
  irresponsible owners might ignore a ban in any event.

Selective or seasonal dog-free provision: 12.8%

“I think that some reserves should not allow dogs on them, especially that has ground nesting birds. May be some reserve could have areas where dogs are allowed and then other areas where no dogs are allowed.”  

- Brenda S

This group supported exclusions at:

• ecologically sensitive reserves;
• reserves with livestock;
• areas containing ground-nesting birds;
• particular zones within larger reserves;
• breeding or nesting periods;
• sites with persistent non-compliance.

This appears to be the principal compromise between the complete-ban and controlled-access positions. Respondents often suggested a reserve-by-reserve approach rather than a single rule for every site.

Mixed, unclear or enforcement-focused: 33.8%

“I have mixed feelings about this - I have met and chatted with some delightful dog owners who respect the reserves and are equally appalled by the owners who misbehave. I have, however, also encountered threatening and abusive dog owners who somehow believe that “my taxes paid for this” and this gives them the right to let their dogs go completely uncontrolled.

I’m also aware that some reserves have public footpaths running through them which further complicates the matter.” 

- Joy D

This category does not mean that respondents had no opinion. Many were strongly dissatisfied with the present situation but stopped short of selecting one clear argument.

Examples included:

• describing incidents without proposing a specific rule;
• saying that “something must change” but questioning whether a ban was enforceable;
• suggesting education, signage or fines without specifying the underlying access policy;
• acknowledging both the wildlife case for restrictions and the wellbeing case for access;
• indicating reluctant acceptance of a ban if other measures failed.

Leads or close control: 27.7%

“Generally I have no major issues with dogs on nature reserves, I visit Felmersham gravel pits and Summer Leys mainly, always with my dog at Felmersham, as it forms part of my morning and evening walk. I have bullet pointed my thoughts:
1. Well behaved dogs/owners are not an issue.
2. Poorly behaved owners are though.
3. Dogs under close control or on leads are not an issue.
4. Owners not clearing up after their dogs are both disrespectful and just plain lazy, this will upset users, me included. I don't like being tarred with the same brush.
5. I consider myself a responsible dog owner, who has a well behaved dog, even so she is kept on a lead whilst at nature reserves. 
6. Not all nature reserves can be considered the same and therefore any new rules should not be a one size fits all.
7. You recently asked how to connect children with nature,  many families will walk around nature reserves and take their dog with them, banning dogs would dissuade families using them, hence taking the opportunity to connect children with nature.
8. Certain times of the year vulnerable areas for ground nesting birds could be out of bounds, as with other nature reserves. 
9. Education is always the best solution, though I admit some people are beyond this.  The vast majority of responsible dog owners should not be punished for the minority.
10. It is well documented how walking in the countryside helps with peoples mental health and wellbeing, taking your dog for a walk encourages you to get out and enjoy the countryside.”  

- Andrew L

This was the largest single explicit policy category.

These respondents generally felt that dogs could continue to be admitted if:

• they remained on short leads;
• owners stayed on designated paths;
• dogs were kept out of water;
• owners removed all waste;
• rules were backed by enforcement or meaningful consequences.

A recurring distinction was made between short leads and extendable leads. Several respondents considered long or retractable leads insufficient because they still allow dogs to enter vegetation, approach other visitors or create a trip hazard.

Some interesting points made

There were so many thoughtful, nuanced points made from people, here are just a couple of interesting quotes that might impact your own perspective!

“I used to manage a nature reserve where this issue came up on a regular basis…

…one anecdote from the reserve I managed: I had a dog walker, who regularly walked 3 Great Danes, the dogs mostly scared children using the reserve, just due to their sheer size, and my educational officer would complain about the dog walker scaring the school parties she had onsite. I remember making the effort to run across the reserve to have a chat (calmly!) I got to know the individual during a number of times meeting onsite. Eventually we agreed to have a meeting in the office, he confessed he could not control three Great Danes. In the end he agreed to walking just one on a lead at any one time. He later became a warden and even volunteered in the centre and arguably he could get the message across about keeping dogs under control better than anyone else.”

- James S

“I’m a warden at a woodland reserve. Since lockdown it’s been hugely popular with dog walkers. There are very few ground nesting birds there for dogs to disturb, but unpicked dog poo (bagged or otherwise) is plentiful. Research I read in British Wildlife showed that paths where dogs are frequently walked have a higher nutrient load than fertilised farmland. This is the opposite of what’s needed for ground flora to survive.

What I am most bothered about, however, is the toxin load in dog urine and faeces from neonic flea treatments. These chemicals are, as you know, extremely persistent and very effective at killing invertebrates. Prof Dave Goulson’s book Silent Earth explains the full horror very well. Subsequent news stories back him up.

It seems insane to undertake conservation work to improve habitat for (say) ground beetles or longhorns, while also loading up their environment with an ever-rising concentration of insect nerve toxins. So, I am quite keen on no dogs in the wood at all. And I am a dog owner.

Another issue which I know many reserves have is extreme wet. People find new paths to avoid the worst puddles and, if said path crosses an area with rare plants in, the plants are finished. I have a colony of sanicle which is down to three plants (from 15 or 20 in 2021). This is obviously in direct conflict with the desire to make nature available for people on our reserves. After discussing this with the new reserves manager I will build a barrier this autumn, and hope it doesn’t get kicked down too often.

Achieving a no-dogs policy is a hell of a communication challenge. At the moment the sign doesn’t even say 'dogs on leads’ (although it will soon) or 'pick your dog’s poo up'. Places to walk dogs are disappearing all over the place in my area, so there are very few decent spots left, and rightly or wrongly people regard the wood as theirs to take their dogs to.”

- Rupert P