FAQs
Centrally located near residential areas to allow for walking;
Located away from high traffic main roads or fenced on main road boundary;
Located away from environmentally sensitive habitat and vegetation
Sufficient cleared area to allow for ball activities;
Availability of parking; and
Small enough to allow for bins, bags and signage at entry points.
improved signage;
additional bins and poo bag dispensers;
increased Ranger presence to ensure compliance under the Dog Act;
zero tolerance approach for any one failing to clean up after their dog; and
use of alternative area in Gloucester Park (likely area immediately south of Tennis club) during winter months when surface restoration required.
Higher risk of injury or collision with other path users especially bicycles;
Paths not accessible to bicycles are often close to environmentally sensitive areas:
Long length and multiple points of entry can make the provision of bin and bag facilities difficult.
Areas that were identified for future review in previous Dog Exercise Area reports and resolutions; or
The transfer of reserve and public open space in newly developing residential areas.
“To allow for community feedback on the impacts and effectiveness of the trial (including suggested improvements and modifications) which will be gathered as part of the major DEA review consultation in 2022;
To assess the impact on Shire ranger resources during the trial period, which also coincides with peak Bushfire Act compliance and illegal camping peak compliance period and determine what further resources may be required if the trial is extended; to effectively patrol and enforce the area, Ranger presence on a regular and consistent basis is paramount. This would consist of two-three attendances per day. For a Ranger to walk the entire beach area, enforcing any breach in legislation would consist of at least one hour each time, therefore, resourcing would require six hours per day, plus one hour for administration. Therefore, additional staff would be required to carry out further strategic foot patrols and for efficiency, visible presence and safety of Rangers, a marked vehicle would be essential. A hybrid vehicle would be sufficient.
To allow officers to further investigate strategies and improvements for the protection of beach-nesting birds to ensure that the most effective methods are being implemented and that no unnecessary restrictions on beach users are in place; and
To allow for collection of evidence of increased breeding/fledging success or decreased reports of disturbance from dogs, noting the limited timeframe of the trial and external factors that may affect breeding success.”
Hooded Plovers are surveyed along the Leeuwin Naturaliste coastline by DBCA and Birdlife volunteers with a focus on breeding season and shoulder periods.
Hooded Plover breeding season is recognised from September to February, though nesting has been observed as early as July. This season volunteers recorded Hooded Plovers between Gas bay and Prevelly over the spring and summer period (July 2021 – Feb 2022) on 12 occasions.
No breeding was reported along this section this season, although in previous years the Hoodies at Grunters point/Gas Bay have been the most persistent and reliable breeding pair of the Capes region, starting as early as September.
This is the first year since the 2013/2014 season that nesting was not observed at this location. This does not necessarily mean no breeding attempts took place, just that they were not captured by our volunteers as Hoodies are difficult to monitor and can be very secretive, and volunteers are often not able to monitor on a weekly basis. Breeding was observed at both at the Margaret River Mouth and Boodjidup beach.
Volunteer observations for the Gnarabup area note that dogs were often seen on the beach offlead, both prior to and after the seasonal closure. It is likely that the prohibition of dogs in the Gas Bay/Grunters area was enforced too late to be able to determine much of a positive impact on Hoodies this season, not coming into effect until mid -December, which should be the peak of the Hoodie breeding season.
Though it appears we may have less nesting attempts recorded across the region this season there may have been other factors (extended summer heat, increased beach visitor numbers) influencing Hoodie nesting success.
One year of wildlife data is not indicative of a trend so we would recommend repeating the trial, ideally over 5 years, to be able to determine with any confidence that a trend (positive or negative) is occurring.
Why have so many new Dog Exercise Areas (DEAs) been recommended?
Portions of four parks, which have previously been dog on lead areas are being proposed as DEAs:
Community consultation in 2022 showed a very high demand for additional dog exercise areas from Witchcliffe to Cowaramup. Having accessible dog exercise areas is one way to ensure dog owners are diverted away from environmentally sensitive areas and prohibited areas. Following the initial community consultation, five new possible DEA areas in Margaret River and Cowaramup were identified. The Shire consulted directly with neighbouring property owners with only one of the five proposals (Merlot Place) receiving significant opposition. All the new DEAs have been located in higher density residential growth areas, with all proposed DEAs being at least 500m from the next nearest DEA.
Why are Nippers and Cowaramup Ovals being proposed to continue as DEAs in light of conflicts with organised sports?
There are a number of elements that make a good dog exercise area, these include:
It is almost impossible to find parks and reserves that meet all of the above criteria, and those that meet most of the above criteria are generally in high demand by the public for other purposes such as sports, recreation and children’s play areas. This means that areas best suited for dog exercise areas will often need to be shared with other users.
While there was some opposition from sporting group stakeholders to the use of Nippers and Cowaramup oval as dog exercise areas the majority of respondents were strongly in favour of retaining Nippers as a DEA. For this reason it has been recommended that both Nippers and Cowaramup ovals be retained as DEAs subject to the implementation of a number of measures, such as:
Oval DEA users need to be aware that if there are a significant number of verified complaints within the next six months (more than one a fortnight) either oval will be brought back to Council with a recommendation for cancellation.
Why are there no new DEAs being proposed on paths and trails despite a high demand?
While there was a high demand for DEAs on paths and trails, they are often not suitable for a number of reasons including:
Why have no new DEAs been recommended in Witchcliffe despite there being a demand?
There was significant demand in the community consultation for more DEA in Witchcliffe, including a petition for Redgate or nearby coastline to be DEA. At the time this review was conducted, there was no cleared public open space available as DEA. While large portions of subdivisional areas throughout Witchcliffe have been marked as public open space they are still in private ownership and the Dog Act requires the land to be under the management of the Shire before it can be declared DEA. A lot of the land marked as public open space will be vested in the Shire by early 2023 at which time the Shire will seek to have some designated as DEA.
The coast from Boodjidup Beach to Cape Leeuwin is National Park under the management of the Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions (DBCA) and prohibited to all non-native animals under the Conservation and Land Management Act and Regulations. The Shire is not able to declare any DEAs in land under the control of DBCA and given the high biodiversity values in that coast line it would be unlikely that DBCA would ever support any portion of it being changed as a dog permitted area.
Why was there no specific questions about Augusta and what is happening with Flinders?
The area specific questions in the ‘Let’s Talk About Dogs’ online survey were based on either:
The report did allow for general comments to be made by respondents living in any area. Seven public submissions were received in relation to Augusta, four of which related to the lack of an Augusta specific question and four relating to Flinders, two relating to poor owner behaviour and enforcement; and one relating to Jays beach and bird nesting (some respondents commented on multiple issues).
Officers proposed an amendment to the Albany Terrace/Flinders bay DEA based on this community feedback, which resulted in a reduction of the existing DEA and a new prohibited area immediately north of the Flinders Caravan Park. When the changes were published in a local newspaper, Shire Website and at Shire Offices as part of the Statutory local public notice a number of nearby residents contacted the Shire querying why they were not directly consulted in relation to the proposed changes.
As a result, these proposals in relation to Albany Terrace/Flinders bay are no longer being put to Council as places to be specified under the Dog Act and it is instead being recommended that the next interim review (following the transfer of POS in Witchcliffe) include recommendations on dog management and specified dog areas in Flinders Bay/Albany Terrace and the greater Augusta locality (including Molloy) following consultation with surrounding residents and the local community.
While there is a statutory requirement to give local public notice of new or amended DEA or DPA there is no requirement to give local public notice of areas that are being retained as is. Therefore there is nothing to stop Council from retaining a place as is, even if local public notice was given of a proposed DPA or amendment to a DEA in the same place.
Why won’t the Shire provide more dog poo bags and bins?
The Shire will be implementing increased numbers of dog poo bags and bins near DEA’s in response to the community consultation feedback. It is the responsibility of dog walkers to ensure they have provisions to clean up after their dog. Dog droppings in public areas are a source of annoyance and a health risk to others. Failing to clean up and adequately dispose of your dog waste is an offence. The Shire provides disposable dog poo bags as a courtesy in many public open spaces where dogs are permitted.
What fencing and facilities will be provided?
$50,000 was allocated to fencing and DEA facilities in the 2022/23 Annual Budget. It is proposed to fence the DEA on Brookfield Ave as a priority given its smaller size and proximity to the main thoroughfare in Brookfield.
There was significant demand for fencing at Hillier DEA, but this will be postponed until further confirmation is received on the design implication of the proposed disability care facility on Tingle Ave. The remaining budget will be spent based on proximity to major roads, size and playground use. Farm House Park and Hillier DEA are at the moment seen as the next highest priorities for fencing after Brookfield Ave DEA.
It should be noted that fencing is not a means a controlling unsupervised dogs or dogs without recall skills. Dogs must be under effective control at all times within a DEA and dogs that do not have sufficient recall skill should not be permitted off lead. It is also not feasible to fence all DEA that are adjacent to roads or to fence all playgrounds adjoining DEAs. In some cases clear delineation between DEA and playgrounds can be an effective mechanism to help owners keep their dog out of playgrounds. Such a delineation is being trialled in the new Riflebutts play area.
Why does the Shire put dog exercise areas so close to houses?
Parks and public open spaces tend to be placed close to residential areas so that people who live in the area can use them for recreation. All the proposed new DEAs have been located in higher-density residential growth areas, with all proposed DEAs being at least 500m from the next nearest DEA.
Why can’t my dog come with me wherever I go?
Dogs must be kept on a leash and under control in all public places that are not designated DEA’s or Dog Prohibited Areas. A dog must be accompanied by a person capable of always controlling the dog(s).
What was the outcome of the seasonal trial of a Prohibited Area for Hooded Plovers at Gnarabup?
When the trial prohibited area was specified by Council in December 2021, the trial was proposed to have the following objectives:
In relation to the impact on Ranger resources, there were a number of competing priorities for Rangers last summer, with illegal camping and Bushfire Act compliance taking up the majority of Ranger time and resources. This summer animal management has been identified as a key initiative for Rangers and subject to emergency responses will be the Rangers first priority. Rangers will have additional resources allocated for peak season with two compliance support officers being employed, allowing for a higher volume of patrols.
As for the effectiveness of protection strategies, rangers patrolled the area as frequently as resources permitted, averaging twice daily, with approximately 72 logged attendances over the trail period. Rangers issued four warning notices to dog owners that were not familiar with the seasonal restrictions. There were no repeat offenders and no infringements issued. There were no complaints received during the trial prohibited period, although following the completion of the trial period a number of local residents presented Shire officers with a log of non-compliance during the trial period (Attachment 6), showing much higher non-compliance than what was witnessed by Shire Rangers. While Rangers were not called to attend or verify any of the non-compliant activity there was photographic evidence supporting most of the logged activity. On one occasion all signage was removed from the Dog Prohibited Area, however this was replaced with more securely attached signage. Overall, Rangers reported that dog owners were compliant with the restrictions implemented for the seasonal trail.
In relation to the collection of evidence of increased breeding success. Feedback was sought from DBCA in relation to data they had collected over the trial period, with DBCA providing the following information to the Shire:
Why is the Gas Bay and Grunters Area being recommended as a Dog Prohibited Area?
The impacts of dogs on Hooded Plovers during their nesting season (October to February) was comprehensively addressed in the officer discussion section of the 2021 Interim Review report to Council, to provide justification for a seasonal prohibition.
The Gnarabup back beach to Gas Bay stretch is important not just to Hooded Plovers but other beach nesting and foraging birds including Red Cap Plovers, Sanderlings, and Pied and Sooty Oystercatchers. Dogs can directly prey upon adults, young and chicks but more commonly cause disruption to feeding and breeding. They key issue is that birds use significant energy and resources avoiding people and dogs, including distraction techniques such as broken wing displays.
What evidence is there that shorebirds rely on Gnarabup and Prevelly beaches? And that dogs have any impact on them?
The Gnarabup-Prevelly coastal stretch is listed as Nationally Significant for Sanderlings in the National Directory of Important Migratory Shorebird Habitat. Sanderlings migrate to northern Siberia each winter to breed year and require adequate undisturbed time over autumn, summer and spring to store sufficient energy reserves for the migration. Sanderlings are a protected species under the Federal l Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. The Federal Department of Climate Change, Energy, Water and the Environment, have recently taken a strong interest in the Shire’s action to protect Sanderling habitat, in the context of their assessment of the Gnarabup tourism proposal.
While the seasonal prohibition was trialled in the 2021-22, year-round prohibition will further increase protection for Hooded Plover nests, particularly at the beginning of autumn and in Spring, and provide significant benefits for those species that are foraging year-round including the Sanderling.
Scientific studies have shown (see for example and other references Maguire et al 2018 ‘Only the Strictest Rules Apply: Investigating Regulation Compliance of Beaches to Minimize Invasive Dog Impacts on Threatened Shorebird Populations’;) that changing from seasonal restrictions to year round prohibition has been demonstrated to have significantly higher compliance rates and are considered to be most effective at protecting shorebirds.
It should be noted that restricting dog access is not the only management action the Shire is taking to protect and enhance the value of our beaches to shorebirds with additional programs including community education, seasonal signage, fencing, and rehabilitation also being implemented.
It is recommended that the full prohibition be allowed for at least four years, with more proactive enforcement and education to see if any increase in bird number and breeding success can be measured. If after this period, if owners have complied with the prohibition but there is still no measurable increase in bird number or breeding success then Council may wish to revisit the prohibition.
Why are you proposing changing Gas Bay and Grunters from a seasonal to a year-round Dog Prohibited Area?
While the seasonal prohibition was trialed in 2021-22, year-round prohibition will further increase protection for Hooded Plover nests, particularly at the beginning of autumn and in Spring, and provide significant benefits for those species that are foraging year-round including the Sanderling.
Changing from seasonal restrictions to prohibition has been demonstrated to have significantly higher compliance rates from detailed studies collected be Birdlife Australia in coastal Victoria and year round prohibition is considered to be most effective at protecting shorebirds. Long-term conservation programs for beach-nesting birds, have previously focused on achieving coexistence between recreation and wildlife, i.e. dogs must be seasonally restricted, or leashed when using beaches when the birds breed. The observed low compliance with these regulations across multiple studies however suggests this is an ineffective approach. The alternative is to prohibit dog access from these sensitive beaches, however this must be approached carefully and coupled with education to ensure community conflict does not arise. One part of the solution is to ensure adequate provision of alternative off-leash areas to divert users away from environmentally sensitive areas which is partly why four news areas have been proposed.
It should be noted that restricting dog access is not the only management action the Shire is taking to protect and enhance the value of our beaches to shorebirds with additional programs including community education, seasonal signage, fencing, and rehabilitation also being implemented.
Does the Shire provide sufficient beach DEAs?
While the Shire doesn’t have the highest proportion of DEA beach in the state is has a higher proportion of DEA than many other local government districts with coastal settlement beaches.
The Shire has approximately 90km of coastline. The majority of that coastline is either difficult to access and/or National Park, but approximately 9km is considered coastal settlement beach, that being beach within 400m of a residential area. All 8972m of the coastal settlement beach is under Shire management with 1216m located at Gracetown, 4461m located between the Rivermouth and Boodjidup and 3295m located in Augusta.
Of this 8972m and taking into account the recommended changes (16%) is dog permitted on lead beach; 3010m (33%) is DEA and 4543m (50%) is Dog Prohibited beach.
Beach type (location) | Distance in meters |
| Dogs on lead (River mouth to Riflebutts) | 1026 |
| Dog on lead (Gracetown) | 393 |
| DEA (Riflebutts) | 670 |
| DEA (Back Beach) | 300 |
| DEA (Gracetown) | 343 |
| DEA (Albany Terrace Augusta) | 1372 |
| DEA (Flinders Caravan) | 325 |
| Dogs prohibited (White Elephant) | 1072 |
| Dog prohibited (Grunters) | 1393 |
| Dogs prohibited (Gracetown) | 480 |
| Dog Prohibited (Flinders) | 413 |
| Dogs Prohibited (Marina) | 1185 |
| TOTAL | 8972 |
While the Shire doesn’t have the highest proportion of DEA beach in the state it has a higher proportion of DEA than many other local government districts with coastal settlement beaches. Comparison against other local government areas is difficult as most do not provide mapping with measurable distances. However, a rudimentary inspection of other maps indicate, with the exception of the City of Busselton and the City of Bunbury both with approximately 60% DEA, that the Shire would have more coastal settlement beach (and a higher percentage) as DEA dedicated dog than any metropolitan local government. For example the combined local government areas of City of Stirling and City of Joondalup have approximately 20km of coastal settlement beach with less than 1.5km of DEA servicing 350,000 residents.
How often does the Shire review Dog Exercise Areas?
A detailed major review of Dog Exercise Areas for the whole local government area occurs every four years. The next comprehensive review is scheduled for 2026.
The last major review occurred in 2018-19, which involved extensive community engagement and a series of changes being endorsed by Council on 12 September 2018. A 2021 interim (and minor) review arose following a series of place-based issues requiring immediate attention.