SR-100-002-01 (7)
1~
FEB 2 8 2006
Council meeting: February 28,2006
Santa Monica, CA
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: City Staff
SUBJECT: Resolution in Support of Legislation Such as AB 359, Establishing a Pilot
Dog Beach Program and Authorization for a Letter in Support of AB 359 in
support of a Dog Beach Pilot Program at Dockweiler State Beach with
I nclusion of Santa Monica
INTRODUCTION:
On February 14, several people spoke during the public comment period of the Budget
Community Priorities Public Hearing in support of the establishment of a dog beach in
Santa Monica. As a result of this public testimony, Council directed staff to prepare a
letter in support of AB 359, state legislation establishing a pilot dog beach program at
Dockweiler State Beach, and to report back on the status of establishing a dog beach in
Santa Monica. This report responds to that direction by presenting to Council for
adoption a resolution supporting legislation such as AB 359 with a request to include an
amendment to establish a pilot dog beach program in Santa Monica.
BACKGROUND:
At its January 11, 2005 meeting, the City Council directed staff to prepare a pilot dog
beach program in Santa Monica by pursuing County and State authorizations, if
needed, and to return to Council with funding requirements.
16
1
FEB 2 8 20U6
On February 14, 2006, Council requested that staff prepare a report authorizing a letter
in support of AB 359, which establishes a pilot dog beach at Dockweiler State Beach
and to provide Council with an update on the establishment of a dog beach in Santa
Monica.
Staff has pursued the development of an off-leash dog beach in Santa Monica, as
outlined in an Information Item to Council dated May 31, 2005 and included as
Attachment B. To date, the State does not have provisions that would allow the
establishment of an off-leash dog beach in Santa Monica. The proposed operating
agreement with the State for Santa Monica Beach on tonight's agenda reflects this
State position.
DISCUSSION
AS 359
AB 359, as currently drafted, would authorize the Department of Parks and Recreation,
the Coastal Commission, the County and City of Los Angeles, and all other interested
parties to develop a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) to establish, manage, and
evaluate a one-year, off-leash dog beach pilot program at Dockweiler State Beach,
located in Los Angeles County.
The bill provides that all costs associated with developing the MOA and the pilot
program will be borne by private sources and that required funding be available prior to
any costs being incurred. The parties to the MOA would be required to report to the
2
Legislature on the evaluation of the pilot program within 6 months of the conclusion of
the program.
The bill includes several criteria for evaluating the program. Language is also included
that is intended to protect the state, the Commission, the County and the City and other
parties to the MOA from liability. It requires that signs be placed on the beach stating
that persons using the pilot program area consent to protect, indemnify, defend, and
hold harmless those parties. The bill also provides that the program area not include
any part of the beach that has been designated as critical habitat pursuant to the federal
Endangered Species Act (ESA).
Proponents of the bill cite the Long Beach Dog Zone, a City-owned off-leash dog park,
as a good example of how a dog beach can be developed and managed, and point to it
as a success story. The Zone is about 3 acres of the beach marked off only by cones
and in the area nearest the water. It has specific hourly and seasonal times when it's
open for off-leash dogs.
Proponents state that there are 57 dog beaches in California, but that LA County is
underserved in this regard, since it has only one, in Long Beach. (San Diego and
Huntington Beach operate successful dog beaches.) In findings, the bill states that
there are nearly a million dog owning households in LA County, though other
documents provided by the author's office state that there are 175,000 licensed dogs in
the county of Los Angeles.
3
The State Parks Department cites a variety of reasons for opposition to this bill,
including that dogs can present a potential safety threat to visitors, other dogs, wildlife,
and park personnel when not physically restrained; unleashed dogs may interfere with
recreational users by harassing or harming them; existing law and regulations prohibit
off leash dogs, and dogs on beaches; enforcement concerns - the LA County lifeguards
who are charged with the primary enforcement of rules at the beach are concerned that
the need to "police" dogs on the beach will distract them from their primary mission of
protecting swimmers; fecal matter may be problematic - while many dog owners are
responsible, not all will clean up after their dogs. State Parks cites the Department of
Health Services concerns as shown in the California Code of Regulations 7985.1, which
prohibits animals on any beach designated for swimming; Dockweiler Beach is a habitat
for the federally listed (as threatened) western snowy plover.
While LA County has been silent on the bill, LA County Beaches and Harbors and the
Beach Commission have expressed their opposition to the County Board of Supervisors
regarding allowing dogs on beaches whether on or off leash. Their concerns center on
health and safety of beachgoers; the limited ability of owners to control their dogs when
off leash; and liability and ongoing costs of managing a dog beach area. Below is a
summary of groups that support and oppose AB 359:
4
Support
Freeplay (sponsor)
American Society for the Prevention of
Cruelty to Animals
State Humane
United Animal Nations
California Federation for Animal
Legislation
Contra Costa Humane Society
Animal Legislation Action Network
Numerous individuals
Bill Status
Oppose
LA County Beaches and Harbors
Department of Parks and Recreation
The Surfrider Foundation, Malibu Chapter
Santa Monica Bay Audubon Society
Heal the Bay
Natural Resources Defense Council
Tom Babbitt
Defenders of Wildlife - oppose unless
amended
Audubon California - oppose unless
amended
The bill was last amended on April 11, 2005 and is pending in the Senate Natural
Resources and Water Committee. The bill was amended to prohibit inclusion of any
area "designated as a critical habitat pursuant to the federal Endangered Species Act".
Should the proposed changes to use at Dockweiler involve the Coastal Commission's
regulatory authority, such changes may be subject to a Section 7 consultation under the
federal ESA.
The bill was defeated in Committee but won reconsideration. However, its author
Assemblyman Mike Gordon passed away last year. Assembly member Lieu has asked
the California Research Bureau to assess existing dog beaches in California before
agreeing to carry the legislation. In addition, construction of a two story 9,000 square
foot aquatic center at Dockweiler State Beach may make the dog park pilot infeasible.
5
Santa Monica Off-Leash Dog Beach
Current State Parks policy does not allow for the establishment of an off-leash dog
beach in Santa Monica. In order to expedite the creation of an off-leash dog beach in
Santa Monica, staff recommends that Council adopt the attached resolution supporting
AB 359 and advocating for its amendment to include establishing a pilot program in
Santa Monica. If a pilot program is established in Santa Monica, staff will return to
Council with a Memorandum of Agreement with a non-profit group as outlined in the
Budget/Financial Impact Section.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACT SECTION
Total costs for operating an off-leash area on Santa Monica State Beach are unknown
at this time. However, staff is recommending that the Council resolution extend the
terms of AB395 to Santa Monica, authorizing the City of Santa Monica and all other
interested parties enter into a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) to establish, manage,
and evaluate a one-year, off-leash dog beach pilot program at Santa Monica State
Beach. The MOA will require that all costs associated with developing the pilot program
will be borne by private sources and that required funding be available prior to any costs
being incurred. The parties to the MOA would be required to report to City Council on
the evaluation of the pilot program within 6 months of the conclusion of the program.
6
RECCOMENDA TIONS
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1) Authorize a letter in support of AB 359, establishing a pilot off-leash dog area at
Dockweiler State Beach; and
2) Adopt the attached resolution in support of legislation such as AB 359, with a
request that it include an off-leash dog area at Santa Monica State Beach.
Prepared By: Barbara Stinchfield, Director, Community and Cultural Services
Elaine Polachek, Open Space Manager
Kate Vernez, Assistant to the City Manager, Government Relations
ATTACHMENTS:
A: Resolution
B: May 31,2005 Information Item
7
ATTACHMENT A
"See Adopted
",' -.-.....,
,Resolution No.
,
. 10116 (CCS)
-. ~
".. -. .
~ ~~ ~ ~ .~
May 31, 2005
AI #563
Santa Monica, California
INFORMATION ITEM
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: City Staff
SUBJECT: Status of Off-Leash Dog Area on Santa Monica State Beach
INTRODUCTION
This is a status report on Council direction to establish a pilot off-leash dog area
on a portion of Santa Monica State Beach.
BACKGROUND
At its January 11, 2005 meeting, City Council directed staff to prepare a pilot dog
beach program, pursue County or State authorizations, if needed, and return with
specific funding requirements for Council to consider and implement. Staff was also
to consider Heal the Bay's recommendations and the siting of the area in relation to
people with disabilities.
DISCUSSION
State Parks Policy. In response to Council's direction, staff contacted the California
State Parks Angeles District Superintendent to determine if current State law would
permit an off-leash dog area on Santa Monica State Beach (the City's Operating
Agreement with State Parks requires that the City uphold State law and State rules at
1
Santa Monica State Beach). The Superintendent had previously advised that State
Parks strictly enforces a no dogs policy on all State beaches in the Angeles District
including Santa Monica State Beach. In a letter dated March 8, 2005 (Attachment A),
the Superintendent confirmed this position and outlined several areas of concern
including the impacts of a dog beach on the quality of recreational experiences and
activities, stranded marine mammals, compromised public safety, and health and
environmental issues related to dog waste. He concludes by saying that Santa
Monica State Beach does not appear to be a good candidate for off-leash use.
Staff proceeded to contact the Deputy Director of Park Operations for California State
Parks. In a letter of April 19, 2005 (Attachment B), the Deputy Director defines State
policy and Department history with regard to off-leash dogs in California State Parks.
He states that the Department strongly believes that there should be no exception
made to State law and Department policies and does not support an off-leash area at
Santa Monica State Beach. On May 9th, City staff met with key State Park officials in
Sacramento, and this policy was again confirmed.
Recommendations of City Advisory Bodies. On April 18, 2005, the City's Task
Force on the Environment did not support or oppose a pilot, but recommended
that if the City Council approves the establishment of a pilot off-leash dog beach,
the following minimum conditions must be met:
2
. The off leash dog beach area must contain an adequate number of
enclosed waste receptacles and bags, and a proper collection and
disposal program for dog waste must be maintained;
· Near shore surface water quality monitoring must be conducted up
and down gradient from the dog beach area;
. Monitoring must be performed by qualified professionals;
. Testing of water samples should include tests for total coliform,
fecal coliform and enterococcus;
. Water quality monitoring must be conducted on a daily basis;
· Operation of the dog beach must not cause beach water quality
standards to be exceeded;
. Operation of the dog beach must not significantly impact any other
animal life; and
· The pilot program should be structured in such a way as to
minimize net fiscal impacts to the city.
On May 11, 2005, the City's Recreation and Parks Commission voted to support
the position of California State Parks and Recreation in opposition to an off-leash
dog area on the beach pilot program primarily due to the Commission's concerns
regarding water quality.
State Legislation. On February 11, 2005, Assembly Member Mike Gordon (EI
Segundo) introduced AB 359 which was subsequently amended by the Assembly on
March 17, 2005 (Attachment C). The bill authorizes State Parks, the California
Coastal Commission, the County of Los Angeles, the City of Los Angeles and other
interested parties to enter into a one-year agreement to establish, manage, and
evaluate an off-leash dog beach pilot program at Dockweiler State Beach. Private
3
funding sources would be used to pay for the costs of the pilot program. Dockweiler
State Beach is owned by State Parks and is operated by Los Angeles County. The
bill has passed the Assembly and has been sent to the Senate Committee on Rules
for assignment to a policy committee.
In response to this legislation, the Los Angeles County Beach Commission took a
formal position at its March 23, 2005 meeting to oppose the establishment of on or
off-leash dog areas on County operated beaches (Attachment D). The Commission
recommended that the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors adopt a strong
stance against dogs on the beach. As of this date, a motion for consideration has yet
to be introduced and the Board of Supervisors has not taken a position on the dog
beach.
CONCLUSION
State Parks policy precludes development of a pilot off-leash dog area on Santa
Monica State Beach. Staff will include this issue in discussions regarding a
successor operating agreement with the State for Santa Monica beaches.
PREPARED BY:
Barbara Stinchfield, Director Community and Cultural Services
Elaine Polachek, Open Space Manager
Donn Umber, Animal Control Manager
Brian Johnson, Environmental Programs Manager
Attachment A - California State Parks Letter, March 8, 2005
Attachment B - California State Parks Letter, April 19, 2005.
Attachment C - Assembly Bill 359
Attachment D - Los Angeles County Beach Commission Letter, March 23, 2005
4
Arnold Schwarzenegger, Governor
Ruth G. Coleman, Director
Angeles District Headquarters
1925 Las Virgenes Road
Calabasas, CA 91302
March 8, 2005
Elaine Polachek, Open Space Manager
City of Santa Monica
Department of Community and Cultural Services
Open Space Management Division
2600 Ocean Park Blvd.
Santa Monica, CA 90405-5204
Dear Ms. Polachek,
This letter is a response to our meeting on February 3,2005 regarding the Santa
Monica City Council's consideration for a pilot off-leash dog beach program. As we
discussed, California State Parks does not support an off-leash dog area at Santa
Monica State Beach. This letter serves to outline our concerns.
The mission of California State Parks dictates that we help preserve the State's
extraordinary biological diversity and protect its most valued natural and cultural
resources. While our mission also requires that we provide opportunities for high
quality outdoor recreation this endeavor should not adversely affect the resources
nor the recreational experience of others.
The United States Fish and Wildlife Service in their recovery plan for the
western snowy plover identifies Santa Monica State Beach (CA-104) as habitat for
this federally listed threatened species. CA-104 is found in appendix B entitled
"information on snowy plover breeding and wintering locations." The plan states; "All
known wintering locations (listed in Appendix B of this plan) are considered
important to snowy plover conservation. The recovery plan indicates up to 18
wintering individuals at Santa Monica State Beach and this is supported by the
recent observation of wintering western snowy plovers (north of the proposed off-
leash area).
State Parks' verbal and written information shared with the City of Santa Monica
regarding western snowy plover concerns constitutes formal noticing. If
USFWSIDFG determines that the City has granted privileges that result in the. "take"
of a state-federally listed species, the City can be held criminally and civilly liable.
"Take" not only refers to the killing of an individual of a protected species but can
also be an action that allows or causes harassment or prevents or interferes with
feeding, wintering, nesting or other activities necessary for survival.
Elaine Polachek
March 8,2005
Page Two
Dogs are considered predators by shorebirds including western snowy plovers.
Because dogs are exotic predators they have hunting strategies that native wildlife
prey, have not adapted to. When disturbed or chased by a dog, shore birds including
plovers will leave and not return for significant amounts of time. By interrupting their
feeding and resting behaviors individuals are unable to store sufficient fat reserves
and this, in turn, adversely affects their breeding success and overall survival.
The above facts gravely concern State Parks and could result in an enormous
fiscal and/or legal impact to the City of Santa Monica. For example, at Oceano
Dunes State Recreation Area, State Parks is required by the federal and state
regulatory agencies to create management strategies that cost DPR approximately,
$500,000 annually. This program also diverts large amounts of staff time and
resources.
An off-leash dog area would likely compromise public safety at SMSB. Based on
experience at Huntington State Beach, lifeguards are forced to divert their attention
from aquatic safety concerns to address violations related to the adjacent City-
owned, off-leash beach area, Le.- dogs straying outside designated off-leash zone,
dogs fighting with other dogs, etc. The concern of dog enforcement issues taking
lifeguards from their primary mission of watching the water is shared by the Los
Angeles County lifeguards. Additional enforcement staff to address this is costly
and unlikely.
Based on staff experience at Huntington State Beach, the parking area adjacent
to the City-owned, off-leash dog beach often fills up. Many dog owners will park
outside the off leash area on State Park property (sometimes as far as a % mile
away) and unleash their dog(s) on State property before they arrive at the
designated off-leash area. These dogs will often harass wildlife, sunbathers and
other beach users while enroute to the off-leash area.
The surf zone adjacent to the off-leash beach area becomes a 'human excJusion
zone' for traditional recreational users. Once again, our experience with the
neighboring off leash dog area in the City of Huntington Beach demonstrates that
many joggers and hikers will avoid this area for fear of being chased or bitten by off-
leash dogs or for fear of encountering dog feces.
There is concern forthe probable interaction between dogs and stranded marine
life. Marine Mammals protected by the Marine Mammal Protection Act often become
sick, injured or fatigued and need to rest on the shoreline. Off leash dogs would
pose a threat to these animals and could cause them to re-enter the ocean before
they are able to survive. This interaction is also quite dangerous to the dog. While
the discussion is focused on marine mammals it applies to other marine animals
such as shorebirds.
Off leash dog use is viewed as a local recreational need. Santa Monica State
Beach is intended to provide recreation for statewide interests and with annual
Elaine Polachek
March 8, 2005
Page Three
visitation of between 7 and 9 million visitors is one of the most popular beaches in
the world. Off leash dog use would be more appropriately addressed at a municipal
or county owned facility.
Health and safety issues as they relate to dog feces and dog urine are of
concern. Experience has been that compliance with rules requiring owners to'
remove dog feces is less than 100 %. Removal of dog urine is even more difficult
and currently not practiced. It is important to remember that this is a State Beach
where 7 to 9 million people recreate in direct contact with the sand. A large
percentage of these people recreate by lying directly in and on the sand. Visitors
picnic, consuming food directly on the sand and children play and dig in the sand.
There is also a concern with public safety as it relates to dog - human interaction.
Aggressive dogs will pose a serious safety threat with the possibility of attack and
bites. While this danger exists for all, the possibility of attack is particularly
dangerous to children who play on the beach.
The quality of the recreational experience is of concern. Aggressive dogs aside,
friendly dogs may enthusiastically jump on people and while this experience can be
unpleasant and dangerous, it is terrifying for children and the elderly. One of the
stated reasons for an off leash dog area is so dogs can run. Dogs running in .
amongst beach users can again be very unpleasant when sand is "thrown" by dogs
running nearby onto persons, food and belongings.
There is also a concern with dog VS. dog interaction, primarily fights. In this case
there is the likelihood of injury to one or both dogs but also the likelihood of injury to
bystanders, dog owners or public safety personnel who intervene in the fight.
California State Parks appreciates and understands the love that dog owners
have for their animals. However we have an obligation to protect natural resources
and ensure that we do not adversely affect the experience of our visitors. If you have
any questions, please contact me.
Sincerely,
~p-~
Ron P. Schafer
District Superintendent
Cc: Ted Jackson
Tony Perez
Rick Rayburn
Tom Tanner
Sean Woods
---
Arnold Schwarzenegger, Governor
Ruth Coleman, Director
State of California. The Resources Agency
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION · P.O. Box 942896 · Sacramento, CA 94296.0001
@ (916) 653-8288
April 19, 2005
Ms. Elaine Polachek, Manager
Open Space Management
City of Santa Monica
2600 Ocean Park Boulevard
Santa Monica, California 90405-5204
Dear Ms. Polachek,
This letter is in response to your inquiry about California State Parks' practices and
procedures regarding dogs on state beaches; and more specifically, about the question
of whether dogs could be allowed off-leash at Santa Monica State Beach. As the
Deputy Director for Park Operations, I am responsible for the Department's field
operations and I appreciate the opportunity to explain our dog-related policies and
procedures.
California Public Resources Code, section 5008.1, is the state law that
governs conditions under which animals may be brought into parks. It states:
(a) When it is determined by the director to be in the public interest,
visitors to units of the state parks system may bring animals into those
units.
(b) Any animal brought into a state park system unit... shall be under the
immediate control of the visitor or shall be confined, and under no
circumstance shall the animal be permitted to do any of the following:
(1) Pose a threat to public safety and welfare.
(2) Create a public nuisance.
(3) Pose a threat to the natural or cultural resources of the unit or to
the improvements of the unit.
The California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Natural Resources, Division 3, Department
of Parks and Recreation, section 4312, Control of Animals implements the state law.
This administrative regulation for the Department further defines the requirements for
animals in State Parks. It states, in part:
(a) No person shall permit a dog to rum loose, or turn loose
any animal in any portion of a unit, except upon written
authorization by the District Superintendent.
Ms. Elaine Polachek
April 19, 2005
Page Two
(b) No person shall keep an animal in any unit except under
his/her immediate control...
(c) No person shall bring a dog into, permit a dog to enter or
Remain, or possess a dog in units under control of the
Department of Parks and Recreation unless the dog is on
a leash of no more than six feet in length and under the
immediate control of a person or confined in a vehicle.
(d) No person shall bring a dog into, permit a dog to enter or
remain, or possess a dog:
(1) beyond the limits of campgrounds, picnic areas,
parking areas, roads, structures or in posted
portions of units except as provided elsewhere
in this section.
(2) on a beach adjacent to any body of water in any
unit except in portions of units designated for
dogs.
Off-leash dogs are not permitted in parks owned and operated by the Department. The
Department believes that dogs present a potential threat to visitors, park staff, wildlife
and each other when not under the physical restraint of a leash. In addition, dogs can
impact aesthetics and the "sense of place" sought by many visitors to state parks.
While many people enjoy the companionship of their dogs, many other park visitors
complain that their experience is negatively impacted by dogs.
Today, there are 278 units that comprise the California State Park System. Of the 278
park units, there are four parks that allow for off-leash dog activity in designated areas
away from the general public. Two of the parks are owned, but not operated, by state
parks - Lighthouse Point State Park (Santa Cruz) and Robert Crown Memorial State
Beach (Alameda, San Francisco Bay Area). The other two park properties, Point Isabel
(located within East Shore State Park) and Lake Del Valle State Recreation Area (near
Livermore) are properties that are not owned by State Parks. (Point Isabel is owned
and operated by East Bay Regional Park District. Lake Del Valle State Recreation Area
is owned by the State Department of Water Resources; State Parks has an operating
agreement, but has a sub-agreement with East Bay Regional Park District to operate
the facility.) State Parks believes it would be unwise to allow for the expansion of off-
leash dog areas within the State Park System.
Ms. Elaine Polachek
April 19. 2005
Page Three
With regards to an off-leash dog area at Santa Monica State Beach, State Parks is
opposed to this concept due to the unavoidable negative impacts to public use and
wildlife. Off-leash dog use would displace existing recreational uses at one of the most
popular beaches in southern California. An off-leash dog area also has the potential to
create conflicts between beach users and dogs. dogs and other dogs, and dogs and
wildlife. State Parks is also concerned about the health and safety issues arising from
dog feces and dog urine in such close proximity to a heavily used beach environment.
In summary, State Park does not support an off-leash dog area at Santa Monica State
Beach.
Should you have any questions, please contact me at (916) 653-8288.
Sincerely.
~~u"\t5 M'^-k-.
Theodore Jackson, Jr.
Deputy Director
Park Operations
cc: Ruth Coleman, Director, California State Parks
........., ".J.." J '" ...~tJ"".a..a..a...,.a J .&.Ia&.1.
S&..1...........,.1.'lII.&..I~....,
C Cll!SC I UI ..
BILL NUMBER: AB 359
BILL TEXT
AMENDED
AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY MARCH 17, 2005
INTRODUCED BY
Assembly Member Gordon
FEBRUARY II, 2005
An act to add Section 5006.9 to the Public Resources Code,
relating to parks.
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
AB 359, as amended, Gordon. Parks and recreation: dog beach.
Under existing law, the Department of Parks and Recreation is
required to operate, manage, and maintain units of the state park
system. The Director of Parks and Recreation administers the
operation, management, and maintenance of the state park system.
This bill would .r~q'lir~ tA~ ~QF:a:rt~~Hl.t t9 "'QQ:r~j :A2tV Hi tb.
~ authorize the department, the California Coastal
Commission, the County of Los Angeles, the City of Los Angeles and
other interested parties to enter into a one-year
agreement to QQHillC>F establish, manage,
and evaluate an off-leash dog beach pilot program at
Dockweiler State Beach in the County of Los Angeles. Private
funding sources would be used to pay for the costs of the pilot
program.
Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes.
State-mandated local program: no.
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The Legislature finds and declares all of the
following:
(~) IR ~Q~ nRg~lo~ CQYRty, tb~rv ~X9 ~pproxi~~tQly 1?5,QQQ
li~QRi:ilg Q9Si
{h} IR I ~~ ~:R~"l~h C'Q~U;il.t~7, tR9rQ Ar~ Q~~ y fQHr 9ff 19~i:R
rg~x~a~i~RAl aXQ~h (Q~~n} gQmpri~iR~ . tgt~l ~f l~~~ tRAR 1Q AgrO~ ~f
iipal<''O' ~
l\R 01.~'7\ pro....id9i: hgng.ral bgRQfit~ ?lRg rtlAdig~ "RQlf R9tla Qf thg
f911gpiR9'- (1) Qo~.i' tRAt 4WJr9Xgii:Q ARQ 2!.Xg AllgtJOQ tQ Xldll
(a) An Off Leash Recreation Area (ORLA) provides several
benefits for dogs and dog owners, and studies show both of the
following:
(1) Dogs that exercise and are allowed
to run freely are not as aggressive towards people as dogs that
are underexercised.
(2) OLRAs contribute to the overall physical fitness of people by
encouraging them to exercise with their dogs.
(d) T~gr8 .xv 15 ~Q.~t21 ~~ldRti~~ iR t~Q it.tg of ~Alif9rRia ~A~R
~Q'IRt7 ~as :at l~~~t 9R~ :A9Ritrt~ ~9S ~~iV~
(b) There are a total of 57 designated dog zones along the state's
281 miles of shoreline. Each coastal county has at least one
designated dog zone.
(e) Currently, in Los Angeles County there are approximately
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/publbilVasm/ab_ 0351-0400/ab359 _bill_20050317 _amended_a... 4/1912005
n...u J.J7 n:>;)CJIlUIY Dill - n.1V.u..:.l'lUCU
rllg~ ~ U1 ~
990,000 dog owning households, but only one public dog beach.
SEC. 2. Section 5006.9 is added to the Public Resources Code, to
read:
~QQi P ~Ra &9FArt.~Rt sRA11 Wg~r&iRAtg ,~tA 311 iRtaragte&
JilArtiao;;; tll 'ii'ilu91'ilp ";lR I1ff l'il4iiiA 'ih1~ ~'iliU.R pilat Frg~rA. At pg...Jm'ilil~u'
~tit'il iaagR iR tR'il ~gWRty IIf Las ~R~'ill'ilg
5006.9. (a) The department, the California Coastal Commission,
the County of Los Angeles, the City of Los Angeles, and all other
interested parties are authorized to develop and enter into a
memorandum of agreement to estqblish, manage, and evaluate a one-year
off-leash dog beach pilot program at Dockweiler state Beach in the
County of Los Angeles.
(b) All costs associated with the pilot program shall be borne by
private funding sources.
(c) All other ancillary issues associated with the pilot program
shall be addressed within the agreement.
(d) Parties to the agreement shall establish criteria for the
evaluation of the pilot project in all of the following categories:
(1) Reported incidents.
(2) Traffic trends.
(3) Trends of revenues generated, such as revenues from parking,
concession, and other program related activities.
(4) Public health risks.
(5) Volunteer participation.
(6) Program financial support.
http://wwwJeginfo.ca.gov/pub/bill/asm/ab _0351-0400/ab_359 _bill_20050317 _amended_a... 4/19/2005
County of Los Angeles
Beach
Commission
13837 Fiji Way, Marina del Rey, CA 90292
Phone: (310) 305-9546 Fax: (310) 822-0119
Web Page: http://beaches.co.la.ca.us
:>-
f-
Z
::;
o
u
,,' ,
....r--.
)j
-~ (:anfl~ fUT
Yttlir(':;oaSI
'"
w
-'
w
o
zDeparlJlJ,erlt or
<( Beaches &
sHarbors
March 24,2005
Honorable Board of Supervisors
383 Kenneth Hahn Hall of Administration
500 West Temple Street
Los Angeles, CA 90012
Dear Supervisors:
OPPOSITION TO AREAS FOR DOGS
ON COUNTY OPERATED BEACHES
The County of Los Angeles Beach Commission at its meeting of March 23, 2005 took a
formal position to oppose the establishment of on or off-leash areas for dogs on County
operated beaches, for reasons detailed below. In our capacity as your advisor on
beach-related issues, our Commission recommends that your Board officially oppose all
efforts to establish on or off~leash areas for dogs on the beach. We understand that
there is currently specific legislation pending that would allow such an an~a on one of
the State beaches the County operates and, thus, time is of the essence. This
Commission is convinced that your Board should oppose all efforts now or in the future
to establish such dog areas on any of the beaches the County operates.
. This County and every beach city, along with State Parks with respect to beaches in
Los Angeles County, have ordinances, regulations, or policies prohibiting and/or
restricting dogs on their respective beaches. The City of Long Beach currently has a
small beach area designated as a dog zone.
There are basic health, environmental and safety concems that underlie these
restrictions and/or prohibitions, such as: (1) the presence of animal fecal waste and
urine in sandy and/or other areas that families, children and the general public walk
through, lie down on or play in; (2) the harmful effects of increased bacterial pollution in
and around the coastline; (3) disturbance of the native ecosystem and endangered
native flora and fauna; and (4) the inability to predict or control animal behavior (for
example, fighting with other dogs, barking at or biting the public, and intertering with
users of the beach bike path).
Walt Dougher. Chair Thomas Barnes Charles Hayes Don Rohrer Marilyn White
Rosi Dagit Clare Bronowski Jeffrey Jennings Hal Ross
Vice-Chair Ronald Chatman
Carherine Shea McCurdy Andrew Stern
Gary R. Dimkich Charles Milam Norma Pratt
Don Doyle Phil Pennington Carole Stevens
Dee Hardison Norma Pratt
Honorable Board of Supervisors
March 24, 2005
Page 2
By themselves, these concerns are enough to keep non-dog owners away from our
beaches, and especially families that fear for their children's safety or even about
putting down a blanket on the sand. In addition, there are budgetary concerns
associated with the costs of establishing and maintaining such areas. For instance,
these costs would involve providing bags (with dispensers) to remove waste,
maintaining special signage to designate the area and assigning additional staff (law
enforcement, lifeguards, animal control and other County staff) to explain and enforce
the regulations for the areas. There are also increased costs connected with the need
to sanitize the beach and remove waste daily.
Another and potentially very large cost would result from the County being held liable for
incidents involving dogs. It must be anticipated that there will be dog bites, as well as
other injuries to beach goers, dog owners, other dogs and bicyclists on our heavily used
beaches and the highly trafficked beach bike trail. This is especially so when projecting
the high use that such areas would incur on our popular coastline and from our heavily
populated County.
It is estimated that one very popular beach in San Diego for dogs called Ocean Beach is
used at peak times by up to 10,000 dogs every week. We believe that such numbers
would easily be exceeded on Los Angeles County beaches, because they are
immediately adjacent to highly populated, urban areas. The beaches Los Angeles
County operates are urban-area beaches visited annually by an estimated 55 million
people. When considering all the objections to on or off-leash dogs on the beach, as
well as the high level of beach use by our beach goers, the beaches operated by Los
Angeles County are simply a bad choice for this type of activity.
Accordingly, the Beach Commission has endorsed the position that dogs should not be
allowed on beaches operated by Los Angeles County and recommends that your Board
similarly adopt a strong stance against dogs on the beach.
Very truly yours,
, . '\ u2..:t;-'~ 6-U6k,'\/
,..)../ c d;I
.
Walt Dougher, Chairman
WD:kgs