In a 7 to 2 vote on Tuesday, Tantramar council rejected a proposal to create a fenced-in dog park in Sackville, citing concerns about health risks, potential injuries, and the challenges of managing the park.
The proposal, which included plans for a new dog park behind the Civic Centre, was presented by Active Living Director Matt Pryde. This new location was seen as a solution to the previous concerns raised about the smaller Dufferin Street site, which was close to a school and daycare. However, despite the revised location and the low cost of the project—around $11,000—the proposal was ultimately voted down by the majority of the council.
Councillors raised concerns about the risk of disease transmission between animals, the potential for dog fights and injuries, and the issue of dog owners failing to clean up after their pets. Some councillors, including Michael Tower, expressed apprehension after consulting with veterinarians, particularly regarding the spread of canine parvovirus, a serious disease that can be transmitted in dog parks. Tower also voiced concerns about liability in the event of a dog attack.
Councillor Allison Butcher was the lone supporter of the project, noting that there had been long-standing requests from the community for a dog park. She highlighted that the proposed Civic Centre location was larger, already partially fenced, and within walking distance for residents. However, her points were not enough to sway the majority of council members.
Councillor Bruce Phinne and Barry Hicks echoed concerns about the cleanliness and maintenance of the park, questioning whether dog owners would responsibly clean up after their pets. Pryde assured the council that staff would handle waste management and that dog waste bags would be provided, but some members remained unconvinced.
Jamie Ferguson, the newly-appointed manager of Active Living and Culture, shared his experience managing dog parks in Mississauga, stating that no health issues had been observed in those parks and that any disease outbreaks could be addressed by working with local veterinarians. He also suggested involving bylaw officers to help enforce park rules. However, these reassurances were not enough to shift the decision.
Councillor Matt Estabrooks, who closed the debate, expressed his belief that the dog park was a low-priority project given the town’s other needs. He also questioned the cost and the challenges of maintaining the park, including managing waste and ensuring compliance with park rules.
Following the vote to reject the dog park proposal, the council approved a $126,000 expense to purchase a new dehumidifier for the Civic Centre.