DOG POLICY BYLAW 2019 MANGERE-OTAHUHU …...5953 Devid Cudicio Mangere‐Otahuhu 1 6025 Gareth Beck Mangere‐Otahuhu 1 6029 Kiri Brausch Mangere‐Otahuhu 1 6105 Bernadette Deoliveira

DOG POLICY BYLAW 2019

MANGERE-OTAHUHU SUBMISSIONS

VOLUME 1

11 TO 6611

Submitter # First Name Last Name Organisation Local Board Volume

11 Elodie Fontaine Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

28 Ella Walmsley Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

134 Saara Rawhiti Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

191 Sandra Godkin Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

342 Sandra Jackson Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

454 Mata Manapori‐Marsters Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

713 Marinus Snetler Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

1054 David Gray Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

1091 Mu Chien Lee Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

1138 Roz Palethorpe Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

1152 Anna Vasilyeva Bycroft Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

1253 Samantha Waru Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

1462 Farhan Mirza Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

1490 Linsey Bishop Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

1503 Murray Evans Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

1681 Sherilyn Ryan Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

1791 Matthew Goldwater Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

1907 Samantha Gower Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

1988 Kerrie Hocking Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

2008 Martin Venter Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

2107 Amanda McConchie Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

2558 Carol Hutson Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

2618 Annabelle S Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

2678 Nicola Langley Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

2841 William Duncan Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

3066 Leanne Thatcher Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

3138 Briar Pelling Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

3151 Dominic Anderton Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

3235 David Heeney Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

3312 Kale Tuilaepa Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

3368 Leon Valkenborg Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

3383 Janna Clarke Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

3438 Mia Dabbous Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

3473 Anna Buswell Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

3476 Matt Buswell Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

3485 Simon Kerr Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

3575 Doyle Matautia Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

3674 John Goulter Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

3901 Gerard Elwell Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

3924 David Jennings Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

3941 Rebecca Hendl‐Smith Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

3970 Oscar Aspinall Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

4013 Sophi Johnson Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

4089 Lesley Maipi Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

4176 Diana Meiklejohn Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

4189 Michael Fairgray Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

4355 Adrian Farrell Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

4395 Anne McIntyre Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

4448 Rufus Vermey Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

4509 Linda Kaiou Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

Submitter # First Name Last Name Organisation Local Board Volume

4518 Patrick Rossiter Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

4695 Farisha Hussein Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

4748 Sarah Alden Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

4895 Scott Moffat Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

4915 Tom Buckley Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

5006 Deidre Hills Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

5016 Catherine Ryan Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

5092 Trevor Wilson Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

5180 Thomas Duncan‐Sutherland Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

5431 Alayne McKee Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

5654 Sarah Morgan Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

5931 Andrew Jamieson Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

5953 Devid Cudicio Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

6025 Gareth Beck Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

6029 Kiri Brausch Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

6105 Bernadette Deoliveira Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

6192 Caroline Longley Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

6342 Kymberly Maxwell Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

6418 Kristina Popat Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

6429 Jonasi Malase Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

6510 Helen TePania Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

6563 Mavis Tua Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

6611 Jean Collis Mangere‐Otahuhu 1

Having trouble viewing this email? Click here .

From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dog Policy and Bylaw feedback_ID#14 Date: Monday, 1 April 2019 11:18:27 AM

Dog Policy and Bylaw 2019feedback

Submitter detailsDate received: 1 Apr 2019 11:17

Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1

Remove the schdule of access rules from the Dog Management Bylaw 2012.

What is your opinion of this proposal?

Agree

Proposal 2

All local board rules within Schedule 2 of the Auckland Council Policy on Dogs will be presented ina consistent format.


Agree

#11

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/UHveDihRCeaHYroDggbjxQ

mailto:[email protected]


If you think there are any local beaches or parks where the type of rule apllied will changethis proposal, please specify these below:

Proposal 3

Multiple dog ownership licence will only be required for urban residential properties where thereare more than two dogs at the property.


Agree

Proposal 4

Time and season rule

What is your preference for this proposal?

Standardised regional definition

If a standardised regional definition is applied, what is your view of the proposed definitionof 10am-7pm from the Staurday of Labour Weekend to 31 March?

Disagree

7pm is too late and so is 31 March 5pm or 6pm is a more reasonable restriction 1 March is a morereasonable restriction and coincides with the end of summer

If you'd like the time and season rule changed, what would you like to change it to?

Start time: 10.00am

Finish time: 5.30pm

Start date: 1 December

Finish date: 1 March

Proposal 5A

Implement a standard lambing season rule to prohibit dogs from 1 July to 1 December in regionalpark that have stock.


Agree

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary

Dogs are prohibited from the sanctuary for the protection of wildlife.


Agree

Muriwai Regional Park

(a) Ōn Muriwai Beach, dogs are allowed under control off leash at all times north of the surfer

#11

tower

(b) Dogs are prohibited south of the surf tower to protect the gannet colony.


Agree

Long Bay Regional Park

(a) Dogs are prohibited north of Vaughn's stream

(b) Amending time and season rule applied to the beach south of Vaugn's stream

(c) Dogs are allowed under control on a leash in the small car parking area immediately east ofthe southern entrance to the park

(d) Except as provided in (a) - (c) above, dogs are prohibited from Long Bay Regional Park andassociated beaches.


Agree

Waitakere Regional Park - Whatipu

Dogs are prohibited west of Don McLean Road and south of Walker Ridge track.


Disagree

Proposal 5C

Retain all other dog access rules in regional parks.


Agree

Proposal 6

Extend our ability to makes temporary changes to dog access rules to protect flora vulnerable todogs, such as kauri.


Agree

Proposal 7

Ōwners of dogs classified as menacing due to behaviour will have the opportunity to have theirdog's classification reviewed.


Agree

#11

Auckland Council

#11

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/paDb9laOBaiCXHZGP2KUpQ


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject:Date: Monday, 1 April 2019 12:41:23 PM



Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

Proposal 2



Agree

#28

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/kR7HnGoZexdwMmNup7z5Mg



Proposal 3



Agree

Proposal 4



Local variations


Ōther

This will depend on where the seasonality is applied to. It should be different for areas wherepeople do not usually go for recreation but is popular for dog walkers


Start time: 8.00am

Finish time: 6.00pm

Start date: Daylight savings (late September)


Proposal 5A



Agree

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Agree



#28

tower



Agree










Proposal 5C



Proposal 6



Agree

Proposal 7



Agree

#28

Auckland Council

#28

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/AxnLlIQm6tPilXmFWK-hlw


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dog Policy and Bylaw feedback_ID#138 Date: Monday, 1 April 2019 9:48:47 PM



Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Disagree

The proposed times will further restrict being able to take your dog out and about as a familymember, not to mention that it will be very unsafe to take dogs to the beach before sunrise/aftersunset (the proposed timeframe) closer to wintertime, as a female

Proposal 2


#134

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/SAlZkPsVUXN2uiFpvq5qzA




Agree

I try my best to search if i can have my dog offleash but most places have no/poor signs and theonline info doesn't always match the signs on location


Proposal 3



Agree

This would make it more simple to follow, and also to move across auckland with dogs

Proposal 4



Ōther

Standardise the definition but use a different time frame dec 1st to jan 31st


Disagree

The time is too restricive and the date frame too wide, our dogs deserve time on the beach sameas everyone else


Start time:

Finish time:

Start date:

Finish date:

Proposal 5A



Ōther

Strict on leash rules during lambing season should apply, anyone breaking these should be fined.

Proposal 5B

#134

Glenfern Sanctuary



Ōther

Not all dogs are risk to wildlife, again strict on leash only rule should apply


(a) Ōn Muriwai Beach, dogs are allowed under control off leash at all times north of the surfertower



Agree







Agree




Disagree

Ōn leash only would be better

Proposal 5C



Disagree

Clear on leash only signs would still give the opportunity to take dogs for more variety of walks

Proposal 6


#134


Disagree

Put out the wash stations for shoes and paws

Proposal 7



Agree

Most dogs can be re trained with proper tools and time, change of ownership can also have a verypositive impact on dogs behaviour

Auckland Council

#134

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/JgTA1fsMFQ0hC6RHUoevvw


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dog Policy and Bylaw feedback_Date: Tuesday, 2 April 2019 12:19:28 PM



Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Proposal 2



Disagree

Way too restricted.. there are so many areas that there would be not a sole in sight... And you

#191

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/5fiN9XUfP_qR-MlgpByenA



want me to walk my dog on a leash..


Proposal 3



Agree

Proposal 4



Local variations

Some areas are clearly less populated and would suit broader hours..


Disagree


Start time: 10.00am

Finish time: 4.00pm


Finish date: Daylight savings (early April)

Proposal 5A



Agree

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary





#191












Proposal 5C



Proposal 6



Proposal 7



Auckland Council

#191

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/nN7dflpu_0lJI7r3iotHZw


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dog Policy and Bylaw feedback_ID#346 Date: Wednesday, 3 April 2019 7:54:19 AM



Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

Each suburb is different

Proposal 2



#342

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/heSA17iE41G6TlyX9sOl7A



Agree


Proposal 3



Agree

Proposal 4



Ōther

change to 11.30 to 5.30pm restrictions - current is too hard


Disagree


Start time: Ōther 11.30am

Finish time: 5.30pm



Proposal 5A



Agree

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Agree



#342

tower



Agree







Agree




Agree

Proposal 5C



Agree

Proposal 6



Agree

Proposal 7



Agree

#342

Auckland Council

#342

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/8KsJf0YiDh0ZqjHK17eBlw


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dog Policy and Bylaw feedback_ID#460 Date: Wednesday, 3 April 2019 5:45:18 PM



Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

Proposal 2



Agree

#454

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/T-hF7y-SkeESa0h81CxSSg



Less confusion if its done this way.


Proposal 3



Agree

Proposal 4




Again less confusing for Dog owners.


Agree


Start time:

Finish time:

Start date:

Finish date:

Proposal 5A



Agree

Makes sense. Also keeps Lambs and mothers safe.

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Disagree

There are already other sanctuaries around Auckland why can't dogs share this space and beallowed if on a lead.

#454





Agree







Agree




Agree

Proposal 5C



Agree

Proposal 6



Agree

Proposal 7



#454

Agree

AGREE

Any other feedback:

Auckland Council

#454

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/IKHyF8nimzdFFuqUfqB26w


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dog Policy and Bylaw feedback_ID#720 Date: Friday, 5 April 2019 11:20:25 AM



Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

Proposal 2



Agree

#713

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/x_CNCXxd4Z9cEZ2WWPv-uw




Proposal 3



Agree

Proposal 4





Agree


Start time:

Finish time:

Start date:

Finish date:

Proposal 5A



Agree

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Agree




#713


Agree







Agree




Agree

Proposal 5C



Agree

Proposal 6



Disagree

It is people that spread the disease

Proposal 7



Agree

Any other feedback:

When will the bylaw include the management of cats as the cat population is out of control.

#713

Auckland Council

#713

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/rWocxjg4g9SjREHJ2rJgUg


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject:Date: Sunday, 7 April 2019 7:17:59 AM



Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

Proposal 2



Agree

#1054

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/64EqHJROjPWMfVZy00Z1Wg



Proposal 3



Agree

Proposal 4





Disagree

I feel 10am is too early and should be 11am, as at many beaches no one is there until aroundmidday so give dogs and dog owners a bit more time in the morning on our beaches. 7pm is thebest option at night.


Start time: 11.00am

Finish time: 7.00pm

Start date: Labour weekend (late Ōctober)


Proposal 5A



Agree

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Ōther


#1054




Disagree

The majority of dog owners have their dogs on leash by the time they are at the surf tower due tosunbathers. A ban prohibiting dogs from that point seems unnecessary, make it in leash and thena ban at the colony, which is not suitable to walk dogs on anyway really.







Ōther




Agree

Proposal 5C



Agree

Proposal 6



Agree

Proposal 7



#1054

Agree

Any other feedback:

Auckland Council

#1054

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/53ERLsg-YnSeZtxjmxmnqA


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dog Policy and Bylaw feedback_ID#1,098 Date: Sunday, 7 April 2019 3:09:16 PM



Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

Proposal 2



Agree

#1091

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/zrhPblD87cptX5kKZPn1xA




Proposal 3



Agree

Proposal 4





Disagree

That is a very long period of time, basically prohibiting families with dogs to enjoy the summerbeaches with all their family members. It is acceptable to try to avoid families without dogs duringpeak times, but there should at least give some flexibility for dog owners to access the beach withtheir dogs.


Start time: 11.00am

Finish time: 5.00pm



Proposal 5A



Agree

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Ōther

No comment as does not apply to me.

#1091





Agree







Agree




Agree

Proposal 5C



Agree

Proposal 6



Agree

Proposal 7



Agree

#1091

Any other feedback:

Auckland Council

#1091

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/elMmCSBuxy2JlIHgQ82Gaw


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dog Policy and Bylaw feedback_Date: Monday, 8 April 2019 12:36:02 PM



Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

Proposal 2



Agree

#1138

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/mysV4Em3JeeU7o21-6-MmQ




Proposal 3



Agree

Proposal 4



Ōther

Ōn the fence. Can see the value in individual boards making decisions but a standardised processwould make it easier as a dog owner.


Agree


Start time:

Finish time:

Start date:

Finish date:

Proposal 5A



Agree

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Agree



#1138

tower



Agree







Agree




Agree

Proposal 5C



Ōther

Depends on the effect dogs are having on native wildlife in each park.

Proposal 6



Agree

Proposal 7



Agree

#1138

Any other feedback:

Auckland Council

#1138

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/G9YBUyHk87R46jc2OlcQcw


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dog Policy and Bylaw feedback_ID#1,159 Date: Monday, 8 April 2019 2:54:34 PM



Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

Proposal 2



Agree

#1152

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/KoknlWAQE_5UsT_zxe-Utg




Proposal 3



Agree

Proposal 4





Agree


Start time:

Finish time:

Start date:

Finish date:

Proposal 5A



Agree

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Agree




#1152


Agree







Agree




Agree

Proposal 5C



Agree

Proposal 6



Agree

Proposal 7



Agree

Any other feedback:

#1152

Auckland Council

#1152

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/BvmKFY2HJYwtgh5zqiop7A


Date: Tuesday, 9 April 2019 3:34:00 PM



FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

Proposal 2



Agree

#1253

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/9ErYJrEAPgSBR3ul4qrI7A


Proposal 3



Agree

Proposal 4



Local variations


Disagree


Start time: 9.00am

Finish time: 5.00pm



Proposal 5A



Agree

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Agree




#1253


Agree







Agree




Agree

Proposal 5C



Agree

Proposal 6



Agree

Proposal 7



Agree

Absolutely agree.

Any other feedback:

This is also a good chance to re-evaluate 'menacing by breed' to include the chance to do furthertesting. If the owner of a dog that is 'menacing by breed' can pass temperament tests and have no

#1253

other complaints against them they should also be able to have the classification reviewed. Breedspecific legislation is discriminatory, inflammatory and archaic. Proposal 7 is a step in the rightdirection but more needs to be done.

Auckland Council

#1253

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/cLiFYx7zgogK3-zM_4C0-w


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dogs feedback_ID#1,320 Date: Tuesday, 9 April 2019 3:49:34 PM



Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

Proposal 2



Agree

#1462

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/xES8dHkFJQh_HACdOX3qOQ




Proposal 3



Ōther

From a welfare perspective, the issue is not just related to auckland urban properties. Dog farmsare being generated on the outskirts too. Why not have a blanket license law for anyone whoowns more than two dogs regardless of where they live?

Proposal 4





Agree


Start time:

Finish time:

Start date:

Finish date:

Proposal 5A



Agree

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Disagree


#1462




Agree







Agree




Agree

Proposal 5C



Agree

Proposal 6



Agree

Proposal 7



Agree

This can't be at the discretion of the Council. if the evidence has been provided then theclassification should be changed. Provide certainties as opposed to being under the whim and

#1462

fancy of the council staff

Any other feedback:

Auckland Council

#1462

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/bXOqF3KokBC8tv8ZC-1YpA





Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

Proposal 2



Agree

#1490

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/Jk61bK50rVxkkIhWsD4XMA




Proposal 3



Agree

Proposal 4





Agree


Start time:

Finish time:

Start date:

Finish date:

Proposal 5A



Agree

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Agree




#1490


Agree







Agree




Agree

Proposal 5C



Agree

Proposal 6



Agree

Proposal 7



Agree

Any other feedback:

I am unsure if this falls under AC jurisdiction but would appreciate consideration of dogs beingallowed on Public Transport in Auckland.

#1490

Auckland Council

#1490

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/dmnsSbaul1nXPrmv33zmvw





Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

i do not know the policy or the rules

Proposal 2



#1503

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/IVJ_C-D-os-g7ncJxQ-h0A



Agree

make it black& white rules


Proposal 3



Agree

Proposal 4





Agree


Start time:

Finish time:

Start date:

Finish date:

Proposal 5A



Agree

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Agree



#1503

tower



Agree







Agree




Agree

Proposal 5C



Agree

Proposal 6



Agree

Proposal 7



Agree

Any other feedback:

#1503

Auckland Council

#1503

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/8EWcQQHjDQWuyrgvWd2xsw





Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

Proposal 2



Agree

#1681

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/16ixTrzYffMp0pET5ibjyA




Proposal 3



Agree

Proposal 4



Local variations


Agree


Start time:

Finish time:

Start date:

Finish date:

Proposal 5A



Agree

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Agree




#1681


Agree







Agree




Disagree

Dogs should be allowed on leash

Proposal 5C



Ōther

Be sure thag consistency is maintained

Proposal 6



Agree

Proposal 7



Ōther

Dogs should be removed from their ownership until above course has been completed.

#1681

Any other feedback:

Auckland Council

#1681

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/cXR_EKs7GCS-d5U2QftlIg





Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Disagree

This change may mean some areas that currently allow dogs may fall under the overall umbrellawhich could ultimately ban them.

Proposal 2


#1791

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/7aLaJoM3nSm6ch3mxnxWug




Disagree

Ōwners should always make their own judgement of their own animals behavior.


West side of Ōnehunga dog park may ban dogs from this side if this was to proceed.

Proposal 3



Disagree

Responsible dog owners should daily exercise their dogs and not be restricted to their land size.

Proposal 4



Ōther

There should never be a time restraint on anyone or anybody, this is discrimination on allresponsible dog owners and is against our rights to be free.


Disagree

Considering it doesn’t get dark until 9pm/10pm and light again at 6am during summer, all timerestrictions on dogs is discrimination toward them and their owners.


Start time: Ōther At no time.

Finish time: Ōther At no time.

Start date: Ōther 1/01/2019

Finish date: Ōther 2/01/2019

Proposal 5A



Disagree

Never should a dog be banned from an area if they are well trained or on a leash. Further arearestrictions will further confine dogs.

#1791

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Disagree






Disagree








Ōther





Ōther


Proposal 5C



#1791

Ōther

There should only ever be a on a leash rule where wild life may encounter danger. All other times,off lead should be the owners responsibility.

Proposal 6



Disagree

First prove that dogs contribute to the spread of Kauri dieback. This rule could be enforce fordecades having no time limit.

Proposal 7



Agree

Absolutely, a good dog is only because of a good owner.

Any other feedback:

A broad swept approach is never a good idea, targeting bad owners is the only way to control anydog issues in Auckland.

Auckland Council

#1791

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/cVXOVNI0tpbru6Mqj7Tv4Q





FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

Makes sense as long as its not used with the intent to make negative changes easier

Proposal 2



#1907

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/iUE1kKmPgXsrLkp0GbbHCA



Agree

Currently it's hard to find rules everywhere


Proposal 3



Agree

It should be monitored. Animal welfare is important and they need the right living conditions andtreatment

Proposal 4




Again easier to know what to do with your dogs, however please make it reasonable we need tohave places to take them too! All day beach access at some places really is needed


Ōther

Not sure on all current options. Maybe 6pm..


Start time: 11.00am

Finish time: 6.00pm



Proposal 5A



Agree

Live stock is important. Ōn leash should be acceptable though

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary

#1907



Disagree

Dogs under control are not a threat





Agree







Disagree




Disagree

Proposal 5C



Agree

Proposal 6



Agree

#1907

Proposal 7



Disagree

12 months is too short. 3 years perhaps.

Any other feedback:

Auckland Council

#1907

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/lkPaKbhtKxNUyFEI-Bia1g


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dogs feedback_Date: Wednesday, 10 April 2019 6:22:09 AM



Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

Proposal 2



Agree

#1988

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/PhfAZRO8pbZUA2sx99d-PA



Proposal 3



Disagree

Proposal 4





Agree


Start time:

Finish time:

Start date:

Finish date:

Proposal 5A



Agree

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Agree


(a) On Muriwai Beach, dogs are allowed under control off leash at all times north of the surfertower


#1988








Agree




Agree

Proposal 5C



Agree

Proposal 6



Disagree

Proposal 7

Owners of dogs classified as menacing due to behaviour will have the opportunity to have theirdog's classification reviewed.


Agree

Any other feedback:

just making clear rules for all good dog owners to follow no matter where we go within theAuckland area

#1988

Auckland Council

#1988

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/TYTTPeF-Gq0MhxiJwqpwTQ


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dogs feedback_ID#1,867 Date: Wednesday, 10 April 2019 7:10:28 AM



Attachment:

Proposal 1



Agree

Proposal 2



Agree

#2008

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/iMAfqN582W_TiFnaAlPT7g




Proposal 3



Agree

Proposal 4





Agree


Start time:

Finish time:

Start date:

Finish date:

Proposal 5A



Agree

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Agree




#2008


Agree







Agree




Agree

Proposal 5C



Agree

Proposal 6



Agree

Proposal 7



Agree

Any other feedback:

Need to include cats in these changes

#2008

Auckland Council

#2008

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/JWO_J-bpDeILxMd2KkbhCQ


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dogs feedback_ID#1,918 Date: Friday, 17 May 2019 1:48:31 PM


Submitter detailsDate received: 10 April 2019 8:21

Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Other

Proposal 2


#2107

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/1_8apvjYQ3MYdyVJ3RHa4Q




Agree

If you think there are any local beaches or parks where the type of rule applied will changethis proposal, please specify these below:

Proposal 3



Disagree

Multiple dog ownership license should be applied everywhere - just because people have land ormore space in rural areas doesn't necessarily increase their welfare.

Proposal 4



Local variations

Local variations - there are some areas where dogs are truly welcomed in their communities, andother areas where they are not. So put it to the community and allow them to make the decisions,not apply a one rule for all standard.


Disagree

I think timings and seasons that people can have their dogs exercised is ridiculous. Elsewhere inthe world, dogs are allowed everywhere, they are considered truly, a man's best friend. In NZ, it'slike they are considered pests and owners don't like to have to leave their fur babies alone athome because you cant take them for a well deserved walk on a beach because a small minorityof short sighted people don't like dogs.


Start time: 11.00am

Finish time: 4.00pm

Start date: Daylight savings

Finish date: Daylight savings

Proposal 5A


#2107


Disagree

Regional parks should be for all to enjoy. If stock owners have a problem with this, place theirstock on proper farms in rural areas. If they cant do that, dogs are to be on a leash the entire time

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Disagree

What wildlife exactly? And why targeting dogs and their owners? We know cats are the realculprits because their owners let them roam whenever it suits. We have beautiful areas aroundAuckland that are slowly being prohibited for taking dogs and it is absolutely ridiculous. Thiscountry is becoming a very anti-dog country. Look at the wider picture





Disagree

Why the surf tower? Why can they not have the whole beach? Again - a ridiculous proposal.



(b) Amending time and season rule applied to the beach south of Vaughn's stream




Disagree

Again - what vulnerable wildlife?




#2107

Auckland Council

Disgree

As above

Proposal 5C



Proposal 6

Extend our ability to make temporary changes to dog access rules to protect flora vulnerable todogs, such as kauri.


Disagree

Proposal 7



Agree

Any other feedback:

#2107

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/385XlZ5BET9iBl6vOsR5jA


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dogs feedback_ID#Date: Thursday, 11 April 2019 6:33:29 PM



Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Proposal 2




#2558

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/Vs6ogLqu9X8UMOafALY--w



Proposal 3



Proposal 4





Start time:

Finish time:

Start date:

Finish date:

Proposal 5A



Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary











#2558






Proposal 5C



Proposal 6



Proposal 7



Disagree

As a recent victim of dog on dog aggression (my dog was attacked by another (unregistered)dogwho bowled me over and then attacked my dog) and an owner who had no control over her dogand made no attempt to stop her dog attacking my dog - I am totally against dogs who haveattacked other dogs having their dog's classification reviewed if the owner provides evidence ofcompleting a dog obedience course. A dog who does this should be assessed by a professionalanimal behaviourist. An obedience course is not going to curb/cure this dog's behaviour. He hadan irresponsible owner who had no control over her dog and in fact feared her own dog, which iswhy she just stood and watched and made no attempt to intervene. Her dog would have killed mydog if I hadn't intervened. If this dog had been mine, I would have taken him to my vet and hadhim put to sleep. That is a responsible attitude. Instead, the woman who owned this dog hightailedit back to her car, leaving me on the ground and tried to make off without giving any details. It wasonly because a walker in the park ran ahead and took note of her vehicle registration number thatAnimal Control were able to track her down. She also gave me a mobile number which laterproved to be false. This dog has probably been returned to her owner albeit with conditions, butthis dog needs to wear a muzzle for the rest of his life and be on a lead all the time when off hisproperty. I would not like to see this dog at the park ever again, not just because my dog wasattacked, but because even with an obedience class he would still be prone to attack other dogs,especially given that he is under 2 years old and unneutered - not a good look for a young dog.Because he was unregistered and the park he was coming to was also out of the area where thedog was living, I have a strong suspicion that this dog has attacked before, but no record will beheld because he was unregistered and his irresponsible owners probably took off before theirdetails could be taken. Also, who would take this dog on in an obedience class with other dogsgiven his history, if it was even disclosed by his owner. This dog is a risk to other dogs, especiallybecause he has irresponsible owners - maybe you could send them to an obedience class and

#2558

see if that does any good. I doubt it somehow.

Any other feedback:

Auckland Council

#2558

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/JyJpRZSljVyjZgKR43aGjA


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dogs feedback_ID#Date: Friday, 12 April 2019 9:39:47 AM



Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

Proposal 2



Agree

#2618

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/bQh6UbwaKw49KtPGmxR0cA




Proposal 3



Agree

Proposal 4



Local variations

There is significantly less daylight in March. Having a time and season rule which extends to 7pmin March makes things difficult in terms of having enough light to exercise my dog after work in theevenings.


Disagree

As above, the time and season rule should consider sunset times/how much light there is in theevenings. My local dog park (Seaside Park) has alcohol issues and can be isolated in parts. Thereis no lighting around the park (apart from on the sports field) so I wouldn't exercise my dog thereafter dark for safety reasons (and practical reasons as he can't see the ball).


Start time: 10.30am

Finish time: 6.00pm



Proposal 5A



Disagree

Given the limited number of regional parks this rule would affect, it seems that different ruleswould not be difficult to manage in terms of notifying the public.

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary


#2618


Agree





Agree

Not sure what this is changing from. Is it expanding or decreasing the area dogs are allowed onsubstantially? If not, then I agree.







Agree




Agree

Proposal 5C



Agree

Proposal 6



Agree

#2618

Proposal 7



Ōther

Agree with the principle that classifications should be able to be reviewed, but wonder if simplyattending a dog obedience course is sufficient. I think the review process should involve someassessment that the owner and dog now practice the strategies learned from that course and thathas resulted in the dog being under better control of the owner. Ōwners and dogs could completecourses without adopting any of the learnings or changing the behaviour of the dog. The fact thatno infringements have not been obtained does not provide much more additional protection as ifthere are incidents involving the dog, infringements very much rely on the dog and owner beingable to be identified at the time of the incident.

Any other feedback:

Auckland Council

#2618

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/hRw97emAaKfbcBlQTLpv3A


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dogs feedback_ID#2,486 Date: Saturday, 13 April 2019 7:21:30 AM



Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

Proposal 2



Agree

#2678

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/hULlpl4CLkp7SyQIL-7NCQ




Proposal 3



Agree

Proposal 4





Agree


Start time:

Finish time:

Start date:

Finish date:

Proposal 5A



Agree

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Agree




#2678


Agree







Agree




Agree

Proposal 5C



Agree

Proposal 6



Agree

Proposal 7



Agree

Any other feedback:

#2678

Auckland Council

#2678

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/cPJZtNcMGJN6WHfKzLE6ew


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dogs feedback_Date: Monday, 15 April 2019 9:48:50 AM



Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Ōther

I find the 50 or so pages of Dog Management stuff impossible to keep in my head in order to keepwith the rules and give my pet a decent life. Every rule seems to refer back to some other thingwhich has to be looked up and understood. Are all dog owners supposed to have law degrees inorder to understand how to be responsible dog owners. For goodness sake make it simple if youwant people to obey the law. I don't know what the implications of making it simple for the councilto change things will be. Probably that you just can slip things through without consultation.

#2841

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/4TYKvtn-cBMXpH5mlx-sSQ


Proposal 2



Disagree

Agree that standardising can appear to make things simpler but there are huge differences inpublic use of parks and beaches. For instance taking a dog to Mission Bay where there areconstantly many people enjoying the beach should be assessed very differently from Wesley Baywhere I frequently walked my dogs for 30 years and never ever saw a person picnicking orswimming.


Proposal 3



Agree

I support rules which promote welfare of dogs and peace in urban neighbourhoods. However I'msure there are some more rural places which could support care of more than 2 dogs andespecially if these dogs have been rescued previously. There should be clauses for responsibleowners to be vetted and given extensions

Proposal 4



Ōther

It does make it easier to remember but there are some beaches not used by the public forswimming and picnics which could be available to dogs at any hour.


Disagree

It's far too late in the evening. Should be 5pm. Also where people are retired or work shift workthey are able to take their dogs for walks at any hour and during the day apart from schoolholidays most beaches have no people on them at all


Start time: 10.30am

Finish time: 5.00pm



Proposal 5A

#2841



Ōther

In this day and age it should be easier than ever to quickly check on the internet the rules applyingto any particular place you intend to visit. Just make sure that each park has clear and simplyword instructions on it's web page

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Ōther

I can't see how a dog on a leash is any different to the human footprint. Make it possible to ensurethat rules concerning on leash removal of droppings are complied with.





Agree

Very sensible. Wonderful place for dogs to gambol and let off energy. Ōnly things I think needdoing is a notice to that effect on the path to the beach and that dogs be on leash through thesand dunes as there are notices to say they are trying to regrow grasses on the dunes but dogsscamper in there on their way to the beach







Agree




#2841

Agree

Proposal 5C



Agree

Proposal 6



Disagree

Because the dog footprint if kept on leash is no different to the human one. Ōnly ban dogs if youban humans. I've washed the feet of my dog in areas where required to because of kauri die backonly to see humans trot through without bothering to spray their shoes.

Proposal 7



Agree

Any other feedback:

Be careful that you don't make the laws so restrictive that dog owners give up obeying at ll.Further restriction makes it harder and harder for responsible dog owners and has no effet at allon irresponsible owners.

Auckland Council

#2841

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/_-MCdQeT2UfuetO2b-rQ1Q


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dogs feedback_ID#Date: Wednesday, 17 April 2019 5:19:26 PM



Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

Proposal 2



Agree

#3066

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/OQpnLbANzLCEDgnkL6DjOQ



It is currently very difficult to identify when and where we are able to take our dog and what therules are regarding leashing. It would also be incredibly helpful to have a dedicated website pagewhere we can clearly see the rules - on/off leash, facilities, times (if necessary), fenced etc.


Proposal 3



Agree

Proposal 4





Agree

10am-6pm would be more beneficial, especially as it starts to get darker.


Start time:

Finish time:

Start date:

Finish date:

Proposal 5A



Disagree

Lambing season varies depending on the breed of sheep so it seems unfair to have a blanket rule.

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Disagree

#3066

Dogs on leash would suffice.





Agree







Agree




Disagree

Proposal 5C



Agree

Proposal 6



Disagree

Proposal 7


#3066


Agree

Any other feedback:

Auckland Council

#3066

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/gIZnx00A8Y76cSZ_MVmFIg


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dogs feedback_Date: Saturday, 20 April 2019 7:13:25 AM



Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

Easier for public to understand

Proposal 2



#3138

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/v8dOErNzwdNmnMQ-y0M0lg


Agree

Helps me out if I don’t have to research every place I want to take them


Proposal 3



Agree

Currently I have two and found the different rules for different suburbs hard to understand. Iactually got my council wrong! Three seems much fairer, two dogs are easy to manage.

Proposal 4



Ōther

I’m working and have two dogs. It’s dark by 7pm for a lot of the year, it puts pressure on me torush home from work to take them out while it’s still light. 7pm is too late and dogs should beallowed on a leash in most places.


Disagree

As above. Too restrictive for dog owners and different locations will have different considerations


Start time: 11.00am

Finish time: 4.00pm

Start date:

Finish date:

Proposal 5A



Agree

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary


#3138


Ōther

Not relevant





Agree

Glad dogs are allowed off leash and birds are protected too







Disagree

Ōn lease everywhere would still protect wildlife




Disagree

Dog owners that live in the area are likely to be affected

Proposal 5C



Disagree

Review all with a view to providing more off leash access for well behaved dogs

Proposal 6


#3138


Agree

Proposal 7



Agree

It’s the owner not the dog in these situations

Any other feedback:

Ōverall good logical changes. However please consider that 7pm is too late for those of us whodon’t want to be out walking in the dark.

Auckland Council

#3138

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/0OS1JZuVWk7V-HTLXJzIMw


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dogs feedback_ID#2,911 Date: Saturday, 20 April 2019 2:25:53 PM



Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

Anything that improves dog laws and lets them be tightened is good. We are developing a highlybuilt up urban area and our loose dog regulations that don't work now will become increasinglyunworkable and acceptable to denser populations.

Proposal 2

All local board rules within Schedule 2 of the Auckland Council Policy on Dogs will be presented in

#3151

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/9GYpYW77BvjL0EBHOepuNQ



a consistent format.


Agree

But dog owners need to be far more accountable, many simply don't follow the present rules andthe regulatory bodies are not enforcing them.


Proposal 3



Agree

But just start at two dogs.

Proposal 4




Then everyone is perfectly clear and you can enforce the regulations.


Disagree

Too late. Dog ownership is a privilege for a minority. Why do the majority have to wait for theminority?


Start time:

Finish time:

Start date:

Finish date:

Proposal 5A



Disagree

No dogs should be allowed in Regional Parks, ever.

Proposal 5B

#3151

Glenfern Sanctuary



Agree

Just ban them altogether.





Disagree

No dogs should be allowed on Muriwai. You seem most concerned about dogs and their ownersbut not at all concerned about the general public.







Disagree

Too confusing. Why can't you just have a system of enclosed dog parks that dog owners can goto? Then the public that don't own dogs can safely go about their business. Use motorway sidestrips and other bits of land that are not of much use.




Disagree

see above

Proposal 5C



Disagree

#3151

Ban dogs altogether

Proposal 6



Agree

Proposal 7



Disagree

These sorts of dogs and breeds have no place in a built up urban environment. You should beheld accountable for every dog attack by these sorts of unsafe breeds. Where is the law that holdsyou accountable for Council decisions that lead directly to injured people? I especially have inmind attacks on children. Your decisions should be primarily based on them.

Any other feedback:

I think you need to take far more care and initiative of non dog owners rights to feel safe in thecommunity. Literally every day I drive in Mangere and see big pit bull type dogs running aroundfree in the neighbourhood. I never see a muzzle on any of these dogs when owners are walkingthem. Recently I dropped a boy off up a big driveway in Papatoetoe, he didn't want to walk upbecause the four houses on the side of the drive all had pitbulls who were going mental as wedrove up. Everyone in the van felt scared and unsafe. These types of dogs should be eliminatedfrom our urban environment. (made illegal). I don't think you are enforcing dog regulations, if its acost matter then dog owners should pay. Again, I say its a privilege for someone to own a dog, sopay for it, be responsible, your neighbours rights to a safe and quiet neighbourhood should comebefore your right to own a dog.

Auckland Council

#3151

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/E5ErGZpNjKIypYiGGqjiLg


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dogs feedback_ID#Date: Tuesday, 23 April 2019 1:20:32 PM



Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

Proposal 2



Agree

#3235

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/pM8lLcy-BEC2_dSa0d1NFw




Proposal 3



Disagree

I have two dogs on my property that never leave my back yard. Numerous people in my area havesingle dogs that roam, and have even climbed my 6 foot high fence to access my property. Whydoesn't council make these owners get a license instead of making me pay an extra for keepingmy dogs enclosed on my property? If I have a dog license then I should be exempt fromregistration fees etc.

Proposal 4



Local variations


Disagree


Start time: 7.00am

Finish time: 8.00pm


Finish date: Easter weekend (varies)

Proposal 5A



Agree

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Agree

#3235





Agree







Agree




Agree

Proposal 5C



Agree

Proposal 6



Agree

Proposal 7



Agree

#3235

Hopefully it will stop from jumping fences etc to access my property.

Any other feedback:

Auckland Council

#3235

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/1i5SCRjs_Fjdds_3AdjtyA


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dogs feedback_Date: Tuesday, 23 April 2019 3:37:01 PM



FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

Proposal 2



Agree

#3312

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/ua1e-Bu3bQXj4ZlHil2-Ug



Proposal 3



Agree

Proposal 4





Agree


Start time:

Finish time:

Start date:

Finish date:

Proposal 5A



Agree

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Agree




#3312


Agree







Agree




Agree

Proposal 5C



Agree

Just remember that dogs are family and if we are an active family we like to do things together -includes all family members. Just be mindful about this.

Proposal 6



Agree

Proposal 7



Agree

Any other feedback:

#3312

Auckland Council

#3312

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/6qTESmE165Zy5KYI2Bwb8g





Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Ōther

I agree so long there are no significant changes in the rules.

Proposal 2



#3368

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/uEFx_e09XLijea5RRhw__A



Agree


Proposal 3



Agree

Proposal 4





Agree


Start time:

Finish time:

Start date:

Finish date:

Proposal 5A



Ōther

Are there any statistics that shows that the people who do follow the rules have a negative affecton these areas in these conditions ?

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Ōther


#3368





Ōther








Ōther





Ōther


Proposal 5C



Agree

Proposal 6



Disagree

#3368

Proposal 7



Agree

Any other feedback:

Auckland Council

#3368

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/MdBVwOQBBSrIlKQSbd7DHg





Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

Proposal 2



Agree

#3383

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/l5dyiYdH9QYE1mqmT7yETA




Proposal 3



Disagree

Proposal 4



Local variations


Agree


Start time:

Finish time:

Start date:

Finish date:

Proposal 5A



Agree

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Agree




#3383


Agree







Agree




Disagree

Proposal 5C



Agree

Proposal 6



Agree

Proposal 7



Agree

Any other feedback:

#3383

Auckland Council

#3383

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/KaEpnyAb_rNk5Peq5Lo0Cw





Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

Proposal 2



Agree

#3438

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/Rc3duSvgLdcW-gNwX4tRkQ




Proposal 3



Agree

Proposal 4



Ōther

I think dogs should be allowed at all times as long as they are under control


Disagree



Start time: Ōther 24h/day

Finish time: Ōther 24h/day



Proposal 5A



Disagree


Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Disagree


#3438





Disagree








Disagree





Disagree


Proposal 5C



Disagree


Proposal 6



Disagree

It’s a bit too late for that and there’s limited evidence to suggest that disease is spread by dogsversus humans

#3438

Proposal 7



Agree

Any other feedback:

Can we stop classifying dogs as menacing based on breed? There’s no scientific evidence to backthis.

Auckland Council

#3438

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/Yn81eam-e5-6c7sLLAUmlg


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dogs feedback_IDate: Tuesday, 23 April 2019 9:00:47 PM



Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

Proposal 2



Agree

#3473

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/xrfPKj1XcpMWjyfLbznUwg



Proposal 3



Agree

Proposal 4



Ōther

7pm is too late to walk dogs in the evening, will often be dark. Some busy areas may warrant thistime but there are plenty of areas that are not used by the public and would be safe for dogs to beusing. Differences in timing are not a problem so long as the information is easy to access.


Disagree

7pm is far too late to walk dogs, often dark. Most beach/park users have left the area by then.


Start time: 10.00am

Finish time: 5.00pm



Proposal 5A



Agree

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Agree

#3473





Agree







Agree




Agree

Proposal 5C



Agree

Proposal 6



Agree

Proposal 7



Agree

#3473

Any other feedback:

Auckland Council

#3473

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/_OROR98I8Ya1zwJuukgkgA


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dogs feedback_Date: Tuesday, 23 April 2019 9:17:27 PM



Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

Proposal 2



Agree

#3476

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/OEzE1DaA1PSrwRzgrC5m7Q



Proposal 3



Agree

Proposal 4



Local variations


Disagree

7pm is too late for walking dogs, most families will be off the beach before this 5pm would be abetter compromise


Start time: 10.00am

Finish time: 5.00pm



Proposal 5A



Agree

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Agree



#3476

tower



Agree







Agree




Agree

Proposal 5C



Ōther

Unsure of what is covered in the rest of 5c

Proposal 6



Ōther

I feel locals should be consulted about impacts and length of closure before measures are taken

Proposal 7



Agree

#3476

Any other feedback:

Auckland Council

#3476

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/NNV5IupmkJnbTWUU9f-xog





Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

No problem really with this proposal. If we get some more dog owners represented on thegoverning body it will be easier to relax some of the restrictions in the policy.

Proposal 2


#3485

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/JN2uXI_ziz7A7ER69bdRYg




Disagree

The default rule should remain “off leash but under control”. Changing to default dogs on leash isan unfair restriction on responsible dog owners.


I’m sure Auckland Council is well aware of these beaches already, if not I would be questioningthe value of my dog registration.

Proposal 3



Agree

No problem with this proposal.

Proposal 4



Local variations

There are many beaches where the access rules allow off leash before 10am and after 5pm overSummer, and are free from restrictions earlier than the end of March. Local boards should remainfree to set whatever access rules they deem suitable.


Disagree

Schools are back in March so the beaches are emptier during the day. Daylight saving ends in lateMarch so 7pm is a dark and unsafe time to be walking on the beach, dog or not.


Start time: 10.00am

Finish time: 5.00pm



Proposal 5A



Disagree

dogs controlled on leash should be no problem to stock.

#3485

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Ōther

I don’t know Glenfern reserve





Disagree

The current rules are fine. A simple marker post on the beach at the current point would suffice ifrequired.







Agree

No problem with this proposal.




Agree

No problem with this proposal

Proposal 5C



Agree

#3485

Proposal 6



Agree

As long as the prohibition is for valid reasons as above.

Proposal 7



Agree

This makes sense.

Any other feedback:

Auckland Council

#3485

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/aK8qSAhMueMEza9krrWtNw


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dogs feedback_Date: Wednesday, 24 April 2019 1:49:30 PM



Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

No need for a duplication

Proposal 2



#3575

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/-Tg5F4zOjWkx_9yBlnvViA


Agree


Proposal 3



Agree

Animal welfare is important and dog owners need to be aware. Although, if license is obtained itshould not incur any extra cost to the owner as it will only discourage people to apply.

Proposal 4




These time and season rules have always been hard to keep up with - to the point where they justget ignored now. I agree with standardised definition to avoid any confusion - but dog ownersneed to be considerate of their surroundings and other beach users. Should work with daylightsavings though instead of dates.


Ōther

As above and beaches are emptier in the mornings.


Start time: 7.00am

Finish time: 7.00pm



Proposal 5A



Agree

Animal welfare

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary

#3575



Agree

Animal welfare





Agree

Animal welfare







Ōther

Unless this is all sign posted, it needs standardising - ie when does it change from morning todaytime and then to evening? It's these kinds of rules that make it confusing for owners.




Ōther

Why not on leash for road and walking track?

Proposal 5C



Ōther

Proposal 6

Extend our ability to make temporary changes to dog access rules to protect flora vulnerable to

#3575

dogs, such as kauri.


Agree

As long as there are sufficient sign posts to warn owners

Proposal 7



Ōther

What about dogs classified as menacing due to breed? My American Staffy is trained, goodnatured and never had an infringement in all its 6 years and yet he needs to be muzzled in publicand gets treated like a threat. A dog with behavioural issues may improve slightly but it's theowner that needs the most training. I believe a dog classified as menacing due to breed shouldhave the same opportunity to have the classification dropped and the owner considered forResposible dog owners accreditation.

Any other feedback:

Auckland Council

#3575

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/7c2XImJxOkKTqKbFYgWrUw


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dogs feedback_Date: Thursday, 25 April 2019 10:46:05 AM



Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

Proposal 2



Agree

#3674

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/EeFKRGrdbL3Ayw2p7mUMbA



Proposal 3



Agree

Proposal 4



Local variations

Restrictions should be based on demand I.e. the most popular beaches that will be packed insummer with kids and sunbathers should have the full restriction. Less popular beaches could justbe the school holidays over Dec & Jan + weekends. More remote, less popular beaches shouldhave much lower restrictions.


Disagree

10-7pm is poorly timed, should be more like 9am-5pm. Again based around peak times while stillallowing dog owners to access at reasonable times.


Start time: 9.00am

Finish time: 5.00pm



Proposal 5A



Agree

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Agree

#3674





Agree







Agree




Agree

Proposal 5C



Agree

Proposal 6



Agree

Proposal 7



#3674

Ōther

I think this direction should come from dog specialists. Can “menancing” dog breeds be trained outof instinctual actions?

Any other feedback:

Dogs have had a shared partnership with NZers for a long time. This should be continued. Iunderstand and agree with restrictions to protect fauna and to reduce the risk of dog nuisance inpublic spaces in peak demand times. Some parents/adults promote (intentionally orunintentionally) an irrational fears of ALL dogs and this minority shouldn’t be allowed to dictateaccess to public spaces for all NZers and mans best friend. A ban at all times like at MountMaunganui main beach seems unfair. Having access at morning and night to enjoy the beachresponsibly with your dog is an important part for many dog owners

Auckland Council

#3674

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/2fZmBJybc866QtccGAw0bw


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dogs feedback_Date: Sunday, 28 April 2019 1:34:39 PM



FeedbackProposal 1



Disagree

Any changes should be made by bylaw not some Council policy-maker. Where is yourcommitment to democracy? If a bylaw is necessary for rules on parking on berms, it is surelynecessary for dog access hours. You are not a law unto yourselves!

Proposal 2


#3901

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/EyIp0Uentuxu_jFfwL0IUQ



Disagree

Standardise this through local bylaws not policy decisions as this is undemocratic.


You are changing the legal process. Do not mess with an established legal process.

Proposal 3



Agree

Two dogs is enough for most properties

Proposal 4





Disagree

7pm is too late. Should be 5pm so humans with their dogs can enjoy summer evenings as well asother people.


Start time: 10.00am

Finish time: 5.00pm



Proposal 5A



Ōther

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary


#3901


Ōther





Agree







Ōther




Ōther

Proposal 5C



Ōther

Proposal 6



Agree

Proposal 7

Ōwners of dogs classified as menacing due to behaviour will have the opportunity to have their

#3901

dog's classification reviewed.


Agree

Any other feedback:

Auckland Council

#3901

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/tXBYnMFmBheFd1IfKKciFg


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dogs feedback_Date: Sunday, 28 April 2019 7:59:41 PM



Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

YES Because it sounds like it will make changes easier to make to schedules access if required.

Proposal 2



#3924

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/htz4c2euT1zUauPVxYpFCg


Agree

Seems less confusing.


Proposal 3



Agree

I think that people need to be more accountable for the welfare of their dogs and how they'recared for, this should help with this and hopefully prevent things like puppy farms from happening.

Proposal 4




Less confusion if rules are standardised and uniform.


Disagree


Start time: 10.00am

Finish time: 6.00pm



Proposal 5A



Disagree

I feel we should be allowed to use these parks, providing that dog is on a leash.

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



#3924

Agree

Wildlife needs to be protected and this seems fair.





Agree

This is a fair reason.







Agree

This seems fair.




Agree

Plenty of other places to exercise the dog out west Auckland way.

Proposal 5C



Agree

Most of these rules seem fair and reasonable.

Proposal 6



#3924

Agree

Agree with this as this is a serious problem in NZ at present.

Proposal 7



Agree

Yes this sounds pro-active in terms of promoting responsible dog ownership.

Any other feedback:

No comments to add on the above. However, I am interested in knowing if there may be anyconsideration given to responsible dog owners being able to use public transport with pets. I am asenior citizen and at the moment I am able to drive. There may be a time in the future where thisisn't possible, it would be great to have a city where you can take your pet with you ontrains/buses. I would like to be informed or contacted about this issue. I also think that Aucklandneeds to have more Dog parks and dog friendly beaches. This would be another great benefit to apet friendly city.

Auckland Council

#3924

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/xieQDPIXZyfHLQbpSGWIng


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dogs feedback_Date: Monday, 29 April 2019 10:03:21 AM



Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Disagree

feel the governing body should still retain final right to approve etc

Proposal 2


#3941

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/7de9C6Z9X4s49WXdXk2gfQ



Agree

consistency across the city would be great.


It is my hope that Mangere Mountain and surrounding park areas will continue to remain as off-leash/ under control spaces for walking dogs.

Proposal 3



Agree

Proposal 4



Local variations

local boards can set times that reflect the way in which their local spaces are actually used.


Disagree

not all areas are used in the same way by members of the public - some areas are more suitablefor dog walking than others and vice versa - times should reflect how the community actually usethe spaces.


Start time:

Finish time:

Start date:

Finish date:

Proposal 5A



Agree

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary

#3941



Ōther

not familiar with this area so can not answer either way. feel this decision should be given to thelocal board/ community to decide.





Agree







Ōther





Ōther


Proposal 5C



Ōther

Mangere Mountain should remain an All times - under control off leash area

Proposal 6

#3941



Agree

Proposal 7



Agree

Any other feedback:

Auckland Council

#3941

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/TFgAfaSc_3ghMI1ZV9ehBQ


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dogs feedback_ID#3,733 Date: Monday, 29 April 2019 4:33:08 PM



Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

It sounds like this will just make things simpler and easier to understand so of course it should besimplified.

Proposal 2


#3970

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/6-Lg8OmYNQe3qV7tWAtPXQ




Agree

Of course making things the same makes it easier. If you can understand one sign you willunderstand them all.


Proposal 3



Agree

People move houses, and they shouldn't be stressed or intimidated by different rules becausethey are moving to different areas. Some people also might not know that the requirements aredifferent and be essentially breaking the law unintentionally because of it.

Proposal 4



Local variations

Inconsistency is better than standardization in this case. The specific definitions are there becauseyou need to take into account the wildlife, people and other things in that area. Since the way thetimes and seasons to do with dog walking is being considered to be standardized, it should beeasier for people to find out the different time and season definitions for each area. Some areaswill have to have stricter rules due to the wildlife and other things. If standardized, this will hurtareas that don't require the same limited times.


Disagree

A 10am start is definitely too late in the morning for dog owners and 7pm is too early in myopinion. This restricts owners too much. Everyone has different schedules but for most, morningsand nights are the times you can take your dogs for a walk. Most people work, attend school orjust go out during the day. So mornings and nights, before the day begins and after it ends is thebest time for dog owners to give their companions an essential walk. Our dogs need to be freeand get out and around. These times restrict owners to not be able to give them this.


Start time: 7.00am

Finish time: 8.00pm



Proposal 5A

#3970



Other

Standardization doesn't take into account each areas needs but it seems to be for the bestbecause it's truth that many people won't bother finding that areas allowed times. I have mixedfeelings on this proposal.

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Disagree

I don't know the specifics but if blender sanctuary has already been studied and the conclusionwas to prohibit dogs there then it seems for the best to keep it that way.





Disagree

Again, it seems for the best to keep restricting dogs south of the surf tower to protect the wildlife.







Agree

This is to protect wildlife and it isn't stopping people from taking their dogs to the beach.




Other

#3970

I don't know the roads enough to know if this will limit dog owners or restrict them from reachingany other areas they would want to walk to.

Proposal 5C



Agree

I don't know if any other parks rules need to change or not.

Proposal 6



Other

I don't know what things the council will gain from extending the ability to make temporarychanges.

Proposal 7



Agree

This will give our dogs rights and second chances. They wont just be put down unfairly.

Any other feedback:

Auckland Council

#3970

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/3qrDTl7iQgB7Pj7M2olO8A


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dogs feedback_ID#3,776 Date: Tuesday, 30 April 2019 10:43:40 AM



Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

Proposal 2



Agree

#4013

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/2HdfmyfOIABAZWzNOilU9A




Proposal 3



Ōther

Proposal 4



Local variations

There should be considered reasons for time restrictions on dog access. Having a blanket rule willremove any thought process behind why and when dog access should be restricted.


Disagree

7pm is unnecessarily late. 5pm or 6pm are more reasonable options, use of parks and beaches atthis time is mostly by people walking their dogs. Ōther leisure users would be there during themost warm and sunny hours.


Start time: 10.00am

Finish time: 5.00pm



Proposal 5A



Agree

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Agree

#4013





Agree







Ōther




Ōther

Proposal 5C



Ōther

Proposal 6



Agree

Proposal 7



Ōther

#4013

Dogs should not be classified as menacing due to breed. Breed specific legislation is wrong anddoes not work. Proposing that a dog that has actually exhibited menacing behaviour can have it’sbehaviour reviewed, but a dog unfairly classified as menacing purely due to its breed cannot isridiculous in the extreme. It is completely nonsensical to not allow a dog that hasn’t done anythingwrong to prove itself.

Any other feedback:

Dogs being classified as menacing based on breed needs to be stopped. Breed specific legislationis ill-informed, ineffective and morally wrong.

Auckland Council

#4013

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/S6y8dIrtceREduJh5ehhVg


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dogs feedback_Date: Wednesday, 1 May 2019 6:10:42 AM


Submitter detailsDate received: 1 May 2019 06:08

Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

Proposal 2



Agree

#4089

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/8kn8_2FqPzPbUAp3MvlH1Q



Proposal 3



Agree

Proposal 4



Local variations


Disagree


Start time: 7.00am

Finish time: 8.00pm



Proposal 5A



Agree

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Agree




#4089


Agree







Agree




Agree

Proposal 5C



Agree

Proposal 6



Agree

Proposal 7



Agree

Any other feedback:

#4089

Auckland Council

#4089

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/gxJAEF7Bw28kUJzuTlnZJQ


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dogs feedback_ID#3,941 Date: Thursday, 2 May 2019 8:36:47 AM



Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Ōther

What is the Governing Body - do you mean the Auck City Council? Why do we have bothanyway? Sounds a bit silly, surely it would be better to have either one of the other..

Proposal 2


#4176

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/0p7V3X_BmlT_HgQPCkaRWw




Agree

Makes sense but then again I don't know all the different dog areas in Auckland so my opinionwould seem irrelevant.


Proposal 3



Agree

Makes sense since we have this ridiculous "Super City" arrangement.

Proposal 4



Local variations

Auckland is far too big - Wellsford to Frankton?? Ōf course there should be local decisions onmatters like this.


Disagree

Again, there are places where no rules are needed - the locality dictates common sense.


Start time:

Finish time:

Start date:

Finish date:

Proposal 5A



Agree

Makes sense and I'm assuming that the people in charge of stock have agreed to this, otherwiseit's a nonsense.

Proposal 5B

#4176

Glenfern Sanctuary



Agree

All steps possible should be taken to protect wildlife.





Agree

Makes sense.







Agree

All steps should be taken to protect wildlife.




Agree

All steps should be taken to protect wildlife.

Proposal 5C



Agree

The picking up of dog poo is a real problem in all parks. Sadly some dog-owners don't care whattheir dogs do and where.. At the Ōnehunga Lagoon free-dog area there is a local lady who doesn'thave a dog yet every day, sometimes twice a day, she picks up dog poo. She (and others) alsoput dogpoo bags on tree branches for those who suddenly need a bag and have forgotten. A great

#4176

little community had developed there - caring for th dogs and each other!

Proposal 6



Agree

Every effort should be made to protect the wildlife.

Proposal 7



Agree

Makes good sense.

Any other feedback:

Dog parks and areas which allow off-leash running help to socialise dogs and therefore producehappier and safer dogs. The addition of seats (preferably with tree shade in the summer) alsoencourages people to get to know one another. The social benefits to folk should not beunderestimated - elderly, alone, lonely, unwell etc people can walk around, talk to dog-owners andtheir dogs - it can make huge differences to outlooks and contentment, costs nothing, but makes agreat change in people's lives.

Auckland Council

#4176

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/oJ9Gk5YL8juVfnIqUajCEQ


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dogs feedback_ID#3,954 Date: Thursday, 2 May 2019 9:44:40 AM



Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

Removing duplication will be an improvement

Proposal 2



#4189

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/GzTq62hMorRuNBN958OF4g



Agree

Removes confusion


Proposal 3



Agree

Removes confusion and makes it easier for people changing address to have a consistantrequirement

Proposal 4




Makes it easier for owners when visiting or moving to another location


Agree

Time frame gives dog owner access to these areas to walk their dogs and it is reasonable that thepublic be given access without being concerned about dogs being in their area especially wherechildren are concerned


Start time:

Finish time:

Start date:

Finish date:

Proposal 5A



Agree

Removes confusion and protect stock at these times

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary

#4189



Agree

Protection of wildlife is extremely important so dogs should be excluded from these areas





Agree

Protection of the gannet colony is extremely important







Agree

The change is sensible




Agree

Protection of wildlife is important and sensible.

Proposal 5C



Agree

Proposal 6


#4189


Agree

Provided these changes are made known to the public before implimentation

Proposal 7



Ōther

With some reservation to the change provided Council follows through.

Any other feedback:

Auckland Council

#4189

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/-Ri1bQrQyvN6oMskFICIXQ


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dogs feedback_Date: Friday, 3 May 2019 11:14:32 AM



Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

Proposal 2



Agree

#4355

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/p5Vl7d39JFW1t9dYpe8bWA



Proposal 3



Agree

Proposal 4





Disagree

Daylight saving period people who work walk dogs late in these areas after 7pm


Start time: 8.30am

Finish time: 8.00pm



Proposal 5A



Agree

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Agree



#4355



Agree







Agree




Agree

Proposal 5C



Agree

Proposal 6



Agree

Proposal 7



Agree

Any other feedback:

Very timely this was reviewed

#4355

Auckland Council

#4355

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/E5h5gF1ofjl0NGfYt7OpBA


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dogs feedback_Date: Friday, 3 May 2019 1:19:29 PM



Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

duplication can cause confusion for interpretation reasons.

Proposal 2



#4395

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/BGibJCSp_-25BDPEg_KSAg


Agree

same rules for everybody


Proposal 3



Agree

if there is a multiple dog ownership licence for all of the Auckland area there is no hassle having toreapply when moving into another area within the Auckland region.

Proposal 4




fairness to everybody


Agree

consistency across all of auckland


Start time:

Finish time:

Start date:

Finish date:

Proposal 5A



Agree

Clear guidelines for when you can and cant take your dog to a regional park

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary


#4395


Agree

no dogs should be allowed at any time near wildlife sanctuaries





Disagree

maybe change to dogs on lead at all times.







Agree

clear information for dog owners required




Agree

no dogs should be allowed at any time near wildlife sanctuaries

Proposal 5C



Agree

Proposal 6



#4395

Agree

in these cases environment comes first.

Proposal 7



Agree

provided there is enough evidence that the owner of the dog has taken responsibility andimproved the behaviour of the dog review is a good thing.

Any other feedback:

Auckland Council

#4395

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/JX5jKIR22PZohlrnk6O_yg





Proposal 1



Agree

Proposal 2



Agree

#4448

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/THv-gd__2IhBy6qbrrBF6w



Proposal 3



Ōther

Proposal 4




Easier to remember


Disagree

Too long and too late. Ōur family enjoys interacting with dogs when going for a walk


Start time: 11.00am

Finish time: 4.00pm



Proposal 5A



Ōther

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Ōther



#4448

tower



Ōther







Ōther




Disagree

Proposal 5C



Proposal 6



Disagree

Proposal 7



Any other feedback:

#4448

Auckland Council

#4448

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/1uKcXrtouXVt-aCDWQMZ5Q


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dogs feedback_Date: Saturday, 4 May 2019 8:43:19 AM



Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Ōther

Not convinced that it being easier to make changes to Policy schedule is a negative or positiveaction

Proposal 2


#4509

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/ZC338MaEeZ1IE5H7iaklCw



Disagree

What about the impact of different ground/park areas in different local board areas - will this not beeffected?


Proposal 3



Agree

Too many animal owners do not want to "care" for dogs they want to "possess" them.

Proposal 4



Local variations

All areas, beaches included are different and people travel to them in accordance with theirwork/life schedules - some are closer to residential areas than others and the local boards shouldbe able to reflect this.


Ōther

Unsure - is this the timeframe when dogs are allowed on beaches or not allowed? Some peopleprefer to go to parks and beaches late because less people around.


Start time: Ōther Depending on response to above

Finish time: Ōther Depending on response to above



Proposal 5A



Agree

All animals deserve protection - both from bad owners and potential predators, natural orotherwise

#4509

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Agree

Protection of wildlife - keep in mind it is not only 4-legged potential risks here!





Agree

As per previous response







Agree

As per previous responses




Agree

As per previous responses

Proposal 5C



Ōther

#4509

Not sure - it would depend on each area

Proposal 6



Agree

Protection of native species

Proposal 7



Agree

I do hope this review will also apply to/for "menacing" owners as most positive animal owners areaware, menacing owners present a greater risk to pubic than animals - who become this waybecause of their "owners" or more accurately tit;ed "possessors".

Any other feedback:

No - except for I do hope that the animals wellbeing is considered alongside the publics.

Auckland Council

#4509

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/cgP-w9uu1QM5m2Bom3Hvgg


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dogs feedback_ID#4,251 Date: Saturday, 4 May 2019 8:46:29 AM



Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Disagree

The ability for civil servants to change a wide-ranging policy like this without political approval isinappropriate. Removing the schedule of places from the policy and leaving it in the by-laws wouldbe more appropriate. Policy should not contain detail, it should be a statement of principles. Theby-law should be the single place the detail is stated.

Proposal 2

All local board rules within Schedule 2 of the Auckland Council Policy on Dogs will be presented in

#4518

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/uHt4fqjE9WArI2JhSIOaKQ



a consistent format.


Agree

Simplicity and consistency


Proposal 3



Disagree

Every dog should be individually licenced, and the council system should be aware if multiple dogsare present on a property. If people claim that the costs is therefore too high, they cannot affordthe dogs and should not hold them.

Proposal 4




Any person visiting another area of the city will be aware of the situation, with no claim of thatbeing different from his / her local area.


Ōther

I am unaware of the implications of this definition and therefore have no opinion.


Start time:

Finish time:

Start date:

Finish date:

Proposal 5A



Agree

Standardisation. No argument from dog owners that they did not know the "local" rule.

#4518

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Agree





Disagree

As there is a gannet colony the dogs should be on leashes or prohibited. A single dog disobeyingan owners command (which will inevitably eventually happen) could cause significant damage.







Ōther

Don't know how far the southern car park is from the sensitive area.




Agree

Proposal 5C



Ōther

As I don't know what the rules are and don't have time to research I cannot form an opinion on thequestion.

#4518

Proposal 6



Agree

Appears to be an obvious need.

Proposal 7



Agree

Any other feedback:

Auckland Council

#4518

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/dhF9XVTMMsZ03jdM4PWMdA





Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

To keep dogs owner responsible when out and not interuppting families in parks and public aeeas.

Proposal 2



#4695

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/NwwKeMalhT7rAQZHtXOIHw


Agree


Proposal 3



Disagree

Care given to dogs should not be related to where you live or how big your house is. This proposalis stupid. Cleanliness and proper diet are more important.

Proposal 4



Local variations



Start time:

Finish time:

Start date:

Finish date:

Proposal 5A



Agree

Stock should be protected

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Protect wildlife


#4695




Compromise










Agree

Proposal 5C



Proposal 6



Agree

Proposal 7



Agree

Protect other dogs from menacing ones

Any other feedback:

Protecting the public and other animals from menacing dogs is important but having the power to

#4695

control people on how many dogs they can have is outrageous. That is giving too much control.Regulating cleanliness and making sure dogs are given proper diet is important and thats whatshould be checked.

Auckland Council

#4695

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/VHCDpJFN89n6QeBQ_lk2Tw





Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

As long as it is just a duplication then there is no need.

Proposal 2



#4748

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/bRsv_XkYS8otzD8friQDAA


Agree

We care one city and it is confusing as people move around.


Proposal 3



Agree

Again consistency across the city.

Proposal 4




Consistency.


Agree

Dog owners can still walk their dogs outside the hours. Less children are around then.


Start time:

Finish time:

Start date:

Finish date:

Proposal 5A



Agree

If the public want to be able to enjoy these parks they need to also respect the stock requirementsif we want stock use of the land.

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary


#4748


Ōther

Ōnly if it is absolutely safe to change the complete ban.





Agree

Am not too sure if all dog owners can discern control as I would.







Agree

Dogs are part of the family for many, so allowing sufficient access, but reducing risk to wild lifewould help families to do things together.




Agree

Dogs wander and people get busy and do not always notice.

Proposal 5C



Agree

Particular attention to ensuring people know the pick up[ and disposal rule of dog poo! Notsufficient to bury in the sand.

Proposal 6

#4748



Agree

Proposal 7



Agree

Any other feedback:

Should all owners be required to attend a care of dog course before being allowed to own a dog?Some owners are very negligent and appear to think they have exclusive rights, particularly inareas where children are around. Children and dogs are unpredictable responsibility is both theparents and dog owners, but ultimately a child is unlikely to maul a dog, so dog owners have agreater responsibility.

Auckland Council

#4748

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/9XaJyETUUdB4cAJQ8DwlAA





FeedbackProposal 1



Ōther

Proposal 2



Agree

#4895

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/d5Sn-bqeyND7kujHRsgXeg



Proposal 3



Disagree

All about money for council

Proposal 4




Easier to police


Disagree

Should be able to be with family members at any time of day and night


Start time: Ōther 24 hrs

Finish time: Ōther 24 hrs



Proposal 5A



Agree

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Agree


#4895




Agree







Agree




Disagree

Ōn leash is fine

Proposal 5C



Disagree

Most people don't know them or cant find them for the area they wish to visit as council website isvery confusing

Proposal 6



Disagree

People do more harm to trees than dogs

Proposal 7


#4895



Disagree

Its usually not the dogs fault as lack of training and love and care

Any other feedback:

Dogs should be judged as individuals and not as breeds as there is some very different ways theare taught

Auckland Council

#4895

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/Fytmxal3e50T0uvOoO0nmw


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dogs feedback_ID#4,491 Date: Saturday, 4 May 2019 10:57:09 AM



Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

Proposal 2



Disagree

#4915

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/w0IiB2bPcz7pTqzXMipU4g



Important to allow local communities to determine dog access in their area. Decisions like thiscould be too easily changed without adequate consultation if centralised by Council.


Proposal 3



Ōther

Not enough information to provide feedback.

Proposal 4




Standardisation makes sense, however this change shouldn’t reduce the season


Ōther

Same as previous feedback, shouldn’t reduce the access.


Start time: 7.00am

Finish time: 8.00pm



Proposal 5A



Disagree

Matter should be resolved by local board

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



#4915

Agree





Agree







Ōther




Agree

Proposal 5C



Agree

Proposal 6



Agree

Proposal 7


#4915


Disagree

Classification as menancing seems to be over used and lacking common sense (at times)appropriate protections should be in place, given this m, it is important to retain a clear andunderstood grounds for appeal process.

Any other feedback:

Auckland Council

#4915

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/UNEbRtN4H_YlYcl273n3ug





Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Ōther

Proposal 2



Agree

#5006

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/G-hGkPbZf9np9kWn5AW7xw



Proposal 3



Agree

Proposal 4



Local variations


Agree


Start time:

Finish time:

Start date:

Finish date:

Proposal 5A



Agree

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Agree




#5006


Agree







Agree




Agree

Proposal 5C



Agree

Proposal 6



Agree

Proposal 7



Agree

Any other feedback:

#5006

Auckland Council

#5006

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/6AwHwoKVRdr5gjxTeKb4Gw





Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

Less bureauracy.Rules made clearer.

Proposal 2



#5016

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/tex2l03XcfWbQ8f1ped0AQ


Disagree

Ōne rule for all areas please


Proposal 3



Agree

A house near me has lately had three dogs roaming about, no front fence.It is intimidating,causing me to cross the street when walking past.

Proposal 4




Ōne rule for all.


This is very clear and fair


Start time:

Finish time:

Start date:

Finish date:

Proposal 5A



Keep it simple.

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Agree

#5016

Fair enough for this term





Agree

Yes this is an important place










Proposal 5C



What a long winded lquestionair.No wonder our rates are so expensive with people sitting aroundcoming up with all of this.Make a rule and get on with it.I am sick of my money being spent on allthis long winded decision making.There are people paid to make these rules and see they areenforced, what are they doing.?

Proposal 6



Disagree

Proposal 7


#5016



Any other feedback:

Auckland Council

#5016

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/LFZm5Udmdz7Vei80QEGGLA


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dogs feedback_ID#4,412Date: Saturday, 4 May 2019 9:59:27 AM



Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

Proposal 2



Agree

#5092

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/s_cKYyXRtLWjdMT0Vvmpiw




Proposal 3



Agree

Proposal 4




Agree

I agree to a standardised regional definition BUT make the time period to the same as daylightsaving.


Start time:

Finish time:

Start date:

Finish date:

Proposal 5A



Agree

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Agree



#5092



Ōther

I have no opinion on this







Ōther





Ōther


Proposal 5C



Agree

Proposal 6



Agree

Proposal 7



Agree

#5092

Any other feedback:

Auckland Council

#5092

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/qc95faloXOGMgl0Bdjo9lw


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dogs feedback_Date: Saturday, 4 May 2019 3:15:37 PM



Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

If it makes it easier to make changes to policies then it's a good idea!

Proposal 2



#5180

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/VPNoP8jEXSPiIYRBdgV-mA


Disagree

The rules need to be standardized across the city for continuity so EVERYŌNE (dog owners & thepublic) understand when dogs should be allowed in public spaces. There are too many rules fordifferent areas which just confuses both dog owners and the public using the same space.


Proposal 3



Agree

Dogs welfare should be looked after and the property they live at should be checked to ensure it'sbig enough and well fences to ensure those dogs are safe and healthy

Proposal 4




Standardise the rules. Giving local boards the option to 'customise' the time and seasons definitionmakes no sense. They'll just change them back to what the original times and dates and it will bea waste of rate payer money and achieve nothing. A standard rule will take away any doubt,ambiguity about when a dog should be on the beach and it will empower non dog owners to letdog owners know that their dog shouldn't be on the beach.


Disagree

I'm excited about standardised regional rules as 10am - 7pm is prime beach use time for thegeneral public. I would like to see these rules applied all year round as beaches are still utilized bya large number of Aucklanders throughout the year.


Start time: 8.00am

Finish time: 5.00pm



Proposal 5A



Agree

#5180

I don't use these Regional parks, however the protection of live stock is important

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Agree





Agree







Disagree

I agree with the north of Vaughns stream to protect wildlife as well as the car park on leash rule. Idon't agree with dog access during the day for the summer months. This beach is probably themost used beach in Auckland during the summer and the standardised access rules should apply.




Agree

Proposal 5C



Agree

Beach access is an important part of the regional park dog rules and the standardised accessrules should apply to all areas not designated as a dog recreation area, specifically beaches.

#5180

Proposal 6



Agree

Proposal 7



Disagree

If the dog has been classified as menacing the owner has failed the dog to look after andadequately train their pet. If it is classified as menacing it should stay in place for the life of the dogand appropriate action by owner (e.g. muzzle) should be enforced

Any other feedback:

Auckland Council

#5180

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/FijPIgWcLqxzCtqrVd28aQ


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dogs feedback_ID#4,965 Date: Sunday, 5 May 2019 10:10:05 AM



Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Disagree

Proposal 2



Agree

#5431

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/vFe74BKXJ_wRjanQRDjU_A




Proposal 3



Agree

Proposal 4





Disagree

The period from Labour Weekend to end of March is too long


Start time: 10.30am

Finish time: 7.00pm



Proposal 5A



Agree

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Agree



#5431



Agree







Ōther

I think that these instructions are overly complicated Could (b) not use start & finish times ratherthan vague morning, daytime & evening and have dates for Summer and Winter like other placesdo? Could (d) not simply say something like dogs are not allowed anywhere else in Long BayRegional Park, and its beaches




Ōther

It would be helpful to have a landmark

Proposal 5C



Agree

Proposal 6



Agree

Proposal 7



#5431

Agree

Any other feedback:

Auckland Council

#5431

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/_B4DOiAqp6YOefYTBwXHVw


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dogs feedback_Date: Monday, 6 May 2019 9:41:21 AM



Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

Proposal 2



Agree

#5654

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/A2nA0hMnNmE7pavFKv6V7Q


I agree this would make things easier, but I'm a bit leary of all places being leash as default. Thatsucks for the wild spaces.


Proposal 3



Agree

Proposal 4



Local variations


Agree


Start time:

Finish time:

Start date:

Finish date:

Proposal 5A



Agree

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Agree



#5654

tower



Agree







Agree




Agree

Proposal 5C



Agree

Proposal 6



Agree

Proposal 7



Agree

Any other feedback:

#5654

Auckland Council

#5654

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/WKLePCQI1iLNuzbzEbY-Ig


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dogs feedback_ID#5,479 Date: Tuesday, 7 May 2019 8:10:51 PM



Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

Proposal 2



Agree

#5931

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/AfubGCxeYa4T-Z632MP7qA




Proposal 3



Agree

Proposal 4





Disagree


Start time: 11.00am

Finish time: 4.00pm



Proposal 5A



Agree

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Agree




#5931


Disagree







Disagree




Agree

Proposal 5C



Disagree

Proposal 6



Agree

Proposal 7



Disagree

Any other feedback:

#5931

Auckland Council

#5931

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/JsQDC2dbl2CNlTFWhEvXeg


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dogs feedback_Date: Tuesday, 7 May 2019 10:52:01 PM



Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

Proposal 2



Agree

#5953

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/tEbKZwX05hHrpsuBvE4_TQ


It's confusing to have different rules in different areas. I visit many different areas with my dog andwant to have a simpler process/set of rules to follow


Proposal 3



Agree

Proposal 4




It's confusing to have different rules in different areas. I visit many different areas with my dog andwant to have a simpler process/set of rules to follow


Disagree

7pm is too late, only gives 2 hours of access (if a park closes at 9pm). People with well behaveddogs should be encouraged to visit and access the area from 5pm onwards. It would be better tofocus on improving behaviour: Ōpen up more access (e.g. hours) to owners that have doneobedience training course, in this way you encourage and incentivise people to be better dogowners. Restrict access and have more rules to restrict people with uncontrolled or untraineddogs.


Start time: 10.00am

Finish time: 5.00pm



Proposal 5A



Disagree

Dates are too long, why is the lambing season so long.

Proposal 5B

#5953

Glenfern Sanctuary



Disagree

If people are allowed, then dogs should be allowed on leash





Agree







Disagree





Disagree


Proposal 5C



Agree

Proposal 6


#5953


Disagree


Proposal 7



Agree

Any other feedback:

Not all dogs are the same and not all owners are the same. There should be more focus onincentivising and encouraging good behaviour, training and good dog ownership. Restrict accessto owners that demonstrate bad behaviour, lack of training, lack of control of their dogs. Peopledisplaying bad behaviour can be as menacing or damaging as a dog.

Auckland Council

#5953

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/XAG2eJA0UTKD5wSDlEOQkQ


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dogs feedback_Date: Wednesday, 8 May 2019 6:04:32 PM



FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

Proposal 2



Agree

#6025

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/Qz3-K8aK_d1AS4rV70XA7A


Makes sense


Proposal 3



Agree

Proposal 4



Local variations

Having these overarching times are good if they were actually reasonably. This is not the liveablecity which i moved to. You go to many other cities around the world and dogs are not treated asthey are in Auckland. I pay a high fee for my dog every year (more than my car) and yet the areasi can take her are so limited and now these are going to be restricted further. I would rather eacharea had its say.


Disagree

Again unreasonable times. 10am is fine as it allows dog owners in summer to have a morningwalk before the heat of the day. However 7pm is stupid and most people are off beaches waybefore that time. Also In November it is still not exactly warm at the beaches and December isprobably more reasonable.


Start time: 10.00am

Finish time: 4.00pm



Proposal 5A



Agree

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary

#6025



Agree





Agree







Agree




Agree

Proposal 5C



Disagree

I dont know all the regional parks rules but these should be looked at as i feel dogs are far toorestricted.

Proposal 6



Agree

#6025

If its reasonable then fine

Proposal 7



Agree

Any other feedback:

Auckland Council

#6025

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/psrDsp_QFWat_4sUAcZL1g


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dogs feedback_Date: Wednesday, 8 May 2019 6:46:18 PM



FeedbackProposal 1



Ōther

Proposal 2



Agree

#6029

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/VYUsgzrnsei5Uw_HeUvm8w



Proposal 3



Agree

While I agree I’m principle I think it depends on the breed of the dogs

Proposal 4



Local variations

Allowing local variations will mean that the locals will be able to have more of a say


Disagree

For people that work normal business hours this severely restricts the daylight hours for exercisingyour dog. This will mean either having to exercise them in the dark which is a safety issue or notbeing able to excercise the dog which will lead to behavioural issues


Start time: 11.00am

Finish time: 4.00pm



Proposal 5A



Agree

Not all dogs can be controlled around stock

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



#6029

Agree





Agree







Agree




Disagree

Ōn leash on walking tracks have no more of an impact than humans using the track

Proposal 5C



Agree

Proposal 6



Disagree

What is to then stopping the council using this to change other areas access

Proposal 7

#6029



Agree

Any other feedback:

Auckland Council

#6029

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/XBTvByAUgmPqiv1lJkRVdA


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dogs feedback_Date: Thursday, 9 May 2019 1:17:20 PM



Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

Proposal 2



Agree

#6105

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/LPmwAn1yjeKvDAZGu_HjcA



Proposal 3



Agree

Proposal 4



Local variations


Agree


Start time:

Finish time:

Start date:

Finish date:

Proposal 5A



Agree

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Agree




#6105


Agree







Agree




Agree

Proposal 5C



Agree

Proposal 6



Agree

Proposal 7



Agree

Any other feedback:

#6105

Auckland Council

#6105

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/em3dd1HmB4Bx_hS29hyzzQ


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dogs feedback_ID#5,899 Date: Friday, 10 May 2019 1:54:44 PM



Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

Proposal 2



Agree

#6192

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/oI60eC2LvF-mTd6unE1MIA




Proposal 3



Agree

Proposal 4



Local variations

I see no reason to restrict or amend any currently-enjoyed access times.


Agree


Start time:

Finish time:

Start date:

Finish date:

Proposal 5A



Disagree

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Agree



#6192



Agree







Agree




Agree

Proposal 5C



Agree

Proposal 6



Agree

Proposal 7



Agree

Any other feedback:

#6192

Auckland Council

#6192

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/1C9vJDuUWL6DrK5HZdqUhw


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dogs feedback_Date: Friday, 10 May 2019 9:18:37 AM



Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

Proposal 2



Agree

#6342

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/bFU4Fx9yTtR8uMoJAYnAvw



Proposal 3



Disagree

Multiple dog ownership licence should be required for ANY PRŌPERTY where there are morethan two dogs (not just urban residential). All dog owners should be subject to the same approachwhether they live in an urban or rural setting.

Proposal 4





Agree


Start time:

Finish time:

Start date:

Finish date:

Proposal 5A



Agree

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Agree


#6342




Agree







Agree




Agree

Proposal 5C



Agree

Proposal 6



Agree

Proposal 7



Agree

Any other feedback:

#6342

It is important for dogs to be allowed on public transport in Auckland. I am a regular user of trainsand buses, but whenever I wish to take my dog to another area, I have to drive them. I believe mywell-behaved dogs should be allowed on public transport, as they would be in many major citiesaround the world.

Auckland Council

#6342

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/mY7BVuK4pCffVVawhgkEJQ





Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Disagree

Proposal 2



Disagree

#6418

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/ABzp84BlwmoDBCCnxeTXDw



Proposal 3



Agree

Proposal 4



Local variations


Disagree


Start time: 11.00am

Finish time: 4.00pm



Proposal 5A



Agree

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Agree




#6418


Agree







Agree




Agree

Proposal 5C



Agree

Proposal 6



Disagree

Proposal 7



Agree

Any other feedback:

#6418

Auckland Council

#6418

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/mpKOBOkVatHiNctxeQeuGQ


From: Auckland CouncilTo: dogsbylawreviewSubject: Dogs feedback_Date: Tuesday, 7 May 2019 4:39:30 PM



Attachment:

FeedbackProposal 1



Agree

Proposal 2



Agree

#6429

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/JZglkd17w6OOsTjbfxrb7g



Proposal 3



Agree

Proposal 4





Agree


Start time:

Finish time:

Start date:

Finish date:

Proposal 5A



Agree

Proposal 5B

Glenfern Sanctuary



Agree




#6429


Agree







Agree




Agree

Proposal 5C



Agree

Proposal 6



Agree

Proposal 7



Agree

Any other feedback:

#6429

Auckland Council

#6429

https://engage.ubiquity.co.nz/surveys/link/m6FwDtmDuqF4I2lSOvrVLA

#6510

#6510

#6510

#6510

#6510

#6510

#6510

#6510

#6510

#6563

#6563

#6563

#6563

#6563

#6563

#6563

#6563

#6563

#6611

#6611

#6611

#6611

#6611

#6611

#6611

#6611

#6611

#6611

Documents

DOG POLICY BYLAW 2019 MANGERE-OTAHUHU …...5953 Devid Cudicio Mangere‐Otahuhu 1 6025 Gareth Beck Mangere‐Otahuhu 1 6029 Kiri Brausch Mangere‐Otahuhu 1 6105 Bernadette Deoliveira