No pooping in my back yard - Canine NIMBYism?

The excluded species from our planning

by Mateja Mihinjac

In our SafeGrowth work we are constantly defining the most real and human moments of neighbourhood life.  Jane Jacobs once advised that we should carefully watch the sidewalk ballet that is the street and watch the natural rhythms than make neighborhoods work. In today’s world, in the best cities, that world involves our dogs! 

We live in an age obsessed with dogs – they star in adverts, fill social media feeds, and have their own cafés and birthday parties. Yet, in real life, restrictions are often imposed on dogs that communicate they are unwelcome or severely restrict their instinctual behaviour.

On my dog walks I often observe tiny squares of grass, empty traffic islands, and unused patches of green in urban environments that are full of signs “No Dogs”, “Keep Dogs on Leash”, or the ever-polite “Dog-Free Zone.” The message is: dogs are welcome… but not here. Occasionally, during my walks, I also experience judgmental stares when my dog just sniffs the grass. 

Signs of restriction, not permission

Is this curious paradox a form of modern NIMBYism – canine NIMBYism? This paradox is particularly curious when you notice the signs appear in places where no one else seems to go. The grass stays immaculate and unused. 

While many of those patches of grass invite birds, hedgehogs and cats with intentional food leftovers, the grass is not necessarily reserved for another group. The “no dogs” signs are therefore not necessarily about cleanliness but about defining who it is for. It’s about place politics: ownership and subtle exclusion, even when the space might not be private. 

NEW CANINE RESTRICTIONS

With an increasing density of canine companions, new dog parks now appear as a selling point in neighbourhood (re)developments. Dog parks are ideal for bringing legitimate eyes onto the street — especially in places that might otherwise have no one around to watch. This happens all over the world.

Calgary's East Village development with children's playground, community gardens, dog park, public hiking trails - planning for inclusion and safety

In Calgary, our SafeGrowth practitioner Anna Brassard worked on the East Village redevelopment years ago, and today that neighbourhood places dog parks beside children’s play areas and community gardens, creating safer, more animated public spaces.

In Slovenia, many cafés and shops now allow (smaller) dogs inside, letting them accompany their handlers and adding to the natural rhythms of street life.

While dogs are valued in theory, their presence is often controlled or restricted. This has been especially evident over the past years due to increasing numbers of dog ownership. According to one source, 39% of Slovene households have at least one dog, the fifth in Europe and above the European average of 25%.

With these numbers, new tensions have also emerged. 

Dog park in Gan Meir, Israel
- photo David Shankbone, CC BY 3.0, via Wikimedia Commons

As more canines populate urban areas and green space is becoming increasingly scarce, Slovenia has recently toughened penalties for dogs off-leash and for neglecting to clean after a dog, aiming to promote “responsible dog ownership”. 

Similar stricter punishments have been introduced in the UK where restrictions on dogs and their dog handlers are enforced through public spaces protection orders.

Such legislative changes reflect the growing impatience with dogs in public space and the disruption of (expected) public order.

RECONCILING PUBLIC ORDER & MESSINESS 

Most people prefer order and feel at unease when it gets disrupted.

Yet, dogs sniff, run, bark, chase, pee, poop, which brings a mess into otherwise tidy urban space (which is not always so tidy!). Lovas Kiss describes how dog walkers move through space differently than other users who go about their activities. That sometimes creates feelings of unpredictability and discomfort.

Signs of exclusion, not inclusion

This messiness is also what makes streets and neighbourhoods feel alive. A dog changes the rhythm of a neighbourhood. It draws people out, encourages social contact, creates friendly chaos and animates otherwise dead corners. In a Polish city park study Bogacka also showed that people with dogs are perceived as more trustworthy and reduce perception of unsafety compared to other park visitors.

Some studies suggest that public space should therefore reflect the messiness of life, including noise, smells, joy, and occasionally, inconvenience, and not feel bare and sterile.

TRANS-SPECIES URBAN PLANNING AS AN ANTIDOTE TO CANINE NIMBYism

For this reason, urban studies scholars Phil Hubbard and Andrew Brooks talk about the importance of considering how urban planning practices affect all species. For example, gentrification, often considered undesirable, affects animals as well. They may get displaced, excluded or their behaviour severely restricted because it’s considered “too messy” in the upscaled environment. 

Calgary's East Village - people, dogs, parks, playground, gardens

As urban geographers, Julie Urbanik and Mary Morgan, similarly note that planning needs to think about how non-human uses and users fit into urban space and consider aspects like fences, off-leash zones, proximity to residences, conflict management, and other aspects.

Thus, to be inclusive and to reduce the potential for conflicting uses, trans-species urban planning practices need to acknowledge the interactions between human and non-human animals. 

In crime prevention I often criticise when the focus is exclusively on communicating what is prohibited or penalised or not permitted rather than informing users about the desirable behaviours. If we want to curb canine NIMBYism, we should stop policing dogs and start planning for them by designing spaces that support the behaviours we want and respecting their nature.