If you are as concerned as we are about the proposed dog management plan, and you want to make sure that the GGNRA hears the will of the public, please call Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi to ask her to help.
We recommend keeping your call to Congresswoman Pelosi's office brief and courteous. For example, you can say, "I am very concerned about the GGNRA's proposed dog management plan. I hope Congresswoman Pelosi will do everything she can to help stop this plan and preserve recreational access for all people, including people with dogs, in the GGNRA." If you live in the Congresswoman's district, make sure to leave your name and address.
- Washington, DC office: (202) 225-4965
- San Francisco office: (415) 556-4862
- Email through her website
The Golden Gate National Recreation Area has released a plan to dramatically cut where people can walk with their dogs on GGNRA lands. There will be NO off-leash dog walking anywhere on GGNRA land in San Mateo County. Rodeo Beach will be the ONLY off-leash area in Marin. In San Francisco, the plan will ban dogs entirely from the vast majority of Fort Funston, the East Beach at Crissy Field and most of Ocean Beach.
The San Francisco Board of Supervisors has voted twice to oppose the GGNRA's extreme plan. Now, we need Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi, who represents people in many of the areas that have been impacted, to help us stop this misguided plan by the GGNRA and to stand up for her thousands of constituents who have been walking with their dogs for decades in areas that are controlled by the GGNRA.
- Congresswoman Pelosi has not made any statement in support of or opposition to the GGNRA dog management plan, and her support is essential in protecting outdoor recreation for dogs and people in the GGNRA.
- The Golden Gate National Recreation Area has spent millions of dollars trying to severely cut and in many places entirely ban where people have been walking their dogs for decades in Marin, San Francisco and San Mateo Counties.
- The GGNRA's first "dog management" was roundly criticized 3 to 1 in public comments against it and opposed by the San Francisco Board of Supervisors. Yet almost three years later, the GGNRA has now released a new plan that is identical to the original with insignificant, meaningless changes.
- The plan does not offer any evidence to support the need for such a drastic change in usage. The plan fails to manage the GGNRA for the recreational needs of the people of the Bay Area, in direct contradiction to its reason-to-be as described in the legislation that created it.
- The Plan will severely cut where people with dogs, who have walked in the GGNRA for decades, will be able to walk in the future, without offering any evidence to support the need for such drastic change in usage.
- The Plan fails to manage the GGNRA for the recreational needs of the people of the Bay Area, in direct contradiction to its reason-to-be as described in the legislation that created it.
- The Plan wrongly acts as if the GGNRA is a remote wilderness, when it is actually located within and adjacent to a large city, with its services and environment inextricably intertwined with those of the cities that surround it.
- Recreation is the reason the GGNRA was created, and it must continue to be its guiding principle.