>“We were told by the council they couldn’t lock the gate in the first place.”
So people saw a fenced off area with a gate, where they could let their dogs run free and assumed it was a dog park
Some simple questions
* Why couldn’t they lock the gate?
* Why couldn’t they put up a NO Dogs / No Entry sign?
My dogs dont damage plants. I have seen dogs dig. I would not suspect the dogs. Maybe dry weather after planting? Poor planting? Poor plants?
Let’s not pretend the real villain here is some wee woman trying to give her collie a run. The council drops a hundred saplings in the middle of a park like it’s a fucking art installation and just wanders off, expecting us to treat it with the reverence of a sacred grove. That said, if your dog’s pissing on a clearly planted area with wee sticks and guards, you’re not evil, you’re just thick.
Us Scots like to ruin everything.
If you don’t put a sign or block access you can’t blame folks for using a space.
There was a large area that was fenced off, the fence not being present in earlier images. There were a few signs that said “this wildflower area is being managed to enhance biodiversity and reduce our carbon footprint”.
Those signs disappeared in later images, vandalised.
I couldn’t see saplings in the available pics though. Could have been planted outside of when the images were taken.
It’s possible that deer might have nibbled any saplings present. That fence wouldn’t have stopped them.
> The GMB Union says that in 1992 Glasgow had around 1800 staff working in Glasgow’s parks. By 2007, this had been cut to 1000. Now there are around 160 staff left. In a four-on, four-off shift pattern this means that only 80 workers are left to maintain the city’s vast areas of parkland.
a >90% reduction in staffing for the parks service has impacts.
I stay near here. AfaIa there is no gate.
Also further down they planted a load & within days some had been uprooted..I also saw young uns jumping up and down on more established saplings.
If there’s enough money for 1000 saplings, why not add an extra hundred quid into the budget for a No Dogs sign?
Honestly as a dog owner, if i knew there was a big fenced off bit of parkland with an open gate where the dogs could get a safe run around I’d potentially use it. But obviously add a closed gate and a sign that says No Dogs and I’d leave well alone.
Young trees just planted need loads of regular water. Don’t blame the dogs.
Sounds like the dogs ran
Sounds like there is another appetite for areas to let dogs off that is fenced in? Not just places you need to pay £ for
Why would they assume it was a dog-run though..since when did councils provide that service?
12 comments
>“We were told by the council they couldn’t lock the gate in the first place.”
So people saw a fenced off area with a gate, where they could let their dogs run free and assumed it was a dog park
Some simple questions
* Why couldn’t they lock the gate?
* Why couldn’t they put up a NO Dogs / No Entry sign?
My dogs dont damage plants. I have seen dogs dig. I would not suspect the dogs. Maybe dry weather after planting? Poor planting? Poor plants?
Let’s not pretend the real villain here is some wee woman trying to give her collie a run. The council drops a hundred saplings in the middle of a park like it’s a fucking art installation and just wanders off, expecting us to treat it with the reverence of a sacred grove. That said, if your dog’s pissing on a clearly planted area with wee sticks and guards, you’re not evil, you’re just thick.
Us Scots like to ruin everything.
If you don’t put a sign or block access you can’t blame folks for using a space.
Looking around the area with google street view, I think I found the relevant area here: https://www.google.com/maps/@55.8210842,-4.3578109,3a,75y,346.23h,84.41t/data=!3m8!1e1!3m6!1sY4CwVMcyMD5ckwcevjTtKQ!2e0!5s20240501T000000!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fcb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile%26w%3D900%26h%3D600%26pitch%3D5.594841309842963%26panoid%3DY4CwVMcyMD5ckwcevjTtKQ%26yaw%3D346.23428351752005!7i16384!8i8192?authuser=0&entry=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI1MDkxMC4wIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D
There was a large area that was fenced off, the fence not being present in earlier images. There were a few signs that said “this wildflower area is being managed to enhance biodiversity and reduce our carbon footprint”.
Those signs disappeared in later images, vandalised.
I couldn’t see saplings in the available pics though. Could have been planted outside of when the images were taken.
It’s possible that deer might have nibbled any saplings present. That fence wouldn’t have stopped them.
The root cause is long-term cuts in funding.
this article mentions the park: https://www.heraldscotland.com/life_style/24509386.our-parks-allowed-decay-name-biodiversity/ archive link https://archive.is/xLjBP
> The GMB Union says that in 1992 Glasgow had around 1800 staff working in Glasgow’s parks. By 2007, this had been cut to 1000. Now there are around 160 staff left. In a four-on, four-off shift pattern this means that only 80 workers are left to maintain the city’s vast areas of parkland.
a >90% reduction in staffing for the parks service has impacts.
I stay near here. AfaIa there is no gate.
Also further down they planted a load & within days some had been uprooted..I also saw young uns jumping up and down on more established saplings.
If there’s enough money for 1000 saplings, why not add an extra hundred quid into the budget for a No Dogs sign?
Honestly as a dog owner, if i knew there was a big fenced off bit of parkland with an open gate where the dogs could get a safe run around I’d potentially use it. But obviously add a closed gate and a sign that says No Dogs and I’d leave well alone.
Young trees just planted need loads of regular water. Don’t blame the dogs.
Sounds like the dogs ran
Sounds like there is another appetite for areas to let dogs off that is fenced in? Not just places you need to pay £ for
Why would they assume it was a dog-run though..since when did councils provide that service?
Comments are closed.