Response from the Friends of San Remo Wombats group
I am writing to appeal to your editor to set the record straight about untruths that were published in your paper and online in May 2025 ‘They’ll tell you how to walk the dog’, author unknown HERE. This article has only now come to my attention, as I wasn't contacted for comment, even though it mentions our group in it.
In the article your paper misrepresented our group, Friends of San Remo Wombats. I'm a qualified professional writer myself, therefore I'm aware of the importance of balanced and accurate journalism, especially when writing about issues that have the potential to negatively impact the health and wellbeing of dogs, wildlife and the environment.
Firstly, the article starts with, “...it might come as a complete surprise to many to learn that between December 1 and April 30 each year, you can’t go for a stroll along ‘Lovers Walk’ in Cowes with your dog, on the shared pathway connecting The Esplanade to Stradbroke Avenue.
“Between the hours of 10am and 5pm, and also between 8pm and 7am, dogs are completely prohibited in this area, on leash or not. But regardless of the rules, posted at both ends of the walking path, it remains one of the most popular locations for local residents and visitors to go for a walk with their dogs at all times of the year."
The Sentinel author writes, "It’s not civil disobedience, it’s simply how it is… people using the pathway to walk up to the Cowes’ shops from their homes, holiday houses and other accommodation in the East Cowes area.".
They also call the rules for Lovers Walk an 'anomaly'. Was this article submitted by the Phillip Island and Bass Coast Dog Owners Association for publication? It doesn't have an author listed, but reads as an opinion piece rather than an article that was well-researched and true.
While I can't speak for Lovers Walk, many in the community hope that the council has rules (by-laws) in place for good reason - we know they do for people running off-leash dogs on the San Remo back beach. The beach has just a few simple rules that most people follow so we can safely, and ethically, share the beach. But still far too many people break the rules, allowing their dogs in the dunes and vegetation, out of sight of their owners, not under voice control and around wildlife, and sometimes inside wombat burrows.
This activity is not only a breach of the local by-laws, but is a breach of the Wildlife Act 1975; legislation in place to protect native species. The behaviour of rulebreakers is impacting wombats, including their vulnerable joeys; wombats that are already under pressure dealing with habitat loss, roadkill and the scourge of mange.
I wish our group hadn't (inadvertently) identified this problem with dog owners breaking this beach's rules, but we did, and have been trying to help advocate for the wombats ever since.
The information in your article highlights that some dog walkers ignore local by-laws clearly marked on signage, and walk their dogs in areas that are restricted. In our group's view this is because there is a 'culture of non-compliance' on the Bass Coast in terms of dog walkers not following the few rules that are in place for beaches and other residential areas.
Your article claims the rules in place for Lovers Walk are an 'anomaly', and thus appears to defend people doing the wrong thing, which, in our view, is irresponsible and unhelpful. What other council by-laws are acceptable for some individuals in the community to breach, without penalty, when they don't agree with them?
Nonetheless, your article also misrepresented a few other facts, which is disappointing for a professional and well-respected publication. If you had contacted our group, we would have presented our side and the facts.
Our group, back in November 2024, while treating and monitoring wombats suffering from the cruel and contagious mange mite disease, found that scores of dogs were visiting and sometimes entering wombat burrows on the San Remo foreshore (see Facebook HERE)
After identifying the problem, we appealed to the council, and the community for help in January 2025. Still, it was only a few weeks ago, after eight months of crying out for help, that the council finally installed two or three small temporary signs on the beach. These new 'conservation area' signs were in addition to the regular beach signs stating the off-leash rules that were already being ignored by some dog walkers. We appreciated the signs and hoped the new signs might help.
Earlier in the year, we started a petition (open letter) to submit to the council if all other measures failed, view HERE.
Our group has been clear, in our petition and everywhere else, as you stated in your article, “we have no issue whatsoever with off-leash dogs on allocated beaches if the owners do the right thing”. This is a true statement and reflects our sentiments of wildlife protection and the understandable desire for people to follow the beach regulations to benefit everyone. The operative phrase here is 'if the owners do the right thing'. Dogs aren't safe either if allowed into the snake-ridden dunes and vegetation, out of sight of their owners and into burrows where wombats or foxes are infected with highligly contagious mange.
We aren't focused on calling for a ban of off-leash dogs, we simply want people to follow the basic beach rules. Our petition states, "If the BCSC won’t, or can’t, appropriately regulate and enforce the rules currently in place, they must immediately reassess the rules to ensure dogs are always leashed, or at least, significantly reduce the times off-leash dogs are allowed."
Our list of calls to the council also includes, if all other measures fail to, "Reassess the allowance of off-leash dogs on the San Remo back beach/foreshore" and, "disallowing off-leash dogs along the San Remo foreshore OR at least new significantly reduced times that off-leash dogs are allowed". We, as wombat protectors, are in a difficult position. What would any good wombat group do in our situation with the evidence we have, and if dogs continue to impact wombats? We can't just walk away and let the rulebreakers do what they like.
We have, for the past 9 months, done everything in our power to educate the community about this issue and lobby the council for increased signage and patrols, so the beach can be shared. Only if we can't affect the much-needed change, or the council can't sufficiently manage and enforce the rules, then our group has no choice but to lobby the council for more protection for the wombats, including a reassessment of the rules on the San Remo back beach. But the way you have quoted our petition in your article, doesn't give the full picture of what we are asking for and why. In our view, it's misleading to leave out important context and statements that may imply that we are contradicting our own words - which is untrue and unfair.
Unfortunately, to date, even with permanent beach signage stating the rules, new additional 'conservation area' signage, with the flyers we produced and put up in shops and handed out in San Remo, with our articles online, Facebook posts, and information on our Facebook page and petition - all appealing for rulebreakers to do the right thing - dogs are still visiting wombats burrows. We sincerely wish this wasn't the case.
In our view, this beach probably shouldn't have been made off-leash in the first place, it has vegetation filled with native wildlife, including wombat burrows - while many other beaches don't have wombats living on them. And the council is unable, thus far, to sufficiently manage the rules down there to prevent wombats being impacted. As far as we know, no ecological survey was commissioned to establish what wildlife was down there before the council made it off-leash 24/7 for most of the year - we've asked the council for the ecological report, but they won't supply one, so we assume one wasn't completed.
We've been very patient and supportive of the council, we love dogs and want dogs to use the beach. But our group feels a bit helpless to protect the wombats from stress and the other impacts of dogs frequenting and sometimes entering their burrows, which is totally unacceptable. Dogs out of sight of their owners are also less likely to have their poo picked up. Thus, wombats are having to traverse lots of dog poo in search of fresh grass to eat. With San Remo set for yet more residential (major) development, we feel the wombats need more protection, not less.
The council allowed dogs off-leash after much lobbying from the powerful, and aggressive, Phillip Island and Bass Coast Dog Owners Association (DOA). Our Domestic Animal Management Plan (DAMP) submission provided much evidence of the DOA's name-calling, bullying, harassment, untruths, and misrepresentation of wildlife over the years, and much abuse directed at anyone who disagrees with their agenda. Abuse (that we have much proof of) includes name-calling, defamation, misrepresentation and mockery directed at wildlife volunteers, conservationists, elected councillors, council staff, and even includes the sexual objectification of a DEECA Wildlife Officer patrolling the beach in San Remo.
The DOA has been proven to have acted dishonestly, unethically and in a harmful manner to many in our community - they are not a group that always tells the truth, or is balanced or ethical. I would be happy to provide you with lots of evidence of these things if required. There has been at least one legal letter sent to their group's President to cease and desist their defamation of a community member and official complaints have been filed with authorities about the behaviour of some of their members.
Your article misrepresented facts about our group, giving the impression that we are not a 'real' community group, and weren't officially invited, by the council, to the DAMP review. You wrote, "The meeting was supposed to be invite-only, with only registered community groups supposed to attend, but a representative of the so-called Friends of San Remo Wombats group had a seat at the table."
This statement is untrue. While we aren't a registered charity, or an incorporated association, we are a genuine community group that helps wombats in San Remo, advocates for them, and has obtained grants from the council and the Rotary Club (in our group's name, auspiced by Mange Management Inc). We educate the community and work with the council and other groups to achieve better outcomes for local mange-infected wombats. We were officially invited to the DAMP meeting on April 30th, 2025. The invite was sent by the Local Laws department via email from the council, see below.
Many 'unregistered' (whatever that means) groups were invited to the DAMP review along with individual stakeholders with an interest in the subject of domestic animal management on the Bass Coast. Again, your article got it wrong.
Your article also published a quote by Owens about Birdlife Australia - I've contacted Birdlife Australia for clarification. You wrote, “It was refreshing to hear the representative of Birdlife Australia saying that a dog on-leash presents no more risks than a person walking on the beach," said Cheryl Owens". This is not what Birdlife Australia said at the DAMP meeting as far as we heard. And it's an untrue statement, and not based on facts, whether a Birdlife Australia representative made the statement or not.
Dogs, even those that are leashed dogs, impact wildlife including hooded plovers - the research is clear. Here are just a few articles on the subject. Click links to read:
https://www.publish.csiro.au/pc/pdf/PC24071
https://felidaefund.org/news/general/domestic-dogs-and-unintended-impacts-on-wildlife
https://www.earth.com/news/pet-dogs-severely-harm-wildlife-even-when-leashed/
https://www.environment.sa.gov.au/goodliving/posts/2025/04/dogs-in-nature
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0006320716303603
Even Birdlife Australia reported in one of their own papers in March 2022, "Walkers accompanied by dogs often evoke greater responses from ground-dwelling birds than people alone (Sime 1999; Lord et al. 2001; Taylor et al. 2007; Sastre et al. 2009). Glover et al. (2011) showed that of eight shorebirds tested, stimulus type (walker, jogger, walker with leashed dog) significantly influenced Flight Initiation Distance (FID) of three species. Excluding joggers, all three species had the highest FID when approached by a person with a leashed dog, rather than by a walker. Lambert and Ratcliff (1979) and Taylor et al. (2005) suggest that it is likely that dogs are seen by ground-dwelling birds as much more of a threat than people, as dogs are more likely to catch and kill them or their chicks" HERE
Your article, and Owen's statement, is simply incorrect and misleading.
Nonetheless, our group has been balanced, reasonable, transparent and clear, that we don't want a ban of off-leash dogs in San Remo, we'd much prefer that dog owners follow the rules so we can all share the beach.
We hope the Sentinel-Times fact-checks any information that is provided to you by the Phillip Island and Bass Coast Dog Owners Association or their supporters in the future. And we hope, at least, your paper continues to offer the other side of such biased and incorrect claims.
Information about wildlife and their impacts, should be carefully researched and spoken about by those with sufficient qualifications, experience and knowledge, lest your paper inadvertently makes matters much worse for the already suffering wildlife and the environment. It's hard enough to help the poor wombats without having to contend with the community unfairly distrusting us as people or believing untruths about our important and challenging work. Such claims are defamatory to our personal characters and our work.
Please take down this misleading article, and/or publish an apology that sets the record straight.
Eve Kelly, Friends of San Remo Wombats.
