Fencing proposal for Minnehaha Off-Leash Dog Park would block most of the beach

The rambling forest trails and Mississippi River beaches that most people consider part of the Minnehaha Off-leash Dog Park are poised to shrink next year as the Minneapolis Park Board and the National Park Service install fencing meant to formalize its legal boundaries.

The proposal, which would sever the dog park from most of the beaches where dogs currently tumble and swim, has polarized park users ahead of this week’s Park Board meeting, when commissioners are expected to vote on the concept.

Located in the Minnehaha Regional Park along the Minneapolis side of the river, the sprawling dog park is the largest in the city and the only one located on a beach. It’s also the only Minneapolis dog park that isn’t completely fenced in. As a result, some dogs over the years have found their way out through the woods and into traffic. Many dog owners weighing in online seem to approve of finally building a fence that would safely contain their pets.

Others are raising alarms because the project map shows that the proposed fence would cut off large swaths of land that people have considered part of the off-leash dog park for decades.

“I don’t want to diminish the fact that they are doing a lot of improvements to the actual dog park property,” said park user Arik Van Asten. “But they are drastically changing the use of the overall space.”

Park Commissioner Steffanie Musich, whose district includes the Minnehaha Off-leash Dog Park, said the fencing project is largely being undertaken at the request of the National Park Service, which owns the land along the Mississippi River.

“Installation of fencing in the dog park area is an effort to be good neighbors to adjacent property owners who have different leash rules and prevent off-leash dogs from entering their property,” she said in a statement. “MPRB does not own or manage the land outside where the fencing is being proposed, and has been requested to better demarcate the rules and manage access.”

The land surrounding the Minnehaha Off-leash Dog Park is a jumble of jurisdictions.

Contrary to popular use, the actual area of the dog park is contained to a 6.6-acre triangular chunk in the southeast corner of the total area where park users currently let their dogs roam off-leash. The National Park Service owns land along the river, the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs owns adjacent land to the west and the Minnesota Historical Society owns the land to the south.

Those other landowners have asked the Park Board to erect a fence clearly defining the boundaries between their land and Minneapolis parkland, with the National Park Service offering a federal grant to fund the project, said Park Board project manager Carol HejlStone. That fence would cut off the dog park’s access to the river for all but a small stretch of beach, and reduce off-leash dog access to some woods, too. Knowing this would upset members of the public, the Park Board proposed expanding the formal boundaries of the dog park to just under 17 acres of Minnehaha Regional Park land over which it does have jurisdiction.

“We understand that that dog park users would be upset with the addition of a fence, and so what we were wanting to do is formalize the rest of the MPRB-owned area as off-leash space, which is how it’s been used through time,” said HejlStone. “But we are intending to cut off access to land that is not owned and maintained by MPRB because those landowners don’t want off-leash dogs on their property.”

In short, while the dog park’s acreage will be legally expanded from 6.6 to 17, the total area where off-leash dogs have played for more than 35 years will be diminished in practice.

A Change.org petition to “Save Minnehaha Dog Park” is quickly gaining steam, with more than 800 signatures gathered in four days.

“For 30-plus years people have had access to this and the beach, and we’re talking generations of dog owners and dogs,” said petition organizer Michelle Garens. “It feels really not very transparent, like they were kind of doing the bare minimum of posting, and it wasn’t really clear what was being given up. ... We really haven’t heard from those landowners or had an opportunity to express our point of view.”

The Department of Veterans Affairs did not immediately respond to questions from the Minnesota Star Tribune about why they want to change how the Minnehaha Off-leash Dog Park is used.

The National Park Service declined to be interviewed for this story, but Planning Program Manager Forest Eidbo provided a statement: “The [Mississippi National River and Recreation Area] manages lands near the Minnehaha Dog Park and has partnered with the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board for over a decade to ensure that these lands’ cultural and natural resources are protected from unleashed pets. The NRRA views the MPRB’s decision to install a fence on the boundary of the dog park as further commitment from the MPRB to protect the nationally significant resources on these lands and waters.”

The Minnesota Historical Society provided a statement from Amber Annis, its associate vice president of tribal relations and Native American initiatives: “This area is a sacred site and part of the Traditional Cultural Property designation of Mni Owe Sni. MNHS will be installing signage to educate the public about this sacred site and its preservation.”

Mni Owe Sni, or Coldwater Spring, is a natural spring in the historic Fort Snelling territory that is sacred to the Dakota people, located about 1,400 feet inland from the beach that is currently used by dogs.

The full Park Board will meet Tuesday at 5 p.m. to decide whether to approve the fencing plan without a public hearing. Park officials had been determined earlier that a minimal amount of public engagement would be required because it’s a decision based on “technical, operational or safety constraints only,” over a project thought to “not result in a change in the type, location or extent of the current facility or service.”

While Park Board staff intended to partner with the National Park Service to plan a “Bark Ranger” event to inform park users of the changes, National Park Service staff held that event without the Park Board and made it about dog-leashing rules in general rather than the specifics of the fencing proposal, said HejlStone.

If approved, the fencing project would be scheduled for completion this fall at an estimated cost of $70,000. About $55,000 of it is coming from a National Park Service grant. While some dog park users have suggested that the fence money be spent on other social priorities like housing support and food security, federal park funds and Minneapolis Park Board funds are designated for park improvements.

Paul Herwig, who has brought his dogs to the Minnehaha Off-leash Dog Park multiple times a week for about 25 years, described its culture as one that is especially respectful, with the grounds kept clean by volunteers.

“I just feel like bringing fencing in and cordoning off stuff is just a real slap in the face,” he said. “It says to me that the people involved in making this decision are really unaware of that culture, and how valuable it is to the very large group of residents who use it.”