Arlington Dog Owners Group (A-DOG) Supports the Substitute Motion presented by Michael Ruderman (TMM, Precinct 9), with provisions as summarized:
- To change the 6 ft leash length limit for restraining a dog, enabling use of a leash with length not to exceed twenty (20) ft.
- To allow dogs off leash in Town-owned open spaces between the hours of 7:00 to 9:00 a.m. and 7:00 to 9:00 pm., “provided the owner or keeper of the dog is present and attentive toward the dog and the dog is under effective control. Dogs must, however, be restrained by leash in proximity to a permitted sporting or other event.”
Statement of support:
The current leash bylaw in Arlington was established in the 1960’s. Based on the transcripts from its debate in Town Meeting, as well as on the wording (for example, its provisions for the Animal Control Officer to hold a dog for 10 days until the owner claims him), it was intended to address dogs roaming free without owner supervision, or “at large”. Few, if any, dogs roam “at large” in our town nowadays because dog owning practices have changed. The modern dog owner treats his dog more as a family member, and typically would not consider letting him roam unprotected. As the Arlington bylaw is currently enforced, it prevents dog owners from exercising and socializing their dogs off-leash, even if such activities occur under owner supervision and at times when few others are using the parks. A Green Dog Pilot Program is being developed, with community input, to provide off leash hours, as well as dedicated fenced dog parks, town-wide. While the original goal was to submit this program to Town Meeting this year, this submission has now been delayed, with a new goal of Town Meeting, 2009. While dog parks have been allowed in the bylaws since 2003, there are none yet available. Previous attempts to establish dog parks in Arlington (for example, a dog park proposed at Hill’s Hill in 2005) have been unsuccessful.
The purpose of this Substitute Motion is to make an incremental change to the current leash law enabling responsible dog owners to have some limited opportunity to legally exercise and socialize their dogs, while minimizing impact to the community. We recognize that the proposed schedule will not benefit all dog owners. It is expected that, should a more comprehensive Green Dog plan be adopted by Town Meeting in future years, its provisions would more broadly serve the community. However, until that time comes, this Substitute Motion will provide some relief to the current situation.
Some believe that no action, even an incremental one, should be taken on this issue until the Green Dog committee has completed its work. We respectfully disagree with this position. One year is quite a long time in the developmental life of a dog. Another year of inadequate opportunities for training and socialization can have only a negative impact on individual dogs. This delay also has a negative impact on Arlington dog owners, who are being asked to wait yet one more year before being allowed to legally conduct what is, for many, a favorite recreational activity. The need for legal off-leash recreational opportunities has been recognized by the town and officially discussed for at least 5 years, with no resolution. We believe that a substantive change is long overdue. Respectfully, we ask whether, for example, dedicated softball enthusiasts would tolerate having to suspend their games for an entire season, let alone several years, while details of, for example, a field reconstruction, were being worked out. They would not, nor should they be expected to do so. At the very least, they would likely seek some interim arrangement until the final, presumably perfectly renovated, site was ready. In this case, the Green Dog plan is being touted as representing the best overall solution to the dog/dogowner issue for Arlington. This may very well turn out to be true. But that doesn’t mean that a simpler, less perfect measure would not be of significant value in the interim.
In the Substitute Motion, the limited early morning and evening hours were selected so as to minimize off-leash activity when the parks are more heavily used, for example, by children. The requirement that the owner be present and attentive to the dog means that the law will not allow dogs running “at large” in the parks. The additional requirement that the owner have the dog under “effective control” prevents this law from applying to an untrained or out-of-control dog, even when owner-accompanied.
The Substitute Motion also seeks to amend the current specification of a 6 ft leash. The 6 ft limit prevents owners from using flexible, retractable leads or from teaching their dogs off-leash “recall” using modern obedience training methods, including those advising a training lead of 20 to 30 feet (Miller, Pat, 2001, The Power of Positive Dog Training). The Substitute Motion is intended to relieve this restriction. The proposed 20 feet is the same leash length that is specified by the American Kennel Club (AKC) in its “Canine Good Citizen” certification test (www.akc.org, CGC program).
The proposed changes apply to Town-owned parks and conservation lands only. Dogs would not be allowed off leash on other public property, such as streets and sidewalks or on private property without the property owner’s permission. In addition, bylaws against excessive noise and failure to clean up after ones dog would, of course, remain in force at all times.
In comparison, several local communities (Acton, Bedford, Burlington, Concord, Lexington, Lincoln, Sudbury, Wellesley, and Weston) have bylaws allowing dogs to be unleashed, under owner supervision and control, in public parks without restriction as to hours. Such bylaws refer to “effective command” or its equivalent as a requirement. Others (e.g. Cambridge, Boston, and Somerville) allow dogs to be unleashed in selected location(s), including dedicated dog parks (Boston, Somerville). Brookline has a “Green Dog” system whereby dogs are allowed off leash at certain hours in certain parks and has no dedicated dog parks.
