Substitute Motion on Article 36: Early Morning Off-Leash Recreation Under Certain Conditions

Posted on by
Reply

A Substitute Motion on Article 36 was submitted to Town Meeting, along with a supporting report written by a few of the (ever-increasing!) number of A-DOG members who are elected Town Meeting Members. It is expected to come up for a vote as early as May 3. The Report, including the text of the Substitute Motion, is reprinted here:

We support the following Substitute Motion under Article 36:

To amend Section 8 (“Animal Control”) of Article 1 (“Use of Areas under Control of Park Department”) of Title IV (“Public Areas”) and/or Article 2 (“Canine Control”) of Title VIII (“Public Health and Safety”) of the By-Laws so as to allow a maximum of three dogs per owner to be off-leash, under effective owner control, from park opening time until 9 am, in all lands under control of the Parks and Recreation Commission except:

  • those lands directly abutting school properties;
  • within 15 ft of playground equipment;  and
  • by specific exclusion of the Parks and Recreation Commission.

********************************************

The Board of Selectmen (BoS) voted (4-1) “no action” on our proposed motion under Article 36 at its March 22 hearing. The BoS has reported to TM that “behavior of dog-owners who routinely violate the leash law needs to change before a bylaw amendment should be considered again.”  With due respect to those 4 Selectmen, this penalizes responsible dog owners for the actions of the irresponsible few.  As noted by one supporter at the BoS hearing, driver’s licenses are not denied to all because some drivers cause accidents. Another concern voiced by one Selectman at the hearing was that there were no provisions to exclude out of town dog owners.  We respectfully take issue with this concern on two grounds. First, it is unlikely that many dog owners will drive to Arlington from other towns in the early mornings that we propose. And, even if some do, it is questionable that they will have much impact.  Second, our parks are public space.  Some of us from Arlington now use parks in Lexington, where dogs are allowed off leash.  We would hope to extend the same courtesy to our Lexington and other neighbors and, again, doubt that there would be much impact from outsiders at the proposed hours.  The BoS report also advises waiting to see what the Parks and Recreation Commission, through its “Dog Park Task Force” (called the “Green Dog Subcommittee” in the report), decides with respect to fenced off leash recreation areas.  We are very familiar with the work of this Task Force and, in fact, one of us is an appointed member.  As discussed further below, we believe that Article 36 complements the Task Force’s mission.

On April 13, the Parks and Recreation Commission voted unanimously (4-0) to support our proposed bylaw change, noting, for example, its simplicity and reasonableness, as well as its flexibility.  We hope that TM will agree with the Parks and Recreation Commission’s assessment and vote in favor of this Substitute Motion.

********************************

 

 

Article 36 FAQ (Summary)

(See the following pages for full discussion)

 

  • Why propose this Article for the third year in a row?  TM transcripts describe the current leash law, enacted in the late 60’s, as being aimed at dogs “at large”, or roaming free. When it is used instead against owner-supervised dog play groups, it prevents dog owners from exercising and socializing their dogs, and from a community activity they themselves enjoy.

 

  • Why propose this Article when TM rejected the Green Dog plan last year?  This vote was narrow (88 opposed, 83 in favor), and the need and demand for legal off-leash recreational options continues.  Feedback from TM included comments that the Green Dog plan was too complex, and that many had favored the amendment to limit hours to mornings (by 10 am).  Article 36 addresses such experience and feedback.

 

  • Why isn’t it enough for dog owners to have the Town working on fenced off leash recreation facilities?  Even though Town has established a “Dog Park Task Force” to address this issue, it is not clear when or if there will be a sufficient number of fenced off leash recreational areas (OLRA) to serve Arlington’s dog owner community. Article 36 acts in parallel to the work of the Dog Park Task Force.

 

  • Why the proposed hours of “park opening time until 9 am”? Arlington parks are used quite sparsely early in the morning. The intent of our proposed hours is to be conservative. In several other MA towns dogs are allowed off-leash, under effective control, in virtually all parks at all open hours.

 

  • Why the phrase “effective owner control”?  This requires that only dogs accompanied by their owner, and under control, would be allowed off-leash. Other MA town bylaws have similar wording (“complete and effective control”, “effective command”, etc.).

 

  • Why “lands under control of the Parks and Recreation Commission”?  These lands would exclude potential areas of concern, including the bike path, Town Hall gardens, cemetery, and conservation land.

 

  • Why “by specific exclusion by the Parks and Recreation Commission”?  This adds flexibility, avoiding the need for specific locations to be debated in TM. It recognizes and respects the role and the authority of Parks and Recreation Commission, appointed to make detailed decisions on use of our public parks.

 

  • Why not propose a pilot plan?  We trust that the Parks and Recreation Commission will act in good faith to implement a flexible bylaw such as this one.  It is essentially a pilot plan anyway, because the Commission can exclude any park, or all parks, at any time.

 

  • What will this cost the Town?  There should be no significant cost to the Town.  We already have an ACO to enforce the leash law, including distributing flyers describing the leash law. With last year’s decision to increase the license fee by up to 50% and impose late fees, dog owners are now being charged more, providing some extra revenue with no increase in privileges.

 

  • Why “a maximum of three dogs”?  For consistency with our town bylaws that allow up to three dogs per household, and with similar limits specified in other off-leash programs.

 

 

 

Article 36 Substitute Motion — Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ): 

 

Why propose this Article for the third year in a row?

Based on TM transcripts, major provisions of our current leash law were voted in at TM in the late 60’s. Concern was primarily with dogs “at large”, or roaming free.  It was not intended to be used, as it is today, against owner-supervised dog playgroups, which were uncommon, if not nonexistent, in that era. The behavioral benefits of well-exercised, well-socialized dogs are now well accepted by animal behaviorists, dog trainers and others.  In addition, meeting with their neighbors to exercise and socialize their dogs together is a community activity much enjoyed by dog owners, as the response to A-DOG’s and Green Dog committee efforts has demonstrated.  Over 900 Arlington residents, to date, have signed A-DOG’s petition in favor of off-leash recreation for responsible dog owners in Arlington.  Many other communities in MA and across the nation have recognized the needs of their tax-paying dog-owning residents by modernizing their leash laws.  It is time that Arlington did so, as well – there has been at least 8 years of work on this issue in our town, with no implementation of any off-leash privileges.

 

Why propose this Article when TM rejected the Green Dog plan last year?

The need and demand for legal off-leash recreational options continues.  Last year, with their recommended vote to TM, the BoS indicated approval of the spirit of the Green Dog plan, to enable responsible off leash recreation at certain times in certain parks. The vote at TM was very close (83 affirmative to 88 negative).  Several TM members later told us that they felt the measure would have gained more support if the Green Dog Plan were not so complex and/or if the narrowly defeated last-minute proposed amendment for only morning hours (up to 10 am) had passed.  We can never know for sure if that is true, but it is our recollection that nearly half of TM supported the amendment to restrict the Green Dog Plan to mornings. Two years ago (2008), TM voted “No Action” on an Article similar to Article 36 (#28).  At that time, the primary reason cited, including in the Selectmen’s recommendation for “no action”, was the need to give the Green Dog committee time to do its work. Nonetheless, even then, several TM members supported a substitute motion for positive action, with some proposing amendments that would enable their support. Our Substitute Motion under Article 36 addresses what we learned from experience and feedback from other TM members, on both previous attempts.

 

Why isn’t it enough for dog owners to have the Town working on fenced off leash recreation facilities?

Fenced off leash recreation areas (OLRA) have been legal in Arlington for 7 years, but the Town has yet to establish any.   (In contrast, in Somerville, a Dog Owners Task Force formed in 2004, the first OLRA was constructed in 2006, and today there are 2 operational OLRAs, 1 more in advanced planning, and 2 more under serious consideration. The Somerville Open Space and Recreation Plan, 2008-2013, highlights off leash recreation in Somerville as a “Success Story”.)  Many dog owners, including us, are encouraged that the Town has now established a “Dog Park Task Force” to identify possible sites and work out details.  Some of us have been named to this Task Force and have begun working constructively with fellow members.  Still, such OLRA are costly, each at least $200,000, based on the experiences of Boston and Somerville, as well as other information gathered, so far, by our Task Force.  With budgetary and other constraints, it is not clear when there will be a sufficient number of fenced OLRA to serve Arlington’s dog owner community.  In addition, even if unlimited financial and open-space resources were available, a fenced OLRA is not appropriate for all neighborhood parks and for all users.   (Indeed some TM members indicated they did not support the Green Dog Plan in 2009 because it included fenced OLRAs.)  Other programs, most notably NYC’s very successful off-leash recreation program (http://www.nycoffleash.com/html/FAQ.htm) rely on a combination of dedicated fenced facilities at some parks and “shared hours” at others. We believe that the best solution for Arlington will also include both approaches, and feel that Article 36 works in parallel to the work of the Dog Park Task Force, with complementary goals.

 

Why the proposed hours of “park opening time til 9 am”?

As noted above, we learned from last year’s Green Dog debate in TM that morning hours were less controversial and that the motion to restrict hours to prior to 10 am is regarded as one that would have strengthened chances of passage.  In our proposal, hours are limited even further to end at 9 am.  In NYC, the default off-leash hours in shared-use parks are from 9 pm til 9 am, unless a park closes at night, as ours do.  This has apparently worked well for over 20 years in a very densely populated city.  Those of us who visit Arlington parks early in the morning know that they are used quite sparsely at this time.   We believe that the proposed hours would have minimum impact on park usage, and would give responsible dog owners the option to exercise and socialize their dogs before going to work and/or helping their children get to school.  The hours will not be optimal for all dog owners, but we believe that they will be useful to many. The intent of restricting hours in this proposal is to be conservative.  In several other MA towns (e.g. Lexington, Bedford, Burlington, Acton, Concord, Lincoln, and Wellesley) dogs are allowed off-leash, under effective control, in virtually all parks at all open hours.

 

Why the phrase “effective owner control”?

This requires that only dogs accompanied by the human owner, and under control, would be allowed off-leash.  Article 36 is not intended to provide an opportunity for dog owners to allow their dog to run “at large”, or to enable out of control dogs to run through private property, jump on people, attack other dogs, or otherwise cause problems.  Complaints about out of control dogs should be addressed by the Animal Control Officer (ACO), if necessary, as well as by peer pressure from other dog owners.  In other bylaws, similar wording is used, for example:

 

Acton:  “complete and effective control”

Brookline: “must control the animal”

Bedford:  “effective voice control”, “effective control of its owner”

Burlington: “obedient to command”

Concord:  “under the control of its owner”

Lexington:  “effective command”

 

Under this bylaw, owners who cannot or will not control their dogs would always be in violation.  Owners playing fetch with their dogs, supervising their dogs playing with other dogs, or conducting other harmless, enjoyable activities with their dogs prior to 9 am, would not.

 

Why “lands under control of the Parks and Recreation Commission”?

These lands would exclude potential areas of concern, including the bike path, Town Hall gardens, cemetery, and conservation land.  We learned that, in Arlington, this is preferable to the overly broad term “open spaces” that was proposed in 2008, though the term is used in other town bylaws, most notably Bedford’s (below).  Interestingly, Bedford’s bylaw also distinguishes a dog “at large” from one under “effective control of its owner”.

 

From Town of Bedford bylaws, Article 42.5.1 Dogs Running at Large (Leash Law Provisions):

“No owner or keeper of any dog shall permit their dog to run at large at anytime. An owner or keeper of a dog must accompany and restrain the dog on a leash or accompany with leash in hand and maintain effective voice control of the dog while off their own property. An obedient dog which is under the effective control of its owner may be permitted to be unleashed in Town-owned open spaces within the Town. Dogs must be on a leash on bike paths and at public events. No dogs are allowed in cemeteries. The provision of this paragraph shall not apply to a guide dog or service dog while actually engaged in the performance of its trained duties.”

 

Why “by specific exclusion of the Parks and Recreation Commission”?

This adds flexibility, avoiding the need for specific locations to be debated in TM. It recognizes and respects the role and authority of the Parks and Recreation Commission.  In Brookline, the bylaw change that passed at TM allowing a Green Dog Plan was general (see below), leaving it up to the Parks and Recreation Commission to establish details of off-leash use and, importantly, to modify this use whenever needed.  We believe that Parks and Recreation Commission’s role should be accorded similar respect and authority in Arlington, and that it is not necessarily a productive use of TM time to debate details of implementation.  In Arlington, we have a Parks and Recreation Commission, appointed by our Town Manager, with approval by our elected Selectmen, to make detailed decisions on use of our public parks.

 

From Town of Brookline Bylaws, SECTION 8.6.7(a) RESTRAINT OF DOGS:

“However, in areas officially designated as designated off

leash area by the Park and Recreation Commission, or its

designee, a dog shall be allowed to be off the leash under

the following conditions…”

 

Why not propose a pilot plan?

We believe that there is no need to make this a pilot plan, subject to even more TM debate next year and in subsequent years. We trust that the Parks and Recreation Commission will act in good faith to implement a flexible bylaw such as this one.  It is essentially a pilot plan anyway, because the Parks and Recreation Commission can act to exclude all parks, though, we are trusting them not to do so.  Under this bylaw, the Commission might, for example, choose to exclude a park it deems “controversial”, conduct a public review process and, potentially, designate specific sub-areas only, or no areas at all, for morning off-leash recreation.  And, of course, TM can vote in a more restrictive leash law in future years.

 

What will this cost the Town?

As we discussed, as Article 36 proponents, with the Finance Committee, we believe there will be no significant cost to the Town.  We already have an ACO to enforce the leash law, and we understand that he provides a flyer with the current leash law to the public. This flyer could be modified and could also be given to dog owners when they register for licenses. Also, details, including exclusions established by the Parks and Recreation Commission, could be available on the Town Website. Community groups such as A-DOG and Friends of parks groups can help by keeping their members informed.  These groups might also choose to work with the Town to donate signage or other items to personalize their neighborhood parks. It is worth noting, too, that in response to an Article submitted to TM last year by an opponent of off-leash recreation, the Town raised the dog license fee by up to 50%, moving it from the median to the highest range in the Commonwealth (based on numbers available in spring, 2009), and imposed a costly late-fee.  That Article’s proponent had suggested that such fees be used for “enforcement”.  While specifying such use was ruled illegal, it is nonetheless clear that dog owners are being charged substantially more this year than last year, providing some extra revenue with no increase in privileges.

 

Why “a maximum of three dogs”?  This was added for consistency with our town bylaws that allow up to three dogs per household, and with similar limits in other off-leash programs. 

*****************************

Talk to us at TM:  Mary McCartney (Pct 1), Sue Doctrow and Jennifer Goebel (Pct 21), Ann Smith (Pct 17), BethAnn Friedman (Pct 15), and Andrew Fisher (Pct 6)

 

Website:  www.arlingtondogowners.org.  Board of Directors:  Susan Doctrow, Andrew Fisher, MaryAnna Foskett, Brenda Kokubo, Mary Mangan, Carrie Moore, Gian Schauer, Gerald Silberman, Ann Smith, Roslyn Smith, Judy Weinberg

Spring Unleashed Networking Event at Picture Perfect Pets, May 15 in Arlington

Posted on by

April 12, 2010

ARLINGTON—Local businesses will celebrate spring while joining together to support the efforts of the Arlington Dog Owners’ Group to earn local dog owners the privilege of exercising and socializing their dogs responsibly off-leash. This fund-raising open house, “Spring Unleashed – a Celebration of Responsible Dog Ownership,” will be held at Picture Perfect Pets Dog Training and Pet Photography (11A Medford Street in Arlington Center) on Saturday, May 15 from 2:00 pm to 5:00 pm.

A-DOG supporters are encouraged to bring their friendly dogs on leash to network with dog friendly businesses and fellow dog lovers while enjoying complimentary pet photography by Bette Yip, refreshments for canines and humans and door prizes donated by local, dog loving businesses. Tax deductible donations to support A-DOG’s efforts are appreciated, but are not required to join in the fun.

Says Bette Yip, owner of Picture Perfect Pets, “In my dog training classes, I emphasize to students the importance of seeking out safe opportunities to let our dogs run, play and socialize with a variety of other dogs in order to maintain both their physical and mental well-being. Dogs that get this sort of activity present fewer behavioral problems. It troubles me that Arlington dog owners have no places to legally follow my advice.”

Arlington Dog Owners Group, or A-DOG, organized in 2008 in Arlington, MA, with these guiding principles:

* Relationships with dogs and other companion animals have numerous benefits to individuals of all ages, and to the community at large.
* With dog ownership comes responsibility, not only to promote the health and welfare of one’s dog, but also to ensure that one’s dog does not adversely affect the safety of others.

A-DOG’s mission includes:

* Advocating for the rights and interests of Arlington dog owners.
* Promoting responsible dog ownership, emphasizing respect for the rights and interests of neighbors and the community and the welfare of our companion animals.
* Educating the community about dog behavior and other factors influencing canine-human interactions.
* Working to promote safe, healthy recreational venues for dogs on- and off-leash in Arlington, enabling responsible dog owners to exercise and socialize their dogs

With this kick-off celebration, A-DOG is initiating its fundraising campaign to contribute to the establishment of fenced off-leash recreation areas currently under consideration by the town of Arlington. In addition, A-DOG continues its advocacy work for the legalization of responsible off-leash recreation more broadly in Arlington parks. A-DOG is a tax exempt public charity under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code.

A-DOG (www.arlingtondogowners.org) is also a founding member of the Coalition of Massachusetts Dog Owner Groups (www.massdog.org), which advocates for local and state recreational policies to benefit responsible dog owners. Members of other MassDOG member groups will also be invited to participate.

Article 36 to allow dogs off leash in the mornings: Board of Selectmen recommend “no action” while the Parks and Recreation Commission is supportive

Posted on by
Reply

The following proposed vote for Article 36 was presented by A-DOG representatives to the Arlington Board of Selectmen on March 22 at about 10 pm:

The signers of Article 36 are proposing the following wording:.

VOTED:

To amend Section 8 (“Animal Control”) of Article 1 (“Use of Areas under Control of Park Department”) of Title IV (“Public Areas”) and/or Article 2 (“Canine Control”) of Title VIII (“Public Health and Safety”) of the By-Laws so as to allow dogs to be off-leash, under effective owner control, from park opening time until 9 am, in all lands under control of the Parks and Recreation Commission except:

those lands directly abutting school properties;

within 15 ft of playground equipment;

and by specific exclusion of the Parks and Recreation Commission.

The Board of Selectmen voted 4 – 1 against recommending any action on this Article. This means they will direct Town Meeting not to vote for any changes to the leash laws. However, Substitute Motions can be presented, and Town Meeting can vote in opposition to the Selectmen’s recommendation.  (As it did, for example, in last years’ Article to allow Arlington residents to keep hens, which the Selectmen opposed.)

Subsequently, at an April 13 hearing, the Arlington Parks and Recreation Commission voted unanimously (with 4 out of 5 Commissioners present) to support the Article that A-DOG representatives will present to Town Meeting, to allow dogs off leash, under effective owner control in the mornings. It will be a Substitute Motion since the Board of Selectmen did not vote to support it (see below for more information). Parks and Recreation Commissioners commented that it was a sensible approach, and gave them the flexibility to further modify park use by dog owners, as needed.

At Town Meeting, which begins on April 26, the proposed vote will be introduced as a Substitute Motion. We hope that the support of the Parks and Recreation Commission, and the efforts of our members to contact their elected Town Meeting Members, will help to overcome the disadvantage of the Selectmen’s lack of support.

*************************************

A recording of the Board of Selectmen Hearing (in three Parts, each 7 to 8 min) can be found at the A-DOG YouTube site , with a written summary below:

Guide to Videos from Board of Selectmen hearing on Article 36

Please note: These videos are unedited, except for being divided into three parts to meet YouTube maximum video requirements. Total time for the three is approximately 22 min.

This is the Arlington Dog Owner Group’s (A-DOG) proposed vote under Article 36 under discussion:

To amend (appropriate sections) of the By-Laws so as to allow dogs to be off-leash, under effective owner control, from park opening time until 9 am, in all lands under control of the Parks and Recreation Commission except:
those lands directly abutting school properties;
within 15 ft of playground equipment;
and by specific exclusion of the Parks and Recreation Commission.

Part 1:

1. Presentation of Article 36 proposed vote by three proponents:

Mary McCartney (TM member, Pct 1): reads proposed vote and reviews its assets, including only early morning hours, requirement for owner control, and flexibility for the Parks and Recreation to make additional changes
Ann Smith (TM member, Pct 17): presents petition in favor of off-leash recreation signed by 900 Arlington residents, supplying list of these names to the Selectmen
Susan Doctrow (TM member, Pct 21): discusses why the proposal is relatively conservative, citing leash laws in other MA communities as examples; she also says that it is complementary to the work of the Dog Park Task Force (on which she’s also serving) currently evaluating possible fenced parks

2. Selectman Clarissa Rowe recommends that the Board vote “no action” and this is seconded by Selectmen Jack Hurd and Diane Mahon.  While commending A-DOG’s efforts, Ms. Rowe says that A-DOG must continue to educate dog owners to be more responsible before anything like this will be acceptable.

Part 2:

1. For continuity, repeat of final lines (Part 1) from Selectman Rowe and “no action” motion

2. Selectman Diane Mahon raises concerns that out-of-towners will come to Arlington to use its parks for their dogs’ off-leash recreation. Any plan like this should address ways to exclude outsiders, if possible.

3. Ann Smith and Susan Doctrow rebut this concern:
Which towns and cities will such dog owners come from? For example, Somerville and Lexington already have facilities and provisions for off leash recreation. (Ms. Mahon’s answer to this included Cambridge and Boston).
• Only early morning hours are proposed. People need to get to work or their kids to school and are unlikely to have time to drive very far. And, even if they do, the parks are virtually empty at such hours so the impact, if any, is questionable.

4. Susan Doctrow further comments on Ms. Rowe’s statement that Arlington is too densely populated for this proposal, with a discussion of the successful off leash recreation program (over 20 yrs in operation) in New York City. Ms. Rowe answers that NYC has more parkland, and that the off-leash areas are further from residences, citing her visit to her daughter in NYC.

5. Public commentary begins, with Article proponent James Goebel, explaining that this proposal makes sense, and is much less complex than the Green Dog plan that Town Meeting voted against last year.

6. Article proponent Deborah Goldsmith states the need for a leash law change such as the one being proposed, for example, to help dog owners raise well-trained and behaved dogs. She discusses why the proposal with limited hours is reasonable. She mentions, in particular, how unproductive it is to have it be illegal to even use a 26 ft training leash. She also says that she believes it is time, and that another year without doing something will not help the situation.

Part 3:

1. For continuity, repeat of final lines (Part 2) from proponent Deborah Goldsmith

2. Article proponent Ellen Kravitz addresses Ms. Rowe’s comments that it is incumbent on all dog owners to educate, and correct the behavior of, irresponsible dog owners before there can be any change to the leash law. She says that dog owners are being held to a standard of perfection that is not expected of other groups. For example, even though there are dangerous traffic accidents, nobody says that other drivers cannot be allowed to have drivers’ licenses until all drivers behave responsibly. Similarly, sports events are not cancelled because a few park users litter during such activities.

3. Article proponent BethAnn Friedman (TM member, Pct 15) stressed that last year’s vote at Town Meeting against the Green Dog plan was very close (88 to 83), indicating that there is wide support for allowing dogs off leash under certain conditions. Ms. Rowe said that a proposal such as this can still be presented as a Substitute Motion at Town Meeting, even though the Selectmen will vote against supporting it.

4. Article opponent Mustafa Varoglu (TM member, Pct 8) says that he supports off-leash recreation under certain circumstances, and also is a member of the Dog Park Task Force. But, he doesn’t support this proposal because it leaves too much decision in the hands of Parks and Recreation Commission instead of in the public and the hands of the Board of Selectmen. He did not like the previous Green Dog plan, and raised concerns about the views of this Commission, stating 3 members of the Parks and Recreation Commission were members of the Green Dog committee. (This is not correct, to our knowledge. Only one individual, Leslie Mayer, is part of both Parks and Recreation Commission and Green Dog Committee. As in other communities, the Parks and Recreation Commission is appointed by the Town Manager, with oversight from the Board of Selectmen to decide on details of park usage.)

5. The Board of Selectmen issued their final vote against A-DOG’s proposal under Article 36. Selectman Kevin Greeley (Chairman of the Board of Selectmen) voted against his colleagues. He explained that, like last year, he feels that a lot of work has gone into this effort by the Green Dog committee, and that it deserves a discussion at Town Meeting. However, the vote was 4 to 1, so it is “no action”. Mr. Greeley said we must keep talking about this issue, and joked that he wants to see all 900 petition signers at the Town Meeting when this is discussed!

Coolidge Corner Theatre “Best in Show” screening with Dr. Nicholas Dodman March 15

Posted on by

From Cheryl White, Community Outreach Coolidge Corner Theatre:

It’s all about dogs and the people who love them when the Coolidge Corner Theatre presents a special screening of Best in Show, master mockumentarian Christopher Guest’s hilarious send up of competitive canine culture, paired with a talk by Nicholas Dodman, one of the world’s leading veterinary behaviorists, on Monday, March 15 at 7:00 pm.  In keeping with the evening’s theme, the Coolidge will raffle off a free basket of pooch goodies from Polka Dog Bakery.

Guest (This is Spinal Tap, Waiting for Guffman, A Mighty Wind) wrote and directed Best in Show, which follows a colorful group of contestants as they prepare for one of the greatest events of their lives – the prestigious Mayflower Dog Show in Philadelphia.  Winner of American and British Comedy Awards, this inspired gem features a stellar ensemble cast who perfectly capture their characters’ eccentricities, anxieties, and competitive zeal as they vie for the coveted cup.

Before the screening, Dr. Nicholas Dodman, founder of the Animal Behavior Clinic at Tufts’ Veterinary School of Medicine and best-selling author of The Dog Who Loved Too Much, Dogs Behaving Badly, and The Well-Adjusted Dog, explores the sometimes curious bond between people and their pooches, the evidence for dogs’ intelligence, and whether we under- or overestimate our canine companions.

This program is part of the Coolidge’s popular Science on Screen series.  For more information, visit Coolidge Corner Theatre’s website or call 617/734-2501. Tickets are available through the web site or at the Coolidge Corner Theatre box office, 290 Harvard Street, Brookline.

Lexington Speaks out about Unleashed Dogs in Willard’s Woods

Posted on by
Reply
Willard's Woods
(Photo by Scott Goldberg of AM DEW Photos, Lexington)
(editorial Intro by S. Doctrow)  As many of you know, unlike Arlington, Lexington enjoys a modern leash bylaw, whereby dogs are allowed off leash under owner control.  One of the favorite recreational spots for dog owners from Lexington, as well as surrounding towns including ours, is the conservation land known as Willard’s Woods. Currently, there is controversy over dog recreation at Willard’s Woods, fueled primarily by complaints from abutters, complaints not only over dog owners using Willard’s, but also over Willard’s users parking their cars on the abutters’ street.  In response to such complaints, the Lexington Conservation Commission has held hearings and is reportedly leaning toward requiring dogs to be leashed on this property.  I attended one public meeting, in which a member of the Commission said that their primary concern is not with the interest of residents who enjoy recreational use of this space but, instead, with protection of the land.  Lexington dog owners, who have enjoyed a reasonable off-leash policy in their town for many years, are speaking out against this threat to take away a favorite venue for responsibly exercising and socializing their dogs.   (This story is an all  too familiar one to we A-DOG members, unfortunately.  In our town, we have faced several examples of opposition by abutters who seem to believe that they have the right to control the use of our public land, only because they live next to it).
The editorial page of the Lexington Minuteman (Feb 4) reported being “inundated” with letters supporting off-leash recreation. A selection of letters was published, reprinted in its entirety below.  If you are a responsible dog owner in Lexington, or a neighbor who enjoys taking your dog to Willard’s Woods for exercise and socialization, please speak out by writing to the Conservation Commission and to the Lexington Selectmen, your elected officials if you are a Lexington voter.  (Also write to candidates for Selectman in the upcoming election to find out where they stand.)  The Conservation Commission will reportedly vote on this measure February 23 at their meeting.  The meeting is currently scheduled for the Lexington Selectmen’s meeting room in Town Hall, but might be moved to accommodate the large turnout expected.  We will try to keep an update on the meeting on the front page of our website, but please contact us by email for the newest information on it.  If you want to get involved in a new Lexington based dog owners group (“LexiDOG”), please write to us and we’ll put you in touch.
Please note that Leslie Goldberg, a spokesperson for Lexington Dog Owners, asked me to add a reminder that we must use natural resources like Willard’s Woods as responsibly as we can, to clean up after our dogs always.  In addition, Leslie has voiced regrets that Willard’s Woods is described as a “dog park” in some books and websites.  She is concerned that this has brought in people unfamiliar with the controversies and sensitive issues around its use.  In particular, she hopes that users will use extra care and remember that it is conservation land.
******************************************
From the Lexington Minuteman (Wicked Local online site)
Lexington —

Note to readers The Lexington Minuteman was inundated with letters this week about the upcoming Feb. 23, Conservation Commission hearing about whether dogs should be leashed at Willard’s Woods. There were too many letters to publish, however, here is a collection of snippets from the letters the newspaper received. We’ll have more snippets next week since we have received even more letters about the issue. The meeting will be held at 7:30 p.m. on Tuesday, Feb. 23, Room G-15/Town Office Building, 1625 Mass. Ave. — Anthony Schinella, covering editor

Lexington conservation lands are supposed to be open to all. That is supposed to include everyone, even dog owners, but now we might as well stay home and walk our dogs down the street. You’ve decided that everyone else’s rights take precedence. You’ve been swayed by abutters who come in with photos of dog poop, and cry how their lives and health are being negatively impacted by cars on their street, and dogs in the conservation land next to their homes. — Frances Gillespie, Gleason Road

It seems the current compromise is to require dogs in Willard’s Woods to be leashed at all times. This is a simple and straightforward solution to many of our issues in this conservation area. Unfortunately, it is almost the same as banning dogs. I walk my dogs on leash on the streets, in the town center, and other areas. The joy of Willard’s was to allow my dogs off leash. — Mark Eykholt, Patterson Road

I am a conscientious dog owner and diligent about dog waste removal. I know that having to leash my dog at Willard’s Woods would stop me from using the space. When the rights of some are restricted, it is called discrimination. How can it be that a few people can disallow the many access to a public space and restrict their freedom? When one space becomes restricted what’s to stop the spread of restriction? — Sheri Foreman, Peachtree Road

We have been residents for 30 years, with and without dogs, and we treasure the freedom that our dogs have enjoyed. A small minority of owners may not be as responsible as they need to be, but to deny all dogs the opportunity to run free is unconscionable. They simply cannot get enough exercise if they are always leashed. — Pat and Audrey Sallese, Lowell Street

Of course the woods are a great resource for other types of recreational activity — jogging, hiking, etc. — but these activities are generally not ones in which one meets, converses with, and gets to know other park users. The nature of the experience with the dogs off-leash — in which we are letting the dogs socialize, run, play, etc. — fosters a type of camaraderie that is increasingly rare in today’s society, and it would be a great loss to our community were it to become unavailable. — Evan Ziporyn, Turning Mill Road

I am a Lexington resident and have been one for 42 years. I am also a dog owner. Although there are a few “bad dog” (or perhaps bad pet owners) the majority of the dogs are friendly and obedient. As stated on the Lexington High School auditorium wall … Lexington is the Birth Place of a Free America. Please allow our dogs to have a little bit of freedom as well. — Joanne Kaye, Peachtree Road

My own unscientific survey would estimate that 90 percent of people walking the park are dog owners; and I have never witnessed bad or aggressive behavior from any dogs. Most are off leash but under owner’s command, some are leashed, and the experience has been incredibly positive. With 44 percent of U.S. families owning a dog and the overwhelming majority of people walking in Willard’s Woods having a dog, it seems to me that restricting Conservation Land in Lexington to either leashed dogs or banned to dogs, would prevent the very people that enjoy and value the conservation land from using it fully. — Enrico Cagliero, Paul Revere Road

This ruling is prejudiced and unfair to the hundreds of dog owners and users of Willard’s Woods that maintain control over their dogs, pick up after their pets and obey the rules. It is a travesty of justice and fairness that a small number of people that break the rules will be allowed to take away the rights of the vast majority of law abiding citizens. A leash rule may be an easy answer but it is far from fair or right. — Douglas J. Luckerman, Outlook Drive

There are few places for a dog to vigorously exercise in Lexington, and walking on-leash would not fulfill that exercise requirement. Which brings up another source of irritation — the lack of sidewalks in Lexington neighborhoods. Clearly, wandering in the streets while walking the dog can’t be desirable. — Ann McCartan, Lincoln Street

I revel in the beauty of the landscape at different times of day, various weather conditions and all seasons. As a local artist I have painted over a hundred canvases of Willard’s Woods. Walking there is often the highlight of my day both because of the natural beauty and the camaraderie of spending time with other dog people and their pets. Being off leash is certainly the best part of my dog’s day. Her happiness while playing with other dogs and running after tennis balls is a joy to see. — Laurel Cook Lhowe, Percy Road

As an avid dog-lover and frequent visitor to Willard’s Woods I was appalled by the Conservation Commission’s decision. Being able to walk dogs off-leash at the Woods brings immense joy to so many people. Requiring leashes at all times would have the same effect as banning dogs as there would no longer be a reason to walk at Willard’s Woods versus down the street by our homes. The point of going to the Woods is for the dogs to have space to run freely and play with other dogs. — Sharon Olofsson, Hill Street

My husband and I take our dog over there for off leash walks and play time for the dog. It something we all really enjoy. If the dog is required to be on a leash it would defeat the purpose of our trip to Willard’s Woods to give the dog good exercise and socialization and well as for us to enjoy the beauty while we walk together. We leash our dog in and out of the woods and always clean up after him as well as observing the proper parking. It has always been a really nice experience meeting other people, with and without dogs. — Karen & John Buschini, Tower Road

The problem is those owners who do not pick up their dog waste. This is a small percentage but it is enough to cause great concern. Both dog owners and non-dog owners who enjoy the woods are disgusted by this behavior. How to solve it? Well certainly not by requiring dogs to remain on leash. Those that do not pick up will continue to do so whether their dog is leashed or not. Dogs off-leash behave much better than leashed dogs who often feel trapped and/or protective of their owners and can act aggressive towards other dogs. Any reputable dog trainer/professional will tell you this. — Dayle Ballentine, Tower Road

In Memory of PJ Smith

Posted on by
2

dogs at beach (19)a

Our hearts go out to A-DOG founders and board members Ann and Roslyn Smith, and to Dick and Scarlett, too.  They lost their beloved PJ last night, December 3.  PJ had a long, active, and joyful life, with so many adventures and good times like the one in his photo!  And, his doggy life was filled with love to the very end, with his family there with him to comfort him.

Holiday Pet Drive Sponsored by A-DOG Member Family

Posted on by
Reply

Our fellow member Briana Flynn wrote to us recently to ask that we help spread the word about a holiday pet drive she and her family are planning.  They are collecting donated items needed by local shelters.  Please contact Briana at <petdonations@yahoo.com> to ask how you can help.  Their flyer is reprinted below to give an idea of what is needed:

HELP PETS IN NEED THIS HOLIDAY SEASON
Hello! We are a local family collecting the following items to donate to local animal shelters that are in desperate need of the following:
Bath Towels
Laundry detergent
Bleach
Plush toys
Rubber squeaky toys
Tennis balls
Dental Chews
Knotted rope toys
Rawhides/knuckle bones
Training treats
Phone books for small animals to shred
Cat litter
Copy paper
Paper towels
Toilet Paper
Dog beds
Distilled Water
3-tab manila file folders
Dishwashing liquid
Large trash bags
Hand sanitizer
Bowls
Cat and dog food
Rubbing alcohol
Scissors
Tape dispenser refills
Air fresheners
Radios
Pens
Old Crates
Collars
Leashes
If you have any of the above, please contact us at: petdonations@yahoo.com
We will pick up any of the above items that you can part with and will donate them to local shelters (MSPCA, Buddy Dog, ARL, Alliance for Animals)  in mid December.  THANK YOU FOR ALL YOUR SUPPORT!
Every little bit will help!

Prison Pups Screening, Oct 21 in Belmont: Fundraiser for Hearing Impaired Cambridge Teacher

Posted on by
Reply

Many of you may recall that A-DOG sponsored a very successful screening of Prison Pups in April, 2008. Here’s another chance to see it and to support an excellent cause. And, please be so kind as to forward this information to everyone you think might be interested!

On Wednesday, October 21, 2009, at 7 p.m. at the Belmont Studio Cinema, 376 Trapelo Road, Belmont, the Friends of Betty and Dexter will show the award-winning documentary, Prison Pups, to help raise funds so that Elizabeth Smith MacKenzie of Watertown may obtain a new hearing assistance dog.

MacKenzie, a special needs teacher with the Cambridge public schools, will get her hearing assistance dog from NEADS (the National Education for Assistance Dog Services) Dogs for Deaf and Disabled Americans, the same organization that matched her with Dexter, her current hearing assistance dog. Dexter, who is ill, is over 12 years old and will retire soon.

MacKenzie explained that, “My dog works primarily for me, but also accompanies me to the classroom and sits for reading time, helps with counting and often comforts an upset child as needed. He has been an invaluable asset to the school room.”

NEADS, a Massachusetts non-profit, in 1976, pioneered the training of dogs to help people who are deaf or hard-of-hearing, in the same manner as guide dogs assist the blind and people with limited vision. NEADS has now expanded its services to provide training for people with other disabilities also.

In 1998, NEADS began the Prison PUP Partnership in which inmates foster and train service dog puppies for the first year of the dogs’ training. The film, Prison Pups, tells the story of four inmates as they raise and train service dogs for the handicapped and hearing impaired at Concord Farm, Massachusetts, a minimum-security facility.

“Dexter, and before him, Chico,” MacKenzie said, “have been my ears for 25 years. They allow me to function independently at home, in the community and at work. They tell me the smoke alarm, teakettle, door knock, phone, etc. They do the same sounds at work, plus a different fire alarm. On the street they tell me if sirens are coming, and alert me to other environmental sounds that are above or below the sounds that my hearing aides can compensate for.”

She added: “My service dog allows independence in a way that gives me, a disabled person, control over my safety. Service dogs are more focused and reliable than any human companion. They are always available and willing to accompany me anywhere at any time.”

A donation of $25.00 for adults and $5.00 for students is requested for the screening. More information about NEADS may be viewed at http://www.neads. org/index. php.

Contributions for Betty may be made directly by going to:
http://www.neads. org/about_ us/client_ view.php? id=189

A-DOG Booth a Success at Town Day 2009!

Posted on by

A-DOG’s booth at Arlington Town Day, 2009 was much fun and another big success!  Highlights:  We collected 192 signatures on our petition for off-leash recreation in Arlington.  This should bring us to over 900 signers!  Volunteers at the booth reported that residents were lining up and waiting patiently to sign, showing that support for this issue is as strong as ever in Arlington!  If you missed us at Town Day, you can, of course, still sign the petition online.  We also signed up several new members, including new neighbors just moving to Arlington.  We sold some T shirts and took orders for more.  Six lucky winners were selected in our free drawing, winning great gifts generously donated by businesses and individuals who support us.  The prizes and winners were:  Gift certificate good for one day of daycare at Crate Escapes (Belmont) or Raining Cats and Dogs (Cambridge) — Wendy Richter and Pam Byron;  Gift certificate good for 2 dozen cookies from Lakota Bakery — Betsy Leonder;  One pound of coffee from Starbuck’s Arlington Heights manager Rachel — Emily Page; and a wrought iron “pawprint” leash hook, made in North Conway NH and donated by an A-DOG member — Teleia Pastore. Congratulations to all our winners and WELCOME to our new A-DOG members.  And, thank-you to all our wonderful volunteers at our Town Day booth!  And, thanks, again to our business Friends of A-DOG for their continued support!  Stay tuned for more photos of Town Day, 2009.

Annual Report 2009

Posted on by
Reply

Annual Report
September 27, 2009
submitted by Susan Doctrow, president

In spring 2008, a group of concerned dog owners in Arlington incorporated a new not-for-profit organization, Arlington Dog Owners Group (or A-DOG), to improve life for dogs and people in Arlington. A-DOG’s guiding principles are:
— Relationships with dogs and other companion animals have numerous benefits to individuals of all ages, and to the community at large.
— With dog ownership comes responsibility, not only to promote the health and welfare of one’s dog, but also to ensure that one’s dog does not adversely affect the safety of others.

A-DOG’s mission includes:
— Advocating for the rights and interests of Arlington dog owners.
— Promoting responsible dog ownership, emphasizing respect for the rights and interests of neighbors and the community as well as the welfare of our companion animals.
— Educating the community about dog behavior and other factors influencing canine-human interactions.
— Working to promote safe, healthy recreational venues for dogs on- and off-leash in Arlington, enabling responsible dog owners to exercise and socialize their dogs.

A-DOG’s founding directors are: Susan C. Ruderman and Susan R. Doctrow (co-presidents); Andrew Fischer; MaryAnna Foskett; Brenda Kokubo; Carrie Moore; Mary Mangan; Ann Smith; Roslyn Smith; and Judy Weinberg
A-DOG’s founding officers are: Susan C. Ruderman (co-President); Susan R. Doctrow (co-President, Treasurer); MaryAnna Foskett (Clerk and Vice President).

Highlights of A-DOG’s second year:

1. First Annual Meeting: The first Annual Meeting was held in September, 2008. A new board of directors and officers were elected and will serve a two-year term, through the Annual Meeting in September, 2010. These are: Susan R. Doctrow (president and treasurer); Andrew Fischer; MaryAnna Foskett (clerk); Brenda Kokubo; Carrie Moore; Mary Mangan; Gian Schauer, Gerald Silberman, Ann Smith (membership director and acting co-president); Roslyn Smith (membership director and vice president); and Judy Weinberg. Please note that “acting co-president” and “membership director” are not official positions in the state filings, but the Board has agreed that these individuals serve in this capacity.

2. A-DOG’s “Pawprints” Newsletter: Editorial team Lynda Gutowski, Hank Haddad, and Gian Schauer have produced two issues of the A-DOG newsletter, available on our website and distributed by email to members. The expertise and creativity of our editorial team has resulted in a very professional, informative, and beautiful publication.

4. Town Meeting: More details can be found on our website. The Green Dog plan, sponsored by a town committee but supported independently by A-DOG, was defeated by only 5 votes at Town Meeting, 2009. This is a substantial improvement over what happened last year but, still, Arlington has yet to join many other communities in modernizing its leash law, and/or providing fenced areas that are already legal, to allow off-leash recreation for responsible dogowners. Our plans to promote this include encouraging the town to establish a Dog Owners Task Force, similar to the ones established in Somerville and other communities, to seek ways to provide off leash recreation to responsible dog owners and their dogs.

5. Marketing and Promotion: Thanks to professional efforts by several A-DOG member/volunteers, A-DOG continues to build its reputation with distinction in Arlington. Dan Foskett designed and continues to maintain our website (www.arlingtondogowners.org). The website features our logo, created for us by graphics designer Lisa Berasi during our first year. This logo is also featured on our full-color brochures, designed by Ericka Gray, also during our first year. Lisa joined with Gian Schauer and Ann Smith to produce, with generous help from Arlington Community Media, Inc. (ACMI), a Public Service Announcement (PSA) that has been airing on ACMI cable channels. The PSA emphasizes the core mission of A-DOG, to represent the rights and interests of responsible dog owners through education and advocacy.

6. “Friends of A-DOG” program: This program continues, thanks to generous businesses listed on our website. Some of these businesses offer discounts to A-DOG full members; others have provided A-DOG with financial donations or donated goods or professional services. Several businesses or individuals donated prizes given away in a drawing on Town Day.

7. 501(c)(3) Status: Through a detailed application process, A-DOG has now gained recognition by the IRS as a tax-exempt, charitable organization under code 501(c)(3). Contributions to A-DOG, including membership dues, are now considered tax deductible, retroactive to our founding date, May 5, 2008. A-DOG is also registered as a public charity with the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

8. Town Day. A-DOG sponsored its second booth at Arlington Town Day on September 26, 2009. Activities at the booth included: (1) Signing up new members and “Friends of A-DOG”, (2) Collecting signatures on our petition (see below); (3) Selling and taking orders for A-DOG T shirts; and (4) A free drawing for prizes generously donated by Friends of A-DOG businesses. The booth was a great success, in particular, people were standing in line to sign our petition. Clearly, there is much interest and support for our mission in Arlington.

9. Membership: Ann Smith and Roslyn Smith, as our Membership Directors, will issue a report at the Annual Meeting. A membership outreach, by mail, to about 1300 registered dog owners was very successful and our membership now numbers about 400 individuals. Membership cards are distributed to full members to enable their use for discounts at Friends of A-DOG businesses.

10. Petition: In an effort spearheaded by member/volunteer Iain Miller, A-DOG launched an online petition last year, also collecting hand-signed signatures. At Town Day, 2008, we collected 245 signatures. Before Town Day, the total was over 750 and the list continues to grow. Approximately 190 signatures were collected at Town Day, 2009 and we believe that most, if not all, of these are new ones. The list of petition signers, organized by Precinct, thanks to Ann and Roslyn Smith, was presented to Town Meeting members and the Board of Selectmen to support the Green Dog program. We believe that this helped make the vote as very close as it was, and will continue to collect names of our supporters in order to make legal off-leash recreation a reality in Arlington. The Petition can be accessed and signed via our website.

11. MassDOG Founding Membership: This new coalition was envisioned by Michele Biscoe, chairperson of somldog of Somerville and is now a reality. The Coalition of Massachusetts Dogowners Groups (MassDOG) is network of dog-related community organizations in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. The leaders of each of these groups meet, usually every other month. MassDOG has met several times already, and has begun to establish its presence and influence, on behalf of responsible dogowners throughout the state. (Sue Doctrow represents A-DOG.) Besides helping one another through sharing of strategy and experience, MassDOG is leading education and advocacy efforts at a statewide level. MassDOG members have been interviewed in some excellent press coverage of the off-leash recreation issue, for example, on WBUR (90.9 FM) and in the Boston Globe. MassDOG member teams, including a team from A-DOG, walked together at the MSPCA Walk for Animals, raising several thousand dollars for the MSPCA/Angell Animal Medical Center. Our own A-DOG team raised over $1500 and the MassDOG teams together raised over $5000. For more details on MassDOG, see our website www.massdog.org.

12. Treasurer’s report: This, too, will be presented at the Annual Meeting. A-DOG has raised approximately $3500 this year, to date, and has approximately $2600 cash on hand to fund its future endeavors.

Future plans:
I believe that our specific activities in the coming year, pending Board approval, should include:

— Working with the Green Dog committee to synergize with their efforts and to ensure that the program they develop will serve the interests of our members and other responsible dog owners in Arlington. This includes continuing to advocate for, and to have a role in, a Dog Owners Task Force.
— Expanding our membership outreach efforts. This includes encouraging existing full members to renew their memberships (otherwise, they will remain as associate members unless they resign).
— Continuing to collect signatures on our petition and to otherwise mobilize support for legal off leash exercise and socialization opportunities for dogs in Arlington.
— Forming an Advisory Council of professionals in relevant fields to provide guidance to us as we go forward.
— Continuing to sponsor valuable educational and advocacy events in our community, and to participate in appropriate events sponsored by others. For example, it has been suggested, including by a pediatric emergency physician at Town Meeting, that teaching children to interact safely with dogs, and to interpret their behavior, has a significant effect on bite prevention. Arlington dog trainer Bette Yip has established a program to teach children how to safely interact with dogs, and has presented it for other groups, including MayDOG. She would be happy to also present it with us. Another event we’d like to hold would be repeat screening(s) of Prison Pups, perhaps in smaller venues than the Regent, though not necessarily, since that screening in May, 2008 was such a big success. Perhaps we could repeat it as a charitable fundraiser, with co-sponsorship of other MassDOG groups.

Pawvilion Fur Ball 2009 to benefit the Animal Rescue League — September 24

Posted on by
Reply

Here is a notice about a fun event to benefit the Animal Rescue League:

Please join the Animal Rescue League of Boston at

The 2009 Pawvilion Fur Ball
A Dance Party for Animals in Need
At the Bank of America Pavilion

Thursday, September 24, 2009
VIP Reception: 5:30pm to 6:30pm
Dance Party: 6:30pm  to 11:00pm

Tickets available now at the Pawvillion or Animal Rescue League websites.

Live Nation and the Animal Rescue League of Boston are pleased to announce “Pawvilion 2009 A Dance Party for Animals in Need” will be held at Boston’s premier outdoor venue, the Bank of America Pavilion, on Thursday, September 24, 2009.

Following on from the success of last year’s fundraiser at the Bank of America Pavilion, this year’s event–The 2009 Pawvilion Fur Ball–will feature a 1970s and 1980s musical theme. Playing the hits of the day will be DJ “Big Missy,” along with a silent auction of amazing items and a “Best Dressed” competition. Whether you have two legs or four, the evening promises to be a barking good time! Television journalist Maria Stephanos and comedian Steve Sweeney will be among the emcees.  Come support our furry friends and travel back to the era of polyester, platforms, and big hair.

Tickets are priced at $40 for standard admission and $100 for the VIP package which includes a private reception and free parking, along with other special features.

All proceeds raised at the Fur Ball will benefit the Animal Rescue League of Boston, a 501(c)(3) non-profit humane organization dedicated to rescuing domesticated animals and wildlife from suffering, cruelty, abandonment, and neglect. For more information about the Animal Rescue League of Boston’s programs, please visit http://www.arlboston.org/ or call (617) 426-9170 x615.

The Bank of American Pavilion is located in the heart of Boston’s waterfront district, 290 Northern Avenue, Boston, MA, 02210.

We hope you can join us on September 24!  Please spread the word about this special event.

Fun and Success at the MSPCA Walk for Animals

Posted on by
2

Our A-DOG team had a wonderful day at the MSPCA Walk for Animals on Sunday, September 13 at the Boston Common.  This event was such fun! More important, it did so much to help the MSPCA, with at least a thousand dogs and owners participating, and approximately $300,000 raised. Our A-DOG team joined forces with other teams from the new Massachusetts Coalition for Dog Owners Groups (MassDOG), especially the team from Somerville’s somldog.  Our coalition of MassDOG teams is very proud to have raised a total of at least $4882 for the MSPCA!  We congratulate the somldog team, who won the friendly challenge with 17 team members and $2752 in donations.  Our A-DOG team made a strong showing, with 11 members and $1595 in donations.  We thank everybody who walked with us or sponsored us today.  Although the somldog team won the MassDOG challenge, they kindly shared their prize with us, delicious Taza chocolates made in Somerville.  Besides this yummy treat, their team also won a gift certificate from Arlington’s own Lakota Bakery, which also happens to be a Business Friend of A-DOG.

A-DOG’s Team to Walk in the MSPCA Walk for Animals on Sept 13 — Join or Sponsor Us!

Posted on by
4

A-DOG is sponsoring a team to walk with our dogs at the MSPCA Walk for Animals on Sunday, September 13. We will be walking with teams from other community dog owners groups, including from Somerville, Dorchester, and Newton. We are all part of the new Coalition for Massachusetts Dog Owner Groups or MassDOG.

We all know that the MSPCA does wonderful work to protect animals.  Michele Biscoe, captain of the SomDOG team asked Brian Adams, the MSPCA Senior Manager, Media and Community Relations, to describe for us just how our donations will benefit animals, and he replied: “The donations raised will go towards the MSPCA-Angell’s General Fund to help where the money is needed most. Some programs include helping care for homeless animals in our adoption centers, providing financial assistance to pet owners facing certain financial struggles and caring for animals surrendered or seized through our Law Enforcement department. These are just three examples and there are many more….”

As part of MassDOG, we are participating in a friendly challenge issued by our friends at SomDOG. The team that brings the most members to the Walk will win prizes donated by Michele Biscoe (Taza chocolate, made in Somerville) and Sue Doctrow (Lakota Bakery cookies, made in Arlington). Our A-DOG team, with 7 members as of this writing, was in the lead for quite awhile. But suddenly, SomDOG has surged ahead, with 11 members! And, they’ve raised $1180, to our $1190.  Competition is certainly heating up!  So, if you can, please join our team and walk with us on Sunday! If you can’t join us, then please sponsor our team, or an individual team member of your choice, with a donation to the MSPCA.

Click here to join our team or sponsor us!

Arlington Board of Health Warns of Toxic Algae in Spy Pond, August 2009

Posted on by

Natasha Thorne, Health Compliance Officer of the Arlington Board of Health has notified us of a safety issue at Spy Pond.  Dogs and humans should stay out of the water until the toxic algae situation has resolved.  Consult the Board of Health for further information.

Ms. Thorne’s letter, and the Public Health Advisory she sent us, are reprinted below:

Hello:

The Arlington Health Department is requesting your help to notify dog owners of the risks associated with allowing their dogs to swim in Spy Pond. High levels of microcystis algae continue to be detected in water samples from Spy Pond. This type of algae can be toxic to both humans and animals. It can be especially toxic if it is ingested in high doses as well as cause skin irritation and a rash after wading or swimming.

Although signs have been posted at Spy Pond and a Public Health Advisory has been released via the Town Alert system, it seems that more outreach is needed, therefore I am hoping you would be willing to post something to your website or direct me to another source to get this information out.

Please find the Public Health Advisory attached

Thank you,

Natasha Thorne
Health Compliance Officer
Arlington Board of Health
781-316-3170

**********************************

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
OFFICE OF THE BOARD OF HEALTH

Town of Arlington

27 Maple Street
Arlington, Massachusetts 02476
Christine Connolly Sharkey, MPH, CHO                            Tel: 781 316-3170
Director of Health and Human Services                            Fax: 781 316-3175

UPDATE: PUBLIC HEALTH ADVISORY
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
August 17, 2009

High levels of microcystis algae continue to be detected in water samples from Spy Pond. This type of algae can be toxic to humans and animals. Water samples are being collected and monitored on a weekly basis by the Massachusetts Department of Public Health and the Mystic Watershed Association. This Public Health Advisory will remain in effect until cell counts drop to safe levels for two consecutive weeks. This type of algae can be toxic if ingested in high doses and can cause skin irritation and a rash after wading or swimming .The Arlington Board of Health strongly advises residents not to swim or stand in the water and especially urges residents to keep pets away from the water.

Microcystis is a cyanobacteria algae that grows naturally beneath or on the surface of many waterbodies.  Under certain conditions (such as warm weather and an abundance of nutrients in the water) the algae may undergo an explosive type of growth that results in dense, floating mats of algae.  This is commonly referred to as an “algae bloom.”

Contact with high levels of the cyanobacteria algae has been found to contribute to eye, ear, and skin irritation.  Microcystis is different from most other types of algae because it contains and can secrete a toxin into the water.  During an algae bloom, the amount of algae and toxin in the water can become elevated and exposure can be potentially harmful to people and animals.

Health concerns vary depending on the concentrations of microcystis and its toxin, microcystin.  Ingestion of elevated concentrations of the algae and its toxin can lead to more serious health effects (e.g. muscle cramps, twitching, and liver damage)

Since algae benefit from warm, sunny weather, as the days get shorter and cooler, the algae are likely to dissipate.  Any toxins that are in the water will decline over time as the algae die off.  In addition, any rainfall will help to circulate the water and break-up the bloom.

FOR REGULAR UPDATES OR FOR MORE INFORMATION:
Please check online at www.arlingtonma.gov

Green Dog pilot off-leash plan narrowly defeated at Town Meeting

Posted on by
Reply

The Board of Selectmen recommended that town meeting vote in favor of the Green Dog plan this year. This represented a tremendous show of support by two Selectmen (Ms. Annie LaCourt and Mr. Kevin Greeley), who added their votes to the positive vote of Green Dog plan co-creator Selectman Clarissa Rowe. However, when the Article was debated at Town Meeting (May 13), it was defeated by 5 votes. See a video on the TM session, including TMMs speaking for and against at the break here. While incredibly close, it still did not pass, which means that there are still no legal off leash exercise options in Arlington. As many of you know, there were quite a few Selectmen’s meetings on the Green Dog Plan and other dog-related warrant articles. Many of our members, as well as other proponents, have attended and spoken, along with opponents, in these meetings. Insightful comments by member Everett Shorey are published below. Several letters to the editor and letters sent to the Selectmen are reprinted here. Our Petition, with over 600 signatures, was presented to TM members and the Selectmen. If you haven’t already signed it, please sign it and ask other Arlington residents to sign it as well. We will continue to update the signature list, and will use it as we continue the drive for legal off leash opportunities for responsible dog owners in Arlington. (More history of the Green Dog plan is given in the article below . Contact us (arlingtondogowners@gmail.com) with any questions about the process, including those about Town Meeting.)

“The Buzz Around Town”: Arlington Speaks About Off-Leash Dogs

Posted on by
7

We thought it would be interesting to print a selection of publicly available commentary by residents of Arlington concerning the recent discussion of the Green Dog plan. What follows are unedited letters to the editor that originally appeared in the Arlington Advocate, as well as online responses from readers writing in on the newspaper’s blog. Others, feel free to post your own comments on our blog, as well as to paste in other publicly available commentary that you find. In the interest of fairness and accuracy, please do not edit others’ publicly printed comments but, instead, paste them (or entire pertinent excerpts) in their entirety.

************************
Letter: Off-leash law short-sighted
By Vera J. Bernacchi
Thu Mar 12, 2009, 06:30 AM EDT

Arlington, Mass. – There has been an increase in the number of off-leash dogs I have seen in the last few years. It is possible that all the talk about dog parks and free-range dogs has given encouragement to dog owners to set their dogs free all over Arlington. It is illegal. It is dangerous. And it is an abomination.

During a recent warm spell, as I was walking along Massachusetts Avenue in early evening, I saw more dogs that were off-leash than on. One young mother was petrified because a huge boxer raced across the avenue and stuck his head in her baby carriage. When I chastised the dog’s owner, he swore at me.

I have overheard some of these bold dog owners say that they are happy when the dog officer goes off duty for the day, so they can set their dogs free. Shockingly, many of these people evidently purchased their dogs knowing they did not have the proper facilities for them. Now they erroneously believe the people of Arlington are going to make up for their short-sightedness by providing space for their dogs to run and play and socialize.

I was bitten by a dog twice in my life. As a little girl just walking along my street en route to visit an ill neighbor, I was bitten by a dog — possibly because I showed fear as he raced toward me. Arlington did not have a leash law then. Thirty-five years later, I was bitten by another dog in Florida — possibly because I was carrying a puppy. Dog bites are shockingly painful and they are frightening because, while you are in excruciating pain, you immediately have to investigate the dog’s record of shots and past behavior.

I have spoken with many people in Arlington about the situation of all the off-leash dogs and they are livid about it. Please call the selectmen and your representatives on Town Meeting to share your opinions on this important subject. A couple of selectmen are running for re-election unopposed. However, you can express your opinion on this subject loudly and clearly by withholding your votes from them, if you feel they are about to work to take away your freedom of walking through Arlington without fear.
Vera J. Bernacchi

Massachusetts Avenue

Arlington Advocate Online comment by: gdcook1969
We are having a very valid debate in this town about how to accomodate dog owners – and accomodate then somehow we must. I find in sad that in this situation, where we need to cut a deal that will satisfy no-one, but find the best accomodation for all. The true extremists are those who would use words like ‘abomination’ to describe a dog off of a leash. I’ll remember to use it to describe the poor-of-sight drivers who tend to float down the middle of Mass Ave, taking up two lanes – perhaps we can ban them too..

In this issue, there are two levers we have – where and when. Where can a dog owner run their dogs, and at what times of day. There is an enormous set of options – 1 park, all parks, 1-2 hours a day, morning, evening, after dusk -and dog owners just seem to want something. The opponents here are the ones saying grant them nothing – not 1 minute of a day without a leash. No one here is proposing letting wolves run free in Arlington Center, foaming at the mouth, waiting to maul Vera as she walks out of the local coffee shop. Release in a controlled area, during a controlled time, with penalities justified for those that flout a more permissive law, is a reasonable outcome.

I sympathize with dog owners letting their dogs run off leash in quiet times (hint: wait till Vera is in bed, I suspect). A well regulated program may save Vera some of her concern (well, perhaps not.., but one can hope) – a dog would have to have up to date shots, its past behavior would be documented, identifying if the privilege should be taken away from that owner, etc. And while dog bites can be excruciatingly painful, most aren’t – I suspect Vera is a guilty of a bit of theatrics here.. and there are a lot of things in Arlington that can ‘bite’ more severely – auto collisions, food poisioning, crime, kids making wide u-turns on the Minuteman cutting in front of cyclists… but in the end, I suspect Vera’s freedom to ‘walk through Arlington without fear’ is a canard – fear to her is a cudgel used to enforce the opinion of a zealot..

************
Letter: Discontinue the hyperbole
By Iain Miller
Thu Mar 19, 2009, 06:30 AM EDT

Arlington, Mass. – I have read with interest a recent letter (March 12) in opposition to the town’s Green Dog proposals and find myself, once again, saddened by the tone and hyperbole employed. The letter in question alleges that the “people of Arlington” are not obligated to provide parks for people exercising their dogs off-leash. Of course, they do not — the writer should remember that our parks are multi-use and that their maintenance is provided by all taxpayers, including the thousands of responsible dog-owners of Arlington, who are of course also “people of Arlington.” No individual lobby group should be in a position to exercise a veto over legitimate use.

The letter also implies that off-leash dogs are more likely to bite. This is contrary to the published literature in this field, which documents that leashed dogs are twice as likely to bite, due to the higher stress levels and defensive reactions.

So, lets stick to the facts, discontinue the hyperbole, and be reasonable about all this. There is no “abomination” here (as the writer alleges) — only reasonable people trying to find a middle ground. Dog owners need a way to exercise and socialize their animal friends. This is a both an animal rights and a basic civil tolerance issue, which should not excessively vex a progressive town such as Arlington. Lets keep the debate civil and reasonable and find a middle ground, whether it is fenced dog parks or the hybrid Green Dog proposal currently on the table.
Iain Miller
Kensington Park

*********
Letter: Before voting, answer this
By Bob Radochia
Thu Mar 19, 2009, 06:30 AM EDT

Arlington, Mass. – After reviewing the Green Dog Pilot Project Proposal presented at the Feb. 23, 2009 selectmen’s meeting several times, I have come to the conclusion that the most manageable solution is to have four to six fenced in areas about the town. To allow unleashed dogs in unfenced areas where non-dog adults, children and dogs on leash may be present is unacceptable.

Thirteen locations seem excessive in comparison to the number of other recreational sites throughout the town. For example, we have:

· One swimming location

· One skating rink

· One outdoor skating location

· Three tennis locations

· Five baseball locations

· Twelve Little League/softball locations

· Twelve soccer locations

· Fifteen basketball locations

Before I could reconsider my position, I would need more clarification or answers to the following:

1. One of the intentions of this program to create many neighborhood sites and avoid having destination sites has not been met in my opinion. There are only two off-leash locations, Reeds Brook and Turkey Hill that are located east of Route 2A (Mass. Ave. and Summer St.). Dog owners in the Bishop and Thompson neighborhoods will most likely have to drive to an off-leash location. Selectman Kevin Greeley is farther away from an off-leash site than many residents of Belmont, Cambridge and Lexington.

2. Will the permit be issued to the dog owner or the dog?

3. Can the dog be accompanied to the off-leash site by another member of the family, a neighbor, or paid dog walker as long as the lanyard is displayed?

4. How many rangers would be required per off-leash shift?

5. Where did the number 1,800 dogs come from? The annual reports for the last three years list 1,031, 1,067 and 1,254 licensed dogs and this year there are 1,100 licensed dogs. If 600 dog owners purchased a permit, the proposed $40 fee is too low to meet the goal of $40,000. The $40 fee is not exorbitant compared to the fees in the hundreds of dollars parents must pay for extracurricular and out of school sports activities.

6. How will the unfenced areas be staked out or will the entire field be available for off-leash activities?

I urge you to not support this warrant article until a more manageable and acceptable solution can be presented.
Bob Radochia
Columbia Road

**********
Letter: Dog parks deserve a trial run
By Dick Smith
Thu Mar 19, 2009, 06:30 AM EDT
Arlington, Mass. – In 2003, Arlington’s Town Meeting voted to add a provision for fenced dog areas to the Town bylaws. The Park and Recreation Commission began discussing a proposal to take advantage of this fenced dog area provision, but because of pressure from neighbors who didn’t want this kind of area in their neighborhood, and because having only limited fenced in-area available would mean that dog owners throughout the town would all use that limited area, the idea was not followed through. This eventually led to the creation of the Town’s official Green Dog Committee

Before the Green Dog Committee came into being, FOCCA (Friends of Canine Companions of Arlington) and, more recently, A-DOG (Arlington Dog Owners Group), which now has about 350 members, were formed to promote responsible dog ownership. Now the Green Dog Committee, after studying the problem and holding hearings for two years, have made a recommendation for a one-year trial period, providing for small areas in 13 parks — including two fenced areas — throughout the town, to be used during limited hours, and by payment of $40 for a permit, for off-leash dog activity.

Those who have been following the discussion on the Arlington List realize that this is a sensitive issue with many strong feelings on all sides. But I think that there is virtually unanimous agreement that something must be done. To do nothing means that the present unhappy and unsatisfactory situation, for responsible dog owners and non-dog owners alike, will continue, and that the Green Dog Committee — if it doesn’t simply throw up its hands in frustration — must go back to the drawing board.

The Green Dog Committee’s proposal is a step in the right direction, and, as a Town Meeting Member, I expect to vote in favor of it.

Let’s wait and see how this pilot program works out. It isn’t perfect; I believe that there should be many more fenced areas. There will still be complaints from all sides, but if responsible dog owners cooperate, and if presently less-than-responsible dog owners are pressured to become responsible, hopefully we will find that the plan is in fact improving the situation. There are provisions for making changes during the trial period.
Dick Smith
Washington St.

******

Letter: Nothing Green About Off-Leash Dogs

Arlington, Mass. – If proponents of letting dogs run unleashed in Arlington want to change the law to allow this, they should call it what it is: A proposal to let dogs go unleashed. There is nothing “green” about unleashed dogs or dog parks. Proponents of unleashed dogs and this paper should stop this charade. The plastic used to scoop up the feces come from petroleum. Driving the dogs to the new unleashed parks will cause more carbon emissions. If this encourages more dog ownership, it will mean more dog food and there is nothing “green” about that. If new fences are made, a bigger “carbon footprint.” All the paper and ink on this subject, new signage for this proposal — nothing “green” about that.

Many in Arlington might approve of going “green” by lowering their use of resources and carbon emissions, but allowing dogs to run off leash does nothing to achieve this. So, please, if you want to run your dogs without leashes, just say that. Don’t try to fool me that this will help save the planet.

Michael Jacoby Brown
Brattle Terrace
******

Letter: Please vote no on letting Arlington go to the dogs

by Robert M. Kuhn and Darcy C. Devney

Thu May 14, 2009, 06:30 AM EDT.

Arlington, Mass. – Warrant Article 18 is not about neighborhood fenced dog parks for Arlington dog owners. This is strictly a proposal to license 1,000 dogs or more to run off-leash for hours every day in more than a dozen parks in Arlington.

Residents Opposed. Dogs (clean up/disturb others) was the third highest concern regarding the town’s recreational and open spaces in the Vision 2020 survey. When a dog park was proposed at Hill’s Hill, more than 500 neighbors signed a petition to protest.

Imaginary Boundaries. Proponents didn’t want to locate an unfenced Park Tower dog area next to Park Ave. because of the safety of their dogs. Any assurances that dogs will not violate the nonexistent barriers are false, so the entirety of 13 parks will end up being off-leash.

Unequal Sharing of Resources. For the benefit of less than 1,000 dog owners, more than a dozen parks are being taken over for several hours each day. People who want to avoid dogs (including dog owners whose leashed dogs have been harassed by other dogs) will be unable to use the 13 parks during off-leash hours. Also, there are no planned off-leash areas for almost half of Arlington’s land area.

Overrun by Non-resident Dogs. By law, non-residents must be permitted equal access to Arlington parks. About half the dog-walking users in Brookline are from out-of-town (in 2007, about half the fined violations were by non-residents). Cambridge has also had ongoing problems with non-residents. Arlington parks are already too highly recommended in “The Dog Lover’s Companion to Boston.” If this proposal is accepted, Arlington would have the most indulgent dog laws in the Metro Boston area. Arlington parks would be a magnet for dog owners and professional dog walkers.

Already not Working. As proponents admit, dogs are already running off-leash in Arlington parks. Already, some people have abandoned their local parks because of free-ranging dogs. Already, dog waste is not being picked up. Already, an estimated 700 dogs (out of 1,800) are not licensed. How would rewarding current illegal behaviors with less regulation result in improved behavior?

Worst Decision Ever Made. As the Brookline administrators admitted to the Arlington Selectmen, their definition of success is “nothing got worse” and there is “less illegal activity” because “it’s legal now.” A Brookline police officer told Arlington police that the program was “the worst decision we ever made.” Somerville officials also said, “opening parks for dogs off-leash was one of the worst decisions the city made,” according to Selectman Diane Mahon.

We like dogs, and believe that a few self-supporting, fenced dog parks (with posted capacity limits) could be a worthwhile amenity for dog owners in Arlington and the surrounding communities. But we don’t believe in unfunded fantasy fences. So we recommend that you call or e-mail your Town Meeting members about voting No on Warrant Article 18 (unfenced off-leash areas).

Robert M. Kuhn and Darcy C. Devney
Thorndike St.
******
The text of the above Advocate letter was incorporated into the following statement sent to Town Meeting Members prior to the vote on the Green Dog Plan:
Please vote NO on letting Arlington go to the dogs.
To: Town Meeting Members
Re: Warrant Article 18 (Bylaw Amendment / Animal Control)
Warrant Article 18 is not about neighborhood fenced dog parks for Arlington dog owners.
Dogs are already welcome on-leash throughout Arlington 24/7. This is strictly a proposal to
license 1,000 dogs or more to run off-leash for hours every day in more than a dozen parks in
Arlington. Please vote No on Article 18. Here’s why:
Residents Opposed or Unaware. Dogs (clean up/disturb others) was the third highest concern
regarding the town’s recreational and open spaces in the Vision 2020 survey.1 When a dog park
was proposed at Hill’s Hill, more than 500 neighbors signed a petition to protest.2 There have
been some neighborhood meetings, but the majority of Arlington citizens have no idea that their
personal use of local parks would be forever changed, and not for the better.
Imaginary Boundaries. The entirety of each of 13 parks will end up being off-leash, since
there is no way that the invisible limits would work. Proponents didn’t want to locate an
unfenced Park Tower dog area next to Park Ave, because of the safety of their dogs.3 Any
assurances that dogs will not violate the nonexistent barriers are false.
Unequal Sharing of Resources. For the benefit of less than 1,000 dog owners, more than a
dozen parks are being taken over for several hours each day. People who want to avoid dogs
(including dog owners whose leashed dogs have been harassed by other dogs) will be unable to
use the 13 parks during off-leash hours. Also, there are no planned off-leash areas whatsoever
in the area north of Massachusetts Ave in East Arlington or north of Summer Street/Washington
St. in the rest of Arlington – i.e., almost half of Arlington’s land area.4 So the stated goal of
neighborhood dog parks spreading the burden is obviously unmet.
Overrun by Non-resident Dogs. By law, non-residents must be permitted equal access to
Arlington parks.5 According to the administrators of the Brookline program, about half their
dog-walking users are from out-of-town6 (and in 2007, about half the fined violations were by
non-residents7). Cambridge has had ongoing problems because their off-leash areas are so
attractive to non-residents. Arlington parks are already too highly recommended in The Dog
Lover’s Companion to Boston.8 If this proposal is accepted, Arlington would have the most
indulgent dog laws in the Metro Boston area, and Arlington parks would be a magnet for dog
owners and professional dog walkers.
Already not Working. As proponents admit, dogs are already running off-leash in Arlington
parks. Already, some people have abandoned their local parks because of free-ranging dogs.
Already, dog waste is not being picked up. Already, an estimated 700 dogs (out of 1,800) are
not licensed.9 How would rewarding current illegal behaviors with less regulation result in
improved behavior? If the promised “peer pressure” by other dog owners doesn’t work now,
why would it magically work in the future? Enforcement of the current leash laws, Warrant
Article 21 (Gated Dog Parks), and Warrant Article 23 (Increase Dog Licensing Fees), are
efforts to mitigate the current situation. Legalizing more dogs off-leash (whether or not
enforcement is increased) would create more problems than it solves.
Worst Decision Ever Made. The results of these programs in other towns are clear. As the
Brookline administrators admitted to the Arlington Selectmen, their definition of success is
“nothing got worse” and that there is “less illegal activity” because “it’s legal now.”10 A
Brookline police officer told Arlington police that the program was “the worst decision we ever
made.”11 Somerville officials also said, “opening parks for dogs off-leash was one of the worst
decisions the city made,” according to Selectman Diane Mahon.12
We like dogs, and believe that a few self-supporting, fenced dog parks (with posted capacity
limits) could be a worthwhile amenity for dog owners in Arlington and the surrounding
communities. But we don’t believe in unfunded fantasy fences. So please vote NO on Warrant
Article 18 (unfenced off-leash areas).
Sincerely yours,
Alan Frank, Pct 1
James B. Crouch, Pct 2
Alia-Anor Akaeze, Pct 3
Mary Beth Wilkes, Pct 3
Julie Chamberlin, Pct 4
Darcy C. Devney, Pct 4
Robert M. Kuhn, Pct 4
George Laite, Pct 4
Aram Hollman, Pct 6
Aileen Gildea-Pyne, Pct 8
Andrea Hodgson, Pct 8
Anne Murray, Pct 8
Catherine Bieber, Pct 9
Meghan Elledge, Pct 9
Nanci Ortwein, Pct 9
Katharine Daley Fennelly, Pct
10
Paul F. Fennelly, Pct 10
Anne D. Kenney, Pct 10
Mustafa Varoglu, TMM Pct
10
Matthew Hanley, Pct 11
Jerri Newman, Pct 11
Richard Newman, Pct 11
Charles Bryant, Pct 12
Janet Bryant, Pct 12
Heather Bryant Mckenney,
Pct 12
David J. Lewis, Pct 14
Craig Burgess, Pct 16
Suzanne Burgess, Pct 16
John Belskis, TMM Pct 18
Jeanne Leary, Pct 19
Bernadette McGonagle, Pct
19
Ed McGonagle, Pct 19
Barbara Jones, Pct 20
Cathy Joyce, Pct 21
(Footnotes:)
1 2007, 17% of Arlington households.
2 Presentation at Selectmen’s Meeting, 10/17/2005.
3 Green Dog Meeting, 01/22/2009.
4 Arlington Green Dog Proposed Locations Map, revised 3/30/2009.
5 Selectmen’s Meeting, 3/30/2009.
6 Presentation at Selectmen’s Meeting, 3/23/2009.
7 Brookline Tab, 05/28/2008.
8 Dog Lover’s Companion to Boston, 4th Edition, 2006.
9 Arlington Green Dog Proposal & Stephanie Lucarelli (Town Hall)
10 Presentation at Selectmen’s Meeting, 3/23/2009.
11 Arlington Chief of Police F. Ryan, memo 3/4/2009.
12 Arlington Advocate, 07/26/2007
*********************
The following Letter was sent to Town Meeting in Response:

In Response to “Please Vote NO on Letting Arlington Go To The Dogs”:

The report with this title, signed by 34 Arlington residents, was distributed to Town Meeting members by email on May 12, 2009.   Among the reasons listed for opposing Article 18, the Green Dog plan, this document alleges “clear” negative results with off-leash dog recreation in two other communities.

The paragraph in question reads:

“Worst Decision Ever Made.  The results of these programs in other towns are clear.  As the Brookline administrators admitted to the Arlington Selectmen, their definition of success is “nothing got worse” and that there is “less illegal activity” because “it’s legal now”.  A Brookline police officer told Arlington police that the program was “the worst decision we ever made”.  Somerville officials also said, “opening parks for dogs off-leash was one of the worst decisions the city made”, according to Selectman Diane Mahon.”

*******

It seems unlikely that the Brookline Green Dog program is widely regarded as being the “worst decision ever made”, given that it was made permanent by Town Meeting after its pilot period of testing and adjustment.  Of course, individual town employees such as this officer are entitled to opinions that differ from those of Parks and Recreation administrators, as well as from the positive views of the two Parks Commissioners who appeared before our Board of Selectmen last March.  I have personally discussed the Green Dog plan with Brookline’s former Director of Recreation and the present Parks and Open Space Director.  Both were quite clear with me that they regard the Green Dog program as being beneficial to the community.  In fact, Robert Lynch, the former Director of Recreation and the first official to administer the Brookline Green Dog plan, told me on the phone that he had predicted the Green Dog plan would never work.  Yet, he said, it succeeded beyond his imagination, with a very low number of complaints that he felt were readily addressed.  He credited this success in part to the highly effective “self-policing” and monitoring by responsible dog owners who volunteered to serve as his unofficial park liaisons.

To address the alleged failure of the Somerville program, I attach a copy of page 71 from the City of Somerville Open Space and Recreation Plan 2008-2013 (Draft, with final version due sometime this spring).  As shown in the Credits and Acknowledgements, also attached, the Mayor and many town employees and committee members, including those representing Planning, Recreation, Public Works, and Conservation, contributed to this document.  In it, Off-Leash Recreation in Somerville, which began in 2006, is touted as a “Success Story”, with third and fourth off leash recreation areas now being planned for that city. If, indeed, allowing off leash dog recreation was “one of the worst decisions the city made”, then it seems as though Somerville has been making some very good decisions!

Another concern cited in this Article 18 opponents’ report is that “If this proposal is accepted, Arlington would have the most indulgent dog laws in the Metro Boston area, and Arlington parks would be a magnet for dog owners and professional dog walkers.”  However, much more indulgent bylaws exist in several other towns, including one right next door:

Lexington
Section 2 of Article XXVII of the town’s General By-Laws requires that a person who owns a dog shall keep that animal under restraint at all times.
“No dog owned or kept in this Town shall be allowed to be off the premises of its owner or keeper except in the immediate restraint and control of some person by means of a leash or effective command. The owner or keeper of any such dog that is not restrained or controlled off the premises of its owner or keeper shall be punishable by a fine of up to fifty dollars or the maximum permitted by Section 173A of Chapter 140 of the Massachusetts General Laws, whichever is higher.”

Bedford
Article 42.5.1 Dogs Running at Large (Leash Law Provisions).
“No owner or keeper of any dog shall permit their dog to run at large at anytime. An owner or keeper of a dog must accompany and restrain the dog on a leash or accompany with leash in hand and maintain effective voice control of the dog while off their own property. An obedient dog which is under the effective control of its owner may be permitted to be unleashed in Town-owned open spaces within the Town. Dogs must be on a leash on bike paths and at public events. No dogs are allowed in cemeteries. The provision of this paragraph shall not apply to a guide dog or service dog while actually engaged in the performance of its trained duties.”

To date, over 671 Arlington residents, dog owners as well as non dog owners, have signed the Arlington Dog Owners Group (A-DOG) petition requesting off-leash recreation opportunities for responsible dog owners in our town.  (As of today that number is 676).  On behalf of such constituents, and in the spirit of respectfully sharing our community open space, I urge my TM colleagues to support the Selectmen’s recommended vote under Article 18, the Green Dog plan, as distributed to TM on May 11.

Sincerely,

Susan Doctrow (Precinct 21)

somervilleOSRP1084


In Memory of Genie (2004 – 2009)

Posted on by
3

092806_geniegeniefriend

Our beautiful friend Genie passed away on June 2. She was much too young, and far too strong and healthy, until her recent tragic illness, to leave us this way. Those of us who loved her, including our own two labs who played with her almost every morning, are heartbroken. Our deepest sympathies go out to our dear friends, and fellow A-DOG members, Audrey and Pat, for their terrible loss. Genie had the sweetest, most fun-loving temperament. She loved hiking in the mountains or at the Fells, skiing, splashing around in any pond or mud puddle she could find, having “sleepovers” when Pat and Audrey cared for Miles or Maddie, and chasing tennis balls endlessly with her buddy Becker. She also loved her “Frosty Paws” or her “doggy lattes” at Starbucks and was always so very gentle with her toys (her “babies”). Above all she adored Audrey and Pat, and the exciting, outdoorsy labbie’s dream life that they gave her. Genie, we really miss you, but will think of you every day, especially on hikes, where we will imagine that, somehow, you’re up ahead breaking trail for us. (Read more messages of love and condolences from Pat, Audrey, and Genie’s hiking friends here.). Love, Sue and John
(Portrait by Justin Ide and “Genie and Junior” by Audrey).

Dog Behavior Workshop

Posted on by
Reply

Sponsored by MayDOG, the Maynard Dog Owners Group

Have you ever wondered…

* How can I keep my dog safe when he/she plays with other dogs?
* What does normal dog play behavior look and sound like?
* What are the warning signs that two dogs might be about to fight?
* How do I deal with bullying behavior?
* How do I deal with resource guarding?
* How long should I stay at an off-leash area?
* What can I do BEFORE we meet other dogs to prepare my dog for a fun, safe play session?
* How can I teach my dog to be polite when greeting other dogs and people on-leash?
* What are ways we can build our training relationship?

Come learn the answers to these and many other questions at a dog behavior workshop sponsored by the Maynard Dog Owners Group (MayDOG) on Sunday, May 3, 1:30-3pm. The workshop will be facilitated by Gerilyn Bielakiewicz, CPDT, of Canine University. It will be held at the DOGS! Learning Center, Hudson, MA. The $60 workshop fee admits up to 2 people. A $10 discount is available if you sign up for our mailing list, and if you join MayDOG, the workshop is just $35. Pre-registration is required; register at our website or by calling 978-293-3371.

This workshop is a fundraiser for the Maynard Dog Owners Group (MayDOG), a 501c3 nonprofit community group in Maynard, MA. All proceeds will go toward our mission of promoting responsible dog ownership and building community through safe, legal off-leash recreation in the Maynard area.

Getting to Yes or What’s in a Compromise for the Dog Walkers?

Posted on by
2

A message to responsible dog owners from A-DOG member Everett Shorey:

The Green Dog group in Arlington has clearly done a lot of work, thinking and hard bargaining to come up with a proposal for off-leash dog areas in and around Arlington. I listened to their presentation at the Selectman’s meeting the other day and came away humbled by the difficulty they have taken on and by the strongly held opinions on all sides of this issue.

Mostly I realized that we dog walkers are making an essential bargain: we are gaining legitimacy and, in return, we will need to obey the laws. I am as guilty as any other dog walker today. I flout the leash law and I do not expect anyone serious pushback from my fellow dog walkers. Most of us try to be courteous and not to disturb other park users but we assume a right to exercise our dogs in the park, we keep a communal lookout for the dog officer, etc. This is effective but breeds a culture of disrespect for the formal rules – we may have made our own informal rules but we are outside the formal system.

An essential aspect of the grand Green Dog compromise is that we are trading legitimacy during certain hours for an agreement to abide by all of the rules all of the time. Our culture that we can use the parks as and when we please is going to have to change. This is what we give up in the compromise. We get guaranteed access without watching out for the dog officer and without carping from other park users and we agree to play by the rules.

To me this is a fair bargain as long as we get reasonable space and time. Each of us in talking to the Selectmen, our Town Meeting Members and others in Arlington need to reach our own conclusion about whether the deal is a good one. However, once the deal is made, we are all bound by it.

The deal extends beyond just walking dogs in the parks. Other people want full enforcement of the rules. This means that we agree not to walk and exercise our dogs off leash in times and places not open under the rules. An open playground with no one on it will not be an ok exercise area. The deal also means being sure that we clean up after our dogs everywhere. It means that we create a culture of disapproval when others are off leash in the wrong times and places and when someone does not pick up after a dog,

This can be done. Even Manhattanites manage. Central Park is an off-leash zone in the early morning and the evening. People keep their dogs leashed other times. It is socially unacceptable in Manhattan not to pick up after your dog. You can actually walk along the street there without looking down. (I would not say the same about some otherwise clean major cities like Paris and Buenos Aires. Actually, a recent stroll down Charles Street along Beacon Hill was equally clean.) If those dreaded Yankee fans can do it, we should be able to also.

If we do not hold up our side of the bargain, this deal will collapse and we will be back to our old situation. The dog walking community needs to pick up to its side of the bargain.

Update on the Green Dog Program

Posted on by
Reply

The Green Dog program is being planned by a town committee including Leslie Mayer (Chairman of Parks and Recreation), Clarissa Rowe (Chairman, Board of Selectmen), and Joe Connelly (Director of Recreation). The Conservation Commission, Public Health, and Animal Control have also been involved in the program. This group is developing a pilot plan to allow dogs off leash, under certain conditions, in certain Arlington parks. When a plan is ready, it will be submitted to Town Meeting for a vote on whether to enact this change to the current leash law. (The current leash law does not allow dogs to roam “at large”, and specifies a 6 foot leash. As it is currently enforced by Animal Control, even owner-supervised dogs, or dogs receiving “recall” training with a longer leash, are in violation and their owners are subject to ticketing.) Last year, several Green Dog public meetings were held to introduce residents to the Green Dog concept and to allow them to provide input on a draft plan. Opponents of dogs off leash, as well as proponents, attended these meetings and/or submitted suggestions to members of the committee. Members of the Green Dog Committee decided, as a result of all the concerns they’d received, that last spring’s Town Meeting was too soon to propose a change to the leash laws. Some changes were made to the plan and another series of meetings were held. With input from these meetings, it is it is now anticipated that a plan will be submitted to Town Meeting for a vote in spring, 2009. This plan could be further discussed and amended during Town Meeting, so there is still time to provide input to the Green Dog Committee as well as to your Town Meeting Members (see below).

Leslie Mayer provided the following update for this article: “Since Town Meeting 2008, we have continued to explore issues raised at last year’s neighborhood Green Dog Meetings, including enforcement, costs, hours, locations, and fenced area details. The next group of neighborhood meetings have been scheduled for Nov. 6, 13, 20 and Dec. 4 (if needed) at 7pm in the Senior Center. These meetings are intended to bring the neighborhoods in to discuss the limits and parameters of specific locations and to refine hours to better suit the needs of each site.”

These meetings, now completed, each focused on a specific area. (There was also a follow up public working meeting on January 22.)
November 6th: Mt. Gilboa, McClennen, Turkey Hill,Hills’ Hill, Hurd, and Res
November 13th: Spy Pond/ Hornblower, Spy Pond Park, Magnolia, Waldo and Thorndike
November 20th: Menotomy, Robbins, Water Tower, Ottoson Woods and Poet’s Corner
December 4: Revisiting areas named above, in particular, as requested by opponents of dogs off leash in the Summer St. area.

A-DOG members were urged to attend these public meetings and to provide input to Leslie and her colleagues. Many of you did, but so did many opponents. It is still important for A-DOG members to contact the Green Dog committee, preferably by email, to ask questions about the plan and to inform them of your opinions and needs regarding legal off leash hours and sites in Arlington’s parks, especially in your neighborhood parks. This will help to ensure that the final Green Dog program will provide responsible dog owners with off-leash exercise and socialization options that will best serve our needs. Send your questions and comments on the Green Dog plan to Leslie Mayer (blmayer@msn.com), Clarissa Rowe (clrowe@comcast.net), and Joe Connolly (jconnelly@town.arlington.ma.us).

Now that a vote on the Green Dog plan is likely this spring, A-DOG members are urged to contact their Town Meeting Members, including candidates for election on April 4. Discuss with them how you’d like them vote on this issue during Town Meeting. If your precinct has an open position, consider running as a write-in candidate in the town elections yourself! Feel free to contact us at arlingtondogowners@gmail.com for any questions about Town Meeting, or other aspects of the process.

More information on the Green Dog program, and on an October 6 meeting of the Board of Selectmen discussing dogs off leash, can be found at these links:

YourArlington

Arlington Advocate

A report on the November 6 meeting appeared in the Arlington Advocate . Comments only from opponents were quoted by the reporter, though those of us who attended observed that it was a more balanced meeting and that many excellent statements were made in support of allowing dogs off leash in our parks.