"Dogs improve our lives and help protect our city parks"
The following is an OpEd piece I wrote which appeared in The Providence Journal on Monday, March 29, 2010 under the headline:
"Dogs improve our lives and help protect our city parks."
I am the fortunate owner of two great Beagles named Plaid and Stripe, the owner of the shop bearing their name in Wayland Square and the acting director of ProvidenceBarks! A group formed to encourage responsible dog ownership and to make Providence a more “dog friendly” place to live. (ProvidenceBarks! is the successor to the former Providence Dog Park Association). I am also a member of the Blackstone Parks Conservancy.
I was saddened to read the commentary from the president of the Blackstone Parks Conservancy (“Repairing damage from unleashed dogs in Blackstone Park” March 22, 2010). Not only did it contain numerous false allegations and unfounded statements about canine destruction in the park, but Ms. Browder is well aware that these assertions have been questioned by both our Parks Department officials and conservation experts and found to be categorically untrue. In no way does it appear that unleashed dogs have created any destruction of habitat in the park. Additionally, the City of Providence and it’s Parks and Recreation officials deserve a lot of credit for creating a mechanism to dispassionately review and discuss these issues taking the needs of both park lovers and dog owners (frequently the same) into consideration in determining the future use of Blackstone Park. Ms. Browder participated in a well attended recent meeting held at the Roger William Casino where input and comment were requested by the city from all interested parties in an effort to find a solution to what Ms. Browder apparently feels are conflicting uses of the park. I do not feel it is helpful to engage in a point by point refutation of the specious claims Ms. Browder has made and I think it is sufficient to say that the people who will ultimately decide how the park will be used are well aware of the reality of the situation and that removal of dogs from the park will do little or nothing to change its physical nature. Unfortunately, the reduction in activity could have one major negative effect, the return of the park to the drug infested sexual trysting place it was infamous for being before dog owning park lovers discovered it. Meetings with the city regarding use of city parks by leashed and unleashed dogs have been going on for some time and they appear to be having a beneficial effect on how we view dogs in Providence. Based on the number of dogs currently registered in the city of East Providence (which has a well organized and enforced registration program) we estimate the number of dogs within the Providence city limits at between 25 and 35,000 (with the vast majority unregistered due to long time lack of registration enforcement by the city). We should be past the point by now where we attempt to penalize people for keeping a family pet and understand that like the children we
love, they need care, socialization and exercise. Currently city laws make bringing a dog into a city park either leashed or unleashed unlawful. That attitude simply does not recognize the reality of dogs in our lives or the great beneficial impact that these animals have on the more than 15,000 people who care for them in Providence.
“The city needs to make a policy decision, not a political one”, on that one point, Ms. Browder and I completely agree. Up until the publication of her commentary she has been a participant in this process. It is unfortunate that Ms. Browder apparently now feels the tide may be turning in favor of reasonable dog policies which make certain sections of city parks (including Blackstone) available for off leash activities during specific hours and has decided instead to attempt to undermine a reasonable discussion of all of the complex issues involved with half
truths, untruths and an attempted demonization of dogs and their owners. Unless Ms. Browder will be satisfied with nothing more than a complete expulsion of dogs from Blackstone Park, I am quite confident that Parks and Recreation Director Robert McMahon and the inclusive process he has put into place (which he should be congratulated for) are capable of finding an equitable and fair policy which recognizes the value of our parks and the needs of dog owning Providence citizens as well. I am very sorry that Ms. Browder and some of the Blackstone Parks Conservancy do not share my confidence in the process and thus appear to be attempting to stir up negative public opinion regarding dogs in city parks.
"Dogs improve our lives and help protect our city parks."
I am the fortunate owner of two great Beagles named Plaid and Stripe, the owner of the shop bearing their name in Wayland Square and the acting director of ProvidenceBarks! A group formed to encourage responsible dog ownership and to make Providence a more “dog friendly” place to live. (ProvidenceBarks! is the successor to the former Providence Dog Park Association). I am also a member of the Blackstone Parks Conservancy.
I was saddened to read the commentary from the president of the Blackstone Parks Conservancy (“Repairing damage from unleashed dogs in Blackstone Park” March 22, 2010). Not only did it contain numerous false allegations and unfounded statements about canine destruction in the park, but Ms. Browder is well aware that these assertions have been questioned by both our Parks Department officials and conservation experts and found to be categorically untrue. In no way does it appear that unleashed dogs have created any destruction of habitat in the park. Additionally, the City of Providence and it’s Parks and Recreation officials deserve a lot of credit for creating a mechanism to dispassionately review and discuss these issues taking the needs of both park lovers and dog owners (frequently the same) into consideration in determining the future use of Blackstone Park. Ms. Browder participated in a well attended recent meeting held at the Roger William Casino where input and comment were requested by the city from all interested parties in an effort to find a solution to what Ms. Browder apparently feels are conflicting uses of the park. I do not feel it is helpful to engage in a point by point refutation of the specious claims Ms. Browder has made and I think it is sufficient to say that the people who will ultimately decide how the park will be used are well aware of the reality of the situation and that removal of dogs from the park will do little or nothing to change its physical nature. Unfortunately, the reduction in activity could have one major negative effect, the return of the park to the drug infested sexual trysting place it was infamous for being before dog owning park lovers discovered it. Meetings with the city regarding use of city parks by leashed and unleashed dogs have been going on for some time and they appear to be having a beneficial effect on how we view dogs in Providence. Based on the number of dogs currently registered in the city of East Providence (which has a well organized and enforced registration program) we estimate the number of dogs within the Providence city limits at between 25 and 35,000 (with the vast majority unregistered due to long time lack of registration enforcement by the city). We should be past the point by now where we attempt to penalize people for keeping a family pet and understand that like the children we
love, they need care, socialization and exercise. Currently city laws make bringing a dog into a city park either leashed or unleashed unlawful. That attitude simply does not recognize the reality of dogs in our lives or the great beneficial impact that these animals have on the more than 15,000 people who care for them in Providence.
“The city needs to make a policy decision, not a political one”, on that one point, Ms. Browder and I completely agree. Up until the publication of her commentary she has been a participant in this process. It is unfortunate that Ms. Browder apparently now feels the tide may be turning in favor of reasonable dog policies which make certain sections of city parks (including Blackstone) available for off leash activities during specific hours and has decided instead to attempt to undermine a reasonable discussion of all of the complex issues involved with half
truths, untruths and an attempted demonization of dogs and their owners. Unless Ms. Browder will be satisfied with nothing more than a complete expulsion of dogs from Blackstone Park, I am quite confident that Parks and Recreation Director Robert McMahon and the inclusive process he has put into place (which he should be congratulated for) are capable of finding an equitable and fair policy which recognizes the value of our parks and the needs of dog owning Providence citizens as well. I am very sorry that Ms. Browder and some of the Blackstone Parks Conservancy do not share my confidence in the process and thus appear to be attempting to stir up negative public opinion regarding dogs in city parks.
