Hey, there! Log in / Register
Dog park etiquette
By stephaniemar on Tue, 03/30/2010 - 7:37pm
I have been meaning to write this post for a while. Tonight pushed me over the edge.
I have a 13+ year old dog who is literally on her last legs. Luckily I live across from Highland Park in the Fort Hill neighborhood of Roxbury. Since I moved in over 2 years ago I have been walking Ramona at Fort Hill everyday. There is a small dog community who let their dogs off leash up there. A majority of them are very nice. I keep Ramona on a leash most of the time because she cannot really run anymore, but in her prime I used to run her at dog parks all over the city: Franklin Park, Peter's Hill, Fresh Pond, S. End etc.
When a dog owner takes their dog to these parks there are certain behaviors or etiquette that most people follow: picking up after their dog, controlling barking etc.. One of the most important ones is that if your dog is running towards another dog or person please let me know if they are friendly. It is really a safety issue. This seems to have been lost some of the nice people of Fort Hill. There have been numerous occasions when a dog has rushed Ramona and the dog owner says nothing. Twice I have actually asked if a dog was friendly and got nothing as the dog proceeded to be aggressive towards Ramona. It is kind of scary when a dog you do not know runs towards you.
There is also a set of dog owners in the park who own a dog named Jazzy. This dog is never on a leash. She is walked by two different men. They seem to know a lot of people in the park and Jazzy is a very exuberant dog. I also think they breed her and other people in the park have adopted the puppies. She is a large boxer. This dog has attacked Ramona at least 6 times, pinning her down on two occasions. This dog has also attacked other dogs I know and drew blood. When ever I see the owner in the park I tell him Jazzy is aggressive to my dog and he does not seem to care. He never puts her on a leash. When I yelled to him across the park tonight as I try to avoid him and he yelled at me and told me not to threaten him. All I said was, "Your dog is aggressive to my dog and has attacked her numerous times, my dog is on a leash." He also went into how he has been living the neighborhood longer then I have been alive and just keep walking my dog and mind my own business. Another dog owner he was with slunk away as he continued to argue with me and basically call me a liar. Jazzy does play with other dogs in the park and is fine, but she does not seem to like Ramona very much. There is another dog in the park who also has problem with female dogs and that owner immediately takes control of her dog when she sees us and we have a great relationship. In all my dog owning years I have never met a dog owner who does not seem to care that their dog does harm to other dogs and a dog community to supports that behavior. Every other dog park I have ever been to would never put up with such bad dog park etiquette. It is unfortunate because the park is really a hidden gem.
See original post at following blog link: http://stephaniemar17.blogspot.com/
Neighborhoods:
Topics:
Free tagging:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
Well then!
Call Boston Animal control! I have the same Issue with a few dogs @ Millennium Park in Westie. I don't own a dog, but still dogs run wild up there and owners need to understand or "remember" that we have a Leash Law in the city!!! A quick boot to the dogs side will smarten up the owners to keep their mutts in-line.
Exactly, why post this sad
Exactly, why post this sad story here? Call the proper authorities, this isn't exactly community relevant news.
I think it is a community issue though
I think most people would rather that people talk out issues and let people know what the community standards are than immediately calling the cops. If a new neighbor is leaving trash cans out for several days, do I first call ISD and have them ticketed, or do I let them know what days are trash days and let them know there's a law and a community standard that they put them out of sight the other days? If a neighbor is playing loud music on Saturday night and I work early on Sunday mornings, should I immediately call the cops, or should I go ask them to turn it down? I think most people would prefer to be asked first, and I think most people are decent. Then if they aren't, then yes, call the cops.
Boot to the dog's side?
Hey dude. If I _ever_ see you or anyone else maliciously kick a dog, I promise that you'll be in the hospital with acute renal failure.
Hey Doc !!
Listen Doctor Dick fag, I don't care who's dog I Kick. If that dogs not on a leash and that mutt is coming @ me and i feel threatened YOU better believe Me that Dogs catching a swift one real hard to the Kidneys along with some pepper spry and if the owners of the delinquent dog has something smart to say, or want's to get "TUFFS" they'll Catch one too I'M @ THAT PARK ALL THE Time and people with dogs think it's so great to let their dogs run like wild horses.… its time for a wake-up call. Boston Animal control will be @ that park more often issuing tickets or impounding violator, cause myself and many others had enough.
dude, chill with the language...
...no need for cussing, and *never* any need for homophobic slurs.
i will also remind you that, unless provoked by an attack that threatens you with personal harm, kicking somebody's pet is a crime. and a pathetic and cruel one at that.
would you please read what
would you please read what the guy said. He isn't walking around kicking peoples dogs at a whim. He clearly said that if a dog is coming at him in a threatening manner, then he will defend himself. Sounds pretty reasonable to me.
Personally, when i go to Millennium Park with my 2 boxers they are always on a leash no matter what. I try (and succeed) my hardest to avoid other dogs, taking different paths, turning around and cutting across the field if i have too. My 2 dogs are not friendly towards strange dogs, and if an off leash dog runs up to my dogs they will attack. I will let go of the leash and let nature run its course. I can restrain them, but I am not going to deal with strange dogs running right up to them and ruining my walk.
Just a warning to anyone who off leashes their dog at Millennium Park. I will not be responsible if your dog is hurt by my 2 dogs when mine are leashed and yours is not.
Animal Control?
Did you speak to people at Animal Control? I tried calling awhile back but they pretty much said they couldn't do anything.
Dogs (dog owners I guess) are a real problem at Millenium - one time I tried to walk down by the water & couldn't because so many dogs were running around blocking the path & was told it was a dog area by one of the owners. No, it's not. There are many signs at Millenium saying dogs must be leashed & you must clean up after them but many people feel they don't have to follow the rules and no one enforces them.
Animal Control?
I have to say I am up at Millennium daily with my dog, off leash. Come on down to to the river next time, the dogs are very friendly. When dogs become aggressive, folks up there are very good about making sure that the owner needs to restrain their dog. I'm sorry if you might be put off by them off leash, but there is no off leash dog parks in that area, so us owners need to do something. For the four years I have been going there, it appears that the people who use the park, dog owners and non-owners, have come to an understanding. Dogs that are aggressive are kept on leash. If they are not on leash, you can assume they are friendly. If you hate dogs, there are other parks. Sorry.
Not quite
Sorry, but it is extremely disconcerting to be minding your own business, strolling along a path through the woods next to the Charles to have some giant dog come bounding out of nowhere right at you. I don't care how friendly you think your dog is.
If the dog owners want to convince the city to turn the park into a dog park, fine, have at it and if you win, put up big signs at the path entrances that this is a dog park to let the unwary stroller know. Until then, it's still technically illegal for you to let your dogs off leash in the woods.
its also techinically illegal....
... for anyone to use a wheeled vehicle (that's not assistance e.g. stroller, wheelchair) in a park. About 4 years ago, a bicyclist and a roller blader ran into each other. The roller balder broke his neck. Sure, monthssss.... later he was fine and back roller blading, but it still blows my mind that no one thought that was a problem.
This is incorrect
Many of Boston's parks, including the Emerald Necklace, were built in the first place with bicycles in mind. That is why they have paved bike paths. It is not illegal to ride a bicycle on the paved bike paths present in many Boston parks. This is a matter of not just custom but law.
Not in the Public Garden, you can't
No bike riding.
Last week I saw a woman come over the bridge on her bike. Two park rangers told her she's not allowed to ride in the park. They weren't mean or obnoxious ("Another few feet and you're home free," one of them told her, pointing to Charles Street), but they were pretty clear about it.
That is correct
There are a lot of special rules that apply only to the Public Garden and not to other parks (e.g. the Common, across the street). No bike riding or skating anywhere is one of them. Get off and walk. Also, you can't walk a dog in the Garden even if it's on a leash (except seeing-eye dogs), and you can't sit on the grass.
Biking on the common
I was under the impression that you had to walk bikes through the common as well.
Is that true? I would love to be able to cut through rather than bike up Beacon Hill.
Biking on the Common is allowed
It is banned ONLY in the Public Garden, nowhere else.
That doesn't mean it's always a good idea to try to bike on the Common, as I found out on the first day of spring when the park was jammed with pedestrians. I would have been better off using the surrounding streets instead of trying to cut through the Common to get to the Esplanade.
Nope, that's correct
But I don't doubt that if an area/path is designated for bicycle use, than its legal. Just like its legal to have offleash dogs in the few dog parks in Boston.
Not all Boston Parks are part of the Emerald Necklace. Nowhere in Millenium does it say anything about bicycles being legal or there being bicycle trails there.
You stated
"It's illegal for anyone to use a wheeled vehicle (that's not assistance e.g. stroller, wheelchair) in a park."
That is not true. In addition to the numerous linear parks with marked bike travel lanes, it is legal to use a bicycle on the paved paths in almost every park (the Garden being a notable exception) in Boston's park system, just as it is legal to ride a bicycle on a most sidewalks in Boston (those outside a central business district). Riding your bicycle on the grass or off a sidewalk / bike path in a park, however, is prohibited.
There may be a few dog parks in Boston, where it is legal to have a dog off leash, but Millennium Park is not one of them. It is, however, legal to ride a bicycle in Millennium Park. That is why it has bike paths.
Here's the link...
... to the regulation to back up what I'm saying: http://www.cityofboston.gov/parks/rules.asp
So, if its not otherwise designated, bicycles are illegal in Boston parks.
Also, a link to Boston's bicycle map which indicates that Millenium does not have bicycle paths. They are proposed for Millenium, but proposed does not mean legal. http://www.cityofboston.gov/TridionImages/BosBike%...
Just because some laws are not enforced that doesn't mean those laws don't exist.
Now, please post a links to the laws/ordinances/codes to back up what you're saying. Thanks
Set apart for the purpose
The fact that bicycles are allowed in city parks is demonstrated by the bicycle map you link to, which includes numerous routes through parks where motorized vehicles are not permitted. These ways (for example, Pierpoint Road to School Street, in Franklin Park) are marked on site with no cars signs, and are generally closed to motor vehicle traffic, but are not marked on site with bicycle signs. Notwithstanding the fact that they are not explicitly marked as bicycle paths, bicycle riding is permitted on them and, as per your map, formally encouraged by the city of Boston.
The rules and regulations you cited state not "designated" but "a place especially set apart for the purpose..." Designated would mean marked in some way, such as signage or bicycle icons painted on the way. Setting apart can be done by means other than signage or marking. It can be done with, for example, pavement. As you know, many roads in America were initially paved for the convenience of bicyclists. The older parks initially had a network of bridle paths for riding horses, many of which have been converted to bicycle and walking paths through paving.
The rules you link to are sufficient for the interpretation - shared by all Boston park rangers and police officers I have asked - that it is legal to ride your bike on the paved ways of the Common and other city parks, with the exception of the Garden. The paving sets them apart for the purpose. I encourage you to get outside and ask. I believe you will find out that what I say is true.
If you want more clarity on the matter, you could refer to the Boston Bicycle Plan of 2001, where, on Page 5, you will see Millenium Park identified as an Existing Facility as part of Boston's bicycle plan. This is not because it is a destination for cyclists, where they must lock up their bikes and walk around, but because it is a good place to ride your bike, and riding your bike there is encouraged by the City. No signs are necessary to make this legal. The paths around the landfill hill were made broad and paved, similar to former carriage paths in older parks, in order to facilitate bicycle riding. This sets them apart for the purpose.
The map I linked to...
.. is called "Bikes Routes of Boston" and is dated Spring of 2009 and shows that bicycles are allowed in some city parks. Millenium and Boston Garden and Boston Commons do not have any bicycle routes running thru them (compare to Franklin Park which have a few bike routes running thru it).
The pamphlet you link to is the Boston Bicycle Plan for 2000-2010. A plan is an idea or proposal, not a law or ordinance. Page 5 does not identify Millennium Park as an Existing Facility. It is listed under "Existing Facilities and Projects in Design", as are 21 other locations/paths/streets/parks/etc. None of those locations are individually marked or noted as either Existing or in Design. Neither Boston Commons or Boston Garden are listed, which means they are neither Existing Facilities or Projects in Design.
The map on Page 5 shows Existing Facilities in Boston (solid red lines) and Proposed Facilities (dotted red lines). Franklin Park has a dotted red line going thru it. Boston Commons and Garden don't have any lines. Millenium doesn't have any lines going thru it (which contradicts listing it as "Existing Facilities and Projects in Design", but maybe that means which pathways there to propose or plan for bicycles is still unclear.
You're right. The rules and regs I linked to doesn't say a place "designated" but say "a place especially set apart for the purpose...".
Ultimately, it seems we're no going to agree on this topic. I hope we can agree to disagree :).
The most important rule
I am happy to disagree with you about your understanding of the park rules and regulations regarding bicycles as long as you promise not to go on foot on any bridle path unless you're crossing it from one sidewalk to another. That one's pretty clear.
Assumptions
If I shot your dog, you can assume it was attacking me.
Sorry, no
Millenium Park is not a dog park.
It is illegal to have your dog off-leash. The law requires owners to clean-up after their dogs.
Just because some people don't want to respect the law does not mean it is OK. It is not OK.
You ought to find a legal place to let your dog off-leash, or else keep it on the leash.
what the crap?? the solution
what the crap?? the solution is not to just annoy the crap out of other people doing something ILLEGAL, the solution is to petition for a fenced in dog run at the park.
Enough, sir
Please knock it off with the cursing and slurs.
Doggie mace
There's a product or two out there designed for USPS letter carriers who are attacked by dogs on a daily basis. One of them is called Direct Stop or Doggie Stop or something like that I don't know what's in it, but it works, from what I hear. Keep some handy, when you and your dog get approached by an aggressive off-leash dog, let 'em have it. It does NOT harm the dog. If the offending dog's owner gives you shit about it, invite them to call the police.
Hmm...
That sounds like good advice for an unattended dog, but otherwise I'd worry about getting shot or getting my tires slashed or something. Not that this is reason to just let people go on breaking laws and creating nuisances, but I'd especially worry since a lot of drug dealers and gang members keep aggressive dogs. And no, I'm not one of those people who assumes all dogs of certain breed categories belong to drug dealers. I've just observed in my experience working in violent offender treatment that it's pretty common practice to have an aggressive dog to intimidate people, scare them away, etc.
Yeah I kinda meant non-pittbull non-rottie aggressive dogs
If the park is frequented by drug dealers with pitties and rotties, I ain't going there in the first place. :0)
Plus, we all know that pitbulls
are SAVAGE animals with LOCKING JAWS and NEED to be BANNED, to boot.
LOL just when I'd forgotten about that
...uh, thanks for the link.
How could you EVER forget..
..the "locking jaws".
You reap what you sow
Etiquette would at a minimum involve following the law. If you cannot show and have not shown the simple courtesy to your neighbors of keeping your dog on a leash as the law requires, then you should not complain about reaping what you have sown. The climate of threat, aggression, and lawlessness that you now suffer from is one of your own creation.
Peters Hill is not a dog park. There is no part of the Arnold Arboretum where it is legal to run your dog off leash. If you are not a Cambridge resident, it is not legal to run your dog off-leash at Fresh Pond. Likewise, you are breaking the law if you let your dog off leash in Franklin Park.
The solution to your problem is to bring your dog only to parks where dogs do not run off leash. Unfortunately, because of people like you, such a place will be hard to find.
Dear Anonymous Loser
Please crawl back into your hole (or under your bridge).
Agreed!
I live next to Peter's Hill and frequently walk there. Its not a dog park, its just less visited than the Hunnewell side. I'm sure most dog owners mean well but they're not being honest with themselves. You cant control a dog thats acres away from you, nor can you see it taking a dump. I've owned dogs before and understand their need to run but thats something people should think about before bringing a dog into an urban area. A lot of the Peter's Hill dog owners seem like they've gotten more dog than they can handle and just hope for the best when they turn it loose. Sure the guys tossing a kong around with their dog are usually on top of things but they're out numbered by hopeless owners(mostly 30 something females) desperately shouting after their shelter rescued pitbull mutts.
also
Owners With Doggie day cares, they need other places to bring there WORK! Pubic parks should not be a place where they bring 7 or 8 dogs all pulling in every different direction fuckn braking up a storm shitin and poopin all over the place "WHOS WALKING WHO? "
Never seen that before
" they need other places to bring there WORK! Pubic parks should not be a place where they bring 7 or 8 dogs all pulling in every different direction fuckn braking up a storm..."
Pray tell, what's a "Pubic" park? Sounds interesting.
and I think dogs should be good at "braking" because how else will they learn to stop when they're running?
(lighten up would ya?)
I agree to agree - the Arboretum is not a dog park.
Not only can one not let a dog run around off-leash on Peter's Hill, Bussey Hill, wherever in the Arboretum (though tons of people do, and most of them are no problem), one can not play catch, frisbee, etc. It's not your typical park: it's not supposed to be your typical park.
Not really a park at all
In many ways, the Arnold Arboretum isn't a park at all - it's a museum of living plant life. We're lucky that it's open free of charge and that the public is welcome to enjoy the use of the Arboretum, but visitors have to respect the grounds - it's not just landscaping, it's a collection.
Funny you mention that
I got a lecture from a cop about "our tree museum" when I got kicked out of the arboretum for climbing a tree.
http://www.wickedgood.info/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cg...
Terrible
Terrible that this had to happen to you and your loved one. The other dog owners showed no concern or care.
There's a place for un-leashed dogs - it's called New Hampshire!
At our off leash park,
Waverly Woods in Belmont, there is a set of unwritten laws that are enforced by the community, number one being overly aggressive dogs with apathetic owners are asked to leave and not come back, or else animal control becomes involved. It's only fair and it's what the park ranger requires in order to keep it an off leash park. It is a safety issue for humans as well as pets. Bring Ramona here! We have several older dogs here that are well respected, as they should be.
To Billings, I say this; I try to tolerate and even make light of your inane postings, because every web forum has at least one asshole like you, but if I ever saw you kick a dog, I'd make sure you shit teeth for a month you fucking scumbag.
I con't post often here.
Are threats of violence routine on this forum? Based on this thread, it looks like threatening to kick someone's ass is acceptable, but using foul language is frowned upon.
Not usually..
and I never use profanity either, but I've had it with this Billings twit. I apologize for my lack of decorum.
I just think Billings needs to be kicked, not a dog coming at him.
Thanks for the explanation
Thanks for the explanation and apology. Threats of violence have no place in a serious discussion forum, but I understand that our temper gets the best of us sometimes. Slainte.
oh dear. you can bet that if
oh dear. you can bet that if a dog ever attacked me or my (leashed) dog, i would surely take action and if that meant kicking the aggressor, i'm more than willing to do so.
Thats Cool
I'll make sure now to go out of my way to Waverly Woods in Belmont!!! Hope your dog on a leash "dickoff"
Are you looking to get banned?
Try counting to ten before getting all gratuitous. I'm up to about 8 before hitting the "block user" checkbox.
9, and 10
bounce this twit out of here
How about some consistency?
It's your forum and you're free to ban billings. He/she may be a hairpuller. I neither know nor care. But the fact that two physical threats have been made against billings in this thread, and neither party has received any admonition, does not reflect favorably on this website. It's apparent that your dislike for billings has impaired your ability to moderate.
If it's a choice between keeping billings and moderating the comment section in a fair and equitable manner, that's a pretty easy decision, isn't it?
While I appreciate the sentiment..
I have apologized to the group for my outburst. As far as physical threats go, I neither know who billings is nor do I care, but he is an ignorant person who I know I will never meet in person. I don't expect to see him at my dog park, as his type only have the courage anonymity provides. Adam should not be taken to task for what you perceive to be a flaw in his moderation of this forum. I am grateful for the work he does in this site and I try to honor his hard work by moderating my own use of profanity and if I am guilty of anything, it's losing my temper and giving billings that which he craves, which is attention.
I don't have a problem with your apology.
I take you at your word - billings got under your skin, you got annoyed and lashed out. It happens.
The issue is with Gaffin and his lack of consistency. If UH is to be a fun, lively, and enjoyable forum, he can't play favorites and threaten one commenter with banning while ignoring more egregious conduct from others. For the sake of argument, let's ignore your comment and subsequent apology entirely. The other person that threatened billings received no rebuke from Gaffin. Rather, he ignored it and chose to chide billings for using the word "fag." Apparently, calling someone a fag is worse than threatening to bash their face in - either that, or Gaffin just doesn't like billings and he's playing favorites. Either scenario constitutes an appalling lack of judgment by the moderator.
There are a lot of smart and engaging people who post in the comments section. If Gaffin wants to keep it that way (and avoid the dark days of trolls et. al. that nearly ruined this forum in years past), he should take some responsibility for his own conduct and moderate in a fair and equitable manner.
Here's the problem
You're just looking at this one thread. I, for better or worse, try to at least glance at all the threads on the site (still possible given that UH is nowhere near the size of, oh, boston.com). If billings were just verbally abusive here, that's one thing, but he's pulled this sort of thing in a number of other discussions (typically involving crime reports from black neighborhoods). Other people in this particular thread haven't been doing that.
But, yes, you're right: People should not be talking about bashing each other's faces in. So please, everybody, knock that off.
Wait
I thought it was Will the Tulip who dissed certain hoods and people who aren't American-born whites. Billings is the one who swears and talks about kicking people's asses a lot and hates anyone who has any education, a job, has ever left Massachusetts, etc.
Thanks for the reply.
I understand that billings is a problem and that he likes to get under people's skin, and that you have a thankless job moderating.
Some unwritten rules are unknown...
..e.g. 1st I've heard of the "if your dog is running toward mine/me, tell me if he's friendly". Dogs pretty much always run towards each other. Their body language will tell you if they're friendly, or not.
Spring and summer, I don't let my dog off leash at parks like Millennium. Dog owners should just accept that non-dog owners are increasingly using the park. In bad weather/off hours, I'll let my dog off leash at some locations. Times like that, places like Millennium would be completely empty certain if it weren't for dog owners. Share and share alike.
A tired dog is a good dog. The city needs more off leash areas. They could get $ for that by charging a few bucks for a special license. Only those who pay have the license could use the off leash areas. Brookline has had success with parks having off-leash hours.
Plus, drug-dealers, vandals, and underage drinkers, etc. use the parks when the general public doesn't. Dog owners who walk their dogs off leash at those times call the police and thus those parks become undesirable for such activity.
Lord grant me the serenity.... I have issues with the way many let parents let their kids act in public, let their kids play on streets, etc., but I choose not to confront to confront anyone about it. You look for trouble, you will find trouble.
New Orleans just opened....
... a state of the art Dog Park in its (immense) City Park (still recovering from Katrina).
http://www.nolacitybark.org/safety.html
MEK
Dog Parks
Dog Parks are one of those areas that are always going to have problems unless you have an animal control officer there 24/7. Some people don't like dogs, and don't know dogs, and don't know what a friendly dog is, or how to act around a dog.
What happens is that nice dogs go up to people like Billings, but Billings doesn't know how to act around dogs. Billings might think the dog is going to attack Billings, so Billings kicks or pepper sprays the dog. Now Billings might be in a park where dogs are not allowed off leash, so can we really blame Billings for his behavior? Billings just wants to go on a walk with the knowledge that he is scared of dogs, but knows that dogs are not allowed of leash where Billings chooses to walk.
Now I love dogs, and even if a dog was running in a muddy river and came up to me and jumped on me to lick my face, I would have a really hard time getting angry, even if I were dressed up going to my own wedding. Thats how much I love dogs.
That being said, the enforcement in the city of Boston for leash issues is very lax.
Leashes are man and woman's second best friend
My dog is alway on a leash - for my safety, her safety and the safety of the other dog. If an unleashed dog approached mine and they didn't get along the likelihood is that the other other dog will leave regretting the meeting. But if that dog was on a leash (i.e,. under control of the owner) then the situation would not have arisen.
Recently a group of owners were walking with their three dogs in a local park. If those three dogs had ganged up on my dog there would have been blood. All simply because the owners refused to leash their dogs.
I have asked other owners to leash their dog after coming near mine. Their response is generally to remain silent or not fit for printing.
I agree that the man with the aggressive dog is completely in the wrong. Calling Animal Control might help. Contacting the Councilperson might help also (some of them really do try to help out with nieghborhood problems). Calling 911 might be worthwhile. The police will probably try to push it off as something not worth calling about but if they are pressed they will respond. I've dealt trying to play down "small" issues like this; but when pressed they would respond.
Off leash dogs are a danger to themselves. Parts of Boston have coyotes. A small off leash dog looks like a tasty meal to a coyotes (which are out as early as dusk).
What does an owner do if their off leash dog meets an unfriendly off leash dog and a fight ensues? Can the owner stomach their harm that may happen to their dog? It's a myth that when a dog which "wins" the fight always stop. Some don't.
Boston has a leash law. Call
Boston has a leash law. Call 911. Period. This behavior is utterly unacceptable.
Interesting
So, we have to update our profile of "The Most Awesome Post on UHub Ever" to include leash laws.
The Most Awesome Post on UHub Ever:
"Did you see that Southie politician who ignores traffic laws when biking around town with his dog running by his side without a leash? I hear he was attacked by a rogue cop who abused his authority only one night after having arrested 50 kids for underage drinking."
two little changes
Throw a pink Red Sox hat in there somewhere, and argue about which neighborhood it technically took place in.
Don't forget
That one of the pink-hatters was riding her bicycle against the light on Mass. Ave.
bu students
where are they walking their dogs?
Those dogs look so happy, don't they?
After all, it's an accessory, like the iPhone and the Black Dog t-shirt. I'd like to tie some of those people...no..wait..temper..temper.
Good Points
The Most Awesome UHub Post Ever:
"Did you see that Southie politician wearing a pink Red Sox hat who ignores traffic laws when biking around town with her dog running by her side without a leash? I hear she was attacked by a rogue cop who abused his authority only one night after having arrested 50 kids for underage drinking at a house party in the South End (right next door to Symphony Hall)."
Etiquette is not your solution
Following the law is. Unless you're in a designated off-leash dog park, you dog needs to be on a leash. No ifs, ands, or buts about it.
If you don't like it, work with other dog owners to find a space to create an off-leash park, or move to a property with a yard. Your lack of a backyard for your dog to run around should not become my problem if I want to walk around a park.
The most dangerous place for a politician
Mario Cuomo used to say that the most dangerous place for a politician was between people and their pets.
Dog parks aren't very good for dogs. Just avoid the whole thing and take them out in the woods. If you're a woman you may get yelled at more than a man, because most people are cowards. I never get yelled at.
Take them out in the woods?
Just don't do it in my neck of the Fells if your dog is ill-trained. People live near "the woods" and also like to walk/run/bike/send kids out there, too. Leash laws do apply in most areas around Boston, whether the "dog people" like that or not.
I like the foxes and coyotes that I occasionally see near my home. These are well behaved and shy of humans. Off leash dogs who bolt have caused far more problems in my neighborhood. I don't give a crap if your dog "really is gentle blah blah blah" when it just knocked my kid off a swingset or growled at/charged an elderly neighbor.
I like, know, understand and WILL detain your dog until animal control shows up if it gets onto my property and you are nowhere to be found. I have done this before and will again if I deem it necessary. I do not like aggressive animals on my property without my permission, especially when they attack my pets and harass my children and neighbors.
nobody goes in the woods
I never see normal people there. The woods are snowy, muddy or full of bugs most of the time. See a few maniacs though.
Define "normal"
please?