DCDogVoter.com

Called DPR lately to check on the status of the park?

First they were closing down the park for “maintenance” and “cleaning.” Then we heard they would tear down the fence (and have an open field?)… or fix the swing set and use it as a playground. The latest idea? Use the fenced-in area as a soccer field for little kids. At every turn DPR has a new story for how they plan to use the vacant, fenced-in park space at Allison and Arkansas Ave. NW. Never mind that dog owners used the space for over a year with the knowledge and (at least implied) consent of DPR.

And now we are all locked out (dogs, dog owners, two-foot soccer players) while the park stands vacant and padlocked shut.

Why not re-open the park to dogs and their owners while DPR debates internally the future of the space?

According to DPR, DC 8-1808 disallows us from using the space without an easement by the DC City Council. (This seems to be because we are barred from having dogs off-leash in any public space other than an official dog park—and without the regulations we can’t establish an official dog park.)

But as Cleo has noted, illegal activity in other parts of the Upshur park hasn’t caused DPR to shut the whole park down. Walk your dog through the park and she’ll find drug paraphenalia, glass shards from liquor and beer bottles, condom wrappers, etc.–not to mention witnessing some of the activity. Clearly, there’s a double-standard.

Let’s be clear. We’re glad the city is moving forward to establish dog parks and regulations to go along with them. But how about some tolerance for those demonstrating responsible dog-ownership NOW? Here’s an unused space, next to a dumpster, out of the way of residences and businesses–and a proven meeting ground for dogs and their people. (Responsible people, by the way. While we’ve heard tales of dog owners leaving ballparks without cleaning up after their animals, here’s a park that was used exclusively for dogs–and clean to boot.)

The DC City Council has the power to grant us an easement. Join me in sending this message: Open the Allison/Arkansas park to dog owners until a neighborhood dog park has been established.

Write to Councilwoman Bowser now. Ask her to support dog parks in Ward 4 and an easement re-granting access to the Allison/Arkansas park. template_letter_to_bowser2.doc

Sign the Arkansas & Allison petition.

Please register your dog. It doesn’t cost much ($13 for spayed or neutered dogs, $46 otherwise) and it’s easy: you can do it by mail.

Here’s what you need in order to register:

Application/Processing Requirements:
Please read and follow the instructions below carefully. A correctly completed application will expedite the issuance of your dog license.

• Please complete your application with current information.
• Proof of rabies and distemper vaccinations is required.
• Proof of sterilization (spaying or neutering) is required.
• Each dog over four months old must have his/her own license.
• Owners with five or more dogs over four months old must apply for a hobby license.

By Mail Please forward the required information and a check or money order made out to DC Treasurer to the address above.

Department of Health
Division of Animal Disease Prevention
51 N Street, NE
6th Floor
Washington, DC 20002
(202) 535-2323
(202) 535-2325

Why should you register? Well, we’re trying to convince the city to establish commonsense-based laws to allow law-abiding citizens who own dogs the opportunities already afforded to, say, law-abiding soccer players. So let’s abide by the law and make sure our dogs are registered.

Personally, I would pay double the current fees if the city would take the money and use it to establish and maintain dog parks.

Please take the time to sign this petition.

To:  DC Department of Parks and Recreation

We, the undersigned, as concerned tax-paying DC residents—dog owners and non-dog owners—want a reasonable set of rules to allow for the establishment of Dog Exercise Areas (DEAs) in our neighborhoods. The Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) has developed proposed regulations that will preclude the development of DEAs in most neighborhoods throughout the District.

We do not believe that dogs are more important than people, but we do believe that dog owners are equal to other park patrons and should be treated equitably. We believe that the Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) and its partner agencies must provide the same privileges, status, and rights to proponents of DEAs as they do to other park patrons (e.g., playgrounds, tennis courts, athletic fields, swimming pools, and community gardens). We believe that DPR should apply equitable rules and standards to all park patrons and that dog owners and DEAs should not be held to a higher standard for park use.

Are other park patrons:

· Restricted to a minimum or maximum square footage—e.g.10, 000 sq.
feet– no more than 25\% of total park, and no steeper than 5\% slope?

· Required to provide contact information for use of park; and are
they required to obtain such information on all residents within a
specified block radius?

· Required to certify a rat-free zone within a 5-block radius?

· Required to be separated by 200 feet from all other park
patrons, businesses, and residential housing?

· Required to be within 50 feet from water source and sewage lines?

· Required to obtain consent of the community to establish their form
of recreation?

· Required to be sponsored by a 501 (c) 3 group to establish desired
recreation facility?

· Required to pay for the desired facility?

We formally request that the regulations be rewritten to facilitate the development of DEAs throughout the city and in accordance with the intent and the spirit of the law passed by DC Council in November 2005. We request that revised regulations incorporate suggestions made in DCDOG’s Comprehensive Response that reflect common practices in other urban areas nationwide.

We also request that representatives from DCDOG, animal organizations (e.g. Washington Humane Society and WARL), veterinarians, and other interested stakeholders be involved in a task force to assist with the process of analyzing public comments and working on revised regulations–facilitating a negotiated rulemaking process

Because the current regulations need major revisions, we believe DPR should offer the public another opportunity to comment on the revised proposed regulations before they are published in their final form. We believe the revised proposed regulations should be published for public comment no later than September 1, 2007 with an effective date no later than December 31, 2007.

Kathy Silva on behalf of DCDOG: a community action group working for the development of legal, fenced-in, OFF LEASH, dog exercise areas in DC.

Anyone catch last week’s DC Politics Hour with Kojo and Jonetta? http://www.wamu.org/audio/kn/07/07/k1070706 (Scroll to about 42:24.)

 It featured a segment on dog parks that lasted all of eight and a half minutes, during which Jonetta complained about the “secret taskforce” meetings [to review and comment on DPR's draft dog park regulations] that “advantage dog owners and professional dog walkers.”  Let’s hope that’s true, folks. 

I can agree with Jonetta on one point: she hasn’t heard what’s going on with the taskforce and neither have I.  It’s a problem that more information hasn’t come out about the taskforce.  But I digress. 

Apparently, we dog owners are “extremely well-organized” (as a professional organizer I’m thrilled by this) and “very intimidating” and those opposed to dog parks are afraid to make their views known.  Jonetta noted that her friends are concerned that “we now have to have cow parks and pig parks” and next it’ll be, gasp, cat parks!  Kojo piped in, “Alligators have no place whatsoever!” (roll over, Kojo, why don’t you.) to which Jonetta replied, “Exactly. See, we can go from one extreme to the next on this.”  So dog parks are “extreme?”   

The dogs did have one advocate on the show.  Here’s a bone for Bill on Capitol Hill, a member of the “secret taskforce” Jonetta fears.  He was given a scant few seconds to comment during which he dropped this bomb: “Parks and Rec staff, themselves, admitted they’re opposed to the concept of dog parks in the city!”  When he noted that he and other dog owners had lobbied for dog parks (effectively, I might add; the City Council did, after all, enact legislation calling for their creation), Jonetta snickered. 

Offering the last words on the topic, Jonetta said, “Dog parks aren’t cheap, Kojo.” 

Cheap? Perhaps not.  Valuable way to build community? Absolutely.  And here’s one dog voter who’d like her tax dollars spent on dog parks.   

By the way, check out (and sign!) this petition:

http://www.petitiononline.com/DCDOG/petition.html

Dear Mayor Fenty:

I am writing to urge you to show your support for responsible, tax-paying dog owners in Ward 4. My neighbors and I are outraged that the Department of Parks and Recreation has prioritized keeping dogs OUT of parks, rather than helping us get them in.

In recent messages to the community, DPR has stated that the city is making it a priority to arrest dog owners for taking their dogs off-leash or taking their dogs to athletic fields, community parks, playgrounds, etc. Where are we to go? Why is the city diverting police resources away from fighting the more serious crimes that plague our community?

Dogs that get the exercise and socialization they need make better neighbors. As a responsible dog owner, I regularly take my dogs on leashed walks and allow them time to play in my yard. However, that’s no substitute for playtime with their canine companions in a space large enough for them to run.

For the past year or so, a number of dog owners have used the fenced park space at Allison St. and Arkansas Ave. NW . This park was formerly a playground used by the neighboring school. We began using the abandoned park with the knowledge of the local park manager. We picked up after our dogs (and each other’s dogs), fixed the hasp on the gate, and got to know each other while our dogs got their exercise. This dog park helped build community in Ward 4.

About two months ago, DPR closed the park and communicated to us they plan to demolish it and remove the fence, making it unusable by anyone. Apparently, DPR received a report that the dogs were causing a disturbance. It’s worth noting that this park is ideally located in that there are few homes facing it and none directly next to it. If it is unacceptable, where can we go? I challenge DPR to find us a better spot that meets their specifications.

I’m an active, voting, tax-paying community member. I want dog parks in my community and I’m asking for your help. Please restore access to the park at Allison St. and Arkansas Ave. NW and call on DPR to make access to dog parks in all wards of the city a priority. I look forward to your response.

Sincerely,

DC Dog Voter

Well, it’s the law. That is what Jesse Round says in his last email to me.

Apparently ‘…a counter-response to dog-owners need for dog exercise areas has arisen.” So DPR had to close the fenced area since they could not control the use there. He said ‘It’s use as an off-leash dog area was popular with the community but was illegal under DC law….Until these regulations are complete we must continue to regulate and remove the temptation to undermine DC law.’

The bottom line is that they are being selective on which laws to enforce. Since they believe we are a small group, with little or not impact on them, it is easy to tilt the scale to the other side.

If they will follow and apply Mr Rounds reasoning 100%, we will have nearly no parks open. I believe that to trash, use drugs and alcohol as well as sex in public areas is illegal. Currently DPR can not control this use and abuse in the Upshur Park. I walk every day in that park and I always find trash, broken glass, empty liquor and beer bottles as well as condom packages.

.

So, this is just one more excuse to not allow us to use this park. It is an abandon area not in use by any other group, no reason not to allow us to use it until rules are defined.

Unless we all start letting DPR and the Mayor know we exist, our concerns and needs will be left at the end of the bin. Please use the link to the right and let the DPR director and Mayor Fenty know we exist.

Just got off the phone with Jesse Rounds from DPR.   DPR is currently working on the second round of community input with community groups.  Once they have heard from these task forces, they may or may not change any of the proposal regulations.  The legislation then goes to the Attorney General for signing.  If all runs smoothly, the rules could be in place by the fall.  Currently the city does not have specific sites in mind, rather the city will rely on communities to come forward with proposed sites, signed letters of support from community members and ANC support.  If a park does not fit the exact regulations and there is a compelling reason for the park, DPR will consider the park but this would be a rare occurance.   The partnership for the park would not be totally responsible for maintaining the park.  The city is looking at dog parks as not specific to neighborhoods but rather “city wide communities.”  DPR feels that people already think they are against dog parks but they are taking a careful and considered approach because they “want the parks to work.”  DPR is enforcing the off-leash laws because as a result of the hearings they are getting more complaints about dogs in parks.  They may or may not tear down the park at Allison and Arkansas and there will be public input on the future of this park. 

ACTION:  I think we should put together a plan to start gathering community support and also start locating a space that could work.

http://dpr.dc.gov/dpr/cwp/view,a,1239,q,637521,dprNav,|32112|.asp

Seems like Montgomery County understands that dog parks are a win-win situation for all animals involved.  Note the positive approach to dog parks that the County takes.  Also from the Montgomery County Dog Park Site:

Why are Dog Parks needed?

Dogs need sufficient exercise to maintain their physical health and to learn appropriate behavior when socializing with humans or other dogs. They also need regular outings to reduce boredom, release pent-up energy at home, and decrease aggressive behavior.Owning a dog encourages people to exercise and visit their local park.  More than most other park facilities, Dog Parks have been places where neighbors and other local residents regularly meet and greet, often forming the beginning of longer-lasting community ties.Dogs and their owners have been affected first by planning for communities and public open space and then by its management. As more people live in compact types of housing surrounded by heavier traffic, greater demands are placed on public open space.  More intense user conflicts within existing parks, especially those in more urbanized areas, have often meant greater restrictions on domestic animals to public open space. Montgomery County has over 25,000 licensed dogs and many more who are unlicensed. 

In looking at metro area official dog parks, it’s not hard to notice that other municipalities have established legislation that provides flexibility in creating dog parks.  Please see such rules below governing Montgomery County.  My challenge to DC officials:  talk to Montgomery County officials and find out about best practices!

Managing Dog Parks within Montgomery County’s Park System: 

The Department of Parks will provide basic maintenance for these facilities. Development of these facilities will be supported by the Department of Parks’ Capital Improvement Program (CIP) with daily operation and maintenance support. Oversight of the dog parks will be the responsibility of the Department of Parks, park managers and the Park Police. 

The following criteria for choosing locations for Dog Parks within the public parkland system: 

At least acre in size; preferably more; perhaps an area large enough to develop two sections, allowing for use of one while maintaining the other; (smaller areas may be considered in urban areas of the county). 

Healthy soils with good drainage, some large shade trees or an open shelter; 

A site that is compatible with existing uses in that park; 

Safe distance from roadways; 

Accessible parking area with safe passageway between parking area and dog exercise area; 

A sufficient distance or a buffer from residential areas; 

A clean drinking water source for dogs (desirable but not mandatory);  

Easy accessibility for trash removal and other park maintenance tasks; 

If designed for neighborhood use, accessibility (within walking or short driving distance) to residential areas; 

A site that is not unduly environmentally sensitive, and that can accommodate a dog exercise area without excessive environmental damage.