PDXDogBlog

Anybody out there? Good. Go to this meeting. Please?

2004-11-15T17:05:00.000-08:00

If you're reading this, God bless you. I sorta stopped updating this because several political campaigns consumed all my free time. Also, I'm terribly burned out on this issue. Despite the work of many, many people, it doesn't look like the end-result includes more than an inch or two of ground. It's clear that Parks values other park activities (sports and playscapes) above all others and there was never an intention to find a reasonable plan for shared usage. But, the work of the committee will be presented for feedback and it'd be, like, cool if you could go and comment on it. If you miss the one for your area, don't hesitate to go to one of the other meetings to give them a piece of your mind (meeting details below).

And, hey, I'm sort of collecting names and email addresses of folks who want to work together for when this is presented to our new city council. If you want, send me a note at pdxdogblog@yahoo.com. Or send me a note to say hi, but no thanks.

A citizen Off-Leash Advisory Committee has spent the past year working with PP&R to evaluate the current program and recommend ways in which it can be improved. Their draft recommendations will be presented for review and comment at three public meetings scheduled in mid-November. While information about all 33 off-leash parks will be available at the meetings, each meeting will have a particular geographic focus. Participants will have the opportunity to evaluate detailed information about the parks of greatest interest to them.

Saturday, November 20, 9:30-11:30am
Mt. Scott Community Center, 5530 SE 72 Ave.
Focus: Southeast and Outer East Park Locations

Saturday, November 20, 1:30-3:30pm
University of Portland, Buckley Center, 5000 N. Willamette Blvd.
Focus: North and Northeast Park Locations

Monday, November 22, 5:30-7:30pm
Multnomah Art Center, 7688 SW Capitol Highway
Focus: Northwest and Southwest Park Locations

The Times They Are A Changin'

2004-09-28T22:38:00.000-07:00

In case you didn't already know....Sunrise Wednesday is at 7:07 and sunset is at 6:54. So, if your "shared" park is near a school, you have exactly 53 minutes in which to exercise with your dog. Probably want to do the full 53 minutes, because that's all you're going to get. You're pooch won't get any evening time. So please, PLEASE don't oversleep!
Oh, and on Thursday? Two minutes less.

Picking up Poop in Seattle

2004-09-27T20:43:00.000-07:00

I've long believed that this whole issue really boils down to scooping poop. Everyone has at least one vivid memory of stepping in some, and it's a not-too-pleasant memory, either. And it's very tempting to spot it on the ground and want to attribute it to the first dog you see. It wasn't until I read an story in the Austin American-Statesman that I discovered that Seattle requires owners to carry visible poop-scooping bags. I think it's a fine idea.

In Seattle, for example, dog owners in city parks must visibly carry scooping equipment and can be ticketed $50 for not having it. And people do get ticketed, said Dewey Potter, communications manager for the Seattle Parks and Recreation Department.

More Dark Days

2004-09-17T08:22:00.001-07:00

The rains have returned to Portland. In a city of people who love parks, you'd never know it this time of year. Playscapes (all 110 of which are inspected daily by Parks) are wet and unused. Soccer and baseball fields are soggy at best, mudpits at worse. No matter where you are, your neighborhood park will continue to be, er, underutilized for the next 6 months (or more!), save for the occasional non-rainy day. But there is a sizable group of users who will be doggedly continue to be at parks, rain or shine. In many parks, dogs and their owners are often the only park visitors on dark, rainy days. (And if it wasn't enough fun to get out in the rain and mud twice a day, many Portlanders will have the added joy of driving back and forth to parks with their wet and muddy pets because the empty park down the street is not available.)

So, given these conditions and the fact that off-leash hours don't actually start until 30 minutes after dark, surely Parks will correct their mistakes and at least move the evening hours to a time that's actually before dark? No. Several dog owners endured a boring OLAC meeting on Tuesday for a chance to politely plead to fix this policy oversight. Said one: "who do I need to talk to to get this changed, because it needs to be changed right away, like tomorrow." Parks told them in no uncertain terms that neither this, nor anything else would be changed until the "test" period is over, which won't be until next year at the earliest. Wait a minute. We've been told repeatedly that this was a 1-year trial. We're already 14 months into this one-year trial and now we're informed that no matter how boneheaded it is, it'll continue for another 4 months?

For dog owners, Parks has no sympathy.

Reminder: Meeting Tonight

2004-09-14T13:35:00.000-07:00

Please come to the Off-Leash Advisory Committee meeting tonight at 5:30. It's a chance to speak up about your park usage to the citizen's board that will make recommendations to the Council about what to do going forward.

They Ruin the Ballfields!

2004-09-13T19:35:00.000-07:00

One reason mentioned for excluding dogs from parks is damage done to the fields... It's true that there are a few areas used by dogs where the turf is getting a little thin this time of year. Since dogs are now forced to congregate in dense numbers, this is not surprising.

The same is true of every sports field in the city as soccer players and softball games have pounded and scraped sections of fields. But in Chapter 12 of "Do as we say, not as we do", the same Parks Bureau that wants a light footprint by dog users, feels free to make daily use of heavy trucks driven willy-nilly through the parks, including the sacred sports fields, because park employees apparently can't use a wagon or some other low-impact method to carry trash from cans to their truck.

The Parks Bureau will spend a lot of money and time in the off-season revitalizing these fields: aerating, seeding, mowing, and yes, smoothing out ruts caused by sports users and Parks' trucks. But when was the last time you heard the suggestion that fields shouldn't be used by softball teams because they might be damaged by them?

If the Parks Bureau can determine that the labor hours saved in using heavy vehicles to retrieve bags of trash offsets the cost of the damage done by the trucks, then I'll take their word for it, but why are dog owners the only users held to the highest standard?

Here are some recent pictures (taken at 8:10 last Thursday morning) from Sewallcrest park.

And at another park a few weeks back.

Don't Cross This Imaginary Line

2004-09-11T13:19:00.000-07:00

If the City passed a law that said you can only walk on your right foot or else pay a large fine, how many people do you think would follow it? To me, the leash laws are a lot like that. Yet surprisingly, most people are willing to obey even unreasonable laws. You have to click on the photo below to see the large version...notice the cluster of dog owners at Sewellcrest Park on last Thursday morning at 7:50 a.m. The field is entirely empty save for a few crows, yet the dog owners (it looks like they're in jail) are all in their small allotted space. This is a typical scene during "dog hours" ... the only people using the park are there with their dog(s). I see it a lot and it's both humorous and sad at the same time. This demonstrates how arbitrary the time and space requirements are. I'm all for giving preference to human sports teams and human picnickers, but why do we have to give preference to crows?? More importantly, it shows that if a set of reasonable regulations were actually presented (No dogs in play scape areas, groomed ballfields; pick up after pets, etc.), we could expect dog owners to follow them.

Willamette Park Meat Was Laced

2004-09-08T20:59:00.000-07:00

If you haven't heard already, it was announced today that lab tests confirmed that the meat (including nine whole chickens) left in Willamette Park was laced. Strangely, the meat contained high levels of caffeine (which can be poisonous to dogs and cats in high dosage).

As times goes on, it's becoming clearer and clearer that the small number of folks who are anti-dog are tightly clustered on the wack-o end of the spectrum of opinion.

OLAC Meeting on Tuesday, September 14

2004-09-07T16:10:00.000-07:00

The next meeting of the Off-Leash Advisory Committee will be on Tuesday, Sept. 14 in the Portland Building at 5:30. There will be a chance for public input (2 minutes per person). The topics for discussion include reviewing the natural areas study and the survey results. Please come.

(The Portland building is at 1120 SW Fifth.)

"I've gained 10 pounds in the last 3 months."

2004-09-04T05:23:00.000-07:00

That's a comment I overheard at a park last night. The lady who made the quote was referring to the fact that because she can no longer use any of the 3 parks within walking distance of her house, she has had to drive to a park twice a day. Like many dog owners, she actually uses parks for exercise, and that includes the process of getting there and back. Isn't that a primary use of parks...exercise? This has got to be the first time in years that the City has developed a program that actually encourages Portlanders to drive more. Mayor Katz, why would you encourage driving when you pride yourself on getting around by foot in this "walkable city"?

Sunset today is at 7:44 P.M.

2004-09-03T14:22:00.000-07:00

Tonight's sunset is at 7:44 P.M., yet off-leash hours don't start until 8 P.M. Boy how the City has bent over backwards to share a common resource. If you don't like exercising in a dark park, I guess you're just ungrateful.

All this generosity despite the fact that most parks are demonstrably almost empty all day long this time of year..."shared" parks and non-shared parks alike.

I've been told that hours at Irving Park have been extended to start at 6 p.m. instead of 8 p.m. This whole mess started when a small number of people complained loudly and often. It's pretty obvious what it will take to get usage of our parks back...

Park Fun Facts

2004-08-27T15:54:00.000-07:00

Sorry, I've been busy with a number of things and haven't had time to post, so I'll just post some basic facts and you can interpret them anyway you want. The parks data comes from the Portland Parks website.

City of Portland Parks
Acres of land managed: 10000
Acres of park managed: 8738.8
Acres of city golfcourses: 794.4
Acres of full-time off-leash: 33.137

Number of full-time playscapes: 110
Number of full-time off-leash areas: 6
Percentage of Portland households with children under age 18*: 27
Percentage of Portland households with a dog: 40+
Number of daily playscape inspections: 110

Number of tennis courts: 119
Number of softball fields: 99
Number of soccer/football fields: 80
Number of horseshoe pits: 20
Number of time-limited OL areas: 27

Estimated amount of money spent in first year on leash and scoop enforcement: $100,000.00
Number of people doing the enforcement: 20
Number of man-hours spent enforcing scoop and leash laws per month: 3400
Total scoop law citations written in last 12 months: 3

Estimate number of dog visits to neighborhood parks in a year**: 2,427,250
Number of "bite investigations" in parks for 12 months: 25
Number of "bite investigations" per dog visit: .00107% or 1 in 93,356
Number of crime victims in the City of Portland in 2003**: 46,391
Odds of being a crime victim in the City of Portland in 2003: 8.6% or 1 in 11.6

* 2000 census, though this number has been declining for many years.
**Conservative, back-of-the envelope estimate assuming an average of 50 daily dog visits to each of the 132 neighborhood parks plus Forest Park (25+ undeveloped parks omitted, walkways and other public areas (such as the Esplanade and Tom McCall Waterfront Park) and natural areas also omitted. For most parks, the number of visits are much, much greater.
***From City website and assuming a population of 539,438.

No Chickens Here...

2004-08-24T23:01:00.000-07:00

C-SPOT is sponsoring a Take Back Our Park Rally at Willamette Park this Saturday the 28th at 1 pm. Show up with your dog(s)...on leash of course. For more information, contact C-SPOT at 503-230-8131 or go to www.cspotpdx.com.

Still no word on the lab tests from the raw meat...

Last Images for Now

2004-08-24T16:00:00.000-07:00

More pictures. I actually hoped that on at least one of the pictures there would be a field full of soccer players or a playground teaming with kids. But there wasn't, and it's clear to me there won't be. Plus, with the rain, there is even less demand for the open spaces. That shouldn't be a DQ automatically, as dog owner's know that we use the parks rain or shine. Can't say that for baseball players. In fact, one famous story is of a gentleman ticketed for having a dog off-leash in a downpour in Wilshire Park a few months ago. Absolutely no one else cared to be in the park that day (nor did he, I'm sure) but he got a ticket nonetheless. So here are the last pictures for a while.

Bonus park is Wilshire. Picture taken Monday, Aug. 23 at 4 p.m.

City Endorses Actions of Dog Poisoner

2004-08-23T14:33:00.000-07:00

Look at the picture on this KATU news story. The sad truth in Portland is that when dogs are threatened in this town, the City does exactly what the creep who did the threat wanted. If you're angry about this too, plan to attend the next meeting of the Off-Leash Advisory Committee on Tuesday, September 14 on the 2nd floor of the Portland Building downtown. Meeting starts at 5:30 p.m. and there will be an opportunity for the public to speak.

Heavy weekend usage

2004-08-23T08:16:00.000-07:00

Sorry, an unexpected trip to Seattle over the weekend meant I didn't get to take as many pictures as I wanted. But here is Col. Summers park at 5:30 on Sunday evening. (Remember, this is still considered "peak time" in all shared and unshared parks. It wasn't raining, but not a single human was in the park, not even the couple of homeless folks who are usually present.)
Click on images for larger size.

Here is Peak Time in Overlook park at about 6:30 on August 22:

Here is the Overlook "shared" area at about the same time:

More Pictures

2004-08-20T12:16:00.000-07:00

The game continues... I'll admit that after a few days this game gets pretty boring. That's part of the point. It's not difficult to find a place in a Portland park devoid of people in which to play catch with another person or a dog. The fact is that there is just not that much demand for the space, yet access for some is tightly regulated nonetheless. Here's Colonel Summers park at 11 today:

Today's bonus park is...Sewellcrest! This was at 10:15 today:

Sorry again for the small pictures. They're really neat to look at in larger size. If I can just find somewhere cheap (free!) to host them...

What's wrong with this picture?

2004-08-19T12:19:00.000-07:00

Today we start a new game: What's Wrong With This Picture? To play, just examine the daily post of a Portland park scene and try to spot the reason that people cannot be exercising with their off-leash dog. (Secret hint: you probably won't find any problems!) We start with two pictures. The first, of Colonel Summers Park, was taken at 11:30 am on August 19, 2004. Colonel Summers is a large park that, for many in closest SE Portland, is the only park in walking distance, but no dogs are allowed to run there. I'll provide a picture of it each day sometime between 9am and 4pm (the supposed peak-usage hours). I'll try to include bonus pictures of other parks as well.
(Note: sorry for the small size. I can provide full-size images on request.)

Today's bonus park is Sunnyside. This is also a no-off-leash-dogs-allowed park, though it's usually just a big empty field in the middle of a high-dog neighborhood. This was taken Aug. 18 at 5pm.

Though these pictures will be of only a few parks near me, you can bet a box of dog bisquits that most of the 129 dog-feasible parks in town look just the same in the daytime. Also note how green and manicured the grass is....just how much do we spend on keeping these fields nice for the occasional ballgame?

More attempted attacks on dogs

2004-08-18T15:24:00.000-07:00

Not much that needs to be said, because you've probably already heard about the attempt to harm more dogs at a City of Portland Park. How long is the Parks Bureau going to do the bidding of these thugs? And at what point will they take the same sort of drastic measures to protect dog owners that they took by restricting all off-leash activities because of the behavior of a small few? Remember, these guys are doing malicious and deliberate acts targeting owners and their pets.

We're spending how much on this?

2004-08-17T08:53:00.000-07:00

If your neighborhood is anything like mine, you've noticed that there has been a huge leap in crime lately. In the past two weeks, I've seen 5 car break-ins in my little SE neighborhood alone. There is a an epidemic of crystal meth-related crimes in Portland; Portland Monthly reports in it's July issue that Meth is a factor in 85% of all property crimes committed in Oregon. It's a rapidly growing problem and our city and state governments don't have nearly enough funding to even begin to tackle it. The DA office has half the attorneys it had a few years ago and we even have a brand new jail that can't be operated because of lack of funding. Yet young children are living in dangerous, but normal-appearing households, entirely neglected by their parents and thoroughly exposed to dangerous, even toxic, chemicals.

But the city of Portland has recently hired 20 employees to put in 3400 man-hours a month patroling our city. Why? To scour neighborhoods looking for breakins? To rescue abused and damaged children from crystal meth houses? No. They are hired for the sole purpose of driving from park to park, hiding in bushes and waiting to ambush people who are simply walking in a park without physical control of their dog. These are our City's priorities?

Dog ownership benefits owners and society

2004-08-15T12:10:00.000-07:00

As has been said many times, the current leash law scheme discourages pet ownership by making it difficult to provide for pet needs. Yet there is a large and growing body of data that demonstrate the positive effects provided by dog ownership to people from children to the elderly. The CDC, the Mayo Clinic and the National Institute of Health all cite a variety of studies on the contributions which pets make to the health of their owners. Society at large reaps benefits both in the form of lower costs to the public healthcare system and through reduction in the loss of productivity associated with age, depression and many chronic health problems.

The Delta Society lists the following studies on its website:

· Pets fulfill many of the same support functions as humans for adults and children. (Melson, 1998).
· Children exposed to humane education programs display enhanced empathy for humans compared with children not exposed to such programs. (Ascione, 1992). Children who own pets score significantly higher on empathy and prosocial orientation scales than non-owners. (Vidovic, 1999).
· Positive self-esteem of children is enhanced by owning a pet (Bergensen, 1989). And children's cognitive development can be enhanced by owning a pet (Poresky, 1988). Children owning pets are more involved in activities such as sports, hobbies, clubs or chores. (Melson, 1990).
· Children with autism have more prosocial behaviors less autistic behaviors such as self-absorption. (Redefer, 1989).
· Pet owners feel less afraid of being a victim of crime when walking with a dog or sharing a residence with a dog. (Serpel, 1990).
· Pet owners have better physical health due to exercise with their pets. (Serpel, 1990).
· Seniors who own dogs go to the doctor less than those who do not. In a study of 100 Medicare patients, even the most highly stressed dog owners in the study has 21 percent fewer physician's contacts than non-dog owners. (Siegel, 1990).
· Activities of daily living (ADL) level of seniors who did not currently own pets deteriorated more on average than that of seniors who currently owned pets. (Raina, 1999).
· Seniors who own pets coped better with stress life events without entering the healthcare system. (Raina, 1998).
· Pet owners have fewer minor health problems (Friedmann, 1990, Serpel, 1990). Pet owners have lower blood pressure. (Friedmann, 1983, Anderson 1992) and lower triglyceride and cholesterol levels than non-owners (Anderson, 1992).
· Companionship of pets (particularly dogs) helps children in families adjust better to the serious illness and death of a parent (Raveis, 1993).
· Contact with pets develops nurturing behavior in children who may grow to be more nurturing adults (Melson, 1990).
· Pet owners have a higher on-year survival rates following coronary heart disease (Friedman, 1980, 1995). Having a pet may decrease heart attack mortality by 3%. This translates into 30,000 lives saved annually (Friedman, 1980).
· Medication costs dropped from an average of $3.80 per patient per day to just $1.18 per patient per day in new nursing home facilities in New York, Missouri and Texas that have animals as an integral part of the environment. (Montague, 1995).
· People who have AIDS that have pets have less depression and reduced stress. Pets are a major source of support and increase perception the ability to cope. (Siegel, 1999, Carmack, 1991).

PDXDogBlog FAQ

2004-08-11T18:08:00.000-07:00

What is this blog advocating?
We feel that most Portlanders should be able to walk to a neighborhood park and exercise with their dog during all daylight hours, with a few limits. There are some legitimate complaints about dogs in our parks. Baseball and softball teams don't appreciate playing on a field littered with dog poop, for example, and we don't blame them. There are places and times in parks where it is inappropriate to have an off-leash dog, such as summertime sports fields, children's play areas, nature preserves, and anywhere there are lots of people. Unfortunately, a small number of dog owners don't understand what is appropriate. At the same time, many parks are often vacant of people, especially on weekdays and in the winter.

What is the solution?
A reasonable set of rules is needed to allow those who want to exercise in their neighborhood parks to do so and those who don't want to interact with dogs to avoid them as well. It is fair to require dog owners to keep their off-leash dogs in a certain section of each park. Most parks in Portland are more than several acres large, so there should be room for all.

In addition, we should re-allocate some of the $500,000 the City has earmarked for chasing down off-leash dogs to activities that educate dog-owners about proper park etiquette and designated areas for off-leash activity, and enforcement of laws on dangerous animals and poop scooping.

What about the poop?
The problem with some owners not cleaning up after their pets has been around for a long time, but only half-heartedly addressed by the Parks Bureau. A minority of Portland parks actually has a clean-up bag dispenser, and often, there is no trash can in the park or it is inconveniently located. When the parks were going through a severe budget crunch a few years ago, some trashcans had signs near them urging people to minimize their trashcan use to save money. It would be a good idea for the Parks Department to put up similar signs for dog owners explaining the importance of cleaning up after one's dog, and the risks associated with not doing so. It is possible to ask the community of dog owners to be responsible. The current City method of hiring 20 employees to do nothing but enforce poop and leash laws is as expensive as it is ineffective: for the 12 months that ended in June 2004, only 3 citations were issued for violating the scoop law!

What about dangerous dogs?
There certainly are dangerous dogs around. But according to Multnomah Animal Services, they're not generally in our parks. Despite the fact that several thousand dogs go to the parks each day, more than 97% of bite investigations conducted by Animal Services are for incidents outside of parks. Yet by focusing Animal Services employees' attentions at our parks, we're actually distracting them from the (more prevalent) dangers outside of the parks. And it costs a lot of city and county taxpayer money to boot.

What about fenced-in dog parks?
These parks are a good thing for many dogs, but not for all. Some dogs need a fenced in area in which to socialize with other dogs (and some owners need the socialization too!) But we can't possibly build a fenced-in area in enough parks such that most people could walk to them; they are also expensive to build and maintain. And once built, the areas are removed as places to fly a kite, play frisbee, or have a picnic. It is entirely possible for a dog-owner to play catch with his dog in the same field that a mom plays frisbee with her daughter.

Why should dogs be off-leash in parks, anyway?
For one thing, there are many thousands of dogs in Portland; they are in more than 40% of Portland households. Dogs and other pets provide well-documented mental and physical health benefits. For some people, especially the elderly, a dog might be their only constant companion. For others, dogs provide safety and security for their owners in parks and out. But people and dogs both need exercise, and that generally means vigerous exercise, which is difficult to achieve by simply walking around the neighborhood several times a day. And as yards get smaller, or disappear completely, dog-owners need open space for exercise.

Parks, and people who use them, also benefit from having from off-leash activity in parks. Crime, from assaults to vandalism, is greatly reduced when many people are using parks throughout the day. A well-used park is a safer park.

More on the spiked field

2004-08-10T16:38:00.000-07:00

From the you-heard-it-here-first department, Fox 12 (and others) are now reporting on the spikes found at a Portland middle school. I'm grateful that the Police Bureau is conducting a serious investigation into this matter.

Will I have to go to the park in the dark?

2004-08-09T16:57:00.000-07:00

Due to the weird hour restrictions, the answer to that question will soon be "Yes" if you plan on taking advantage of the evening hours at "shared" parks. In the chart below, you can see that beginning sometime in very early September, it will be dark, or almost dark, by 8 pm, the time when you can legally take your off-leash pooch to one of the priveledged few parks in town. That situation will last for two full months until the "Fall Hours" kick in November 1.

If your "Shared Use" park happens to be next to a school, please note that your daily allocated park use time (morning plus evening) will amount to less than an hour a day for much of December and January.

It's also worth noting that no other park activity is limited by time of day like dog activities are.

More park violence

2004-08-04T22:12:00.000-07:00

Now I know that dog owners don't ordinarily go to parks in the wee-small hours of the morning, but the story of a man being shot and killed in Kenilworth Park early this morning, combined with other recent violence in Portland parks, makes me wonder how safe our parks really are. By some accounts, several parks, like Mt. Tabor, are virtual ghost towns where once there were many people. By closing off the parks to a significant number of these users during the day, are we fostering an environment for crime in the nighttime hours?

Fall Off-leash Hours

2004-08-03T15:21:00.000-07:00

Soon it will be fall in Portland. Here's a question for you: How many hours in the evening are available to dog owners in September at "shared" parks? The answer might surprise you: none. Sure, you can take your dog off leash at 8 p.m. at one of the few off-leash areas, but take a flashlight. Beginning in the first few days of September, off-leash hours will START well after sunset.

Even better, when they change the times in November, you'll gain less than one hour of daylight in the evenings for exercising with your dog off-leash. You'll need it because there's less than 2 hours of sunlight in the morning for the entire months of November, December, and January.

The good news: Even in dark December, there will be a full 8 hours a day for you to play horseshoes at any one of the Parks' 20 locations!

Alert. Meeting Place Changed

2004-07-30T10:52:00.000-07:00

Next Tuesday's meeting has been moved to the Portland Building downtown. The address is:
August 3, 2004 - 5:00pm - 7:00pm
The Portland Building
(downtown)
1120 SW 5th
2nd Floor/Room B

Parking is available off-street and in the Smart Park between 2nd & 3rd on
SW Jefferson.

New leash laws encourage abuse

2004-07-26T18:31:00.000-07:00

Despite claims that the new leash rules were being planned before the Laurelhurst poisonings, it was widely viewed as a victory for the evil person who did it. By creating rules that imply that dogs are so dangerous that they must be tightly regulated (and violations harshly punished), the city has sent a message that dogs and their owners are fair game for threats and violence. And there are several unhinged people all over the city that have heard the city's message. Here's a sign I saw today posted at a middle school play lot:

Instead of being a reasoned and reasonable response to some legitimate concerns about how we use our parks in Portland, the new rules were a draconian response that almost overnight stripped a large percentage of neighborhood park users of their use of the parks. Measures like this reward and provide cover for people who have no qualms about injuring or killing dogs, their owners, children and other users of city parks.

This is not the only example. Many people who were exercising with their dogs have been intimidated and threatened while at the park. And don't forget the poor dog that acutually got shot with a gun at Mt. Tabor.

UPDATE:
The police department used a metal detector to retreive more than 100 hand-cut triangular spikes that were embedded in the ground throughout the school grounds with one sharp point facing upwards. More were found last week. Don't know if it's another sewing of spikes or overlooked spikes...

They do get letters

2004-07-26T17:50:00.000-07:00

Saw this on the Parks & Rec Comment page and thought it was good enough to reproduce here. Thanks to whomever wrote it.

I am a resident of the Woodstock area, right across from Woodstock park. From the day we moved in last August I noticed what a lovely place it was for the dog owners that frequented it. People are conscientious about keeping an eye on their dogs and making sure everyone is safe. The organization of our park has the children's play area on the opposite side of the hill from where the dogs play. The geography of the park makes it an excellent area for off leash, since the dogs are much more interested in each other than the kids. My concern is that your committee is forming policy without actually seeing the interactions of dogs and people. I would ask you to come to the park one afternoon and just watch. No media event, or show - just a sunny afternoon - I believe you would be impressed by what you see. A community coexsisting as it was meant to be. Without the afternoon hours available I believe you will be hard pressed to find anyone in the park. This is a sad state for a county that charges a surplus for community services and then constricts who can use those services. The other day I watched two small children, no more than 4 or 5 playing completely out of sight of their parents. I watched for sometime as they played and still no sign of attending adults. The only adults I did see were those making sure that their dogs stayed away from them. In speaking with a woman who is in the park regularly with her dog, she explained that this same family was one that complains at every meeting that their children are "attacked by dogs every time they are in the park" I would think if this mother was really worried, she would not let her children be completely out of sight. Now should all children be confined because of the actions of one family? No. The majority of parents are responsible, attentive and involved. I would say the same is very true of dog owners. Parks are a part of the community and should be for all to enjoy, two and four legged alike.

Dog owners are good for park safety

2004-07-21T14:32:00.000-07:00

It's not a far-fetched assertion that parks are safer when they are populated with people. Frequently when I visit a park -- any park -- the only people there are those with dogs. So if you want to discourage crime, encourage dogs. In fact, at one school I frequent with my dogs, the principal actually wants people to exercise their dogs there (off leash!) because it helps to limit vandalism and graffiti. It's an arrangement that benefits both.

A decade or so ago, I'm told, Mt. Tabor was riddled with crime: drug and alcohol use, prostitution, vandalism, etc. Being an undesirable location because of the crime, dog owners were given an OK by the city to take there dogs there (figures). Since that time it has become one of the most popular spots in town to exercise one's dog. But that's changing. Due to the harassment (see Dog Rodeo?), fewer people are taking their dogs there. Today, a man was robbed at gunpoint at Mt. Tabor. Think there is a connection?

Highly restrictive off leash rules discourage density

2004-07-21T08:31:00.000-07:00

Despite what some may wish, just because the city has begun restricting where dogs can go off leash, it doesn't mean that people will not have dogs, or not have big dogs, or not take their dogs to parks and other public spaces. People in Portland will continue to have dogs even as yards get smaller and more condos are built. The fact that we, as a city, are becoming more densely populated is a good thing (for many, many reasons).

For many of us, our dogs aren't like gerbils, or box turtles, but members of the family. Consequently, we will, and do, make decisions with their interests in mind. At one of my neighborhood parks (sadly, no longer an "off-leash" space), a neighbor lamented that they bought their current house (a mere one block away) specifically because they would be able to exercise their dog there. Another neighbor claims that he and his wife recently purchased a car in order to take their dog to Normandale park which is several miles away. They didn't really need a car otherwise.

I’ve heard that some are apparently worried about dogs impact on wildlife, including some at the Audubon society. I suppose that some dogs might harm our feathered friends (I've never see it happen). But by campaigning for highly restrictive leash laws, though, I don't think they are seeing the forest for the trees. I know I'm not the only one who is presently looking for a house with a larger-than-standard-50x100-foot lot so I can exercise my dogs during the day. And just where can one find one of these yard-rich houses? Yep, the edges of the city and the suburbs. Can sprawl really be better for birds and other wildlife than a few dogs off-leash in our parks? And, as I said before, harassing and restricting dog owners won’t make dogs disappear. They'll still be around...on leash or otherwise.

(Does anyone even have any statistics on damage that dogs might have on wild birds? Seems an odd connection to make to me. The cats next door – which seem to be at our house half the time -- kills several, maybe dozens, each month and I haven't heard about anyone petitioning the city about it. Ironically, my dog (with my encouragement) convinced one of them to let go of a newly caught young raven a month ago. Who knew? Both the cat and the bird were unharmed.)

Lastly, an article in the Oregonian a few weeks ago pointed out that the recent father-daughter residents of Forest Park cut down 6 trees to build a shelter, carved out large swastikas in an eroding hill, deposited much refuse, and dammed a small creek in the park. The total damage was about $10,000. (No word on how many wild creatures were eaten or otherwise harmed.) When asked, a county spokesperson explained that "funding is tight and the park department's priority is going after dog owners violating leash laws in neighborhood parks".

Pretty much sums it up.

Another day...

2004-07-18T23:01:00.000-07:00

Here's another shot of Colonel Summers park at 5:20 on Friday afternoon:

And Sewellcrest at around the same time (4:50 p.m. on Friday, July 16):

Portland Mercury article

2004-07-16T14:49:00.000-07:00

Here's a good short article in the Portland Mercury.

"[T]he new park rules favor a small group of vocal residents and fail to take into account the thousands of dog owners who simply, silently, and responsibly used the parks for years. For example, recognizing that the number one complaint about dogs in the parks is poop, for the past decade dog owners and citizen groups have asked that the city fund more trash cans and dog poop bag distribution kiosks. But the city has balked, saying they don't have the funding. (Oddly, the fines collected for off-leash violations do not help fund the city's parks. Instead, it's the county who is responsible for enforcement and those fines go into a general slush fund. The city does not receive a dime.) "

Dog Rodeo?

2004-07-16T07:47:00.000-07:00

Despite the fact that this new program was implemented in the wake of the Laurelhurst dog poisonings, it was pretty clear from the onset that this program was never put in place to protect the welfare of dogs and their owners. But we never expected the enforcement to actually harm dogs. Maybe it is? My neighbor described how his dog was actually lassoed to the ground by an over-zealous parks official at Mt. Tabor, as if his gentle chocolate lab was a wild and dangerous crocodile. My neighbor was within a few feet of his dog and the two of them were only a short distance from the official off-leash area, yet no attempt was made by the park official to first communicate with the dog's owner. His dog wasn't physically injured, but the brute force treatment sure left a bad taste in his mouth. What's next? Tranquilizer guns?

Where are the people?

2004-07-15T18:12:00.000-07:00

While speaking with dog owners at area parks, I've heard many descriptions of what the parks are like these days: empty, scary, eerily quiet. As one man asked at Mt. Tabor last night, "Where are all the people? It was claimed that people were staying away from the parks because of dogs, but I'm here twice each day and almost all of the people I see, if I see anyone, has a dog."

I went to my neighborhood park, Colonel Summers, during what should be, if the dog hours are any guide, peak time: 5:30 pm on a Thursday. This is a large park, and no one was there. No one was playing tennis, baseball, or even basketball. Not one person. But this is not unusual. Come take a walk in the park with me (um...don't bring your dog, tho).

Please attend this meeting on August 3rd

2004-07-15T08:37:00.000-07:00

The Off-Leash Dog Advisory Committee will meet on August 3rd at 5:00 pm at the State Office Building (near Lloyd Center) located at 800 NE Oregon St., Room 140. It's very important that dog owners unhappy with the current park regulations and harsh enforcement attend to voice their opinions before these (or worse) laws are locked in!