34 South Main St., Attleboro, MA - (508) 222-7000
News
Attleboro council OKs dog park law
Top Headlines Councilors voted 9-2 to approve the law that creates legal parameters for the leash-free park. Councilors Kim Allard and Gerald Chase voted against. Allard did not speak on Tuesday, but last week raised concerns about funding, safety and the ability of the city to enforce park rules. Chase said he would only vote for the ordinance if the city enacted a ban on pit bulls. Several councilors raised worries last week. The ordinance sets out guidelines for the park, which will be a first for the city, but is part of a growing national trend. While the law permits the construction of a park, city finances won't allow it unless it's built by volunteers. But that's exactly what park proponent Roberta Collins intends to do. Collins, who proposed the ordinance almost a year ago and worked to convince councilors it was good for the city, let Attleboro know how she felt after leaving council chambers. She let out scream that could have brought police to the windows of their station next door. "Yahoo, I'm elated!" she said. "There's a lot more to do, but I'm up for the challenge." Collins said she will work to raise money and organize volunteers for the park. While volunteers can run the park, it will be supervised by the park department, which would also create rules for the facility. No site has been chosen for the park. While councilors overwhelmingly approved the ordinance, some still seemed to have concerns, saying the creation of the law does not mean a park is imminent. They said donations and a site will still have to get approval before the park can be built.
Post Your Comments Jessica Kosowski wrote on Jul 16, 2008 10:10 AM: " " Hi, I'm Jessica Kosowski, an editor at the Sun Chronicle. While your comments are always welcome here, you can continue this discussion in a permanent forum at http://thesunchronicle.ning.com/forum Just click on Attleboro once you get there. " " harry hindsight wrote on Jul 14, 2008 6:02 PM: " Anney of the Asians has it right! Let's all donate our old leashes to the school department so the rug rats can be controlled and disiplined. " july_7 wrote on Jul 14, 2008 2:13 PM: " Anney of the Asians, your tax money will not be used in the creation of the dog park. Not one cent will come from the city, it will all come from private citizens and business who make donations to an account that will be set up. Donations don't just mean monies, but rakes, shovels, pooper scoopers, wood chips, poop bags, etc. Which will be at no expense to the city or it's citizens. We are all facing tough financial roads, and the very last thing I would want to see is that the City is funding this project. Just because there is now an ordinance that will allow the establishment of an off-leash dog park, doesn't mean it's the city's responsibility. You an many others will be amazed at all the support from dog owners who will be willing to pitch in to help in one way or another. I hope that this eases your mind as far as your tax money and the dog park. " Anney of the Asians wrote on Jul 14, 2008 1:35 PM: " I'm conflicted over this. I dont own a dog-so why should my tax money go to a dog park? I dont have children-so why should I pay for your kids to get picked up and schooled? Let's see, I like dogs-they never really bother anyone, in fact i love my neighbors dogs, so quiet that you never even knew they were there. My neighbors kids though- re loud, obnoxious and inconsiderate. so i guess what i'm saying is that nit picking what tax money should be spent on and what it shouldnt be is all based on opinion. I think all kids under the age of ten should be on leashes-doesnt make me right does it? and i'm sure this has been reiterated-small dogs are far more aggressive than large dogs. People are stupid and cant accept resposibility (whether its a parent letting their kid do whatever they want or someone letting a dangerous dog loose). Human bites are actually worse than dog bites (go figure). Why doesnt anyone else ask this? When a kid gets attacked by a dog-wanders into a neighbors yard- WHERE ARE THE PARENTS? " july_7 wrote on Jun 26, 2008 7:54 AM: " To all who have concerns regarding children in dog parks. The new ordinance that just passed does restrict children under the age of 12 from entering the dog park. From the ages of 12-18 they must be accompied by a parent or guardian. This is a safe guard so the kids don't get run over or knocked down while the dogs are chasing and playing with each other. From 12-18, it will keep kids and teens coming to to dog park to show off their "strong, aggressive dogs" to impress their friends. Foxboro is a wonderful dog park where I take Spencer to frequently. If you follow the rules that have been established, know your dog, and watch the other dogs, you can usually judge how well they will get along. Spencer is a much better behaved dog because not only did I take obdience classes, get him CGC certified, but I brought him to Sharon and Foxboro to socialize not only with other dogs, but with other people as well. When walking down the street (on leash) I don't have to worry about how he will react to an approaching dog or jumping on another person or child. You are correct that the training process is a 24/7 job. But having the dog park has helped in his training. As Councilor Heagney stated, "This is a choice you make. Either to use it or not." " wretched ron wrote on Jun 25, 2008 10:14 AM: " Good news for dog owners. I live in Texas now but when I did live in Attleboro (40 yrs) I used to bring my dog to Capron Park and only wish there was an off leash dog park. Congrats to the organizer's and city councilers who approved. Seems like making Attleboro a more "resident-friendly" town is the plan of action right now and adding this park is a good step in the right direction. Here is a link to the dog park we bring our dog's to now. It was voted #1 in the country by Dog Fancy magazine in 2006. www.fortwoof.org Don't know if it can link you by clicking on it so just copy and paste it to your browser's address window. The rules and information are very well thought out. Only difference is that the city actually considers this a beneficial help to the community and does give some funding to them. Let the comments roll................ " ld1973 wrote on Jun 24, 2008 2:29 PM: " The reason why small children aren't allowed in dog parks is because many parents don't teach their children how to act around animals. Not to mention, children are small, and dogs view them as playmates and part of their pack, not as a leader. All dogs have wild tendancies, not just Pitts and Rotties, you just have to know how to be a strong leader around them. What people don't understand is that training/socializing your dog is a 24/7 job, it needs to be incorporated each day. You can't be lax in training and think the dog will just get it. A good owner learns and educates themselves on how to bring a dog into a family and how to socialize one. At the shelter, no animal is adopted to a family with children under 5 for those reasons. People get a dog, don't watch their children, train the dog for a week and think that the dog just knows how to act. There's a lot more involved and I will try to find the links and post them so that you can be educated. " Harry Hindsight wrote on Jun 24, 2008 12:56 PM: " Annie, the only thing I have to go on is the Medway Dog Parks' rules. They state that those under 12 should not be in the park. I'm sure those working on Attleboro's park will have some sort of age restriction also. By taking their time, it seems that they want to make this a good thing for the city. " annie wrote on Jun 24, 2008 9:43 AM: " harry hindsight, I truly did not know that their was an age restriction for children to enter the park. What age can a child go into the dog park? Thank you Harry for the lovely comments you made and educating me too. " harry hindsight wrote on Jun 23, 2008 5:56 PM: " Annie, small children are not allowed in the park for fear of being knocked over to say the least. Not all children know how to behave or act around a dog that they are not used to or the dog is not used to the child. Much like you wouldn't let a child into the hunting knife cabinet at Wall-Mart, it is safer for all parties that children don't attend dog parks. An excited child may excite a dog to jump, nip or scratch. None of which is meant to harm either the dog or the child. You are right by that dog parks are supposed to be safe, and if those that go there follow the rules, they will be. Annie, you have great thoughts and ideas here and those putting the dog park together are reminded of all these things as they gather the rules for the park. Let's voice our ideas so that everyone can make their own choice of weather to visit and use the dog park and stay informed. " annie wrote on Jun 23, 2008 4:23 PM: " Parkuser, Why wouldnt a child be allowed to enter in a dog park? Arent dog parks supposed to be safe? Wow, that statement you just made is not nice. You should be ashamed of yourself. I thought freedom of speech was allowed in this country? Are we not allowed to comment if we feel strongly against something? Do you feel that threaten by it that you would have to make such a strong statement against something you truly have not read through? Did you read any of comments afterwards? Yes, I have had pets through my life for which has included cats, dogs, and fish. Therefore, I guess the only one who is trying to cause trouble is you. Again, that is not nice. I have every right as you do to make a comment. " parkuser wrote on Jun 23, 2008 2:20 PM: " Annie, why are you even bringing children into the equation. Children should not be in a dog park to begin with. Other parks have a notice, that you enter the park at your own risk. dog parks are an asset to the community and you probably don't even own a dog now, so why are you even commenting on a dog park in Attleboro, if no other reason than to cause trouble? " gingersnap wrote on Jun 19, 2008 11:43 AM: " It is a growing national trend, I could not agree more with that statement! I am hopeful that it will be a success, now I do not have to drive to Foxboro w/ my dog. I am very happy that Attleboro will have a dog park! " " brwmstr wrote on Jun 19, 2008 8:42 AM: " I see Foxboro dog park is taking a lot of flack in this paper and on these blogs, but the fact is, the dog park in Foxboro is up and running for 2 years now. It is a quiet, clean, family friendly place to take your dog. There has been ONE dog bite in two years. This bite occurred when an overzelous young man "punched" a dog in the head to break up a skirmish. Other than that incident, there has been NO OTHER INCIDENTS inside the park. Let me repeat, NONE. Unfortunatly a few abutters that did not get their way in the meetings, leading up to the opening of the park, have decided to sue, to close the park. There are seven households in the lawsuit. They canvassed the entire surrounding area for other households to join their lawsuit, but seven are all they could get to join. Well good news. A trial date has been set for early Aug. and a judge will determine, once and for all, if the park is legally operating. " Soxfan wrote on Jun 18, 2008 6:20 PM: " If the dogs are at the dog park (a fenced in area) and are biting other dogs (they will be banned) or people (they will be banned) what does it matter to me? It is not anyplace where I'll be going and I do not know of any land near my house that could be used for it so as long as the volunteers are paying for it , have fun! The article did say that the Park Department will be overseeing the dog park. Who will oversee them? Without calling all the apples in the basket bad, it is not the fastest moving group of municipal workers. Again, I applaud the efforts of the people who dedicated their time to do what they feel is an improvement to the city. Get it built and I 'll donate the case of poop bags as promised. " annie wrote on Jun 18, 2008 5:28 PM: " To Nicole1980, No, I won't keep my opinion to myself. I have every right as you do to express how I feel. As an American born citzen and since I lived in ATTLEBORO my whole life I can. FYI: Lets not forget yes I have owned dogs and cats. " annie wrote on Jun 18, 2008 5:20 PM: " First of all, I was born and raised in Attleboro. I love the City I live. My chidren were also born at Sturdy. I have never lived anywhere else but in Attleboro. Second, I have owned dogs and cats thru out my life. I am only pointing out other sides to this. I feel strongly that yes Pit Bulls and Rotts should be banned. 3rd just to let you know I am first generation american. So for you to be using other races and comparing it to dogs. Well, lets just say no comparision. I trust certain breeds of dogs. However, I do not trust Pit Bulls or Rotts. " Harry Hindsight wrote on Jun 18, 2008 3:45 PM: " Kevin h, agree or not with me, please don't sink to calling the statement stupid. It was a smart enough post to get you to respond to it. You can and have offered better comments on posts than saying someone else's comment is stupid. True pit bulls are the buzz breed for agressive habits. Sure I am more cautious around pit bulls with my dogs, but a good dog can be of any breed. Shouldn't the city's dog officer be the one to inform us of who and where the problem dogs are in the city. Wouldn't this be the better person to have comment on this issue? From past history, they should know the dogs that will mix well in a public setting and be the one to place restrictions on the dogs that use the park. " kevin h. wrote on Jun 18, 2008 3:14 PM: " Harry, Your last statement was just plain stupid. These dogs have been bred to have the characteristics that make them THE issue. Nurture cannot overwhelm nature in this case, hence the great percentage of fatalities attributed to these breeds. They are natural killing machines. " Nicole1980 wrote on Jun 18, 2008 2:59 PM: " Annie and Common_sense....do you own dogs? Yes, we DO NEED TRAFFIC in our city, do you even live in Attleboro....when you know what you are talking about then feel free to discuss until then......I would keep your opinions to yourself. " Harry Hindsight wrote on Jun 18, 2008 2:13 PM: " Annie, with that train of thought, we should see what race of people commit the most crimes and exclude them from public places. Your stats hold true, Rotties and pit bulls do bite people, but do not exclude one dog until it has proven to be an issue. " annie wrote on Jun 18, 2008 1:44 PM: " According to the Center for Diseases and American Veterinary Medical Associations about 800,000 people seek medical attention because of dog bites half our children. The rate of dog bite-related injuries is highest for children ages 5 to 9 years. A study was done by CDC on fatal dog bites lists the breeds involved in fatal attacks over 20 years with Pit-Bull type dogs and Rottweilers involved in more than half of these deaths. The study was done between 1979 to 1998 in the United States. " auk wrote on Jun 18, 2008 12:24 PM: " It seems inconsistent to me to be opening a dog park. I've read articles about how we don't allow ice skating on city pond's and kid's cant play "tag" on the playgrounds because of fear of litigation, this seems like it would fall in the same category. " NA townie wrote on Jun 18, 2008 12:18 PM: " Maybe if we stopped focusing on Foxboro and looked at Sharon, Medway, Newport and all of the other dog parks across the nation we'd be able to see that they can be successful. We can take learnings from Foxboro rather than give up based on their outcome. And to ban a breed is unfair no matter what type. The highest number of reported bites are from labs, would you ban them? People who own unstable or dogs who cannot be trusted with other dogs or people wouldn't bring their animals to a dog park anyway. " Harry Hindsight wrote on Jun 18, 2008 12:07 PM: " Common_sense, for every Foxboro, there is a Newport or a Medway. Give it a chance. There is already an off leash doggie day care in Attleboro, so Ralph is ahead of the curve by making money from this idea. Isn't what the ARA is doing also "bring more traffic to our city, require more city services "? At least the dog park is not going to drain any monies from the city budget or ask the mayor for thousands to keep it going when it should have been sulf sufficient. " annie wrote on Jun 18, 2008 12:07 PM: " My question is that who is at fault if a dog bites or attacks a child or another animal. Will the city be at fault? What types of rules are they going to have if all the dogs are running around? Wow, can you just picture all the Pit Bulls and Rottiwellers running around? " moving out wrote on Jun 18, 2008 11:38 AM: " I think this dog park is a great addition to the town. I myself travel to Medway for my dog to play, it will be nice to utilize what will be in my own backyard now. I think what people need to remember is that this is all being paid for by volunteers and nothing is technically coming out of our own pockets. Those who are not in agreeance with this plan are the people who won't use it anyway as they obviously are not dog owners!! " common_sense wrote on Jun 18, 2008 9:58 AM: " A step in teh right direction...??? Does anyone follow what is going on in Foxboro? If it's such a great idea then someone should run it for profit charge a fee, the city has more pressing needs then a dog park. What a wast of time and effort by our city, all this is going to do is bring more traffic to our city, require more city services and expose the tax payers to litigation. What a terrific well thought plan....yahoo!!!! " Harry Hindsight wrote on Jun 18, 2008 7:17 AM: " A step in the right direction! Something for the community that doesn't take from the community, only gives. Anyone else see a trend starting in our city. They close a pool and the citizens raise the funds to re-open it. People want a dog park, and volunteers are going to finance and build it. Maybe other groups that cry and moan that they have lost funding or need more should follow these two examples. Much like the saying " That which one works for is more revered than that which is given." Great work Collins! Keep us posted on the progress! " or
|
