Kit Sang Boos: Fenced-in dog park seems like the way to go
Ablestock Purchase photo reprints »
To the editor:
I know there are many reasons and benefits for people to own dogs as pets. Still I feel sad — when I really think about it — that dogs here are treated much so better than many other people on the planet.
That said, the issue of the behavior of people and dogs and the “piles” they leave behind is much more immediate and “in our face” than the national and global problems that seem so intractable. Would solving this problem ease our sense of helplessness and outrage that “those other people” are ruining things for us?
I am one of those disgusted by the “piles,” especially galling and apparent on beautiful snow. I am wary of dogs but haven’t been otherwise attacked or injured. But I realize that I have been walking much less on that lovely path by the river the last couple of years as the numbers of wayward dogs and their leavings have increased. That, unfortunately, has contributed to the belief of a snippy young woman who told me everyone knows that the Mill River path was a “dog park.” Apparently, a dog park is a free pass. This young woman let her dog run around out of her sight, yet she disclaimed any responsibility, saying her dog did it in the woods. Really? If runners and pedestrians cede the path to avoid injuries and “piles,” does that mean it all goes to the dogs?
I like the idea of a fenced-in dog park and it should be paid for by licensing fees and voluntary contributions. A leash law elsewhere will make it much harder, though not impossible, for owners to ignore their pets’ “piles” and make it safer for people as well. Maybe this is something that we and our local government can really do something about.
Kit Sang Boos