somerville dog

Citizen Strummer

This morning, as the first snowfall of the season was dispersing, Strummer earned her Canine Good Citizen Certificate at Canine University in Malden.¹

To earn her CGC Certification, Strummer had to successfully perform ten tasks, testing her behavior when being greeted by friendly strangers, around other dogs, and when being handled by a canine care professional (i.e. a groomer or a veterinarian); her reliability with the basic obedience commands, "sit," "down," "stay" and "come;" and her ability to maintain her poise (i.e. not bark continually) for three minutes while her owner was not in the room. She also had to show up for the test with a responsible owner, who was required to sign a pledge to take care of her health needs, safety, exercise, training and quality of life and to show responsibility by cleaning up after her in public places and never letting her infringe on the rights of others.

Strummer is looking forward to enjoying the rights of citizenship! In an article on "Dogs and apartments," the Dog Owners Guide suggests that Canine Good Citizen Certification can assuage a potential landlord's concerns about renting an apartment to the dog's owner (see also "Locating Pet-Friendly Apartments") and "Tips for Renters with Pets". It would be great if, as a Canine Good Citizen, Strummer were allowed to accompany her responsible owner in Somerville's parks. And it would be great if there were safe and legal areas in Somerville where Canine Good Citizens could enjoy off-leash recreation under the supervision of their responsible owners.

¹You'd think Malden, the home of Canine University, would be a great place to be a dog, but Malden is considering breed-specific legislation, that would require owners of "pit bulls, rottweilers, chows, Doberman pinchers, shar peis and [wolf] mixed breeds, or any other dog whose behavior endangers a person's welfare . . . to apply for a special permit costing $100 and keep the animal leashed and muzzled whenever it leaves their property" (via Canine University News, November 2004). Of course it makes sense to hold owners of dogs "whose behavior endangers a person's welfare" accountable; it is the part of the legislation that targets dogs on the the basis of breed rather than behavior that is flawed. Did you know that the American Kennel Club does not recognize the pit bull as a breed? The AKC does recognize the American Staffordshire Terrier, as well as the Bull Terrier and the Staffordshire Bull Terrier. The United Kennel Club, on the other hand, recognizes the American Pit Bull Terrier, as well as the Bull Terrier and the Staffordshire Bull Terrier, but the UKC does not recognize the American Staffordshire Terrier.

Safety of Public Open Spaces

A letter printed in the Globe today, in response to the latest electrocutions of dogs in Boston, points to the scope of the problems that endanger us and our pets in public spaces ("NStar is only part of problem"). Monica Ponce de Leon, Associate Professor of Architecture at Harvard University explains that there are no safety standards regulating construction work in public open spaces comparable to the safety standards to which workers are held accountable in the construction of buildings.

We have safety mechanisms that protect the public from faulty work in the construction of buildings; not so for the construction of our streets. When we build a home, a business, or even a public building, electricians must be certified and comply with drawings designed by engineers. Moreover, their work is reviewed by Inspectional Services before completion and the spaces can be occupied. Not so in our public spaces.

Ponce de Leon commends Boston City Councilor and mayoral candidate, Maura Hennigan, for introducing a bill that addresses these issues.

Here in Somerville, Aldermen Dennis Sullivan (At Large) and Robert Trane (Ward 7) recently submitted an order

that the Superintendent of Lights and Lines immediately survey all roadways for possible electrical shocks to pedestrians or animals, and work with the utility to immediately rectify any problems (Agenda for the Board of Aldermen Meeting, March 10, 2005).

With all due respect to Aldermen Sullivan and Trane (and I do respect them) for their initiative, if the claims made in the letter in today's Globe are true for Somerville, and there are no standards in place to insure that future work is completed with regard to public safety, the risk to residents and our pets may not be mitigated by surveying and rectifying existing problems.

If these claims are true, I'm going to think twice whenever I have to cross a bridge. -Canis Major

Mount Misery Organization

In the past year that Strummer has been a member of my family I've taken her to a lot of places I'd never before been: The Middlesex Fells, Fresh Pond Reservation, the Arnold Arboretum, Cat Rock, Wingaersheek Beach, Singing Beach. We visit new (to us) dog-friendly places as I learn of them and return to our favorites regularly.

Though it gets "three paws up" from the Dog Lover's Companion to Boston, we have never been to Mount Misery. I hope we haven't missed our chance.

This spring new regulations were approved relating to dogs at Mount Misery: "effective Monday, April 4, all dogs at Mt. Misery and the neighboring fields will be required to be on a leash at all times. In addition, dog walkers will be required to remove all feces deposited by their dogs in this area" ("New regs proposed for Mount Misery," the Lincoln Journal, March 10, 2005, via the Mt. Misery Organization website).

Note: The majority of the articles and letters that have been printed in the Lincoln Journal with regard to these regulations are no longer available on the Journal's website, but they have been archived by Lincoln dog owner, Dick McWalter on the Mt. Misery Organization's news page. In addition to the Mt. Misery Organization another group, Friends of Mt. Misery, has also formed to faciltate communication between people who enjoy Mount Misery and the stewards appointed by the Town.

Mount Misery comprises "more than 200 acres of woods, trails and agricultural fields bounded by Route 117, Route 126 and the Sudbury River in Lincoln" ("New dog regs at Mt. Misery," March 24, 2005).

Mary Lincoln, Chairperson of the Lincoln Conservation Commission, explains:

the Mt. Misery lands were purchased with state and federal funds as well as local funds. Lands purchased with public funds must be open to all persons in the Commonwealth for passive recreation. However, the commission is still the entity responsible for the stewardship of these lands and as such may limit use or limit access as necessary to protect the land and the ecosystem it supports, so long as we do not discriminate or give priority to our own residents ("Commentary: Can co-existence be achieved?," April 21, 2005).

In response to the organization of a local dog owners, the Commission postponed the implemation of the regulations until after a public hearing could be held to discuss them ("Leash rule postponed," April 7, 2005).

"More than 100 residents of Lincoln and of surrounding towns filled the Hartwell multipurpose room April 27 for the hearing. . . . A follow-up meeting, at which commissioners are scheduled to make a decision on the regulations, is scheduled for 7:30 p.m. Wednesday, May 18" ("Dog regs disputed," May 5, 2005).

I am very encouraged that the townspeople of Lincoln and the Lincoln Conservation Commission are cooperating to find a solution that "will protect the land and the ecosystem it supports" and ensure that Mount Misery continues to serve the many and diverse needs of "all persons in the Commonwealth for passive recreation."

Responsible dog owners have ten good reasons to clean up after our dogs every time. We appreciate the courtesy of mutt mitts afforded at some dog-friendly places, and we find the amenity of adequate trash receptacles preferable to "carry away" policies.

We also support leash laws. In a perfect society we would be able to allow our dogs off-leash: Responsible dog owners understand that, even off-leash, dogs have no more right to "run free" than people do. After all, people stay to the right when we walk on sidewalks, we look both ways before crossing the street, and we do not walk in our neighbors' flowerbeds. Even if I could keep Strummer in a perfect heel every day when we walk along Somerville's streets, leash laws protect us from the owners of other dogs who cannot.

Like our dogs, society is not perfect. We need leash laws, and that is why we also need options for off-leash recreation. (Analogously, we seem to need laws against playing ball on streets [City Ordinance 12-13], which is why we also need ball parks.) Our dogs need to socialize with other dogs and with people. A properly socialized dog does not bark or lunge at other dogs. Moreover, a properly socialized dog can easily be trained to walk appropriately on a leash. And, a tired dog is a good dog. Local options for off-leash recreation benefit every community in the Commonwealth.

Vaccinations and a dog's life

I just learned about dog-trainer Nancy Freedman-Smith's blog, "A Dog's Life." The Canine University e-mail newsletter refered to Freedman-Smith's recent post, "No vaccines for us this year." Friedman-Smith advises pet owners to request that our veterinarians, before administering annual vaccinations, perform a titer to determine if our pet already has adequate levels of antibodies in her blood to protect her from disease. Good advice.

Friedman-Smith also discusses the advocacy work of Kris Christine to pass legislation requiring more detailed disclosure on animal vaccinations in Maine.

You can learn more about pet vaccine legislation tonight on the 11:00 news. In an e-mail printed in the CU newsletter I received this morning, Christine writes,

News about the pet vaccine issue is spreading rapidly and getting more national coverage. NBC's Boston station, WHDH-7 News, sent journalist Christina Mattingly and her cameraman to Alna to interview us as part of a pet vaccine story they are running Wednesday night at 11:00 p.m., May 18th.

Sharing Open Space in New York City

via e-mail

In the years that dogs have been allowed to run free in [New York] city parks, dog bites have decreased 90 percent

according to an op-ed piece in the New York Times today by Jonathan Safran Foer, "My Life as a Dog."

Whether or not the source is reliable is a good question: Foer intimates that his own dog, George, who "occasionally tries to eat [his] son" is one of the culprits keeping the decrease in dog bites in New York City from achieving one hundred percent.

Foer may not be a responsible dog owner, but he does have something worthwhile to say about the place of pet ownership in human communities. Pet ownership, Foer understands, is an inter-species relationship. From his relationship with his dog he has learned that "compromise is necessary to share space with other beings"— a lesson that applies not only in the myriad relationships individuals may have with one another, but also in relationships among groups and organizations of all kinds.

It's well and fine that Foer advocates "sharing our space with other living things," but the the off-leash hours policy in NYC parks is not about humans sharing public open space with dogs: It's about neighbors sharing space with each other; it's about park users sharing space with each other. People who enjoy off-leash recreation live in communities with people who do not like dogs. Public open space must accommodate park users who enjoy off-leash recreation as well as park users who enjoy basketball, frisbee, reading and soccer.

Yes, off-leash recreation is good for dogs. Off-leash recreation provides much needed opportunities for socialization and exercise, and dogs that are well socialized and that get enough exercise are better pets and better neighbors. They are less likely to develop inappropriate and destructive habits like barking, chewing, digging, lunging and jumping-up on people.

Off-leash recreation is good for humans, too. It provides an incentive for people to get out in the fresh air and to meet other people in the community who share similar interests.

Here in Somerville, MA, opportunities for off-leash recreation are provided in designated off-leash recreational areas according to posted rules. We have one OLRA, which opened almost eight months ago—the fully fenced-in OLRA at Nunziato Field. For the time being, one quarter-acre of open space must serve the 27,000+ people who live with dogs in Somerville. In New York City, overuse of the City's 40+ dog parks is mitigated by the Offleash Courtesy Hour policy: In public parks without designated areas for off-leash recreation dogs are allowed off-leash from 9 pm to 9 am.

The New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene Board of Health votes on December 5, 2006 whether to adopt amendments that will clarify the authority of the Parks Commissioner under the Health Code to allow dogs off the leash in City parks.

Off-leash Hours in NYC Parks codified

The New York Council of Dog Owner Groups (NYCdog) cheers the unanimous vote of the NYC Health Board to amend Section 161.05 of the City Health Code, commonly known at the "Leash Law," granting the NYC Parks Commissioner explicit authority to permit off-leash recreation in the New York City parks at certain locations and at certain times.