The Brooklyn Bridge

Over at Gowanuslounge.com, a proposal to allow off-leash dogs at Red Hook’s Coffey Park:

While this has many strong Red Hook supporters, there are some Red Hookers who are reluctant about the proposal, at least partly because they (we) are so used to the guard dogs and attack dogs in Red Hook and of course Red Hook’s erstwhile feral dogs. Obviously attack dogs, fighting dogs, feral dogs, etc., will not be
in the park whether the proposal succeeds or not — people who own guards dogs or run dog fighting rings do not walk their dogs in parks, off-leash or otherwise.

Perhaps the author of this delicious bit of wishful thinking would like to explain WHY this is so "obvious", or how anyone who uses a city park can be assured that each NYC dog owner who unleashes his or her pet in a public space is a responsible dog owner. If she can pull that off, we’ve got a bridge we need her to help sell.

Prospect Park Signs Posted Stating the Law; Off-Leashers Don't Like It

From yesterday's Brooklyn Paper:

New “No dogs” signs in Prospect Park have unleashed a fury from dog owners who say park officials are arbitrarily enforcing regulations and unfairly targeting their four-legged friends.

The bright blue signs showed up on paths leading to the Long Meadow a few weeks ago, and remind dog walkers that their pets are not allowed on the grass — even on a leash — except during the designated off-leash hours.

The signs mention a $100 fine.

Park Sloper Seth Kamil spoke for many of his fellow dog owners when he suggested that the signs wrongly target canine aficionados while ignoring a bigger problem than the few dog lovers who walk their pets across the Long Meadow.

“The signs are fine, but what angers me is the inconsistent enforcement of the rules and policies,” said Kamil, who owns the Big Onion Walking Tour company. “[Park cops] strictly enforce dog rules, but they turn a blind eye to everything else that takes place in the park.”

Read the rest the rest, including a statement by a Prospect Park Alliance that until now there’s been a “grace period” in effect, but that the cops were now going to give tickets. Actually, a quick glance at the picture of the sign in the paper shows that the reporter has it wrong—it says that dogs aren’t allowed on the ballfields at all, at any time, not the whole Long Meadow outside dog hours. That is the law. As we’ve reported, the loose dog aficionados run their dogs, unleashed, on the ballfields (and, for that matter in the woods, where they’re never allowed), ignoring the law. So, as we’ve said time and time again, the unleashed lobby doesn’t feel itself bound by the law. They want the whole park, at all times. And while it’s nice to hear that the cops are supposedly going to ticket the scofflaws, we have good reason to be skeptical.

* * *

Tuesday, 4:25 P.M.: 3 unleashed dogs on the Nethermead. 4:35 P.M., 1 unleashed dog on the east Lullwater path. All the owners were white.

Fort Tilden

From our south Brooklyn correspondent: at Fort Tilden today from 9-12 A.M., I saw three dogs. One was on a leash. One other was unleashed on the beach, followed by a white female. The third was unleashed on one of the side paths in the woods, followed by a white couple.

Prospect Park and Park Slope Miscellany

From our correspondent:

I entered Prospect Park at around 9.30 this morning (Saturday). Five minutes later, at the end of the long meadow near GAP, I was looking at some juncos on the grass when a small off leash rat dog came running up to my pit bull. The white lady owner chased after it. I reminded her that the rules were for the dog's safety and that her cute little cuddly dog could have gotten chomped if my pit bull was not a nice one.

In the corner lawn near the midwood and ravine, this joker was throwing toys for his off leash cocker spaniels. (see attachment) the dogs came running up to me and my pit bull. I was not in the mood to make a detour just to make it easier for this moron. I told him this wasn't the time or place for off leash and he should get up earlier. He said, "WHO CARES? WHO CARES??? WE'RE JUST HAVING FUN! YOU ARE MISERABLE! YOU ARE NOT HAPPY! WE ARE HAPPY!"

He got louder and angrier the further away I walked from him. He was simply too stupid for me to point out to him the likely result of a pitbull vs cocker tag team match.

I would be miserable indeed if I had vet bills to contend with because some jackass scofflaw's loose dogs ran up to us and started a fight with my leashed dog. Fights erupt very quickly and you can't always prevent them, even if you are standing next to your dog.

At the rock bridge overlooking the bridle path, I looked down to see another cocker spaniel gamboling far ahead of its owner--.off-leash. On the bridle path. Nice. The owner was far behind, yapping at a cell phone, I did not stay to get a good look at them, and it was too dark for a picture.

Finally, at the Nethermead, two owners were running four large sheepdogs, including two Puli like beasts, off leash in the shady area near the lullwater fence. (see attached pic)

There was not a PEP officer or vehicle in sight during the four hours I was at the park. Who cares, indeed.

* * * *
From an article in today's New York Times about the Ocean Parkway mall:

"We come here every day," said Muhammad Irfan, 24, who sat with a Pakistani friend. They share space on the parkway with their neighbors: Russian grandmothers eating sunflower seeds, Orthodox Jews strolling to synagogues, recent arrivals from Park Slope walking their dogs.

Not that people in the neighborhood didn't have dogs before the Park Slopers arrived. But that about sums up the fundamental conflict of values we've been talking about. It also explains why for the last several weeks, we have regularly been seeing unleashed on the sidewalks in this neighborhood, accompanied by their white owners. Incidentally, many of the neighborhood's long-time residents are black.

The People Fight Back in Boston; L.I . Home Invasion

In Boston (as in New York) it's dog owners vs. "everybody else":

City Councilor William Linehan, who represents several neighborhoods with growing dog populations, like the South End and South Boston, says the problem of dogs running free in city parks has gotten out of hand lately as dog owners, with little fear of punishment, have become emboldened to flout leash laws.

Linehan has called for a public hearing to open dialogue between the groups and to discuss whether the city needs to toughen up penalties for violating leash and pooper-scooper regulations, step up enforcement, and look at the possibility of creating more dog-friendly areas so the pets and their owners have somewhere to go. The meeting has been slated for Oct. 28 at 6 p.m. in the Ianella Chamber at City Hall.

"We want to try and change the culture of dog owners," said Linehan. "We need to cohabitate, but there are still existing rules."

An avid runner, Linehan said he always sees dogs running around off-leash each morning on Carson Beach, forcing him to make a split-second judgment about whether he'll be attacked.

"It's really the dog owners at fault. I have nothing against dogs," said Linehan.

To those who say their dogs need to socialize and the exercise they receive off-leash, he says, "I know people are passionate about their animals, but they're property."

The only difference seems to be that in Boston, citizens are willing to do something about unleashed dogs in the parks instead of caving to the dog owners.

* * * *

According to Newsday, a brave grey squirrel invaded a home in Long Island and bit the family dog. Unfortunately, the squirrel was euthanized: we were going to offer to release it in Prospect Park.

Dog Waste Transfer Stations; PEP for Hire

About a week ago, green dog waste disposal boxes set on pedestals suddenly appeared at each of the “designated areas” in Prospect Park, courtesy of FIDO. Within a few days, though, these dog waste transfer stations—about as desirable for anybody but dog owners as any other waste transfer stations—were gone. Our DOPR informants can’t get information; the higher-ups aren’t talking.

* * * *
We have figures—which we’ll publish soon—showing that PEP writes virtually no tickets for unleashed dogs in the outer boroughs, but apparently a fair number in Manhattan. We now see one reason why. According to Saturday’s Daily News, private groups that run Battery Park City and Hudson River Park pay the DOPR for PEP officers. But that doesn’t leave very many anywhere else:

Figures obtained by the Daily News show that 38 PEP officers are contracted to work at Hudson River Park. By comparison, only six PEP officers and four supervisors patrol all 4,000 acres of Brooklyn's parkland. In the Bronx, six PEP officers and five supervisors are assigned to patrol 6,900 acres. In Staten Island, there are only three PEP officers and three supervisors assigned to more than 7,000 acres of parkland. The numbers for Queens' 7,000 acres are four PEP officers and three supervisors.

* * * *

Today around 5:30 P.M. , at least five unleashed dogs were rambling around the Nethermead. We’ll post pictures when we can download them from our cellphone.

UPDATE: The pictures are at the top.

* * *

And finally, a report that we missed of a dogfight--between owners--last June at the Manhattan Beach dog run.

Two men rumbled at a Brooklyn dog run in a fight over their beloved pooches - ending when one whipped a water bottle into the other's face, breaking his nose, cops said yesterday.

Mrs. Helmsley's Trust; S.I. Pit Bull Update; Bulldogs in Phoenix

In n extension of the pet-centric indulgence that leads to off-leash policies in city parks at the expense other park users, The New Yorker reports on the trust for Leona Helmsley’s dog in Rich Bitch: The Legal Battle Over Trust Funds For Pets, by Jeffrey Toobin:

The twelve-million-dollar trust for the dog is bigger than any other single bequest in the will. On the whole, the will reflects contempt for humanity as much as love of dogs.

Under the law, certainly, it was Helmsley’s right to divvy up her money any way she wanted. And she is not the first wealthy person to use a will to show a preference for dogs over humans. ...

Is it right to give so much money to a dog—or to dogs generally? And what is the limit of such dispensations to pets? Will there come a time when dogs can sue for a new guardian—or to avoid being put to sleep? One philosopher draws a distinction between the needs of Trouble and those of dogs as a whole. Helmsley “did a disservice to the people in the dog world and to dogs generally by leaving such an enormous amount of money for her own dog,” Jeff McMahan, who teaches philosophy at Rutgers University, said. “To give even two million dollars to a single little dog is like setting the money on fire in front of a group of poor people. To bestow that amount of money is contemptuous of the poor, and that may be one reason she did it.

* * * *

In our August 22 post, we predicted that the Staten Island DA would get have the owners of the pit bulls who killed Henry Piotrowski indicted for second degree murder, and then plea-bargain the charges down. Yesterday’s Staten Island Advance reports that charges have indeed been upgraded from assault, but only to second degree manslaughter.

Under § 125.15 of New York’s penal law, a person is guilty of manslaughter in the second degree when (among other things) he “recklessly causes the death of another person”. Between second degree murder and second degree manslaughter, there are lots of other possible charges including first degree manslaughter and first and second degree aggravated manslaughter. All but second degree manslaughter are classified as “violent felonies” which, as we read the law, require some minimum sentence. Second degree manslaughter carries a 15-year maximum sentence but no minimum. So even without any plea bargaining, the owners here might never serve time. It does not appear that the DA is taking this case all that seriously.

* * * *

And here is a story about a city worker in Phoenix who was attacked and badly injured by two escaped American bulldogs (not pit bulls). A Phoenix police spokesman said that “it is unlikely the dog owners will face criminal charges.” One wonders whether the owner would have taken greater care that his dogs not escape if, as we have proposed, an owner of an unleashed dog that damaged people or property were criminally liable just as if the owner had done the damage himself.