Reasons to Revise the MBW Leash Law
1. Birds/Habitat - In 2018 the City commissioned an ecological study of MBW. In the study the forestry consultant included passages baselessly indicating that the presence of off-leash dogs “harmed” shrubs, undergrowth and other flora in the woods. This study, along with documentation of dog behavioral incidents were presented at the Parks Commission meetings in the spring and summer of 2019 to support the new “dogs on leash” proposal. In addition, the Parks Department discussed their belief that dogs off leash were in contradiction to the original 1946 Deed (for refutation of this argument, please read about Mayor Baxter's intentions here). The actual report from the ecological study, however, did not result in such a drastic proposal, Instead, it stated the following:
“Recreational use. Use trail cameras or other monitoring methods for fixed periods of time to quantify and describe recreation use and evaluate the potential impact of unleashed dogs on wildlife.”
FoMBW offered the following comments to the proposal:
1Birds: The City’s $6,200 MBW management report claims that bird habitat is being negatively impacted by off-leash dogs. These statements, however, were not supported by any observations or scientific evidence. Instead, the report states that 81% of the Woods acreage itself is unsuitable for bird nesting/foraging due to the forest canopy that cuts off sunlight to the forest floor. The supporting Audubon literature for" Managing Bird Habitats in Forest Settings" does not include any discussion of the impact of dogs. Furthermore, there are no historical reports of bird habitat degradation, even given the neglected state BW was in from the 1950’s through the 1980’s.
We continue to wonder how many ground-nesting birds reside in or migrate to Baxter woods? There is a diverse wildlife population, including many species that directly prey on birds and bird eggs (e.g., raccoons, foxes, and squirrels). If anything, the presence of dogs may be a deterrent to these known bird predators.
One of the alternatives suggested for off-leash dogs, the trails behind Evergreen Cemetery, is a widely known bird-watching site; if a declining bird population is the major rationale for leashing dogs, why would off-leash dogs be redirected to Evergreen? If dogs disturb ground-nesting and ground-feeding birds, why disrupt a known habitat only to put resources into establishing a new, less hospitable, habitat? Birds will not only have to survive the raccoon and fox populations but will soon be confronted with the noise and light pollution associated with the development of the field, as the first condominiums to be developed are located directly adjacent to the newly proposed bird sanctuary.
We believe that the proposed Bird Habitat Restoration Area (BRHA) violates the 1946 deed, as it would preclude pedestrian access within MBW. In addition, the BHRA is to be located along Motherhouse fence-line area, an area which will be heavily impacted by noise and light pollution, known factors in the declining bird population (see here for just one example of a growing literature on this topic).**
**see our "What About the Birds" response, one section of a 15-page document submitting to the City
We counter the city’s study by sharing what is perhaps the definitive study on the impacts off-leash dogs have on forests or woodland areas: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/227186702_Effects_of_dog_leash_laws_and_habitat_type_on_avian_and_small_mammal_communities_in_urban_parks
This study shows off-leash dogs have no negative impact acts to forest birds or forest habitats, and that the presence of dogs in the woods may be beneficial to northern forest bird populations.
2. Enforcement: Since April 2021 city park rangers, acting as supposed “Constables” have issued perhaps hundreds of civil summons to off-leash dog walkers in MBW. See the main page for FoMBW President Marc Lesperance’s court cases challenging the efficacy of the city’s enforcement activities.
3. Dog Behavioral Incidents: As shown in the Park Department's records, over a period of seven years, there were relatively few documented cases concerning dog aggression incidents. Specifically, the records show 16 complaints from 12 people, four of whom are directly connected to the Parks Commission (e.g., they did not come from the public). Parks Department staff did refer to verbal complaints it supposedly received, but as these were anecdotal they were not documented or tracked. Timely communications in 2020 and 2021 with the police department and Animal Control Officer revealed no reports of unruly dogs or any dog incidents in MBW.
4. Alternative Off-Leash Areas: Baxter Woods is primarily a destination for local residents. It is not a “dog park” such as Quarry Run or Valley Street, designated dog parks, that are not viable options for many due to numerous negative experiences, travel distance given time restrictions, accessibility etc. In addition, these alternatives have inadequate parking to accommodate current users of MBW; this is true of both Canco Road and Evergreen cemetery trails, with access being an additional issue at Evergreen. Many of these alternative sites are not accessible to the elderly or disabled walkers due to roots and other obstacles.
5. Dog waste: Lack of picking up has been a problem in Baxter woods as it is elsewhere and at dog areas in most cities. Increasing dog ownership, especially during the pandemic, plus the rising population of Portland has lead to more people and dogs in MBW. The local press had an article about Hinckley Park in South Portland, ME (3/22/19) discussing this. Their Park ranger had planted 300 flags to encourage awareness and promote pickup prior to a predicted rain storm. City Staff planted flags in MBW at one point in 2022, but we are unaware if any one was issued a summons for not disposing of their pets waste.
6. Process: The Parks Department did not hold any public meetings or conduct outreach to local stakeholder groups, such as the Deering Center Neighborhood Association or the Responsible Dog Owners of Baxter Woods Facebook group, prior to presenting the proposals. Furthermore, they did not allow an organized group to present at the Parks Commission meetings. We suggest that the proposal should be put on hold in order to allow the FoMBW group more time to organize and address any concerns.
“Recreational use. Use trail cameras or other monitoring methods for fixed periods of time to quantify and describe recreation use and evaluate the potential impact of unleashed dogs on wildlife.”
FoMBW offered the following comments to the proposal:
1Birds: The City’s $6,200 MBW management report claims that bird habitat is being negatively impacted by off-leash dogs. These statements, however, were not supported by any observations or scientific evidence. Instead, the report states that 81% of the Woods acreage itself is unsuitable for bird nesting/foraging due to the forest canopy that cuts off sunlight to the forest floor. The supporting Audubon literature for" Managing Bird Habitats in Forest Settings" does not include any discussion of the impact of dogs. Furthermore, there are no historical reports of bird habitat degradation, even given the neglected state BW was in from the 1950’s through the 1980’s.
We continue to wonder how many ground-nesting birds reside in or migrate to Baxter woods? There is a diverse wildlife population, including many species that directly prey on birds and bird eggs (e.g., raccoons, foxes, and squirrels). If anything, the presence of dogs may be a deterrent to these known bird predators.
One of the alternatives suggested for off-leash dogs, the trails behind Evergreen Cemetery, is a widely known bird-watching site; if a declining bird population is the major rationale for leashing dogs, why would off-leash dogs be redirected to Evergreen? If dogs disturb ground-nesting and ground-feeding birds, why disrupt a known habitat only to put resources into establishing a new, less hospitable, habitat? Birds will not only have to survive the raccoon and fox populations but will soon be confronted with the noise and light pollution associated with the development of the field, as the first condominiums to be developed are located directly adjacent to the newly proposed bird sanctuary.
We believe that the proposed Bird Habitat Restoration Area (BRHA) violates the 1946 deed, as it would preclude pedestrian access within MBW. In addition, the BHRA is to be located along Motherhouse fence-line area, an area which will be heavily impacted by noise and light pollution, known factors in the declining bird population (see here for just one example of a growing literature on this topic).**
**see our "What About the Birds" response, one section of a 15-page document submitting to the City
We counter the city’s study by sharing what is perhaps the definitive study on the impacts off-leash dogs have on forests or woodland areas: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/227186702_Effects_of_dog_leash_laws_and_habitat_type_on_avian_and_small_mammal_communities_in_urban_parks
This study shows off-leash dogs have no negative impact acts to forest birds or forest habitats, and that the presence of dogs in the woods may be beneficial to northern forest bird populations.
2. Enforcement: Since April 2021 city park rangers, acting as supposed “Constables” have issued perhaps hundreds of civil summons to off-leash dog walkers in MBW. See the main page for FoMBW President Marc Lesperance’s court cases challenging the efficacy of the city’s enforcement activities.
3. Dog Behavioral Incidents: As shown in the Park Department's records, over a period of seven years, there were relatively few documented cases concerning dog aggression incidents. Specifically, the records show 16 complaints from 12 people, four of whom are directly connected to the Parks Commission (e.g., they did not come from the public). Parks Department staff did refer to verbal complaints it supposedly received, but as these were anecdotal they were not documented or tracked. Timely communications in 2020 and 2021 with the police department and Animal Control Officer revealed no reports of unruly dogs or any dog incidents in MBW.
4. Alternative Off-Leash Areas: Baxter Woods is primarily a destination for local residents. It is not a “dog park” such as Quarry Run or Valley Street, designated dog parks, that are not viable options for many due to numerous negative experiences, travel distance given time restrictions, accessibility etc. In addition, these alternatives have inadequate parking to accommodate current users of MBW; this is true of both Canco Road and Evergreen cemetery trails, with access being an additional issue at Evergreen. Many of these alternative sites are not accessible to the elderly or disabled walkers due to roots and other obstacles.
5. Dog waste: Lack of picking up has been a problem in Baxter woods as it is elsewhere and at dog areas in most cities. Increasing dog ownership, especially during the pandemic, plus the rising population of Portland has lead to more people and dogs in MBW. The local press had an article about Hinckley Park in South Portland, ME (3/22/19) discussing this. Their Park ranger had planted 300 flags to encourage awareness and promote pickup prior to a predicted rain storm. City Staff planted flags in MBW at one point in 2022, but we are unaware if any one was issued a summons for not disposing of their pets waste.
6. Process: The Parks Department did not hold any public meetings or conduct outreach to local stakeholder groups, such as the Deering Center Neighborhood Association or the Responsible Dog Owners of Baxter Woods Facebook group, prior to presenting the proposals. Furthermore, they did not allow an organized group to present at the Parks Commission meetings. We suggest that the proposal should be put on hold in order to allow the FoMBW group more time to organize and address any concerns.
- CONTINUE to read "Potential Social and Health Consequences of Changing the Leash Law"
|
|