Dog regs disputed
By Cheryl Lecesse
Thursday, May 5, 2005
Placing barrels and plastic bag dispensers at the two ends of Mt. Misery, designating off-leash trails and placing signs reminding people of dog etiquette were some of the ideas discussed at a marathon meeting on dog regulations at Mt. Misery.
After the three and a half hour session, however, the Conservation Commission was not able to come to a conclusion on what leash regulations to impose at the site, off Route 117. 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. The location was not definite as of press time.
More than 100 residents of Lincoln and of surrounding towns filled the Hartwell multipurpose room April 27 for the hearing. The public meeting is the result of a strong response against approved regulations that would require all dogs to be on leashes while at Mt. Misery and would require dog walkers to remove their pets' feces from the property.
The commission announced these new regulations for Mt. Misery, a 200-plus acre conservation trail system that includes agricultural fields, man-made ponds and a section of the Sudbury River, in March, and held a public hearing for residents and Mt. Misery users to comment on them. The commission argues unleashed dogs are degredating the land off the trail and at waters' edges on the property. Commissioners also said many have complained about bad experiences with dogs on the property, and will not go back.
"We think Mt. Misery should serve the entire public and this includes people afraid of dogs," said commissioner Jim Meadors.
Since, many have written letters to the commission against the regulations, and Mt. Misery users organized, creating the Web site www.mtmisery.org.
At Town Meeting April 2, commission Chairman Mary Lincoln announced the regulations' implementation would be postponed until after a public hearing, at which proposed suggestions to modify the regulations would be discussed.
"The decision to implement regulations at Mt. Misery was not made hastily or arbitrarily," Lincoln said.
At the start of the hearing, Lincoln explained how the meeting would flow, and set ground rules for those who wished to speak. The commission took up specific topics of regarding Mt. Misery to review one at a time, including dog feces, the agricultural fields, and the woods and ponds.
Lincoln also explained the process of developing and implementing regulations, saying that although some have publicly argued the commission did not follow bylaws requiring public hearings, there is no requirement to hold a public hearing before issuing regulations.
"The public has been far more involved in the discussion of Mt. Misery regulations than in any other case," Lincoln said.
Dog feces
Commissioners and those in attendance grappled with the question of whether to provide plastic bags and barrels to dispose of dog feces for more than an hour. In the end, commissioners were open to the idea of placing at least one barrel on the property, in the parking lot, and facilitating a way for users to share plastic bags, both taking them if they need them, or donating them if they have extras. Commissioner Peter Von Mertens said he would like to see a barrel, picked up weekly by BFI, put back in the parking lot.
"You need to facilitate a way for people to do this," said Peter Conrad of Old Sudbury Road.
"Most every public land provides barrels," said Paddy Marcotte of Arlington.
"I think the poop is clearly a nuisance issue," said Neal Maxymillian of Long Meadow Road. "I think it's reasonable to expect people to carry it out on their own."
Many residents said they feel dog feces should be picked up if on the trails, but not if it's done in the woods.
Colleen Katsuki of Concord Road, who is active in Walden Keeping Track, said leaving dog feces off the trails limits other wildlife.
"For any canine a poop is a giant sign saying this is my property," Katsuki said. "That's going to limit any wild canine use through the area."
Peter Guldberg of Old Concord Road, an abutter to Mt. Misery, said he is against regulations requiring people to pick up their dogs' feces.
"You're running around with leashes and plastic bags," he said. "This is ridiculous."
Guldberg added, "Frankly I've never ever noticed dog poop on the trail."
The fields
Marking on the trail where the agricultural fields begin and requiring dogs to be on leash when using trails through the fields were some of the suggestions brought up at the meeting.
During the meeting, local farmer Ray Adamson of Codman Road, who uses protected agricultural fields at Mt. Misery as hayfields, said he has had equipment damaged because he runs over sticks and toys people used to play with their dogs in the fields. He said overuse near the fields also knocks down his hay, making it almost impossible to mow at the end of the season.
"Lots of people don't know they're about to enter an agricultural area," said Moira Donnell of Old Concord Road, whose husband farms on some of the land, and many in attendance agreed.
Cheryl Eisner of Wayland suggested the regulations keep dogs from entering from Old Concord Road, where the fields are located.
"I think the leash regulation would address that," Donnell said.
Guldberg said a solution to the fields dilemma would be to ban parking for Mt. Misery on Old Concord Road. Barbara Peskin of South Great Road said the dog etiquette brochure the commission published requests dogs be leashed in the fields during the growing season.
"Dogs shouldn't be running in agricultural fields," said Crickett Redmond of Boyce Farm Road.
Attendees also suggested the leash requirement in the fields be seasonal, and the farmers should pick the dates. Commissioners asked if word of mouth or a townwide mailing about the agricultural fields would work, but many in the audience disagreed with the method.
"Education efforts have to be on site and they have to be conspicuous," said Bernie McHugh of Old Concord Road, saying many of Mt. Misery's users are not Lincoln residents.
The ponds and the woods
Although the commission said it has received many letters offering suggestions to amend the regulations, Mt. Misery users in attendance offered many other suggestions, including allowing dogs to walk off leash, leashing dogs by the ponds, and allowing dogs to be under control using an electric collar.
Commissioners suggested a designated area within the trail system at which dogs would be allowed off leash, but many residents disagreed, saying it would create confusion.
"I just think that this is going to be really hard to enforce," Peskin said.
Peskin suggested dogs be allowed to swim in the first pond, closest to the parking lot.
"It's also a social area for people," she said.
Maxymillian suggested more signage and encouraged self-policing.
Others suggested the commission ask surrounding towns what they have done.
Those in attendance asked that they be given another chance to follow the dog-walking etiquette suggestions in a brochure the committee approved in 2001. Many at the meeting said they had not seen the brochure before.
During the discussion, Nancy Bryant of Lexington submitted photographs of areas of Mt. Misery, saying as a biologist, she does not see proof of degredation to the land.
"None of this has been proven," she said. "There is no data that says there is X damage."
Bryant's comments stirred others to ask if more studies could be done before regulations are put into place.
"It just seems a little weird, we're coming up with solutions when we don't fully understand the problem," said Harold Naparst of Lexington.
2 | |
|
