Look.

Here is what this WHOLE issue was about:

the 5 or 6 curmudgeonly "Leaders" (I use that term VERY loosely) of the JPCA wanting TOTAL control over their park.

They had benches removed years back to keep out the immigrant soccer players

Now, they want the dogs out.

Why?

CONTROL and Proprty Values.

The JPCA and Prospect Park 'Advocate' (another term used VERY Loosely) have done nothing but LIE time and time again. They MAY have set a record:

1. Their ONleash petition was a fraud committed against the people of NYC. By who? Not the off leash advocates, as they FALSELY claim, but these 'leaders' in JPCA and the Prospect Park Advocate. Why haven't they done an investigation to see WHO actually committed the fraud by contacting ipetition.com. The webpage administrators can give them the IP of where these fraudulent downloads came from. Why, you ask? Because it'd be self incriminating. Simple as that.

2. On the JPCA webpage, I think the 'p' stands for 'Propaganda', they claim that Anti-Off Leash folks were booed and hissed by Pro Off leash groups. BULL! The only booing in that room was from some crazy olde lady who was anti-off leash. She was right in front of me. The Off Leash Advocates were ABSOLUTELY courteous. The media was there, they would totally disagree with JPCA's comments on our decorum. What a COMPLETE joke JPCA is.

3. The JPCA continues to embellish stories of dog 'incidents' in their park. They lie to get attention, they exaggerate to get people to read their webpage, what is scary is that SOME people believe them. Yellow (urine yellow) Journalism @ it's worst.

4. The JPCA wasted $10K fighting this losing cause. This could have been spent building a fenced in dog run in the park. No, that'd be too easy for these genuises. It's THEIR way or the highway.

Look, we all know the truth, off leash works, despite what this bunch of insane people WANT you to believe.

A NYS judge decided in our favor

The NYC Health Dept decided in our favor

The Parks Dept decided in our favor

Get over it, move on.

Get a hobby. Volunteer @ the local animal shelter.

Amazing that we ALL had to waste so much time on this.

Woof

dont hate the dog... hate the stupid, selfish dog owners

i also think it should be the responsibility of the owners to know whether or not their dog is aggressive, i mean yes a pit bull or a german shepard can be intimidating but if they are well trained and well socialized, aggressiveness would not occur. therefore the owners need to be responsible enough to know that their dogs cannot be off leash if they have a tendency to be aggressive.

first of all, what normal person would be wandering around the park after 9pm? the time was set for dog owners because they figured most NORMAL people would NOT be in a park after dark, unless you are up to no good. and the same with people who go to the parks at 6am, shouldn't you be getting ready for work? not wandering around the park, unless you exercise in the morning. in which case you are running anyways, if a dog does chase you, the possibility of that is slim, just keep running faster. LoL

Number [29]. My Dear BlogBoy, I can recognize your nasty writing stlye anywhere, even under a new assumed handle. Keep up your vitrol, it makes you seem slightly more noble in defeat than you actually are.

I suppose the 13,000+ public comments to the Health Board were from all those very privledged and powerful people you speak of. And the paultry 202 public comments against off-leash policy were from the real voice of the people. Too bad all those people you claim to say don't want off-leash in the park are so underprivledged and unpowerful that they couldn't afford to write a letter or email to the Health Board during the public comment period. Puleeze.

This was a done deal. Some very privileged and powerful people (including Parks Dept head honchos) want to continue using Prospect Park and Central Park as their personal dog toilets. Their precious child-substitute dogs are much more important to the powers that be than the less wealthy folks who just want to use the park without fear and anxiety.

I like the Boulder CO enforcement idea. Testing dogs on recall would rapidly empty Prospect Park on a typical Saturday morning before 9 am.

Isn't that a cute picture of the kid?

Also agree with Alexia. We had dogs growing up when I was a kid, and I like dogs a lot, but I *don't* like the variables involved when an unleashed canine comes screaming up towards me, because I can't possibly know anything about its temperament, nor its intent. And I've decided I should be allowed to establish a safety zone around me, past which a charging dog is eligible to catch my best Garo Yepremian aimed right at its choppers or ribcage. I'm not getting my ass bitten because of someone *else's* "right" to keep a pet in a 200 sq. foot studio.

I agree with Alexia. My dog and I were attacked several times by an off-leash dog (always the same one) in a city park. The park is huge, and the owner, who always let his uncontrolled German Shepard run free, was never caught by the few rangers or park police who patrol it.

My sister lived in Boulder, CO, for years, and told me about the off-leash policy there. They have large open spaces which allow for off-leash dogs, but they must be under voice control. Animal control officers would regularly patrol the area and ask people which dog was theirs, and then say, "okay, call him." If the dog didn't come running, the owner would get a citation. If NYC had that kind of enforcement, then I could get behind the off-leash hours.

I've been bitten by a dog that was off-leash, and I become very anxious when I see owners just carrying the leash while their dog runs the street in front of them. Sometimes I cannot avoid being in a public park before 9 (group runs, etc.) so I keep my eye out for unleashed dogs.

I don't think it's safe. I'd like to see more and larger dog runs. When a person chooses to buy a dog as a companion, it's that person's responsibility to determine if they can give the dog all it needs to be happy and healthy. However, that person does not have the right to infringe on his fellow man's safety and sense of security. If you want to have a dog and you want him to run free, use a dog run or move somewhere with a yard. I know the idea of doing something you don't like (or not doing every little thing you want to do) just because you are a member of a society is abhorrent to most Americans, but remember: It's not all about you.

www.NYCoffleash.com

NO ADDITIONAL RISK WITH CHANGES TO HEALTH CODE:

After review of the public comments, and for the same reasons stated in the original Statement of Basis and Purpose, and because the off leash policy has been in effect for approximately 20 years, the Department has no reason to believe that there will be any increased risk to public health as a result of the Health Code change at this time.

Guess somebody's prescription ran out. Dude, presenting every factoid known about dogs off leashes isn't advancing an argument or adding to the discussion.

TWENTY YEARS OF SUCCESS: Lastly, courtesy hours have been in place for the last twenty (20) years. In fact, leash requirements cannot and do not prevent all incidents of dogs attacking other dogs or people, and animal behavior experts have concluded that there is evidence to suggest that well exercised and socialized dogs are less likely to bite other dogs or people.

With only 44 dog runs in the City, limited off-leash hours and designated park locations provide a reasonable accomodation for all park users - both dog owners and non dog owners.

ENFORCEMENT: Parks has recently hired additional permanent PEP Officers, resulting in a net increase of one hundred and sixty-three (163) new Officers since 2004 and Parks has issued almost ten thousand (10,000) summonses since 2002 for unleashed/out of control dogs.

WHAT ABOUT POOP? Parks currently requires dog owners to clean up after their pets. Specifically, Section 1-04(j)(1) of Parks’ rules states that “[n]o person shall allow any dog in his custody or control to discharge any fecal matter in any park unless he promptly removes and disposes of same…”.

NO PROBLEM WITH POOP AND OFF-LEASH: Indeed, in over twenty years of experience with the “courtesy hours” policy of informally allowing off-leash opportunities in certain parks, there does not appear to be any serious problem regarding the accumulation of dog waste in City parks attributable to unleashed dogs.

Moreover, Parks believes that clearer rules formally allowing off-leash opportunities for dogs, with certain restrictions, will tend to foster greater, rather than less, respect for other Parks rules, including the rules regarding animal waste removal.

Further, since Parks has also recently expanded its PEP Officers ranks, the enforcement potential to address such violations will be much greater.

VETERINARY MEDICAL ASSOCIATION OF NYC SUPPORTS THE LIMITED OFF-LEASH POLICY, and THE BOH AMENDMENTS:

The Veterinary Medical Association of New York City stated that “This interaction [allowing dog to be off leash] would reduce animal anxiety and reduce the propensity for animals to injure people.”

Department of Parks and Recreation has significant experience dealing with issues related to dog owners and the presence of domestic and wild animals in the City’s parks and has found this policy has increased positive uses of parks at less trafficked hours, while not otherwise compromising the safety of other visitors to parks or unduly impacting the natural flora and fauna.

Section 1-04(i) of Parks’ rules prohibits dogs from certain portions of parks, whether leashed or unleashed, at all times, e.g. (1) playgrounds, (2) zoos, (3) beaches, (4) bathing facilities, and (5) ballfields.

NO INCREASE IN LIABILITY: We have considered concerns that the adoption of the proposed amendment might result in City liability. After consultation with the Law Department, we have concluded that the proposed amendment will not result in an increased risk of liability, because it is anticipated that the modifications in Article 161.05 of the Health Code will allow the Department of Parks and Recreation to better define and regulate areas of the parks that will allow dogs off leash. Parks indicates that selected areas in only approximately 300 of the total of 1,833 parks will allow dogs off leash.

Further, codified rules will allow better enforcement by PEP and other entities such as the New York City Police Department.

ENFORCEMENT: Parks, however, does explicitly prohibit dog owners from allowing their animals to be out of control in any park, and an owner allowing his or her dog to attack another dog would be a clear example of an animal being out of control regardless of whether it was leashed or unleashed.

PEP OFFICERS: Park Enforcement Patrol (PEP) Officers may issue violations to owners who are unable to control their dogs—whether or not such dogs are leashed—regardless of the time of day.

SUMMONSES: Parks has issued almost ten thousand (10,000) summonses since 2002 for unleashed/out of control dogs. Moreover, a leash law requirement does not guarantee that one will not encounter unleashed dogs in City parks.

CLARITY LEADS TO COMPLIANCE: Clearer rules with formal off-leash opportunities should foster more compliance, rather than less, concerning the proper control of dogs by their owners.

Information reported to the DOHMH on dog bites show 93 (2.3 %) of 4,082 dog bites were reported in parks in 2004 and that 86 (2.2%) of 3,956 dog bites were reported in parks in 2005. Current reported data for the period from January thru September 2006 show that of 2,991 bites 55 (1.5%) occurred in parks.

The number of reported dog bites to humans has decreased in the City annually since 1993. Animal bites are reportable under Health Code Section 11.03. The Department is in the process of updating its animal bite reporting program. In addition to accepting reports by telephone, mail and fax, the Department is now accepting on-line reports through the Department’s Universal Reporting Form.