Category: Uncategorized

Please be alert to the possibility that the dog related Article 44 may come up tonight, April 10. If things progress as rapidly as they did last night, they may get to our proposal for a two year moratorium on off-leash bans sooner than we expected.

We have no control over when this gets presented, so we are asking everyone to tune into channel 8 or 9 (CCTV) especially at 9pm, and be ready to come to town meeting if it looks like they might get to us. Or, if you are a die hard (like my wife) you may already be planning to attend all of the meetings.

Tonight will begin with the marijuana dispensary discussion, followed by some innocuous zoning articles. If we are into those at 9pm, then we suggest you come to TM. I will also send out another email alert. We are hopeful that it will not be heard until tomorrow, but there is this distinct possibility.

And in case you question the importance of stopping the town from continuing this campaign, look at how much we have lost already and listen to this seven second clip where Delia says the solution to off-leash dogs is a dog park:

Total land already lost to off-leash use in just one year:

Please plan to attend the town meeting Wednesday, April 11 at the new High School. Our warrant seeking a two year moratorium from leash restrictions on conservation lands will most likely be presented later that evening. We need all concerned Concord citizens to attend who want to maintain access to our forests for ourselves and pets to enjoy.

There will be a presentation and then vote, so please mark your calendars and tell your friends. Thank you!

Town website with TM information: Town Meeting

The NRC says dogs are damaging to conservation lands…

There is little evidence that dogs damage conservation lands and no direct evidence that Concord’s lands have been negatively impacted by off-leash dogs. The studies cited by the NRC are inconclusive and are not based on credible or defensible data. The NRC’s only effort to collect data was to send two rangers (summer employees, with no experience or background) to various trail heads at randomly selected town properties. Their anecdotal observations were that there is no problem with dogs, except at White Pond where erosion is a problem. Whether erosion is dog induced is unlikely and needs to be investigated in a more rigorous manner.

 

The NRC says there is an increased number of dog related incidents on conservation lands…

Police records indicate otherwise. The numbers of dog related incidents since 2012 has declined significantly from 141 in 2012 to just 84 in 2016. 2017 is estimated at 80. Further more, the definition of “incidents” is wide ranging and suggests that there needs to be closer scrutiny as what “incidents” actually relate to off-leash activities.

 

The NRC says they are restricting people and dogs to leashes in Punkatasset to be in line with neighboring properties and that Punkatasset is a nature preserve…

The Punkatasset deed calls for recreation and allows for grazing of animals. It does NOT specify it as a nature preserve. Allowing abutter’s to dictate policy is dangerous and against the very spirit of what was intended for the general, responsible use of conservation land by Concord town citizens. It is not clear whether there has been any investigation as to the true motives of the abutters complaints which appear to be more focused on the fact that they don’t want to deal with the traffic that conservation land brings verses specifically related to whether dogs are on leashes or not.

 

The NRC says that dogs must be kept off of all agricultural land for compliance with Food Safety Act…

 The fact sheet provided by the US FDA on the final FSMA rules says “As was stated in the supplemental rules, famers are NOT required to exclude animals from outdoor growing areas, destroy animal habitat, or clear borders around growing or drainage areas.  Nothing in the rule should be interpreted as requiring or encouraging such actions.”

 

The NRC has not tried less restrictive measures to solve their non-existent problem based on no credible evidence…

We request a moratorium on these proposed regulations to allow the NRC to collect sound, unbiased data, and to work with responsible dog owners to educate the public.

 

The NRC says only 12% of lands will be affected by their proposed regulations…

This will have a town-wide impact and should be voted on at Town Meeting. As citizens of Concord we are all owners of town conservation land and are being disenfranchised without cause. The NRC’s proposals will affect usage at other areas by pushing us off lands we all paid for, crowding us into smaller and smaller areas.

 

While appearing to follow an open meeting format, it is abundantly clear that the NRC began this process with a predetermined outcome in mind which is very disappointing. They have not listened to the over 1000 concerned citizen participants or rigorously debated the facts based on actual evidence and data, which is not in the spirit or intention of governing councils endorsed by the Concord town government. By ignoring the thoughtful and well researched input from the hundreds of citizens who have spoken, written and attended meetings, they have alienated and disenfranchised this very large, vibrant community who perhaps appreciate, and moreover RESPECTS these lands and the opportunity to enjoy them the most.

A simple question for the NRC… Why wasn’t this relatively mundane matter resolved with better awareness, education and improved facilities by working together?

Dear Chris and Members of the Select Board,

Concord dog owners have been trying to work with the NRC, but we have been shut out. With its vote to require leashes at Punkatasset, the NRC has alienated, angered and disappointed the segment of the community most motivated to help in efforts to maintain the nature of our wild places. The 1100 plus citizens who have expressed our opposition to the NRC’s position include nature enthusiasts, environmental activists, conservation writers, young men like Angus Watts (Age 11, whose letter of protest appeared in the Journal), nature photographers, transcendentalists, and health-conscious individuals. Daily, we visit conservation land to walk with our off-leash dogs all over town, regardless of weather. We work extensively with the NRC on other issues like combating invasives and providing trail stewardship. We financially support the Town’s efforts to acquire additional conservation lands. We know and love the area’s natural history and are motivated to help the NRC create a community-driven effort to reach those outlying dog owners who are not respectful of conservation land or of other visitors to it.

Or we should say, we were motivated, until the NRC voted to require leashes at Punkatasset.

The NRC has been unable to provide any evidence of dogs degrading conservation lands in Concord. According to police records, dog incidents have become less frequent since 2012. To prevent problems from developing, which the Commission says is the motivation for their draconian proposals, there are much saner solutions that would enlist rather than enrage the citizenry.

We need the NRC to behave as an authority maintaining the integrity of a town-wide desire for wise use of the Town’s Natural Resources. We rely on the commission to make decisions based on science. The process leading to the decision to restrict dogs and their owners to leashes on Town Conservation Land expressly set aside by the Town for nature AND recreation undermines the Commission’s authority, shines too bright a light on their shaky process, and destroys the NRC’s base of support.

If the Commission were to reconsider its vote to restrict dogs to leashes in Punkatasset, they might still have an opportunity to work with concerned citizens in developing a set of guidelines and an educational program to strengthen respectful use of Town owned conservation land by all and for all, and to improve relations between walkers with and without dogs, bicyclists, skiers, runners, and horseback riders.

As people who value the work of the Division of Natural Resources and the Natural Resources Commission, who moved here long ago because Concord’s citizens are demonstrably capable of creating a community where we can all enjoy our beautiful town lands, we ask that you urge the Commission to take a revote before they ruin what could be a productive partnership with the dog owners of Concord and destroy a beloved way of life for so many of us.

Why is asking dog owners to leash their dogs destructive of a way of life? It is simple: when a leash is required, there is a being on each end of it. The NRC is asking Concord citizens to give up our personal freedom to walk at our own pace through the lands we love with our dogs. This is our chosen form of recreation. Leashes hobble US as much as they do the dogs. For responsible citizens like us, the NRC proposal means a daily loss of joy – they are asking us to give up the source – for many of us, the greatest source – of grace and sanity available to us in this crazy world.

Citizens are being asked to accept this loss for no reason. We would all be better off, if at the end of this process, the NRC gained support and respect rather than losing standing and credibility. We have made extensive efforts to work in a positive fashion with the NRC on this issue, and in response, NRC members have stated that nothing will change their minds.

We call on the Town Manager and the Select Board to ask the NRC to open their minds and rethink their course.

Respectfully submitted,

Tracy Winn
Robert and Elizabeth Morrison
Isaac Sway
Gregory Maguire
Luis D. Berrizbeitia MD FACS
Jeff Young
Michael Dettelbach
Joe Rigali
Carol Aronson
Don Shobrys
Mimi Rutledge
Susanne Jarnryd
Ronni Olitsky
Robert Chartener
Richard and Patricia Waters
Louisa and Robert Paushter
Marc Silver
Belinda Gower
Joseph and Elizabeth McKneely
Mark Bamford
Susanna Barton
Bonnie and David Polakoff
George Vlasuk
Anna Agranov
Kate Skelly
Margaret Wailes
Barbara Faha
Elisabeth Elden
Luis Berrizbeitia
Elizabeth Awalt
Maryl Bode
Liza Carter
Lisette Zinner
Kate Hennighausen
Rob and Betsey Veidenheimer
Tom Sadtler
Joanne and Dick Arnaud
Maude and John Bigelow
Rob Comer
Inge Knudson
Maria Gutierrez
Maureen and Tim Dibble
Andy Sheehan
Gretchen Nelson
Marc and Sheila Boyle
Laurie Foster
Lori Hick
Penny Rodday
Susanna Bedell
Tom Wilson
Kathleen Reidy
Pam Hubbard
Paul Caliandro
Peter Hilton
John and Mary Doyle
Brooks and Ashley Ward
Deb Richardson
Mark Del Guidice
Wayne Miller
Mary Hartman
Steven Torres
Susan and Robert Galford
Rosa Hallowell
Terry Yanulavich
Carsten Nielsen
Ramsay Trussell
Jen Nielsen
Lydia Rheinfrank
Tasha Carter-Gordon
Anna Stevens
Maggie Stern
Richard Mandel
Christina Williams
Helen Christensen
Stephanie Leone
Michael Milofsky
Jill Appel
Ali Baty
Mitzi Johnson
Carol Neville
Gina Sauceda
Heidi Saghir
Carolyn and Daren Gill
Julie Barrett O’Brien
Lori Jackson
Anne and Stuart Randle
Terry Rothermel
Melissa and Chris Finn
Heather Shafner Bout
Mark McClure
Lucy Rosborough
Charles Wilson
Deb and Don Kupka
Melanie Coo
Sarah Jones
Todd Watts
Kara Wilson
Meg Wilson
David and Katie Wilson
Jeremy Carter-Gordon
Scott and Kristin Forsberg
Meg Wickwire
Nancy Mercer
Brian Mercer
Beth Perdue
Helen McKinlay
Charles Barker
Dan Schrager
Kelly Doyle
Peter Zimmerman
Chad Reynolds
Jill Yates
Christian Fischer
Judy Bernard
Beverly Miller
Nancy Johnson
Dan Roache
Sarah Lazarus
Lynn Duffy
Kate Chartener
Bill Lehr
Bouzha Cookman
Kevin Duffy
Cheryl Baggen
Max Johnson
Nate Johnson
Lisa Gainsboro
Hilary Bovey
Richard McWalter
Rob Yates
Sarah and Robert LeRoy
Nancy Morrison
Karen Burns
John Conley
Susan Deysher
Doug Cohen
Charlie Morrison
Richard McWalter
Jon Grayzel, MD
Dan Holin
Jamie Lipcon
Keith Miller
Shivalik Bakshi
Claris Chuah
Peter Burns
Lynn, Andrew, Benjamin and Jonah Aghajanian
Marty Gilpatrick
Laura Klein-Branigan
John Branigan
Althea and David Kaemmer
John Bode
Elizabeth A Lewis
Benjamin H Lewis
Amy Simon
Michael & Aiyana Currie
Lucinda S. Duncan
Sally Hughes
Rick and Kate Olney
Claire Gauthier
John and Kim Wass

We are extremely disappointed to bring you this very bad news, but the NRC voted (December 20, 2017) 4-1 in favor of restricting dogs off-leash from Punkatasset. It is essentially what they have been saying they wanted to do from day one. Our pleas for a trial period of lesser restrictions and our presentation of evidence to the contrary seems to have fallen on deaf ears.

Unfortunately, some correctly predicted this and saw their series of meetings as just a means to appease the public and satisfy town requirements. It appears we were not being listened to and our questioning of their “science” was interpreted somehow as being anti-environmental. We are disappointed not only in their decision, but in their process and failure to consider how valuable this resource is to so many townspeople.

Had there been a reasonable and well constructed case against dogs off-leash, we would certainly have supported it. We value our land and seek to preserve it for future generations. After careful analysis, we never saw any evidence of how dogs are detrimental and the few negative studies cited by the NRC, were primarily from foreign countries and completely inapplicable to Concord. Three local, independent experts (with doctoral degrees in environmental sciences) saw no level of increased damage from dogs off-leash. Tom French, the Massachusetts Fish and Game Assistant Director, even went so far as to say, dogs are often cited more often for political purposes, not environmental.  The NRC also neglected to collect any baseline data prior to the hearings and it was only at the urging of Concord Unleashed, that the head of the NRC actually visited Punkatasset this fall for the first time. We find the whole experience to have been very unprofessional, poorly managed and totally subjective.

Such blatant and willful ignorance of the facts is difficult to stomach. Having participated in all of these summer meetings, Concord Unleashed witnessed this bias from day one and has done their best to educate and inform the NRC members. Very early in the process, a petition with over 1100 signatures was presented to Delia (along with hundreds of comments from local citizens). Mid summer, a poll conducted by the Boston Globe again showed overwhelming support for continued off-leash use of Punkatasset. Lastly, a more recent comprehensive survey and analysis with over 600 responses from Concord dog owners was hand delivered to the NRC. This is all very valuable and useful information, but for some strange reason, it was virtually ignored and discounted by the NRC director and majority of voting members.

Fortunately, Concord has always been a leader and innovator, thinking for itself and not afraid to rebel. We have already filed a warrant for this coming years town meeting, and the NRC must still present their “case” to the Select Board, and then hold a public meeting. As soon as the time is announced, we will let everyone know. It is important that you continue to make your voices heard to the Select Board, since the NRC has not been responsive to it’s constituents and primary users.

We are continuing to work on this and believe that there is a solution much less drastic than an outright ban. However, because they have essentially shut us out of the process, we are no longer working with the NRC (who still have yet to disclose what they are proposing for the other conservation properties). We also hold the power to vote and there may be other ways to make your voices heard. We will be updating as needed and thank you again for all of your support.

Concord Unleashed

Please take our survey if you haven’t already and thank you to all of you who have so far… SURVEY (NOTE: Only take it once. Your IP address will be recognized and it will be invalid.)

Over 500 (a third of Concord’s dog owners) have taken the few minutes to fill it out, but we are still looking for more input. The results are a great indicator of what the Concord dog community feels is important and gives the town much needed data for dog based decisions.

88% consider it important (or greater) for their dogs to walk off-leash (70% say it is “extremely important”). 90% of respondents say they consider “natural beauty” and wooded trails “important” or greater).  85% are not sure if they would use a dog park (with over half saying, “not at all”).  A dog park is “definitely important” to about 6%, with another 6% saying they would “possibly” prefer it over conservation lands.

Respondents say “loss of places for off-leash walks” is their number one concern with 84% saying it needs to be addressed or is a major issue. 83% say “Dogs disturbing wildlife” is “not an issue” or a “very minor issue” and 36% say “out of town dog owners” are  only “somewhat of an issue”.

Please continue to ask your Concord dog(s) owning friends and neighbors to respond as well and as always, be a responsible dog owner and considerate of others whenever outdoors… thanks!

Please take the online survey for Concord Dog Owners. It will only take 8-10 minutes and among other things, give important feedback to the town.

The purpose of this survey is to provide the town with a realistic and clear picture of where we walk, why we walk there and what we enjoy about the experience. We are also concerned about making off-leash encounters pleasant and enjoyable for all users, so we are looking for ways to promote proper pet etiquette. Thank you so much and we appreciate your taking the time to read and respond.

 

CONCORD OFF-LEASH SURVEY

Dec. 6, 7PM @ 141 Keyes Rd.: Options to bring forward for any additional regulation will be formulated at this meeting.

Dec. 11, 7PM @ Town Hall: The NRC will present their findings to the Select Board with their proposed dog regulations, etc..

TBD, (2018): An open town meeting will convene after the New Year and the NRC will present their recommendations to the public, then open for comment.

With pressure from the NRC and education by Concord Unleashed, the responsible dog owners of Concord are keeping their dogs in sight and under voice control, and leaving no trace of dog waste in the woods and fields of the Town Conservation land we all love.

On November 15^th, the NRC subcommittees are planning to report their recommendations for restricting thirteen town-owned properties for use by walkers with unleashed dogs and then present them to the Select Board. Those many responsible dog owners (who train their dogs to be good citizens on and off leash) are the ones who have, for years, been stewards of the lands they walk daily, reporting suspicious activity, removing trash and downed limbs, helping lost walkers, sharing the whereabouts of wildlife so that other walkers can avoid them, and letting the NRC know when the supply of waste bags is low. Though they know, intimately – and appreciate deeply – the lands they walk on, these people are the ones with the most to lose to the proposed restrictions. As some people who live here may play tennis, or golf, or ride bikes or horses, Concord Unleashed citizens’ form of recreation is long rambling walks on conservation land with their dogs off-leash. They are passionate about their sport. They are in the woods and fields every day all year round regardless of the weather. They are the people setting a good example, and encouraging others to comply with the canine commandments:

1. Always maintain control of your dog (leash or effective voice).
2. Keep them within sight at all times.
3. Always pick up after your dog and dispose of waste properly.
4. Leash up when encountering other beings on the trails.
5. Don’t allow dogs on farmed fields or near vernal pools.

As the NRC seeks a balance between conservation and passive recreational use – an important part of NRC’s mission – members of the Concord Unleashed community request the commission to slow down, to notice the improvements that have been made in a matter of months, and take time to work with Concord Unleashed Responsibly to improve the dog-owning public’s understanding of what is expected of all dog owners and their canine companions in the Town of Concord. Let us work together so that walkers and runners without dogs, walkers and runners who are afraid of dogs, walkers with dogs off-leash, and walkers with dogs must be on-leash can all, fully and confidently, enjoy the conservation lands we share.

Dear Editor:

It was very disheartening to hear of the recent vandalism and of the gate construction by the abutters to Estabrook Woods. The over 1100 petition signers and members of Concord Unleashed do not condone acts of vandalism nor would we ever promote such activities. Both actions do little to bring Concord together and only serve to further alienate an increasingly restricted general population who believe in maintaining public access to the woods.