Written, partially read and presented at the July 12 NRC Meeting by Liza Carter:
Dear Members of the Natural Resource Commission,
I am writing in opposition to the proposed ban on off-leash dog walking in Punkatasset. I will address the wildlife issue, the conservation restriction, the importance of off-leash time for the well-being of dogs (and their owners), and conclude with a proposed solution.
WILDLIFE
I am a graduate of the Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies and my first job was for NRDC, the Natural Resources Defense Council, commenting on environmental impact statements. In this field we often found that organizations with an agenda in mind, in the absence of applicable data, would cite research with a title that sounded applicable—even if it was irrelevant to situation being examined. I quickly learned the importance of examining the research presented to support the documents very carefully.
I began my research of the NRC’s supporting documents by carefully reading all the studies listed on the NRC’s website only to find that there is no research listed that supports Concord’s position. We do not have nesting shore birds in Punkatasset or the American crocodile, or the New Zealand kiwi. I was also surprised to find that a number of studies listed on the NRC’s website that argued the opposite position taken by this commission. “Biological Conversation: The ecological impact of humans and dogs on wildlife in protected areas in eastern North America” states in their highlights section that “Wildlife perceived free-ranging dogs as a relatively low threat.” A literature review of from Scotland concludes that ‘our findings suggest that the responses of birds to human use of recreational trails have only short-term effects, with no apparent effects of on nest survival’. Banks and Bryant (2007) also reported largely short-term, rather than long-term, effects of dogs on ground-nesting birds. Another study from Colorado showed that wildlife moved away from trail corridors thus reducing dog/wildlife interactions. Wildlife Responses to Pedestrians and Dogs, Wildlife Society Bulletin, Vol. 29, No. 1 (Spring, 2001) states that the area of influence was smallest for dog-alone treatments and greatest when a pedestrian was present.
Obviously, there are part of our planet where dogs do disturb wildlife and in those situations restrictions are appropriate. Beaches during nesting plover season is a familiar example for Massachusetts residents. But to simply list studies conducted in other parts of the United States and on other continents and then assert that the same is true in Punkatasset is misleading and a gross disservice to Concord residents.
We deserve a more nuanced and accurate understanding on what is actually the situation in our woods. To that goal, I spoke to Tom French, the Assistant Director of the Division of Fisheries and Wildlife for the Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program about wildlife & dog interactions and impact. (July 11, 2017 ) While Mr. French was careful to say that while there are some environments where dogs can have a negative impact, there is no research showing that off-leash dogs have a significant effect on wildlife in forested ecosystems such as Punkatasset. He went on to say that most domesticated dogs are not smart enough or brave enough to harm wildlife.
To the specific issue of ground nesting birds, he said that these tend to avoid areas of human, horse and dog traffic. The places where issues with ground nesting birds arise are when a bird builds its nest early in the season before there is human traffic only to be disturbed later in the nesting season when people start to use the area. As Punkatasset—and all our conservation lands—are used every day of the year by people walking their dogs, this is not a concern for Concord’s land. French went on to say that quite often wildlife used as a tool to persuade various constituents over issues human access and interaction.
I offer you the thought that it is counter productive and destructive to raise the flag of wildlife preservation while actually seeking to achieve other ends–such as dog/human interactions. This has been done multiple times all over the world and it often backfires leading to a weakening of important conservation regulation and an eroding of the support base of humans for protecting ecosystems.
Conservation land is created and maintained because people find value in having access to nature. Concord taxpayers are regularly asked to approve funds for land preservation. It is important for all of us to make sure that all Concord residents keep voting “yes.” Cutting off access and disenfranchising off-leash dog walkers would be very shortsighted. Off-leash dog walkers the majority of people who enjoy the conservation lands. We are the extended eyes and ears of the Natural Resources Commission reporting issues as we discover them. The town could never afford to pay for rangers or interns to provide the same level of coverage that we do as a matter of course. If the town restricts the access of a primary user-group of town-owned land, many residents will quite rightly question why they should support something that has become a haven for the few, rather than accessible to all of us who support- it both philosophically and also with tax dollars? As off-leash, dog-walking, nature-loving, tax-paying residents we are an important constituent base whose needs must be acknowledged and accommodated.
CONSERVATION RESTRICTION AND DEED DOCUMENTS
Punkatasset is a piece of town-owned property with a conservation restriction from the Town of Concord to The Trustees of Reservations containing the following language:
“The town of Concord has a long standing commitment to the preservation and stewardship of the Estabrook Woods, noted for its historic, environmental, cultural and recreational significance to the inhabitants of Concord and the Region. . . Parcel A, known as the Punkatasset Conservation land . . .a place for nature study, walking, quiet contemplation, skiing, horse back riding and other passive recreational uses. As a major entrance into the Estabrook Woods, the Town of Concord has managed the land to accommodate various recreational activities without compromising its natural resource values.”
In the actual purchase deed from 1971, there is language stating that:
“said premises shall be used only for conservation and recreation purposes.”
The cited language above, in both the conservation restriction and the deed itself, is significant as it clearly demonstrates that Punkatasset was protected for multiple constituents and purposes. It is not a dedicated wildlife sanctuary where perhaps more stringent rules might be more applicable, but rather it has a broader purpose. Walking with one’s dog falls under the descriptions of “walking,” quiet contemplation,” and “other passive recreational uses.”
The Conservation Restriction goes on to list a number of Prohibited Acts and Uses in paragraph A. It then continues with paragraph B which reads:
“All acts and uses not prohibited in paragraph A are permissible.”
Paragraph B further protects these rights by stating that anything not specifically prohibited in paragraph A, is permissible. Walking with one’s dog on or off-leash is not listed in paragraph in A, hence it is a protected activity.
IMPORTANCE AND VALUE OF OFF-LEASH TIME
Temple Grandin, the world’s foremost expert on domestic animal welfare, writes that the unintended consequence of leash laws is the increase of dog on dog aggression. Dogs on leash are motivated to protect their owners, while off-leash time to a well-socialized dog means play time. Dogs denied access to off-leash time are the dogs that develop behavioral problems. We need more options for off-leash time, not less.
Patricia McConnell, a well-respected and well-known dog trainer says that dogs need social companionship almost as much as they need food and water. They can only experience this companionship when they have the opportunity to interact with other dogs off leash.
In NYC, the organization NYC OFF LEASH has a large amount of data about the value of off-leash dog time. I quote a few of the most pertinent paragraphs.
“Over the past 20 years, science has began to understand that most dogs, both large and small, require some off-leash time outside every day for proper socialization. Scientific studies (see URL below)* show that dog behavior when a dog is on-leash tends to be more aggressive, more territorial, and more anti-social towards people and other dogs. When dogs are allowed time off-leash, studies show that they are far more social towards people and other dogs, considerably less aggressive, bark less, bite less, and tend to have far less neurotic behavior than dogs who get no off-leash exercise. “
“The benefits of dog ownership are becoming clearer as scientific attention is increasingly directed toward the human-animal bond. Dogs are now recognized not just for their physical and mental health benefits, but for their role as companions and catalysts for human social interaction, and in helping children learn responsibility (Annual Review of Public Health, 1996; Psychological Reports 1996).” “
* http://www.nycoffleash.com/html/files/Summary%20of%20selected%20dog%20off- leash%20studies.pdf
It is important for the emotional and physical well-being of our dogs that they have access to large tracts in which to run and play with their owners. The idea of a fenced dog park (such as are found in cities) as a substitution for Punkatasset is not acceptable on any level for either our dogs our their owners.
SOLUTIONS
When the Town of Gloucester was faced with a conflict between people who wanted to walk dogs off leash and people who wanted to avoid off leash dogs, they designed a win-win solution for everyone. On even numbered days, dogs must be leashed at Good Harbor beach but can run off-leash at Wingersheek beach, and on odd numbered days it is reversed.
A similar solution can be adopted in Concord. As most of the large tracts of land where it is possible to go on a long walk in the woods are already designated either no-dogs or dogs-on-leash—Great Meadow, the Battle Road Trail in the National Park, and Estabrook Woods—the right and equitable thing to do to is to maintain the right of off-leash dog walking in Punkatasset. While the loss of access to Estabrook Woods is deeply disturbing and sad, that is not the question before the NRC today.
SUMMARY
- The NRC has no grounds for promulgating rules to prohibit off-leash dog walking as it doesn’t have the legal right to change the purpose of the original conservation restriction and dead documents.
- The NRC have not provided any research to show there is in fact a problem that might override the legal establishment of the parcel of conservation land.
- Wildlife values are being used as a tool to regulate dog/human interactions.
- Dog/human interactions should be addressed as a separate issue.
- Off-leash time is an important quality of life issues for well-socialized dogs.
- There are many constituent users of conservation lands and the needs of ALL should be accommodated.
- We are lucky enough to live in a town where there are more than one tracts of land suitable for a long walk with a dog.
- Punkatasset should be preserved as an off-leash dog walking area.
- Those who prefer to walk or ride horseback and not encounter an off-leash dog, are invited to go to Estabrook Woods, Great Meadow, or the Battle Road Trail.
On the issue of dog waste a trash can at the beginning of Punkatasset would address the issue of bags of poop. The good news is that people are being responsible by picking up their dog’s poop, but as the dogs tend to poop at the beginning of a walk, no one wants to walk around holding poop for any longer than they have to. People stash their bag with good intentions to pick it up on the return trip—and sometimes forget. Any dog owner would happily pick up a forgotten bag of poop and transport it a short distance to the trash receptacle. It is a rare person that is willing to take another dog’s poop home with them. The additional of a waste receptacle is an easy structural solution.
I leave you with my last thought, which in many ways is my most heartfelt comment. Walking in Punkatasset with my dog is my church, my solace, my therapy, and my spiritual connection to the natural world. If the NRC shuts off access to Punkatasset, I will sadly be forced to move elsewhere.
Concord has a long tradition of reverence for communing with nature and of being a welcoming community for a wide range of people with different needs. I urge you to continue the tradition and keep Punkatasset open for off-leash dogs and their owners.
Statement submitted to the NRC, Town of Concord, July 12, 2017 by
Liza F. Carter, Concord, MA.