Tom Hieronymous writes:
The history of this started back in the seventies when there was an attempt to ban all dogs from the Golden Gate National Recreation Areas. However, because at that time there had been no studies or no public discussion period given, the courts threw out the ban. So the Feds went back to the drawing board and, decades later, at the tax payer's expense of more than a million dollars, they produced a 17 POUND document about the impact of dogs in the parks, a document, by the way, that is not supported by science.
The history of this started back in the seventies when there was an attempt to ban all dogs from the Golden Gate National Recreation Areas. However, because at that time there had been no studies or no public discussion period given, the courts threw out the ban. So the Feds went back to the drawing board and, decades later, at the tax payer's expense of more than a million dollars, they produced a 17 POUND document about the impact of dogs in the parks, a document, by the way, that is not supported by science.
(That document is available to read on-line on the GGNRA website: http://165.83.37.12/document.cfm?parkID=303&projectID=11759&documentID=38106)
Now the proposal is back to greatly restrict dogs (Crissy Field, Ft. Fungsten, and others) or ban dogs altogether (Muir Beach and other areas) in all of their parks.
A discussion period is happening RIGHT NOW, giving people a chance to organize, rebutt their "findings," and protest a ban. So far, the proposed ban has caused quite a stir with outcries from dog owners against these injustices.
A series of four open houses have been planned to meet with the GGNRA parks representatives.
More information can be found:
--on Facebook groups (http://www.facebook.com/saveoffleash) (http://www.facebook.com/saveoffleash#!/pages/Dogs-of-the-Golden-Gate-National-Recreation-Area/189574667743306),
--by Googling "Dogs of Golden Gate,"
and a good Chronicle article: (http://sfappeal.com/news/2011/03/the-people-at-the-golden.php)
Comments can be make on the proposal at the GGNRA site.
Below is an email sent by a supporter:
"The GGNRA proposal is absolutely draconian. They propose, e.g., to ban all dogs - not just off-leash walking - in areas where off-leash walking has been permitted for at least the past 34 years and where the majority of all users are people walking their dogs. (The so-called "New Lands"). Other bans on off-leash walking will effectively reduce the available area in San Francisco and the northern half of San Mateo county to 1/2 of the current Fort Funston and Crissy Field areas.
Both the SF SPCA and San Mateo's Peninsula Humane Society have written letters opposing the GGNRA's restrictive stance.
There will be an "open house" with GGNRA representatives at Cabrillo School, on Crespi Drive in Pacifica on March 9 : 4-8 pm. Please come if you can!
Also - funds are being collected through the Crissy Field organization for a lawyer and an environmental specialist, on the theory that public comment will not be sufficient. (Crissy Field Dogwalkers have legal 501 (c) (4) status). Please donate if you can!
Finally - one last source of information: www.montaradogs.com . The Montara Dog Blog is specifically focused on the New Lands. This is the area where dogs would simply be banned - on or off-leash.
The New Lands comprise virtually all of the open space on the coast north of Half Moon Bay. They run from north of Montara south behind all the communities along the coast down to Half Moon Bay - Moss Beach, El Grenada, Princeton. This is pretty much all the available space. The environmental pressure and degradation on the remaining one mile loop of County park in the area is absolutely predictable. "
Natalie B.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thanks for your comments. Woof, woof!