Laurie Gilman, a retired editorial and research director, has lived in Westport for 15 years. An avid reader, she recently helped establish the Winslow Book Club.
She has a significant other of 40 years, many beloved nieces and nephews, and an 8-year-old pug named Charley who was taken in when he was a year old. Charley walks her around Winslow Park nearly every day. Laurie writes:
We are less than a week away from a vote by the Planning & Zoning Commission on Text Amendment #874. It would alter the zoning laws at Winslow Park in order to build a “dogport” — a fenced area for dogs.
A survey, petition and letters show this is unpopular among dog owners and citizens who want to preserve open space in Westport.
Winslow Park (Photo/Ron Henkin)
The only convincing argument for this project is for dog safety. Gaps remain in the park’s perimeter, where dogs can reach busy roads. Very well thought out, detailed plans have been submitted to the P&Z website that would remove those gaps, and cost Westport less in terms of money and open space.
In addition to ignoring the good ideas to fence the park, a dogport has its own problems with dog safety — for example, dogs being more aggressive in an enclosed area. So we’re pretty sure this isn’t about the issue of dog safety. Far from it.
The amendments explicitly states, “By concentrating off-leash activities into a designated area the proposal helps reduce conflicts between park users, improves predictability for families and walkers, and promotes responsible pet ownership through rules, regulations, and accountability.”
How is it possible to “concentrate” all unleashed dog activity into a dogport when the majority of dog owners at Winslow want to walk with their dogs? Only if rules are changed that force dog owners into the dog port.
Dogs, on and off leash.
A rule requiring dogs to be leashed throughout the park could happen. But that won’t go far enough, because dog owners will still want to walk their dogs on leash. What is more likely is taking the extraordinary step of denying dog owners access to the rest of the park.
“The proposal helps reduce conflicts between park users.” We think the dog owners at Winslow have a very good relationship with all the other users of the park: kids riding bikes or scooters or sleighing during the winter; parents walking their children who stop to pet our dogs, and people of all ages out getting their walk in.
We have never witnessed a conflict between park users without dogs and those with dogs. We have seen conflicts between dog owners. If you were to go to the park today you might find posters of a woman whose dog attacked another dog, and did not take responsibility for the aggressive behavior from her dog.
We are all aware of this incident, and are on the lookout for the owner and her dog if they return. We are a community that acts to keep the park peaceful and protect all its users.
Winslow Park community. (Photo/Cat Malkin)
Finally, a dog port “promotes responsible pet ownership through rules, regulations, and accountability.” There are already rules and regulations posted at Winslow, and the vast majority of owners follow them. Keeping dog owners accountable seems to imply bad behavior of dogs. That can happen in or outside of a dog port.
We all value the beautiful open space and trails at Winslow. By passing this amendment and “concentrating off-leash activity,” dog owners are rightfully concerned that their access to the rest of the park will end.
It’s not a stretch to imagine other uses of the park will replace us. What those may be should concern all of Westport residents who want to protect the unique and cherished open area that is Winslow.
Laurie Gilman
On behalf of the Friends of Winslow Park
(“06880” Opinion pages are open to all readers. Email submissions to 06880blog@gmail.com. To help support this hyper-local blog, please click here.)
Close up dog access to North Compo Rd and the park is fine as it is. Thank you.
Perimeter fence on N. Compo. Win. Win. Woof.
For those dog owners who want a fenced in dog park, there is already one in neighboring Weston you could frequent. It is not restricted to Weston only residents as per their parks and rec department. For the rest of us who cherish the open space of Winslow and walk our dogs there off leash and unfenced, please just let it be. it has been wonderful as is for generations of dogs and their families.
Winslow is so wonderful, please don’t let a fence take this beautiful space away from people who want to walk
In the woods with their dogs offleash. People can walk dogs on leashes anywhere, and if your dog must be fenced in maybe they can fence in their own yards. Please just let Winslow be.
I’ve followed the effort to create a small fenced area at Winslow Park, as I have two dogs who like to run, but who I prefer to be unleashed in enclosed areas. I appreciate the leaders of the Dogport effort, who have presented the case for a small fenced dog run with clarity, and patience. I don’t see how the proposed fenced area jeopardizes the freedom of the dog owners who “cherish the open space” of Winslow, as there would still be a large unfenced space where dogs can be unleashed and the paths on which dogs can be walked on leashes. The various essays expressing resistance to a fenced space list negatives that are debatable, given the popularity and success of fenced dog runs in several neighboring towns.
thank you, Laura! youve captured exactly what we’re proposing. a small fenced in area, adds an option without taking anything away–the overwhelmingly majority of Winslow Park remains open, and the existing off-leash experience remains AS IS. its about adding choice, not replacing what people already enjoy.