Friends of Pastorius prefer alternative to dog enclosure

Regarding the concept of introducing a fenced dog area in Pastorius Park, FoPP, as stewards of the park completely support and hold true to the original vision and design of the park that has endured for nearly a century: a passive green space, made possible by the generous support of George Woodward and his family and heirs (including Quita Horan, FoPP's first president), all of whom have contributed a great deal of money, resources, and the land itself to create the park as designed by local landscape architect Frederick Peck.

The Friends of Pastorius Park cannot support any effort that would change that vision and will oppose any introduction of fencing and other invasive structures which would alter Pastorius Park's open landscape. Instead, we would consider advocacy for a less invasive and more balanced approach to dogs at the park, such as that implemented in Rye, NY, which seems to be very successful.

Tracy Gardner

President

Friends of Pastorius Park

Fighting like cats and dogs

Why is it that if you even suggest that you dislike dogs you are treated like some deranged psychopath, yet cat hating is almost a national pastime?

People love their dogs. I get it. They often treat them like their children, sometimes even better than their children! In recent years, dog ownership and pampering has become this mega industry. As a result, there are many more dogs than when I was growing up. I believe in freedom. Dog owners should be able to buy their dogs the best food, fill up their Instagram with cute pics of Fido, outfit them with fashionable sweaters, treat them to doggie spas – it’s their right. However, dogs are not people, and I believe that people come first.

The conversation regarding off leash dogs in Pastorius Park seems to be reaching a fever pitch after multiple attacks in the last few months. Many have suggested a dog enclosure, but having lived near two such enclosures in Philadelphia I wanted to give my perspective. In both instances, the enclosures where “fixed” to existing parks that had a similar polarization of desires. In both instances the traffic to the parks went off the charts. The wear and tear, overflowing trashcans, foul smell, trash, poop baggies, smaller pups being mauled etc. increased significantly.

Over the years I have routinely asked people at the park “where are you from?” and (anecdotally) the answer is usually from Montgomery County. I’m guessing that, if only dogs from Chestnut Hill / Mt Airy frequented Pastorius, this would be much less of an issue, as most Hillers seem to be super responsible with their pooches.

In a recent letter "A suggestion for Pastorius Park dog owners” by Jordan Bastien, he made the following suggestion:

“From 6-9 a.m. every day, dogs can be off-leash in a very large, defined section of the park. Owners who want to use the park this way pay a $25 fee to register their dogs with the township. Dogs must be current on all shots to be registered, after which they get a special license for their collar. Any dog can visit on-leash at any time. Signs about the system are posted prominently in the park, and rangers visit every once in a while to check that all off-leash dogs are registered. “

I believe Jordan’s suggestion should be looked at closely by the FOPP. I believe this plan, or one similar to it, will keep many dog-owning Hillers happy.

Lastly, we all need to enforce the laws already in place. Ranting on the internet or getting into shouting matches in the park is not going to accomplish anything.

Some helpful suggestions:

I was told that 911 is for reports of people breaking the law - any law - which includes the leash law. It’s not a waste of their time.

Write your congressmen. His name is Dwight Evans.

Contact the Friends of Pastorius Park at facebook.com/friendsofpastorius and give them your opinions.

Contact Yelp, Google, Bringfido etc. which list Pastorius as “off leash friendly” and contribute to 100s of non-local dogs weekly.

If you see a dog on leash, thank the owner for abiding by the law and being a great neighbor.

Joe Brown

Chestnut Hill

Lawn signs

After reading Pete Mazzaccaro's editorial on suburban lawn signs and the reply in the June 22 letters section, I am compelled to offer this comment. Perhaps each person's reason for posting a “Hate has no Home Here” sign is as unique as the individual. In my neighborhood one family's lonely sign stood for a week or so before I got mine. It seemed appropriate to do something in solidarity with these neighbors, who happen to be Jewish, at a time when there were several instances of desecration of Jewish sites.  Now 12 signs grace our small development.

Elizabeth Gavula

Flourtown

Say no to Vision Zero

I urge you to oppose Vision Zero and their anti-automobile agenda. Their goals sound nice but are not grounded in reality. Safety on Philadelphia’s highways depends on people taking responsibility for their actions, not unfairly punishing and demonizing a certain group of travelers Vision Zero don’t like. The Vision Zero supporters see anyone who opposes their Utopian projects as a threat to humanity.

To try to take advantage of a recent tragic, fatal accident to push Vision Zero forward is beneath contempt. Vision Zero could not have prevented that accident, just as it will not deliver the highway safety utopia their proponents claim.

Promote mobility in Philadelphia: discard Vision Zero. Thank you.

Tom McCarey

Member, National Motorists Association

Close the doors when AC is on

Having been born and raised among the ever changing shops of Chestnut Hill, I feel a fierce attachment to the charming boutiques, cafes and markets that line Germantown Avenue. As an outdoorsman and environmentalist, I feel an even fiercer attachment to the earth.

Recently on a walk, I couldn’t help but notice in this 90-degree heat that local retailers are desperate to keep both themselves and their customers cool. Many opt for open doors and fans to generate circulation; others prefer air conditioning.

What concerns me, however, is the stores that take a dual approach and blast their AC with the doors wide open. This is unequivocally a move to attract patrons and lure them into the refreshing air in hopes that they’ll peruse and ultimately buy goods.

And while there is no shame in wanting to promote business, the environmental impact of this, particularly in a time of great global concern, is astronomical and unethical. I encourage shop keepers to follow in the footsteps of thriving cities such as NYC that mandate a “closed door policy” when the AC is on. Not only will this practice reduce massive amounts of wasted energy in what is sure to be a long, hot summer, but it will drastically reduce the electrical bill for store owners.

We are all responsible for climate change, and if it takes placing a welcoming and well-decorated sign outside your doors to draw shoppers in, I’m happy to recruit talented chalk artists for the job. Until all the avenue shops are taking steps to reduce environmental impact, I’ll keep hobbling in to encourage, if not insist, on change.

Avery Stern

Chestnut Hill

English teacher at The George School

Group travel article ‘useful’

I really enjoyed reading Frank Burd's take on group travel (“At age 70, local guy a convert to tour company travel,” June 15). As a single woman in my 60s, I've wondered about this. It was a fun read and useful as well.

I also, as always, loved Tom Utescher's sports photos. I'm not a big sports fan, but I always get a kick out of the composition and dramatic tension in his work. He has a great eye.

Rosalind Warren

Bala Cynwyd