The South Portlander

Wow! Dan “even thought of the idea” of a dog park and is “willing to raise money” for it! He is amazing! Once the dogs are gone off his beach, I wonder if he will have the idea of a skate park and graffiti wall and raise money for it to get the teenagers off his beach? And once they are gone, I wonder if he will have the idea of a toddler park and raise money for it to get the screaming kids off his beach? Oh, and then perhaps he will think of an indoor track and raise money for it to get the joggers and walkers off his beach? I am just in awe of his generosity and community spirit! Thanks Dan. So glad you moved here to help us see the problems with the public using the beach that we just didn’t realize before.

Dan, you own the .32 acre parcel at 6 Beach Street, not the public beach that abuts that property. I’m sure the city will call you if they decide to put Willard Beach up for sale.

"A dog park is a wonderful solution” to make Willard Beach more private. Just because I don’t jog, throw a frisbee, spray graffiti on rocks or benches, make sandcastles or litter doesn’t mean I am not a public citizen who can enjoy Willard Beach with my dog who is under control. I want to use the beach too! I want to use the beach to walk with my dog and I will pick up after her and pick up after the kids who drink beer and leave their cans there, I will pick up the used condoms, broken glass, syringes, plastic baggies from kids’ snacks, wood with rusted nails that wash in from the ocean, tampon applicators and pregnancy tests.

If people with dogs are sent to a dog park, who will clean the beach? I don’t see the Save Willard Beach group down there picking up trash, keeping the beach clean of human trash isn’t even one of their three goals on their website. I have often thought as I picked up a baby diaper that was buried in the sand, if a person walking a dog didn’t pick it up, who would? I hope I will never know, and I hope Willard Beach will remain public.

This summer I saw a lovely man with a reacher each morning who uses it to pick up a basket full of trash EVERY DAY as he walks his dog who stays by his side and bothers no one.

Without people walking dogs on Willard Beach there would be a very empty, private beach, but it would also be very trashy. Is that really the goal?

I really don’t want to have a fund raiser so I can be kicked off a beach that is public. Thanks but no thanks. And I would hardly call Gary Crosby an “activist” because he has offered to dig a hole so he doesn’t have to worry about where he lays down without his shirt on. Please, MLK Jr. was an activist, someone who wants to make public property private is no activist.

Why can’t these two groups get together and leave the rest of alone?  What if I don’t want your dog or your kids on the beach?  I’m tired of hearing it.  One side whines, the other side whines.  Honestly, can’t you get together and figure it out rather than being nasty all the time?  I’m reading more and more about dogs attacking people in the local places.  Why didn’t the dog group reach out to this group before it got to this point?  Hasn’t this been a topic in the council meetings since MARCH??????? 
Change is coming and if these two sides don’t figure out how to get it together, then they will let the rest of the town who could care less about either side decide the fate, and one side will lose, is that so much better than working together???????

You people are idiots.  I was sent an email today quoting Crystal Goodrich quoting Corey Hamilton as stating there had been no “dogs jumping on people complaints submitted to the South Portland police department.” It’s kind of like saying “Gee, we didn’t have any medical emergencies with students having peanut allergies, at our annual Reese’s Pieces Peanut Butter Festival!!!!!” Guess what morons, folks who are afraid of dogs don’t frequent the beach when dogs are present.  This includes me, as my youngest daughter is very afraid of dogs as is my 69 year old mother.  You people should try to make your visit to the dentist as one where you don’t have to see your proctologist at the same time. Smarten up....

You all need to get over this private beach thing.  At no time have I ever heard anyone that’s in favor of taking dogs off the beach mention private.  This seems to be falling under the category of, if you say it enough times people will start to believe it’s true.  If it’s true then someone come up with the video clip or news story or something that proves it.  Otherwise please drop it.  It’s getting old. 
gee thanks, I am impressed to even be put in the same paragraph as MLK. Jr.  thank you.  No one and I repeat no one has ever said they want people off the beach.  At least some of us are trying to come up with a solution.  It would be nice to have a place were we can take a dog that no one can say put it on a leash or in my case have my dog run away.  So yes even though I want dogs off the beach during the summer I can still work in favor of a dog park that can benefit all dog owners.  A good dog park works for everyone.  Not only can dogs run and socialize at the same time the owners need not fear their dog running off plus it takes the pressure off other city parks.  I just don’t see the problem with it.  I find it very interesting that Dan and I are attacked for willing to be part of the solution.

In this debate dog parks are a total distraction.  Simply put, dogs are not the issue it all, rather it is the dog owner that is at the center of the controversy.  It is the dog owner that wants to be on the beach, the dog is merely the spiritual and motivational tool for the human to get out of their house and commune sur le bord de la mer.  Dog owner mental health is what is at risk should dogs be denied the right to walk they’re owners on the beach. The value is not for the dog to frolic and commune on the sand but for the owner to enjoy the convenience and beauty of the ocean side experience.  The animal would be happy and content to be off leash anywhere. Proposing a dog park would certainly be fine for the dog but it would leave the owner demoralized and angry.  Perhaps this is the intent of it being offered as a solution, if so, it is cynical and not worth discussing at this time.  Certainly if dog owners are banned from the beach, then it would be wonderfully generous of Gary Crosby and Dan “got me another beach rock” Labrie, to come to the rescue of South Portland dog owners.

Hey John G - aren’t you John Gillick, one of the Save Willard Beach founders? You have some pretty sketchy information there, third hand information from the police department through the biased special interest group, the dog owners. Is that how you get your information? Wow. Seriously now, if you want to be taken seriously as a group get real facts instead of a second hand, forwarded email that someone told you about from a group you are working against. Then if you are proud to be part of the swb group use your whole name.

Dear Gary- no one has to get over anything. You and your group are working to take away public access to a public beach. That is a direct effort to make the beach private. You have not been involved in watching this from the sidelines for the past 10+ years and it is clear to many people who have lived in the Willard Neighborhood (if it can be called that anymore) that the efforts of the select few are to make the beach private, people off, dogs off, and that’s it. Anything will be said to get dogs off, it will mean less people. First it was poop, then noise, then getting knocked over, then it went to people avoiding the beach, now back to poop. Really, is that it? Poop? Why don’t other towns who allow dogs on their beaches have plague and pestilence like SPortland does, oh that’s right, we don’t have disease here either. We just have people who want a private beach. Gary, do your homework, the real mission here is to get people off the beach. This isn’t about dogs and never has been.
By the way, I don’t have to use my name, this is a blog and I have the right not to use it, and if you don’t want to you don’t have to either. Also I don’t have to “get over this private beach thing” because I strongly believe that that is the mission here. And as for JohnG calling people idiots, please have some class. Just a little. We all know who you are JohnG. one of the founding fathers of the swb group. How rude.

Hello John G,
can you please be polite and not resort to name calling? And I didn’t understand your joke about the dentist and the proctologist (I believe you mean a urologist), maybe it was above me? As I have offered once before, if you would like to contact me directly you can email me at and then we can even speak directly. Also any information you would like about official police reports are public information and can be found at the police station.

To everyone- just so the public knows, two of the members of the Dog Owners Group are working on meeting with and discussing issues with Gary Crosby and Dan LaBrie. As a group we are looking for ways to help the community put animosity aside and work together in a more neighborly fashion.
Many members of the group do believe this is a public land issue more than it is a dog issue. I have mentioned it at city council meetings - our group advocates for public access to public space. We also promote responsible dog ownership and positive interactions between people and dogs. We clean open spaces, volunteer with other community groups and we put forward our best efforts at conflict resolution year after year when efforts are made to restrict access of people who would like to recreate with their dogs in public space.

We are trying to improve this difficult situation. And for the question about “Why didn’t the dog group reach out to this group before it got to this point?” here’s the reason: the Save Willard Beach Group was only created recently (in the last few weeks) so now is the time we have started to reach out. We are trying too. Please have some patience as both groups are trying to work some ideas through. If you don’t like the blogs you read and they annoy you, then you have the right to choose not to read them. It’s your choice.

If anyone has any productive suggestions or advice I welcome you to contact me at .

Thank you, and please, let’s be adults and quit the name calling. Opinions I can handle, but I work in a school and name calling isn’t allowed there, why would you want to represent yourself that way? It’s not a nice role model for your daughter and I don’t think your mother would like to hear it either.

thank you,
Crystal Goodrich

privatebeachthang, Thank you so much.  If indeed you speak for the dog owners then you have said it all so well.  The beach does not matter to the dogs.  That being said why can’t people walk their dogs elsewhere and if they want the beauty of the beach take a walk without the dog. (during the summer )It simply is not asking to much to have a beach that has not been pooped on and peed on before the rest of us go down to play.  It’s very unfortunate that some just don’t see that.  The sad part is that the few that don’t see that are going to ruin it for the rest that do.  Sooner or later it will go to referendum and it will be to ban dogs all year round.  Personally that is not what I am after.  You all need to understand the public in general other than dog owners and even some dog owners have had it.  Now is the time to seriously consider sharing 6on / 6off Dan and I are not trying to come to the rescue just be part of the solution.

A regular person doesn’t complain to the cops when a loose dog jumps on their kid at a public beach. They console the child, possibly yell at the dog owner, and probably leave the beach.

If this happens repeatedly, they probably vote against allowing dogs on their public beach.

Dogs are not “the public,” so denying them access does not equate to reducing public access any more than banning open alcohol containers reduces public access. Except for service animals, dogs are household pets, which are private property from what I can ascertain. I’ve heard nothing about restricting the actual “public” from using the beach, and doubt that could be accomplished at Willard Beach.

Why not a dog park, again?

I do not speak for anybody, I just wish for the truth to be told.  The issue is simple, the need to walk a dog on the beach is a human one and lets face it many who value the beach would never get there on a daily basis if not for the dog.  The dog is the “spoonful of sugar” and if that’s what it takes a person to fulfill the need then who are you or I to question it?  What we are speaking about then is regulating human activity so I feel that dog owner responsibility to the laws on the books should be what stands.  Unfortunately what is lacking is enforcement of those laws.  The police department has failed those who seek relief and has remained on the sidelines as the solution is left to the two shrill sides and the city council.  Over time the situation has reached such a gross level of discourse that police enforcement will never be seen as a reasonable remedy for those who wish to end dog walking on the beach. The conversation, if you can call it that, is poisoned beyond repair, and the results will not be compromise but endless bickering.  That is why referendum is now seen as the last option, it will have to be settled by those who have had to watch this public spat go around in circles with no end in sight.
Personally I feel the dog owners blew it by allowing the complaints of a few people to reach such a high level of public discourse.  They should have let Devon Gray get up at every city council meeting, spout off, and become the crazy dog lady that she would have evolved into. Heck we could have used another Ray Lee.  Instead, they talked the issue to death, kept it front and center, and motivated the likes of Gary Crosby to find some reason to be in the public light.  Now you have bloated egos involved, a city council who took the bait, and a group of dog owners with nothing better to do then email each other and post endless remarks about it all.  The only one missing?  The police department. When this all began dog owners should have been first at Chief Googin’s doorstep demanding that he step up enforcement.  They should have essentially co-opted Devon Gray’s argument and led the charge to clean up the beach behavior.  Too late.

I can’t get past that second sentence without being annoyed by someone who doesn’t understand the difference between a “need” and a “desire.”

You need food but you can desire it too. You need sleep but you can desire a more comfortable mattress. You need air and water. Four universal needs to keep the body alive, after that, need becomes a matter of individual interpretation.  I need music, some may need the beach. Its not all about the body.  What about you sharky what helps you get along?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qZ8WpcZNKoA&feature=related

Also, to put it out there, I do not own a dog but do support the right for people to access the beach within the laws already in place.  I am surrounded by neighbors who own dogs, literally, and probably have twenty or thirty walked by my house everyday as I imagine most citizens do.  As a person living in a community I celebrate those who choose to love and live with dogs.  Unfortunately a large group of people who legally and responsibly own dogs have been demonized by a small handful of citizens.  As I noted in my earlier post, they have not helped their cause by going tit for tat with these few intolerant voices.  It continues to be apparent that they have not learned anything from engaging in the endless poisoned rhetoric.  My advice, to protect your “need” to freely access the beach within the current stipulations, is to stop responding to the shrill voices of people like sharkey, Gary, Devon, and Steve, and start earning the trust of those who will decide your fate, the voting public of South Portland.

I live in South Portland.  I pay my taxes.  I don’t own a dog.  I chose to live here because of the town’s proximity to Portland and because of its many beaches and access to public spaces.  In all my walks at Hinckley, Willard and Bug Light, I have never had a bad dog experience - nor have I witnessed one.  I have seen dogs approach others and myself, tails wagging - but if you ignore them, they go away - unlike children.  On my days at the beach, I have had kids run across my blanket or scream and yell as they stand by my beach chair.  I have been plowed over as they rush to get to the playground or to the snack stand.  I have picked up pringles cans, a chex mix bags and many bottles of water left by families.  But not once have I had to pick up dog poo.  True they may pee on the beach, but so did the little two year old boy I saw at Willard this summer.  Look, I don’t have kids - but I am happy to pay for their education and allow them the same access to public spaces I enjoy. When I am not in the mood for kids, I don’t go to the beach - I go to my porch or yard.  So during three hours in the morning, those who don’t want contact with dogs, could go for a walk on the Greenbelt.  As a community member, it seems that those who want to eliminate the dogs, are those that live on the beach - not folks like me who are happy to share public spaces with dogs, kids and adults.  Incidentally, the 6 months on/off would work if we lived in South Carolina - but in Maine that is not a fair solution. It seems that the ban of dogs from Willard from 9am onward during the summer is restrictive enough.

I wasn’t sure which direction I was really leaning towards until I read all of these posts.  As I read the name calling, insults and accusations, it has helped me to decide. Thank you dog owners for proving that Gary Crosby is a rational and thoughtful person who is standing up for the people in the area that just want to walk on a clean and safe beach. I haven’t heard a nasty word from him, in fact quite the opposite. I think with a little cooperation, coordination and compromise this could be resolved. Yes, I am a dog owner and Yes, I love to walk on the beach - - but most importantly, I respect other people and if my dog’s presence offends or causes concern for others I don’t take my dog there.  You can walk a dog elsewhere. You can only walk on the beach ~ on the beach.

"Shrill?” Hardly. Turn off the sixties music and read them again, slowly.

I too was in the same boat & couldn’t decide how I felt until I read these posts.  But respectful dog owner, my conclusion is far different from yours.  It seems those that want to ban dogs are more concerned with correcting people’s grammar, ridiculing opponent’s intelligence and restricting public access. I think that with some pleasant discourse this can be resolved and in the end that we go back to that which we learned in school - to share.  Let us all share the public spaces.

Actually sharkey the song is from the 70’s but I get the shrill passive aggressive nature of your comment.  I figure you for more of a 21st century guy anyway so here ya go.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SoRu_NphhQs

Here is one reason why a dog park or more than one isn’t a sustainable answer: the costs associated with one can be staggering.

Here is just one article about the costs associated with the implementation of a dog park. (In one article I found that just starting a dog park cost $14,000 in Tuscon, AZ and then when it became a dust bowl the irrigation and the other costs to make it presentable totaled another $85,000).

“Start-up Costs
Signs and fencing are the minimum amount of equipment needed to construct a satisfactory dog park. Research shows that the necessary signs will cost approximately $1500 per park. Fencing costs depend on the material and the amount needed. The installation of a 4-foot chain link fence, with appropriate gate entrances, around a square one-acre area (43,560 square feet), for example, is estimated to cost approximately $10,000.  Using a 6-foot chain link fence for the same area would cost approximately $15,000. In addition, most dog parks include other equipment such as benches and water fountains, which are estimated to cost a total of approximately $3000, as long as a water tin is nearby. Scoop dispensers cost between $75 and $100.
Maintenance Costs
The maintenance of dog parks varies tremendously, depending on the size of the park. Dog parks typically require mowing and should be handled in the same way as other park areas. For example, the fenced area would have to be mowed and trimmed every one to two weeks; a one-acre size tract would require several hours every one to two weeks of routine maintenance to keep up with the grass. 
Trash containers should be emptied daily and waste scoops restocked when needed. While owners are typically required to clean up after their dogs, it is inevitable that some areas will be missed, especially if dogs are running free. We believe staff will be needed to clean up the area regularly. Clean-up rounds should be made weekly to make sure that the park is free from excessive waste. It is also recommended that the fencing and other equipment be hosed down frequently to prevent urine stains and odors.
Park professionals in other areas of the country estimate approximately $8,000 in annual maintenance costs for a ½ acre (approximately 22,000 square foot park). This includes about 3 hours per week in cleaning labor, refilling scooper dispensers, printing costs for dog park literature, and lawn care. In parks with high volume, turf maintenance is constant and can become expensive.
Due to high volume use most dog parks receive, it is often necessary to shut down at least portions of dog parks for repair. Reseeding the grass, particularly around the gate area is a common maintenance concern.”

So for a park the size of Hinckely Park (40 acres) that would cost $320,000 annually, but no worry there, I am sure the dogs would not get more than 2 acres (as suggested by Kay Loring) and that would be $16,000 annually after the inital setup fees. If parking has to be established you would have to add paving and landscaping and plowing. Tags won’t pay for all of that, especially when the city has a school falling down and an armory to fix up and deal with. A dog park isn’t a sustainable plan. No one can afford it, certainly not South Portland.

Sharkey,

You told the poster that you couldn’t get past their second sentence without being annoyed. Then, called on it, you question their reading comprehension. Maybe not shrill but I certainly wouldn’t call your posts very friendly, either.

Just a quick note about extrapolating what people here post with what all dog owners are like… you are seeing a very small portion of dog owners, obviously. It seems silly, to me, to paint all dog owners with the same brush. Just because someone on a blog posts an anonymous, flippant comment doesn’t mean that all dog owners feel that way. I would say that there is a lot of diversity amongst the dog owners.

I would suggest that there are a lot of people who take this issue seriously because it is important in their everyday lives so I urge people to bear that in mind when thinking about this. That is why a city-wide referendum scares me - most people could care less but if they simply keep hearing that the beach is unsafe for children then they could very easily be persuaded to ban dogs. I don’t believe that it is unsafe in any way for children… I see lots of them there with their family dogs. But most people won’t go to the beach to see what it is actually like.

The response to my annoyance over a poster’s confusion between “need” and “desire” was their reply, “need becomes a matter of individual interpretation,” which might be a valid personal opinion, but fails as a matter of both logic and fact.

My peeved comment “read them again, slowly,” was in response to being called “intolerant” and “shrill.” I attempt to write my posts clearly, succinctly and logically, without resorting to name-calling, hyperbole or shrillness. I include my personal observations if they are appropriate. I’m civil, but I certainly won’t respond to misinterpretation and misinformation by being “friendly.”

I headed down to Willard Oct 26th and it was understandably a busy place, both with people with and without dogs.  I had a nice walk and then sat down to enjoy the scenery, which included a fair amount of what I call Dog Theatre.  It is part of Willard’s charm that dogs are allowed, and because it is the norm for well behaved pups to be there, there also seems to be a strong intra-community normative model that good behavior is expected and reinforced.  The friend I was with is, in fact, afraid of dogs, but we were approached (while sitting in the sand) only twice-- once by a gentle giant who was quickly called away by his owner, once by a puppy who was also quickly retreived.  I also witnessed some very neighborly behavior-- dog owners sharing a stash of poop bags when someone else ran short, scooping up trash with the poop, and generally behaving in a way that our insulated society does not usually engender. I do love the summer months when I can lie back without wondering if a dog will come snuffling around my lunch basket, but in the off season I’ve met more of my neighbors through Willard Beach than anywhere else in South Portland. If there is a city-wide referrendum, I will be happy to turn out in favor of keeping things as they stand now.

Thanks for the music, beachthang. A little wistful and poppish for my taste, but always interesting to expand my horizons.

I’m actually quite ambimillenial, so here’s an old favorite that seems appropriate to this thread:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eer9UoqN_9E

Not sure about your choice of Iggy Pop and for that matter the Stooges, the punk sensibility does not seem to jibe with your position on dogs.  Then again Rush Limbaugh uses a Pretenders song to segue in and out of his world of hate and fear so who’s to say how each of us interprets the tune in our head.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EQARzXtc2ik

People are multidimensional. Please don’t compare me to Rush Limbaugh; nothing I’ve posted contains or promotes either hate or fear. Have a nice day.

I did not compare you or what you say to Rush Limbaugh, I pointed out the apparent confusion between the choice of music and the messages one chooses to voice.  I have always thought Rush Limbaugh to be a hypocrite for many reasons, one being his embrace of music created by the very people he disparages, i.e. left leaning artists.  Your choice of Iggy Pop, arguably one of the godfathers of the punk movement and a true proponent of doing exactly as one pleases regardless of the rules, struck me as odd in light of your desire to control and deny people their right to dog walk on the beach. By the way do you listen to Rush?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNT9dXRQ0aE&feature=related

The pundit or the band? The former, never. The latter, rarely.
I’m not going to fit nicely into your box. Bye.

Alan Watts walks his dog.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8aufuwMiKmE

Ayn Rand does too, and its nobodies gol darn business but her own.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ukJiBZ8_4k

Richard Feynman teaches the theory of inertia relative to the size of the dog, the length of the leash, the consistency of the sand, and the weight of the owner.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sk8TVopOBGE&feature=related

Replace tourist with dog walker......
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nEA7IwiJf98

Thanks, everyone - what a parade of minds! Some of my favorites.

Personally, I think it’s a shame that “Maine is one of only a few states in which coastal property owners own land out to the mean low tide line.” http://www.seagrant.umaine.edu/accesslaw/legstat.htm

This whole debate would probably be a complete non-issue if all Maine’s beaches were public.

Kirk weighs in.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3b56e0u0EgQ