Proposal would allow dogs off leashes

Draft ordinance permits pets to run free at seven recreational sites


Two retrievers play unleashed Tuesday at Fort Getty. Although Jamestown prohibits unleashed dogs on municipal recreational properties, the law is not enforced. Councilman Randy White has drafted an amended ordinance that would allow dogs to run free at the park during the offseason. PHOTO BY ANDREA VON HOHENLEITEN

Two retrievers play unleashed Tuesday at Fort Getty. Although Jamestown prohibits unleashed dogs on municipal recreational properties, the law is not enforced. Councilman Randy White has drafted an amended ordinance that would allow dogs to run free at the park during the offseason. PHOTO BY ANDREA VON HOHENLEITEN

Dogs will be able to run free during the offseason at seven publicly owned recreational facilities, including Fort Getty, if a proposed ordinance written by Councilman Randy White is approved.

White presented his draft at the town council’s meeting Monday night after volunteering for the job in March. He spent the last six months researching neighboring communities’ ordinances and reading letters from more than 50 residents to arrive at the ordinance.

“As we all have come to expect, the quality of input from our engaged citizenry is remarkable,” he said. “People had great ideas and a range of opinions.”

The task of rewriting the ordinance surfaced after a dog owner complained in October about being attacked six times by unleashed dogs. What the council found was an ordinance that was out of date.

“There are practices of dog owners in Jamestown that are well established,” White said. “But they don’t comport to what our ordinance says.”

The current ordinance says dogs must be leashed at all times while on municipal recreational facilities. Dogs also are prohibited on the beaches. Unleashed dogs, however, are allowed anywhere else in Jamestown before 7 a.m. and after 4 p.m.

“It used to be that there were neighborhood dogs that took it upon themselves to think, ‘Well traffic’s not so bad, I think I’ll plunk myself in the middle of Narragansett Avenue down by the Dutch Harbor Boat Yard. If a car comes, maybe I’ll look up at it. Maybe I’ll move, or maybe I won’t.’ Those days are gone,” White said.

The amended ordinance requires dogs to be securely attached to a leash not exceeding 7 feet “on the public streets, sidewalks, ways, parks, grounds, buildings and any other property within the town.”

White, however, did include exceptions. From Oct. 15 through May 15, dogs are allowed to be unleashed at Fort Getty, Mackerel Cove, Head’s Beach, Potter Cove, Park Dock, Conanicut Battery, and the Eldred Avenue soccer fields. They also are allowed at those facilities during the remainder of the year but must be leashed.

“This is meant to be an exhaustive list,” White said. “If a place isn’t on the list, you can’t have your dog off the leash there.”

Dogs, however, must be “under the direct command and control of the owner or keeper” to be unleashed. That is defined by the dog returning upon voice command or when prompted by a remotely controlled electronic signal. The dog’s keeper also must “maintain constant awareness of the dog’s whereabouts and conduct,” and they must carry a leash “and employ it when necessary,” the proposed law says.

Finally, for the dog to be considered under direct command and control, the keeper must prevent the dog from interacting with any other person or dog unless that person “clearly communicates their assent to the interaction,” it says.

The proposal says keepers of dogs who are participating in off-leash activity, however, “shall be presumed to have their implied consent to interaction with other owners, keepers, and dogs engaged in the same activity at the same time and location.”

“One of the problems at Fort Getty is that people treat it like a wide-open, open-air, no-fences dog park, and they will chat away as their dogs play away,” White said. “For the safety of not only the dogs and owners, but most especially, for the people who want to use the park who want nothing to do with dogs, that can’t be what the requirement is. If you have your dog under command and control, you have to maintain a constant awareness of where the dog is and what it’s doing.”

The ordinance also addressed the disposal of pet waste, and requires keepers “to immediately remove the feces and properly dispose of any bag (or other container or receptacle) into which the removed feces had been placed.”

“That was an attempt to beef up the feces provision,” White said. “Everybody complains about not only the proliferation of dog mess, but the fact that well-intentioned dog owners bag it up and leave the bags, which is almost as bad as not doing anything.”

As for the provision for dogs at large, White rewrote the entire section. It is the responsibility of a dog owner “to employ whatever measures are necessary and adequate to prevent the dog from leaving the property unrestrained and from moving about at large within the town.”

Dogs found moving about at large will be impounded by the police, “or other person employed by the town to enforce this chapter,” and the dog will be held at the animal shelter until the owner is found.

Mary Meagher, vice president of the council, suggested advertising the ordinance for public hearing at the council’s first meeting in October. She also commended White for his commitment.

“This is just an incredible amount of work,” she said.

Nancy Beye, president of the council, agreed.

“This has been quite an undertaking,” she said. “I’m just amazed.”

The only amendment to the draft that was discussed was whether to include limited times during the day for owners to walk their dogs off-leash. Using Fort Getty as an example, this would stop dogs from “taking over a public park,” White said, and would allow people who don’t like dogs to enjoy the property.

White mentioned timeframes of 7-11 a.m. and 3-7 p.m. for when dogs can be unleashed, but there was no vote to add the provision.

Penalties of breaking the ordinance would be a $25 fine for the first offense, which would double for a second offense in the same year. Subsequent offenses would result in a $100 fine.