In the course of my research regarding the memorial bench brouhaha a couple of months ago, I had an opportunity to speak with Manny Glaser, who lives across the street from the bluffs. Though I knew, and had mentioned in my post about the Berman-Yoshpe bench, that Mr. Glaser is a longtime critic of dog owners who let their dogs go leashless at the bluff in violation of leash laws, until now I had not understood why he feels so strongly. Talking with him gave me food for thought.
Mr. Glaser's points, as I understand them, follow, along with my evaluation of each one:
1) The bluff is a people park. It is not a dog park. Mr. Glaser regrets that the Palisades doesn't have a dog park, but he emphasizes that the bottom line is that the Asilomar bluff is posted as requiring dogs to be on leashes.
My take: Mr. Glaser is accurate: Legally, this is not a dog park. Although, it is also true that laws sometimes lag behind changing social mores.
2) Mr. Glaser and the neighbors on each side of him, all of whom have dogs, are all frustrated because their own dogs become overexcited and bark constantly as they look out their windows at dogs across the street running wildly. (Here Mr. Glaser highlights in particular the people who use long ball-launchers to throw balls for their dogs to chase.) When Mr. Glaser is trying to work or to read, his dog is barking away. Mr. Glaser believes, as apparently also do his immediate neighbors, that the bluff is being hijacked in a way that frustrates their quiet enjoyment of their lives.
My take: Even if the dogs on the bluff were on-leash, the dogs looking out the window at them would be barking. As a sofa-sitter myself, I can attest that one's natural tendency is to bark when one sees a dog go by. If you live in front of a park, you're going to see a lot of activity.
3) The dogs who populate the bluff can be off-putting, in particular to older people who may be scared to walk there, and to young children. In particular, Mr. Glaser feels bad that when his Israeli grandchildren come to visit they have been leapt upon by very large dogs. Mr. Glaser says that in Israel dogs are not routinely kept as pets, so his grandchildren are frightened of these large and unrestrained dogs jumping on them when they go over to play on the bluff or even just to sit on a bench.
My take: This is a valid concern. Dog owners who bring their dogs to the bluff need to be more attentive, more sensitive, and more aware that not everyone else is as comfortable with their dogs as they are. I am thinking in particular of a few dog owners who have the nerve to take umbrage when asked whether or not their dog is friendly. The burden of proof is on the dog owner here. And rather than an unfortunately-titled 'one bite at the apple' rule, there should be no tolerance for any 'bites'. If a dog is possibly unreliable, that dog should not be on the bluff unless tightly leashed and supervised.
4) Dog owners do not always pay attention to their dogs, and thus may miss dog defecation which remains on the bluff and is like a minefield to persons such as Mr. Glaser who might want to walk on the bluff at night. Here Mr. Glaser identifies two categories of culprits: (a) People who come with their dogs to the bluff but may be socializing and miss seeing a poop occur; and (b) One particular neighbor, living a block from Mr. Glaser, whose dogs historically have crossed the street to the bluff while that neighbor stayed at home.
My take: This one is also a valid concern. The bluff isn't a forest; it's a public park where people like to walk. Anyone who repeatedly ignores their dog's defecation should not be permitted to return.
So, here we are. Mr. Glaser is certainly within his legal rights to complain, and some of his arguments are compelling. Is there a way to balance the concerns of the residents whose homes adjoin the bluffs with the desires of everyone else to come to the bluff and enjoy the sunset with their dogs?
Can dog owners stlll gather to socialize while keeping closer tabs on their pets? (I know... easy for me to suggest, since I have no desire to wander far from my owner and in an ideal world I would be carried by her at all times.)
Can the neighbor Mr. Glaser complains about better supervise her dogs?
Would the Glasers and their neighbors be OK with people gathering more decorously but minus the throwing balls?
Can bluff-goers police themselves better?
Can't we all just get along?
