PelhamToday continues to receive reader letters regarding Pelham Town Council's potential ban on dogs in cemeteries. Here are the latest three:
I’m extremely disappointed to learn that council is voting on a ban for dogs in area cemeteries, and Fonthill Cemetery in particular. The Fonthill Cemetery is a very important pedestrian pass-through between neighbourhoods for residents in the area, and banning resident dog walkers from it removes a crucial means of traversing neighbourhoods through a safe, quiet pedestrian corridor (rather than down to loud, busy Pelham Street).
The removal of this pedestrian corridor for our many dog-owning residents is a safety concern. It forces dog walkers onto poorly lit residential streets with no sidewalks, streets that become much narrower in the winter when snowbanks grow tall. I’m thinking particularly of our many elderly dog walkers in the area who utilize the cemetery for this exact reason.
Before council implements a blanket ban, I think residents have a right to have three questions answered:
1. Is the issue off-leash dogs and poop that isn’t being picked up? If so, we have bylaws already in place for this. There are signs at the entrances to the cemetery. I have seen the repeat offenders (many of whom drive in to walk their dogs in the cemetery—they’re not even residents of this neighbourhood), and I have never once seen a bylaw officer in the Fonthill Cemetery in my twice daily walks through.
2. What is being done to enforce the current bylaws that are meant to ensure respectful use of the space? How frequently are bylaw officers posted, and how many fines have been issued? If we are to believe that a total ban is the solution, council needs to prove that the Town is already enforcing the current bylaws and it simply isn’t working. Where are the numbers to support this decision?
I have never once seen a bylaw officer in the Fonthill Cemetery in my twice daily walks through.
3. How will the Town actually enforce this new ban/bylaw? If the answer to the previous question is “no enforcement is currently being done”, then how are we to believe that a ban will fix the problem? The people who are comfortable with breaking rules will simply continue to do so, and the people following the rules are the only ones punished.
This decision, quite frankly, feels lazy. Is this how my taxes are being spent—finding ways to ban residents from shared spaces instead of simply enforcing rules that are already in place?
Is this the kind of community we want to be? One that chooses to punish everyone rather than the few offenders, one that creates divides—both geographical and social? Banning dogs in Fonthill Cemetery isn’t just a ban on dogs, it’s a ban on residents.
Leigh Peterson
Fonthill
Loiterers and vandals, not dogs, are a problem in our cemeteries
My wife and I have been walking our leashed dogs at least once daily through the Fonthill cemetery for almost 40 years. In all that time, other dog owners we have encountered have also had their dogs leashed and under control. We have never come across dogs running loose, let alone, as Councillor Wink has suggested “defecating on graves.” The remains of my parents, sister and those related to many other fellow responsible dog owners are there too, Mr. Wink, and all grave sites are treated with utmost respect!
Since the development of the east end of Fonthill, the population of displaced foxes in and around the cemetery has increased substantially. We see them there several times a week and occasionally coyotes as well. If feces is an issue, it’s that of free-roaming wild animals and not dogs under the control of responsible owners!
The remains of my parents, sister and those related to many other fellow responsible dog owners are there too, Mr. Wink, and all grave sites are treated with utmost respect!
As another letter writer indicated, the cemetery has been the site of many acts of vandalism in the past. Loitering and vandalism by teens or others is far less, if not at all likely to happen when there is a regular cycle of pedestrian traffic. On several occasions over the years, groups of and individual loiterers have disbursed and departed when our presence became known. Presently, the majority of the pedestrians in the cemetery are walking dogs and they won’t be there if they're banned. Think about it! Dog owners are literally providing the Town of Pelham with no-cost vandalism deterrent patrols.
Banishing law-abiding citizens and their dogs from cemeteries is a "solution" to a non-existent problem and the creation of a far more serious one. The Town already has laws in place relating to leashing dogs and picking up their waste. If there are violations taking place, then simply enforce the law. Otherwise, you’re just punishing responsible people and removing an effective crime deterrent.
Tom Daley
Fonthill
Banning dogs from cemeteries would be shortsighted
I thought I would take the time to write you considering the proposed rule changes regarding dogs in the cemetery.
We live right beside the entrance to the cemetery and enjoy seeing all the people walking with families and friends and dogs. I understand completely that some people might be concerned about how dogs behave in the cemetery. I also think that a rule banning dogs is shortsighted and problematic.
The cemetery is a walkway for so many people on either side of it and so this would limit people and how they move through town. How would the new rule be enforced except by tattletales or perhaps cameras?
Walking means a healthier more vibrant community and any limits or obstruction to walking or community is a step backwards.
Most dog owners are conscientious and also understand where they are when they are walking with their dogs. They are very aware and alert in order to maintain control of their dogs. Perhaps more signage about what the expected behaviour should be: keep dogs on path and off graves; dogs must be leashed at all times; clean up after your dog.
These are simple messages but could be effective.
I think it would be a missed opportunity of continued community building with the people of Pelham that are walking. Walking means a healthier more vibrant community and any limits or obstruction to walking or community is a step backwards.
No one wants more rules and no one wants to enforce more rules.
Jon Willms
Fonthill
Have an opinion on this issue?
Share it in a letter to the editor. Share it with Pelham Town Council.
