I don't favor any "off-leash" hours for any park. It is a potentially dangerous situation waiting to happen. Too many young children are in the park during those hours and the possibility of an "off-leash" dog attack is real. Furthermore, the farther your dog is from you, the less likely you'll "see" the dog defecate and pick up after. We are already living in a city where from the city government to the citizenry, we aren't doing the minimum. In this case the minimum is to avoid possible trouble and fence off some areas in our parks for dogs to be off the leash.

I'd much rather a fenced in dog run in Patterson.

I really don't see why everyone's so gung-ho about off-leash dog hours when its currently illegal at all times, yet there are off-leash dogs at all hours.

Off leash hours are for specific areas of the park at specific times not the whole park for most of the day. You wouldn't let your children run thru a baseball field during a game would you? New York city has had off leash hours for over 20 years and they found dog bites went from over 40,000 per year to less than 4000 per year. -- http://www.nycoffleash.com/html/FAQ.htm -- Also, picking up after your pet and off leash hours are 2 separate issues. Someone who doesnt pick up will not do so whether their dog is on leash or not just like people litter even though there are trash cans. Giving people the opportunity to responsible exercise their dogs allows people to modify their behavior by concentrating dogs into one area during specific times and not all over the park all day long.
Taxpaying dog owners deserve and need outdoor space to recreate with their dogs.

Off-leash recreation better socializes dogs, resulting in better canine citizens which benefit the communities in which they live.

Off-leash Hours policy gets people into the parks, bringing people together and making the City a more pleasant place.

Dog owners who use Off-leash Hours are a strong deterrent against crime in the parks early in the morning and late in the evening.

Dogs off-leash in a natural setting playing, running, and being themselves are a beautiful sight for dog owners and most non-dog owners.

Many other cities and municipalities have agreed that providing off-leash opportunities makes good public policy and has has overall positive effect that strongly outweighs any negatives.

Throwing a ball, running with, and playing with one's dog is a legitimate park recreational activity.

Though dog parks are great, there are not nearly enough of them to meet the demand for Baltimore City dog owners.

It's about time something like this happened, and I'll definitely be there.

Other cities, large and small, manage to have off-leash hours without incident. In fact, in NYC incidents of dog bites have gone way down since the advent of off-leash hours, since an exercised and socialized dog, is a well adjusted dog.

I look forward to letting the "boys" off leash legally!

I'm absolutely for off-leash hours. The majority of park users are dog owners (in Patterson anyway), and our dogs need to run. I don't think that we should live in fear of some "potentially dangerous situation that may happen possibly someday" (good grief...the terror!). If a dog isn't obedient their owner most likely won't have them running around off leash. And if they do have them running around off leash and they get into trouble then that owner should be punished for that. Period. We have park rangers in the parks, so why not let them do their jobs. We shouldn't be punishing dog owners whose dogs need exercise (or driving said owners away from the city), because an un-exercised dog is a greater threat to society than a healthy well-exercised one.

I'll be teaching a class that night and can't make it to the meeting, but I would love to advocate for a large fenced dog park in Patterson Park. My dogs will not be allowed off-leash at any time without a fence (my dulcet tones cannot compete with their houndy noses). But my dogs love to run and get exercise, too. More fenced dog parks in the city - large enough for real running - would be great. As for off-leash hours without a fenced park, I'm ok with that, but it won't help my dogs and me any.

I cannot understand why a fenced-in dog area in PP is not back on the table. It seems the best solution.
And the "majority of park users are dog owners"? Really...give me a break. You see what you want to see. I keep my child out of the unofficial "doggy area" across from my house because she's been knocked down flat twice (on the sidewalk), and can't remember not to run away from off-leash dogs that scare her (making them chase her). Not to mention the dog crap that abounds from irresponsible owners not paying attention to where their pups go.
If off-leash hours go into effect as proposed, from 5pm-10, there is no way I'll be able to use the park then - and this is the only time that I - and I'd venture to say most working parents - have to visit.
Thanks to all those responsible dog-owners for watching out for others, but I still say the best solution is separate fenced in area.

@Shannon: Most dog owners are in the park at least twice a day, 365 days a year. Are you there with your child nearly that often? Are those birdwatching, or playing softball, attending a concert, or using the pool there ever day, in all kinds of weather?

I believe that studies of park users have proved this as well.

Regarding off-leash hours, I don't know how this will turn out, but they are generally a specific part of parks at a specific times. Just as I'm sure you don't walk though the middle of a kick ball game in progress, if you don't want to be around dogs, then just don't walk in the area where dogs are off-leash.

Patterson Park is large. There's no reason that all user groups can't be accommodated, especially the largest group of park users--according to most--the dog owners.

Shannon - did you not read the comments above? Off-leash hours do not mean that dogs are going to have the ENTIRE run of the park, pooping everywhere, unsupervised. It means that certain areas of the park will be designated as off-leash during specified hours.
If it can be done in a city of New York's magnitude, it can absolutely be done in Baltimore. I can't say that I agree with 10 off-leash hours a day, but might as well start big and whittle it down from there.
As for a fenced dog park in Patterson Park, well, we have lovely Baltimore City to blame for that. http://www.pattersondogpark.org/index.html It has been in the works for years now, yet no progress made. While a fenced dog park is definitely preferred, in the meantime I think people are willing to settle for off-leash hours.

@Shannon, the Director of Parks and Recs said herself that the majority of Patterson Park users are dog owners. I'm sorry, but this is true, and Ellen's post really summarizes why. We are at the park multiple times every single day.

Off leash hours will give us a designated area where we can count on being able to exercise our dogs proper. I don't really understand it when you say you'll never come to the park during 5pm and 10pm if there are off leash hours. Right now dogs are off leash everywhere *all* the time, so if it's danger you're worried about it seems you'd be better off with off leash hours.

@Ellen - how often someone visits the park does not make them have more of a "right" to the park. If I want to play on the playground with my son five times a week I'll still using the park and should be considered.
@Chris If you walk around Patterson looking through different eyes you might be surprised. I've had dog owners simply say their dog is friendly as the dog is shoving it's nose into my son's stroller. I've never seen rangers in the park (not in a truck) and the dilemma I face is how to deal with unsafe dog owners who aren't responsible when noone else is around us. To assume people in this city will act responsible by default is naive.
@Mike You argue it will bring more people into the park but you are overlooking those who will need to avoid the park. Dogs off leash in Patterson are not a beautiful sight in a natural setting. It's not a natural setting for dogs. It's a park for everyone.
Dogs do need to run. Fence them in. yes, it's worrying about safety but I buckle my child in when he rides in the car and most would agree it is a reasonable precaution even though he hates it. A fence instead of off leash hours is a reasonable precaution.

What is needed is a designated off-leash area, so that dog owners can use whether or not to have their dogs off-leash -- and more importantly can protect their dogs on-leash from dogs off-leash. The proposed off-leash hours are the hours most dog owners walk their dogs in Patterson Park. No policy should take those hours away from dog owners who want to walk their dogs on-leash safely, without concern about attacks from off-leash dogs.

@Faith: Deal with them the same way you'd deal with any other illegality or public nuisance - report it. Call 911...do what everybody else does when they feel they've been wronged or harmed or their safety has been compromised. Call them on it. And to follow your logic (you called me naive to believe that people can be responsible with their dogs) then we'd obviously have to ban people from playing catch in the park, since I know a girl who's face was smashed in my a baseball recently, so we can't have that, since all ball players aren't responsible enough to play in a remote field. And bikes? Well, I think bikes should be banned from the park as well because it would be devastating to be hit by a biker who wasn't paying enough attention. These sound ridiculous right? This is not how our society works (or should work). I simply can't agree with this guilty-until-proven innocent mentality. It's not okay for owners to have no control over their dogs, and I would welcome a proper consequence for this (even if it's just a vocal lashing by yourself), but I do think people can be responsible, and if they aren't responsible with their dogs there should be consequences. It's the same for anything.

@ Peggy, Faith, Shannon - It has been explained, multiple times, that off-leash hours would only be in DESIGNATED spaces in the park. Off-leash dogs would not have free range over the entire park under this proposal. I fail to understand how anybody could have a problem with this. We are all neighbors, interested in utilizing one of the best resources in the city in the safest way for everyone. Off-leash hours in designated areas are a step in the right direction until the city follow through on its promise of a fenced dog park.

Also, I'm so sick of hearing people complain about dog poop left behind by careless owners. Yes, there are people who don't clean up after their dogs. No amount of fine, complaining, threats, etc. will change that. I frequently have used doggie bags left on my front steps. Is it annoying? Yes - but I suck it up and throw them in the trash. There is not much you can do about it. Next time, consider 'paying it forward' and picking up some trash you might see, or use an extra doggie bag to clean up what someone else left behind. If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem.

I used to be in favor of off-leash hours but lately I have several encounters with off-leash pets charging me & my dog who is on a leash and selective about who she likes.

I just don't know if it will work unless it is in specifically boundaried areas, like the one in N. Wyman Park. Does Patterson Park have something like that, where dogs will naturally stay with in boundaries? If not, please be very careful and attentive and make sure your dogs don't run off. It only takes one time for that privilege to be taken away forever.

As a two dog owner I am definitely supportive of changing the rules that make me liable for a very expensive fine just for letting my dogs run in the park. But, I'll be the first to admit they sometimes have a mind of their own and will chase a squirrel or take off after a scent and not immediately heed my command to stop. And, I too have a toddler that I worry about and would be beyond mortified if a dog attacked her. That said, I just wonder how exactly does a limited free run area work? What is to keep the dogs in a specific area? And, while I understand the dog group that meets near the Pagoda is usually responsible, what happens when the bad "pit bull" owners bring their dogs into the mix after they find out its ok to let em go at it. Fact is, once a dog fight or attack starts it's very hard and risky to stop until after the damage is done. How do the supporters suggest addressing that issue?

One of my dogs is a Standard Poodle who, when his hair is on the longish side, admittedly looks like a big fuzzy wuzzy teddy bear. At least 3-4 times a month, a young child will come running up to my poodle when I'm walking him on a leash in Patterson Park, often yelling in a shrill child's voice, to fling him or herself on my dog's neck, giving him an unwanted "hug."

Rarely does the parent ever apologize -- but usually laughs and says how much his or her child loves dogs. My dog was not raised with children and is not used to this type of treatment. Luckily, he just "freezes" when he's assaulted this way and has never bit a child.

Now, if I wanted to generalize based on these experiences, I could think that most parents are irresponsible and don't do a good job of supervising their children. However, I know that isn't true. And I also know that most "dog parents" are responsible and supervise their dogs. It would be nice if we did not make park policy based on worst case scenarios or dog owners.

@Faith====you are worried about natural settings? In an urban park? tennis courts, porta-pots in cages in the middle of the fields, Dept of Public Works yard, full trash cans, etc is somehow a natural setting while dogs playing off leash is an eye-sore? As park users, we are not talking about 'special rights' but equal treatment.

I am not a dog owner. In a previous life, I was co-custodian of a very friendly, very rambunctious German Short-Haired Pointer, who very much enjoyed his outings to the local dogpark. where he could race, wrestle, sniff, and poop with abandon. Not currently having a dog, I do find myself annoyed by dog owners who feel they can use my (yes, I fully understand that the sidewalk in front of my house is not *my* property) meager flower garden as a public toilet, despite the fact that I live a half block from PP and am the only homeowner in my block who has planted around his/her tree. (One dog "owner" responded to my complaint by telling me that she couldn't control where her pooch pooped. I countered by asking if this meant that her dog was allowed to dump in the living room.) I am annoyed when I come home on "garbage day" to find that someone has deposited their dog's sh*t (yes, tidily wrapped in a plastic bag, thank you) in my empty trash can for me to deal with for a week. But I digress. I did not attend the public discsssion of the off-leash "area," but I do have some questions: what is the difference between an "area" and a "dogpark"? Will the "area" be fenced? If not, what keeps the "area" from being synonymous with PP? If not, what will keep dogs from running in to the street? What am I not understandng? I conclude with the point I tried to make at the outset: I am not anti-dog. I enjoy my encounters with well-mannered leashed dogs when I use the Park. I am merely asking that dog owners understand their place in the larger community. Urban dog ownership is not a right; it is a privilege.

I am a city dog owner, and, honestly, I have mixed feelings about this issue. I thought the $1,000 fine the city briefly imposed for off-leash dogs was exorbitant, and signed a petition to get it lowered. I also understand the case that many have made for off-leash hours and/or fenced-in dog parks.

But I also understand the frustration that many have with the behavior of some dogs and their owners in city parks. I have two dogs that get along beautifully with each other, but do not necessarily want to greet and/or play with unfamiliar dogs. Both have been well-trained and have their Canine Good Citizen certifications, and I keep them under my control at all times. So it is very frustrating for me when I walk my two dogs on a leash in the parks closest to my home, and will go out of my way to avoid the areas where off-leash dogs typically play, and yet still will have unfamiliar dogs run up to me and my dogs. If the owner is close by, I will ask them to call and/or retrieve their dog. Sometimes, though, the owner is at a distance, endlessly calling their dog to "come" while the dog completely ignores them, or my favorite is when the person is on their cell phone and doesn't even seem to be paying attention to the whereabouts of their dog. Some dog owners are apologetic and responsive after I ask their dog to retrieve and/or call their dog, but I have had numerous owners look at me with a bewildered expression, or, my personal favorite, they will say "he's/she's friendly" (as their dog jumps rudely all over my two dogs), which in my view is really beside the point. I have perfectly valid reasons for not wanting my dogs to interact with unfamiliar dogs, but I shouldn't have to explain this to other dog owners every time I go to a city park (or sometimes even just walking down the sidewalk, where I have also encountered off-leash dogs). I would prefer fenced-in dog parks for this reason, but I know that many community dog owners, such as in Patterson Park, have had a difficult time getting the approval/funding for fenced-in dog parks. Therefore, I am willing to compromise with my fellow dog owners and support off-leash hours.

However, I do want to emphasize that with off-leash hours should come a renewed commitment by dog owners to behave responsibly. For my part, I will keep my dogs under my control, and will avoid walking within close proximity to the off-leash areas during the designated hours. However, dog owners that make use of the off-leash hours will need stick to the rules (designated areas and hours, controlling their dogs, etc.) and be considerate of those of us that also want to be able to use the parks with our canine and human family members unbothered by off-leash dogs.

BankStreet - Well, if that isn't the most pompous comment I've heard all day. "Urban dog ownership is not a right, it is a privilege." What?

It is unfortunate that you take the poor behavior of a few dog owners and lay blame on all of us. I have had used poop bags left on the sidewalk in front of my house - if I don't pick them up, nobody will. It sucks, but I deal with it. It doesn't mean that every dog owner out there is a bad person.

The off-leash forum has not taken place yet, so you still have a chance to attend. It is at 7 pm on Thursday, and in fact I urge you to attend (after all, it is your RIGHT to voice your opinion there). I don't think anybody has all the answers to your questions yet (that's why we are having a forum), least of all the Dept of Parks & Rec. You will see a cross-section of the responsible dog owners in your neighborhood, and perhaps you will lighten up a bit and recognize that all of your neighbors have a right to use the park for recreational activities. It just so happens that a good majority of the recreational activity that takes place at the park in a given year revolves around dogs and their owners (365 days / year, 2-3x per day). Might as well get used to it.

Henry, I agree wholeheartedly. Your comment epitomizes everything that the community needs to realize about off-leash hours and dog parks. Everyone needs to compromise...Henry by avoiding the areas where off-leash dogs may be, and other dog owners by properly training their dogs and respecting other people's personal space.

Thank you, Henry. There has been so much discussion about the topic, and I think your comment summed it up well. While you may not necessarily want off-leash hours or dog parks for yourself, you recognize the benefit to the community at large.

@b5c0q3:

If you read my posting again, you will see that I do not complain about dog owners in general; in fact, I spoke quite positively about my encounters with dogs in the Park. The stories I tell are of my dealings with only a few dogs travelling to (not so much from) the Park. These experiences, though, do serve to butress the comment you found "pompous." Putting it another way, a city is a community, first and foremost, of people. Those who have invited dogs to join them in that community should, by definition, learn to accomodate the primary residents, and not the other way round.

Thank you for clarifying the logistics for the forum/discsssion.