Monday, May 3, 2010

TAKE A LOAD FOR FREE

TAKE A LOAD FOR FREE: The rabid dog ladies- a term we’ve taken to use in describing the string of middle-aged haole women who have been streaming through the testimony table at recent county council meetings- will no doubt be back in force this Wednesday when the bill to allow dog-walking on the whole “dog path” comes up for a final committee session.

Their stridency is something to behold as is their mantra that “everyone” supports their “right” to walk their dogs on the path.

Today Joan Conrow reports on “an email sent around by Mr. Path, Thomas Noyes” saying”
Based on park users' overwhelming endorsement for allowing responsible dog walking on all of Kauai's existing and future multi-use path systems, as documented in the survey conducted under the direction of the Department of Parks and Recreation, the Kauai Path board of directors supports responsible dog walking on all of Ke Ala Hele Makalae and future path systems.

This “survey” was conducted by 11 of the most hydrophobic of the supporters of allowing dogs on what is of course a “transportation, not recreation” bike path according to the federal law under which the original $40 million was obtained- although Noyes has succeeded in getting everyone to buy into calling it the “shared use path”.

So it’s no surprise then that in answer to the question “Did you experience any problems with dogs on the shred use path” way over 92.9% percent said no. Funny how when “staff”- i.e. county employees- were asked over 20% of those who answered said yes- a statistic that had to be gleaned since it and many other stats weren’t calculated by those that “compiled” the survey.

Of course the selection of participants by the dog ladies and the fact that “no” was the answer the surveyors wanted and expected- in addition to the local custom of telling people what they want to hear- had nothing to do with the answers.

But, as we pause to remove our tongue from our cheek, the one question that stands out when one peruses the entire “presentation” is the question “Is dog feces on the shared use path currently a significant problem?

The result reported was that 90.1% said no. But a look at the results of the staff survey showed that, again, of those who answered yes or no, 24.1% said yes and only 20% said no.

In answer to the question “Do you feel safe with leashed dogs on the shared use path?” again while 97% of the public said yes, a whopping 51.7% of staff (or about 3/4th of those who answered) said no while only 13.4% said yes.

Something’s fishy and it sounds like it just could be the “push poll” nature of the 11 dog zealots who took the public survey.

So what is the real situation with both leash violations and dog poop? Well, as we reported last week the union has filed a grievance because picking up dog crap is not currently in their job description.

A look at the actual “comments” of those volunteers themselves may show why there’s such a discrepancy.

Although the survey conveniently leaves off this info, council questioning revealed that during the period the survey was conducted the volunteers spent little time on the path, most under a half an hour a session on intermittent days- actually most of the surveys were completed by one person.

As a matter of fact total volunteer hours were 30 in December (2008) 24 in January (2009) and only 19.5 in February and a measly 8 in March.

That makes the report of 65 “notations of dog feces along the path” an unfathomable amount of crap if extrapolated for 12 hours a day. And that was only in a two and a half month period.

Buried on page 46 of the report is the meat- the violations reported not by staff but by the volunteers themselves.

We’re going to post the whole list here so you can get the “flavor”. Remember that as time has gone by volunteer monitoring has gone from meager to virtually non-existent despite promises that if the council passes the proposed dogs-on-the-whole-path ordinance they would “pick it up”- the monitoring that is.

Monitoring Log Comments (all sic)
p46
12/2/2008 Dog chained to tree near pavilion, Kapaa Beach Park, noted by volunteer
12/2/2008 Dog feces removed by volunteer (at rest pavilion) Cat feces removed by volunteer (within 5' of path)
12/3/2008 Dog chained to tree near pavilion, Kapaa Beach Park, noted by volunteer
12/3/2008 Dog feces (2 piles) removed by volunteer (within 5' of path & on path)
12/8/2008 Dog feces removed by volunteer (within 5' of path)
12/8/2008 Man with dog off leash at Lihi, reported by volunteer, no indication if warning was done by volunteer
12/11/2008 Stray dog found on path and picked up by Humane Society (noted by volunteer who brought dog to Ranger)
12/19/2008 Dog running loose near Kapaa Beach Park Pavilion, maybe from house where guy carves tikis
12/22/2008 Dog feces (3 piles removed at pavilion Kapaa N/C); (1 pile removed at the large dispenser at Kapaa N/C)
12/31/2008 Dispensers need to be refilled (Kealia & Kapaa N/C)
1/1/2009 Dog feces (2 piles) in the area of Pavilion #3(?) reported by volunteer (within 5' of path & on path)(no notation if removed)
1/5/2009 Stray med sized white dog, at Lihi restroom, no license (no notation if Humane Society called for stray)
1/11/2009 Bicyclists w/dog not on leash - volunteer counseled riders & they complied
1/12/2009 Lady walker w/retracable leash (no indicate if spoke to walker)(AM)
1/12/2009 No bags at Lihi dispenser (empty several days), dispenser at Kapaa N/C stinks, not emptied in a couple of days (AM)
1/12/2009 Removed 2 piles of dog feces (1 on path other within 5' of path)(PM)
1/13/2009 Walkers w/two dogs, no visible poop bags (no indication if spoke to walkers) 1 pile of dog feces picked up within 5' of path
1/18/1900 Dog pot at Kealia overflowing & really stinks, also almost out of bags. "come on guys can't someone empty these"
1/20/2009 Graffitti path adjacent to Otsukas 6'x4' - red paint
1/21/2009 1 walker w/dog with a retractable leash (no notation if walker spoken to)
1/22/2009 Enforcement officer (Tony) picked up brown lab near Kapaa Pool. KHS picked up dog
1/26/2009 Removed 2 piles of dog feces near Kapaa Beach Park
1/26/2009 Lihi dispenser bottom missing & needs replacement parts ordered
1/26&27/09 Only poop on the path is chicken poop - Yahoo!
1/27/2009 Many chicken manure piles & dead & live slugs & snails
1/29/2009 2 walkers with dogs, no license, were informed
2/8/2009 No litter bags @ bathroom, rest site #1, Dogi pot #2 both sides full, Dogi pot #3 (pool) left side empty, Right full
2/8/2009 Dogi pot #4 upper empty, lower 1/4 full (lookout), Dogi pot #5 both full, Kealia Bridge, stray dog Kealia (no indication if Humane Society called)
2/8/2009 Walker didn't have dog on leash, conunseled her-she put dog on leash, 1 pile feces removed near Kapaa Neighborhood Center
2/12/2009 Launch bathroom doggie bags empty
2/13/2009 No dogs today
2/13/2009 Boat launch bathrooms/doggie bags empty, Kealia Lookout/dogi bag empty, 1 pile dog feces Kealia pavilion (no indication if removed)
2/17/2009 Dogi bag dispenser empty boat ramp bathrooms, Dogi bag dispenser police station bathroom empty, 2 piles feces within 5' of path (no location)
2/18/2009 2 walkers with dogs off leash, put them all on leash, 1 speeding ultra-fast bicyclist - no bike bell, 1 pile feces removed by neighborhood center
2/18/2009 No more poop bags at doggie pot dispenser scenic parking lot


If anyone wants to go through the whole presentation we have the “power point” file (you need PP software to download it) and we’ll forward to you upon request.

We should note that we don’t hate dogs. But what we do hate is allowing a small group to dictate policy through intimidation and falsified and manipulated information.

We do support the right of people who are genuinely afraid of dogs- especially little kids who are at eye-to-eye level with some of them- to be able to use the path, along with those on bicycles (whose use should be a priority) to not have to veer off the path when a dog, as they are prone to do, lunges at them, leashes notwithstanding.

25 comments:

kapaagirl said...

Could you be any more racist? It's too bad that you don't have all the facts straight. The comments that you have listed are from the monitoring volunteers who were not all middle age haole women not from the actual survey. The survey was not done by all haole middle age women either. The people who were surveyed were also given the opportunity to make comments and many of them did, only a sampling of the actual survey comments were listed.

cawalt said...

Hey Andy;

I am in support of dogs on the path...am not a middle aged haole lady...am an older local lady..friend of yours I think...have had dogs all my life in Hawaii and ths is the first time something like this has been an issue...I always clean up after my dog...who usually does not make a mess anyway.

FactCheck said...

Ah yes.

Repeating a lie over and over hoping no one will check and the lie will become truth is a tactic authoritarians of the right and the left employ equally.

"a “transportation, not recreation” bike path according to the federal law under which the original $40 million was obtained- although Noyes has succeeded in getting everyone to buy into calling it the “shared use path”."

This is BS and Andy knows it is. If not, where is the government enforcer demanding the funds back? You have to know poor old Mickens has been hounding anyone who will listen.

The path was paid for with transportation enhancement funds which do not have any "transportation only" rules with the exception of Bicycle ONLY projects (ie you cannot create a bike track.). This project has NEVER been exclusively for bicycles and I defy Parx to provide any hard evidence to the contrary.

Museums, rails to trails and a host of other community enhancement projects are allowed which anyone with 2 minutes to Google can find for themselves.

Thomas Noyes is just stating the same facts every other person in the project and the govt accepts. Only the fringe who want no path at all and just use the dog issue as a stalking horse still believe this canard.

As for describing the people pro dogs on the path in vaguely racist and certainly unpleasant terms, perhaps the author should consider his own origins and generally misanthropic style before casting bones from a glass dog house.

FactCheck said...

And it looks like Joan doesn't share your opinion in the slightest:

"What is the legal justification? And what, really, is the big deal with leashed dogs in public places? Yesterday, I got an email from one of my sisters, who is vacationing in Vienna:

You'd like Vienna, people bring their dogs everywhere with them, including cafes and on the tram, train etc. They have to wear muzzles on the transportation but they don't seem to object.

I noticed the same thing when I traveled through Great Britain. Dogs were welcome everywhere, and I didn’t observe any doo doo or attacks. Surely we can ease up a bit, too. Or must dog owners, like the landowners who have the county jumping through hoops, threaten to sue to get the county’s attention? "

carolyn said...

And your problem with middle-aged haole women would be?

Personally, I'm in fear of running into YOU on the the alleged multi-use path.

The crux of the matter is that the majority of Kauai residents are in favor of allowing dogs on the path. Period. Why there should be any controversy at all is the question.

kalanikaumaka said...

It sounds like you've never ventured out of your cave. Exactly what is a "middle aged haole woman"? I think you used this term to get people outraged over your bigoted choice of words more than the badly researched stats of the multi-use path. Had you done your due diligence, you would have found that those stats were from the very beginning of the test period and the dogs that were tied up and the feces that was picked up belonged to people that were living on the beach, not from the responsible dog owners who walked their dogs and picked up after them. You twisted the statistics to suit your needs. My husband and I use the path all the time and we have never had a problem. In fact, we bring a lot of smiles to people who use the path, many who are tourists and who are missing their dogs left on the mainland. Do you have something against fresh air, exercise and canine companionship? Now be a good boy and lie down.

Roberta said...

I don't know where to start....are you aware that the other survey, conducted by an independent company, which encompassed the entire island, came up with roughly the same statistics, being that an overwhelming majority of Kauai residents are in favor of allowing leashed dogs on the Ke Ala Hele Makalae path. As for the county workers' survey, it's no wonder that many of them logged negative responses. Our county administration is not in favor of allowing our dogs to walk the path, and they are the bosses of the Parks guys.

The grievance filed by the union for the public workers represents that having dogs on the path would unduly increase the maintenance workload for areas allowing dogs. Despite many repeated requests for dollar figures,or number of man-hours involved in meeting the extra workload, no answers have been forthcoming over several months' time.

The dog poop issue, as concerns county workers, is way overblown. Do they not empty trash receptacles in other county areas which very well may contain baby diapers, used condoms, vomit, and moldy food containers? They wear gloves while handling the trash.

Do they not clean up human feces and other bodily fluid emissions at county restroom facilities? They wear gloves for that, too.

A lot of the negative input you mention took place in the very beginning of the trial period, as things were being worked out. It's convenient sometimes to take things out of context to make a point.

I am dismayed at all the division and waste of time this process has created, all for having to fight for YEARS to simply be able to walk a dog down the road.

Peaches said...

very interesting... to some degree I believe some information is true regarding time and hours spent by volunteers on the path... if volunteers are willing to buy in, where were they, survey does not reflect high volunteerism.. as well as what is the longevity of volunteers? It eventually becomes the burden of the workers doesn't it? Because it will be there job. However, I am a tax payer to, and I hate dogs, I fear them, and I have children, I believe dog lovers and dog haters should have some compromise, and that would be allowing dogs on a portion of the path, so, WE PEOPLE WITH KIDS and/or without kids can enjoy the path as well, without concern of being intimidated by dogs. You might love dogs, I don't, so why should my safety and concern be compromised?

Peaches said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Peaches said...

I agree with this end note on the blog...

We should note that we don’t hate dogs. But what we do hate is allowing a small group to dictate policy through intimidation and falsified and manipulated information.

We do support the right of people who are genuinely afraid of dogs- especially little kids who are at eye-to-eye level with some of them- to be able to use the path, along with those on bicycles (whose use should be a priority) to not have to veer off the path when a dog, as they are prone to do, lunges at them, leashes notwithstanding

FactCheck said...

How do you reconcile these two ideas?

"We do support the right of people who are genuinely afraid of dogs- especially little kids who are at eye-to-eye level with some of them- to be able to use the path, along with those on bicycles "

and

"what we do hate is allowing a small group to dictate policy through intimidation and falsified and manipulated information."

Only small groups you agree with get to dictate policy?

The data indicates a majority accept leashed dogs. No manipulation needed. As for intimidation, that bit of beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Telling pols you'll work against them is a right even in Parxworld.

Peaches said...

first of all, I am the smaller group that don't agree with dogs on the whole path, I agree with a portion of the path because we all need to share it.. I asked for a compromise on the situation, so why shove it down my throat to say I can't enjoy the path without dogs?I AM AFRAID OF DOGS, and whose to say you have all the right? And should get what you want? Just because an alleged larger portion of the public didn't oppose, that our concerns should be disregarded... give me a break... a bit of something is better than a whole lot of nothing...and besides who gave the survey? PRO DOG VOLUNTEERS? GO FIGURE! BIASED!

Stephanie said...

I didn't know we were keeping tabs on dog shit. For that matter, where's the record of cigarette butts, empty drink containers, snack bags that can get blown away and consumed by an endangered sea bird or turtle. If we are really gonna play this game lets do it fairly, and I think you will see the majority of the waste is from HUMANS NOT DOGS.
I know many people who would LOVE to have a job spending their entire day maintaining a coastal trail without complaint. Perhaps we should consider a union that actually wants to work, not complain about trivial issues.
Kids afraid of dogs??? The only dogs I am afraid of our the ones chained up in their yard all day. Dogs that take regular walks are HAPPY DOGS. Dogs are the motivating force for much of our population to actually get out of the house after work and take a walk. Sorry Mayor Carvalho, some people may like you, but you are in no way a role model for health and fitness. Those who take regular walks, and if you are a dog owner, you will never leave your furry friend behind, are healthy, happy citizens. Perhaps Mr. Carvalho, you should get a pooch to motivate you to get out there at the end of the day and experience what it feels like to exercise.
There have been no reports of violence between an animal and a person on the coastal path. I thought this game was over.

winky said...

blAndy, you just love to criticize. Sometimes you're on the money, this time you're out in left field. Why take an adamant position about something that a) is wholesome, positive, and pro-animal, and b) that you clearly know nothing about? Are you a dog-hater?

I'm a middle-aged haole woman who has walked that path daily since way before it was "the Path." I've witnessed the entire transition from free-range dogs and a muddy trail (which I preferred, but change happens) to what could now be termed "a model community multi-use path."

Andy, you're apparently not aware of how the path-using community has evolved since the crack-down began about poop removal and unleashed dogs. There was a learning curve. LOTS of us got tickets. People had to learn that in order for the path to work, there had to be rules. And the rules had to be enforced.

I participated in conducting the survey -- because it seemed important, and the only people willing to go out there were people who love and use the path. I was heartened to learn how much the tourists love the dogs. I thought they'd be blase, but instead they all talked about missing their own dogs and how great it was to see the dogs having fun. MANY also told me (without prodding) that they wished their hometown dogwalkers were as responsible as ours, and they wished their paths were as clean. One gentleman asked for a blank copy of the survey to take home so he could help improve his hometown path.

Regarding the highly exaggerated issue of dog feces, I defy you to find some! And, on the extremely rare occasion you happen to detect a pile (and it would definitely not be on the path itself), please tell me why grown people get so worked up about it? All us "middle-aged haoles" grew up scraping dog poop off our shoes from rural, suburban or urban sidewalks or grassy fields. It's not some alien blight upon us -- the fact is, the situation is a zillion times improved from even two years ago.

I'm so OVER the mis-use of County funds on the banal issue of dog-walking and dog poop, It's embarrassing that with the amount of alcohol and drug abuse, litter and vagrancy occurring along our shoreline (and path users SEE IT ALL), that instead of ridding recreation areas of the real problems, we endlessly argue over imaginary piles of doo-doo.

And that's what I would have expected to be written by someone who finds fault with things on a daily basis.

Why don't you take a nice walk out there some morning at 6 or 7 o'clock, and report back? Tell us THEN about all the dogs off leash and piles of crap. I'd bet a big pile of........money that you don't find any violations.

kuma said...

I agree wholeheartedly with Winky: you're right on the ...money, not a pile of crap that "Take a Load for Free" is.

Roberta said...

To Peaches: I am sorry that you suffer from fearing dogs. In light of that, you are free to visit every single County of Kauai park and enjoy them, dog-free.
You are also able to go to every single County of Kauai beach and spend the day, dog-free. If you see people there with dogs, you can joyfully call the authorities to remove the dogs that their owners have brought there unlawfully.

As for the conscientious and considerate dog owners, we will be with our leashed and controlled dogs on whatever section of the path we are allowed.

As for a small group dictating policy through intimidation - well, that's just an utter falsehood.

Two surveys indicate an overwhelming majority of Kauai people support leashed dogs on the entire multi-use path. As far as any intimidation, I would say that several members of the previous County Council were blatantly oppositional to many of the people who offered public testimony in support of dog walking. There was definitely intimidation employed, but on behalf of the con dog walkers.

You also assert "falsified and manipulated information" has been
employed. I disagree with that, also. What exactly has been falsified and manipulated? If you are going to argue facts, get some.

sugaamamii said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Peaches said...

yes as much as I can go to any beach park without dogs, you can as-well, take your dog to an unleashed park such as the humane society with other dog lovers, and you can walk them anywhere else that don't have an ordinance on dogs. Besides, I am just stating my opinion on the matter, and I didn't say NO dogs on the path, I simply stated, for a compromise to not allow dogs on the whole path, and a segment of the path for dogs as part of a compromise, for people like myself, who fear dogs... so why such the hostile manner and insensitivity?

FactCheck said...

perhaps if you stuck to facts instead of hype you'd get less push back.

There is no "small minority" shoving things down your throat. There is a minority that want to want their dogs. There is a large super majority that have no problem with that. There is a tiny minority of folk who are afraid of or hate dogs to the point that even with a short leash, they want no dogs around. And some lazy county workers who seem to find dog poop in bags more disgusting than food waste or dirty diapers.

Now which group is being unreasonable? Sorry you have an irrational fear. Expecting others to accommodate that fear is a bit much. It's a mixed use path and always has been. If someone is afraid of bikes do we ban them? Or kids? I really hate kids especially when they squeal and make noise. Would you please keep yours at home so I never have to encounter them? And those diapers -- ugh.

This flapping from Parx has always been about trying to scuttle the path. But he and ol Coach lost the argument and can't get over it. Lord knows Andy Parx isn't going to ever walk the coast.

Peaches said...

Where did you walk your dog(s) before the path was ever developed? And no the path was not there forever! And you still reek of insensitivity!

Stephanie said...

I, along with many others on the east side, walked my dogs along the coastline for YEARS before the path was paved. It was a dirt path, with no rules and no drama. Never ran into any 'bad' dogs. It stretched along the entire coast from the end of Kapaa town all the way a few miles north of Kealia beach. I wish we had our old dirt path back. I miss it so much!

Peaches said...

well blame the county then for such an inconvenience and causing such drama... If they worked harder to keep our island in pure raw landscape, the way we have enjoyed it before it became concrete, we would be the happy people we were before all this... and we should've fought harder to keep it as such! Politics uggh!

FactCheck said...

ding a lings ugh.

When there were no rules at all, we had dogs loose all over. You prefer that now? Or are you revealing that what you are really against is any path at all (like Parx). That's a legit viewpoint, but it's lame to hide behind peripheral issues.

Peaches said...

Who the hell you calling ding a lings? You seem to love name calling! Everyone has an opinion, whether you like it or not, but name calling?... GOOD JOB! You seem to think your word is gold? Whatever, just goes to show character and how low you stoop to name calling!

FactCheck said...

If you first argue that dogs on a leash are unacceptable because of your fear of dogs and then argue that the old way where there were no rules and people let their dogs run free in the same places was a better model, perhaps you are indeed a bit off your rocker.

Or easily confused by your own BS.