nyrgravey9 wrote:

By that I don't just mean stricter enforcement of leash laws, but funding for cleaning, possibly a dog run, etc. The bottom line is that you'll see changes in the future, but it's going to take time, probably not until next spring.

In the meantime, when you see dogs off leash, you must call 201-547-5477 and they will dispatch animal control.

Bubble_Tea wrote:
Morris Canal Park desperately needs a dog run area and leash laws need to be enforced. I see from this thread that this problem goes back years. I am a dog lover and have owned dogs for most of my life, but it has now gotten to the point that the area is known as a "dog park" and people without dogs simply don't want to be there. That's wrong. It's such a beautiful area that people should be able to enjoy, even if it isn't developed any time soon.

jcnight wrote:
Quote:

First of all, why didn't you speak up 3 years ago when I was being accused of making up that story? Secondly, I never insisted it was a lie. I was the one being called a liar!! People said that I made the whole thing up so your memory is a bit off on that one. Also, you could have spoken to the newspaper anonymously and at least cleared up the cloud that hung over the facts. Also, I know that you treat your dogs very well but the person I speak of, who doesn't post on this site anymore, treats their dog like a nuisance. They are hardly in a position to be critical of other dog owners. I respect your opinion but I believe you are over stating the real facts about dogs in Hamilton Park. It really is not a big problem and certain people are just trying to whip up hysterical reactions. In any case I am glad that I am finally exonerated.

I was asked NOT to speak to the paper the very last minute by the owner of the dead doxie and by the walker of the dead doxie. I am pretty sure you know why. With milli- seconds to make a decision I caved and kept my mouth shut but spoke to a detective instead WITH the doxies owner and walker. I tried very hard to get them to press charges to no avail!
I have nothing against you, your dogs, or your family, we just have diffrent opinions ( and I respect yours very much) You have never bothered me neither have your dogs. You have control of your dogs UNLIKE some others.
And yes I do remember now that people said you made it up as they said I made it up. It was a horrible thing for me to see a doxxie get picked up like prey and be killed. It could have been my little guy beacuse I was standing right there talking to the walker. But once again this is a seperate issue. Whats going on in Morris Canal Park has nothing to do with HAmilton Park
Peace

First of all, why didn't you speak up 3 years ago when I was being accused of making up that story? Secondly, I never insisted it was a lie. I was the one being called a liar!! People said that I made the whole thing up so your memory is a bit off on that one. Also, you could have spoken to the newspaper anonymously and at least cleared up the cloud that hung over the facts. Also, I know that you treat your dogs very well but the person I speak of, who doesn't post on this site anymore, treats their dog like a nuisance. They are hardly in a position to be critical of other dog owners. I respect your opinion but I believe you are over stating the real facts about dogs in Hamilton Park. It really is not a big problem and certain people are just trying to whip up hysterical reactions. In any case I am glad that I am finally exonerated.

jcnight wrote:
Quote:

Vigilante wrote:
Quote:

1stStGuy wrote:
Quote:

itsaurora wrote:

Vigilante - what is with your insistence that dogs should be allowed to do whatever they please? This is a serious question. I'd really like to hear your reasoning behind this stance.

Agreed. At first it was nice to hear a voice advocating for the dogs, but now you are starting to sound a bit off-kilter. What gives?

It's interesting that the person who first told me 3 years ago about a pitbull killing a daschund puppy in Hamilton Park is one of the big voices now on this subject. That person then refused to talk to the cops and the press when we needed them most. That pitbull and the owner eventually fled the area without paying compensation or being fined. Instead of tackling the real problem, one aggressive dog with a bad owner, they tried to spin the story and make it about all the dogs in HP. They and some others tried to use the story of ONE bad dog owner to cast suspicion on all the other dogs and owners in HP. There are others too who are influencing our councilman. If you dog lovers out there saw how one of these persons in particular treated their dog you would be appalled. These people have been working to try and exert their control over all things Hamilton Park. (Did I oppose the BB courts? Yes, I think they add more chaos to the park than any other aspect. I have no political influence though. It was just my opinion). These people have the ear of our counilman though and they will do anything they can to control and compartmentalize HP. If the dogs there in the past were so menacing and over-running the park then how was it that there were 5 to 6 cricket games going on all over the park? How was it that the kids always had soccer and baseball practice without problems or incidents? There is no army of sunbathers waiting by the gates of HP shaking in fear. Anyone who wanted to could sunbath there and there were never any problems. These people have created a climate of hysteria about dogs. I have never seen a dog go after a child in HP. In fact, I have only seen the opposite. Children insisting on petting dogs and pulling their tails while parents stood nearby and did nothing. No problem though. There has always been a harmony in the park and things have been fine. Are there bad dog owners? Yes, just as there are bad parents. The subject of dog owners not cleaning up is a COMPLETELY separate issue. It goes hand in hand with LITTERERS. IMO all litterers should be shot.

Once again this is NOT about Hamilton Park. As far as the pitbull and Doxxie I myself was the one who witnessed it and spoke to the authorities about it. Your info is wrong ONCE AGAIN Vigilante. Just beacuse I refused to address it with you and everyone else in Hamilton Park does not mean that it was not addressed. It was taken care of and done so with out the gossip and interfearance of every nosey dog owner in Hamilton Park. The authorities got my statement but as you know since it was a delicate situation with the people involved they got it away from the public eye. So stop spreading rumors that are NOT true. You are such an angry human being Vigilante. Get over it!!!And FYI the pitbull and owner did NOT get fined beacuse the doxxie's owner did NOT want to press charges. Once again stop spreading rumors. Anyways you were the one that kept insisting that the story was a lie. Think before you type and open that mouth of yours.

Vigilante wrote:
Quote:

1stStGuy wrote:
Quote:

itsaurora wrote:

Vigilante - what is with your insistence that dogs should be allowed to do whatever they please? This is a serious question. I'd really like to hear your reasoning behind this stance.

Agreed. At first it was nice to hear a voice advocating for the dogs, but now you are starting to sound a bit off-kilter. What gives?

It's interesting that the person who first told me 3 years ago about a pitbull killing a daschund puppy in Hamilton Park is one of the big voices now on this subject. That person then refused to talk to the cops and the press when we needed them most. That pitbull and the owner eventually fled the area without paying compensation or being fined. Instead of tackling the real problem, one aggressive dog with a bad owner, they tried to spin the story and make it about all the dogs in HP. They and some others tried to use the story of ONE bad dog owner to cast suspicion on all the other dogs and owners in HP. There are others too who are influencing our councilman. If you dog lovers out there saw how one of these persons in particular treated their dog you would be appalled. These people have been working to try and exert their control over all things Hamilton Park. (Did I oppose the BB courts? Yes, I think they add more chaos to the park than any other aspect. I have no political influence though. It was just my opinion). These people have the ear of our counilman though and they will do anything they can to control and compartmentalize HP. If the dogs there in the past were so menacing and over-running the park then how was it that there were 5 to 6 cricket games going on all over the park? How was it that the kids always had soccer and baseball practice without problems or incidents? There is no army of sunbathers waiting by the gates of HP shaking in fear. Anyone who wanted to could sunbath there and there were never any problems. These people have created a climate of hysteria about dogs. I have never seen a dog go after a child in HP. In fact, I have only seen the opposite. Children insisting on petting dogs and pulling their tails while parents stood nearby and did nothing. No problem though. There has always been a harmony in the park and things have been fine. Are there bad dog owners? Yes, just as there are bad parents. The subject of dog owners not cleaning up is a COMPLETELY separate issue. It goes hand in hand with LITTERERS. IMO all litterers should be shot.

Vigilante wrote:
Quote:

1stStGuy wrote:
Quote:

itsaurora wrote:

Vigilante - what is with your insistence that dogs should be allowed to do whatever they please? This is a serious question. I'd really like to hear your reasoning behind this stance.

Agreed. At first it was nice to hear a voice advocating for the dogs, but now you are starting to sound a bit off-kilter. What gives?

It's interesting that the person who first told me 3 years ago about a pitbull killing a daschund puppy in Hamilton Park is one of the big voices now on this subject. That person then refused to talk to the cops and the press when we needed them most. That pitbull and the owner eventually fled the area without paying compensation or being fined. Instead of tackling the real problem, one aggressive dog with a bad owner, they tried to spin the story and make it about all the dogs in HP. They and some others tried to use the story of ONE bad dog owner to cast suspicion on all the other dogs and owners in HP. There are others too who are influencing our councilman. If you dog lovers out there saw how one of these persons in particular treated their dog you would be appalled. These people have been working to try and exert their control over all things Hamilton Park. (Did I oppose the BB courts? Yes, I think they add more chaos to the park than any other aspect. I have no political influence though. It was just my opinion). These people have the ear of our counilman though and they will do anything they can to control and compartmentalize HP. If the dogs there in the past were so menacing and over-running the park then how was it that there were 5 to 6 cricket games going on all over the park? How was it that the kids always had soccer and baseball practice without problems or incidents? There is no army of sunbathers waiting by the gates of HP shaking in fear. Anyone who wanted to could sunbath there and there were never any problems. These people have created a climate of hysteria about dogs. I have never seen a dog go after a child in HP. In fact, I have only seen the opposite. Children insisting on petting dogs and pulling their tails while parents stood nearby and did nothing. No problem though. There has always been a harmony in the park and things have been fine. Are there bad dog owners? Yes, just as there are bad parents. The subject of dog owners not cleaning up is a COMPLETELY separate issue. It goes hand in hand with LITTERERS. IMO all litterers should be shot.

1stStGuy wrote:
Quote:

itsaurora wrote:

Vigilante - what is with your insistence that dogs should be allowed to do whatever they please? This is a serious question. I'd really like to hear your reasoning behind this stance.

Agreed. At first it was nice to hear a voice advocating for the dogs, but now you are starting to sound a bit off-kilter. What gives?

I_heart_JC wrote:
Quote:

1stStGuy wrote:
Quote:

itsaurora wrote:

Vigilante - what is with your insistence that dogs should be allowed to do whatever they please? This is a serious question. I'd really like to hear your reasoning behind this stance.

Agreed. At first it was nice to hear a voice advocating for the dogs, but now you are starting to sound a bit off-kilter. What gives?

The safest place for a dog to be is leashed by its owner's side. If Vigilante insists on letting his pet roam free, he is no advocate for dogs.

1stStGuy wrote:
Quote:

itsaurora wrote:

Vigilante - what is with your insistence that dogs should be allowed to do whatever they please? This is a serious question. I'd really like to hear your reasoning behind this stance.

Agreed. At first it was nice to hear a voice advocating for the dogs, but now you are starting to sound a bit off-kilter. What gives?

itsaurora wrote:

Vigilante - what is with your insistence that dogs should be allowed to do whatever they please? This is a serious question. I'd really like to hear your reasoning behind this stance.

Vigilante wrote:
Quote:

megan2681 wrote:
I never thought much of Morris Canal Park before I had a kid. Now I see it as a much needed, nearby and grassy retreat for my ever curious toddler. I do, however, find myself grossed out by poop and pee and scared by dogs off their leash.

Let me note that I am absolutely a dog lover and realize that dogs need parks too. I think that dog owners must be equally frustrated by curious kids and having to leash their dog (those that do).

I could go to VVP, but the same argument could be made for the dogs. So my questions is - who is Morris Canal for? Dogs or kids? Does anyone want to see changes made (i.e. a dog run) so everyone can happily (and safely) use it?

Long after you have moved to the suburbs for the better and safer school systems the dogs will be there enjoying the park.

megan2681 wrote:
I never thought much of Morris Canal Park before I had a kid. Now I see it as a much needed, nearby and grassy retreat for my ever curious toddler. I do, however, find myself grossed out by poop and pee and scared by dogs off their leash.

Let me note that I am absolutely a dog lover and realize that dogs need parks too. I think that dog owners must be equally frustrated by curious kids and having to leash their dog (those that do).

I could go to VVP, but the same argument could be made for the dogs. So my questions is - who is Morris Canal for? Dogs or kids? Does anyone want to see changes made (i.e. a dog run) so everyone can happily (and safely) use it?

snowflake20 wrote:
I've even seen owners let their dogs jump on the high flowerbeds at Pier House and pee and poop on the flowers.

sjcarolan wrote:
Quote:

phDog wrote:
well regardless of the time of day, i will not hesitate to kick your dog as a last resort to keep it away from either the fragile or dog aggressive dogs i sometimes walk. i will feel terrible for the dog and probably say something less than nice to you. just a heads up.

Shaking in my boots tough guy! If my dog walker brought my fragile/aggressive dog into an environment where they might be provoked, I would say they were incompetent and might be better served in a line of work with less thought required...just a heads up.

ianmac47 wrote:
4:19-16. Liability of owner regardless of viciousness of dog
The owner of any dog which shall bite a person while such person is on or in a public place, or lawfully on or in a private place, including the property of the owner of the dog, shall be liable for such damages as may be suffered by the person bitten, regardless of the former viciousness of such dog or the owner's knowledge of such viciousness.

For the purpose of this section, a person is lawfully upon the private property of such owner when he is on the property in the performance of any duty imposed upon him by the laws of this state or the laws or postal regulations of the United States, or when he is on such property upon the invitation, express or implied, of the owner thereof.





4:19-19. Impoundment of dog
An animal control officer shall seize and impound a dog when the officer has reasonable cause to believe that the dog:

a. attacked a person and caused death or serious bodily injury as defined in N.J.S.2C:11-1(b) to that person;

b. caused bodily injury as defined in N.J.S.2C:11-1(a) to a person during an unprovoked attack and poses a serious threat of harm to persons or domestic animals;

c. engaged in dog fighting activities as described in R.S.4:22-24 and R.S.4:22-26; or

d. has been trained, tormented, badgered, baited or encouraged to engage in unprovoked attacks upon persons or domestic animals.



The dog shall be impounded until the final disposition as to whether the dog is vicious or potentially dangerous. Subject to the approval of the municipal health officer, the dog may be impounded in a facility or other structure agreeable to the owner.




4:19-22. Dog declared vicious by municipal court; conditions
6. a. The municipal court shall declare the dog vicious if it finds by clear and convincing evidence that the dog:

(1) killed a person or caused serious bodily injury as defined in N.J.S.2C:11-1(b) to a person; or

(2) has engaged in dog fighting activities as described in R.S.4:22-24 and R.S.4:22-26.

b. A dog shall not be declared vicious for inflicting death or serious bodily injury as defined in N.J.S.2C:11-1(b) upon a person if the dog was provoked. The municipality shall bear the burden of proof to demonstrate that the dog was not provoked.

c. If the municipal court declares a dog to be vicious, and no appeal is made of this ruling pursuant to section 9 of P.L.1989, c.307 (C.4:19-25), the dog shall be destroyed in a humane and expeditious manner, except that no dog may be destroyed during the pendency of an appeal.





Good luck with all that.

phDog wrote:
well regardless of the time of day, i will not hesitate to kick your dog as a last resort to keep it away from either the fragile or dog aggressive dogs i sometimes walk. i will feel terrible for the dog and probably say something less than nice to you. just a heads up.

woodstock1 wrote:
the bottom line is that people let their dogs off leash in MP all the time and JCPD does nothing about it (or LSP police, since technically it is their jurisdiction too.) So if no one is handing out tickets, what is to stop everyone form doing it... nothing.

jcnight wrote:
Quote:

sjcarolan wrote:
Quote:

neanoora wrote:
Also, I find it extremely curious that now when the weather is nice, the park if full of dogs. What about in the middle of winter - don't those dogs need to run out then too? We certainly take our kid to outings regardless of the weather - he needs fresh air just like anyone else.

Really??? You find it curious why a park is busier when the weather is nice? I wouldn't know, as I dont frequent parks in the middle of winter. Based on your post one would assume that in the middle of winter the park is chock full of kids. I am a dog owner and I do let my dog run at Morris, it is a great place to do so. That said I only do so when the park is relatively empty early am or late afternoon.

Really!!! You only let your dog run when the park is "relatively empty early in the am or late afternoon" So your saying it's okay to break the law at those times, or that the people that are there at that time dont mind your dog?
There are so many things wrong with your statement but I'm just going to keep it simple and say that you are just palin 'ol WRONG!
There are leash laws in Jersey City early in the morning and later in the afternoon.

jcnight wrote:
Quote:

sjcarolan wrote:
Quote:

neanoora wrote:
Also, I find it extremely curious that now when the weather is nice, the park if full of dogs. What about in the middle of winter - don't those dogs need to run out then too? We certainly take our kid to outings regardless of the weather - he needs fresh air just like anyone else.

Really??? You find it curious why a park is busier when the weather is nice? I wouldn't know, as I dont frequent parks in the middle of winter. Based on your post one would assume that in the middle of winter the park is chock full of kids. I am a dog owner and I do let my dog run at Morris, it is a great place to do so. That said I only do so when the park is relatively empty early am or late afternoon.

Really!!! You only let your dog run when the park is "relatively empty early in the am or late afternoon" So your saying it's okay to break the law at those times, or that the people that are there at that time dont mind your dog?
There are so many things wrong with your statement but I'm just going to keep it simple and say that you are just palin 'ol WRONG!
There are leash laws in Jersey City early in the morning and later in the afternoon.