Editor:
Re: Damaging droppings, July 19 letters
I was amused by Patricia Kealy’s quarrel against the presence of dogs on our promenade, by examining their bacterial load per doodoo-event, as compared to those of other beach visitors.
While I don’t profess to know the scatological habits of the common Shih Tzu, something seemed amiss in her relating of the 2009 study, and so I “Poo-gled” it.
Turns out, the study’s beach site in Florida, allows dogs on the beach, and does not require owners to clean up after their pets, even though it is a designated recreational swimming area.
This is not what we are talking about here, but rather owner-managed pets on the promenade when it is offseason.
To suggest that even once an owner has responsibly cleaned up after Fido’s deposition, that there is somehow a massive bacterial load present, ignores the actual reality of other far more threatening sources on our promenade.
I run the promenade every morning and, yes, I look at where I’m putting my feet due to the real minefield of goose “fecal events,” which can litter any area of the promenade, but especially the grassy area around the white rock.
This area is heavily visited by people of all ages and, no, I am not suggesting that geese be banned from the promenade, as some would suggest we revert to with dogs.
I like seeing the geese, and I really like seeing the dogs.
Most people are responsible and, yes, a few will not be, but this is far from the health catastrophe some would suggest.
From what I have witnessed, Fido is comparatively blameless.
John MacKillopp, Surrey