Negative letter does not help dog issue

Even after reading the article, "Stonington couple upset that neighborhood going to the dogs," (July 22), on the Stonington dog park issue and then hearing what prompted the confrontation -loose dogs barking on the small beach "cooling off" at 6:15 am - I have to note the property owners had genuine concerns about loose dogs from the beach getting to their property and going after their three small dogs.

There's got to be an equitable solution to this issue. But then I was shown a letter the couple received in the mail. It contained documents discussing shoreline public access, "high water mark," etc., intended to enlighten them.

Fine, but then it goes negative about not appreciating "outsiders coming into the village" and "threatening neighbors." The letter states, "This may be how you interacted with others in Tennessee and Texas you cannot bully the freedom loving citizens of Stonington."

Funny, in my Navy flying days I had wingmen from those states and thought they were "freedom loving citizens." The antagonizing content was not exactly a call to "live harmoniously with other residents," as the letter concludes.

I am sure the unsigned letter does not reflect the attitudes of most Stonington Village residents and hopefully a reasonable solution exists.

Hide Comments


Loading comments...
Hide Comments