25 replies to this topic

[bordercolliefan]

StevetheDad,

Although I have been neutral on whether Folsom needs a dog park (my dogs isn't the type who loves to romp with a bunch of other dogs), I can tell you from experience that your fears are unfounded.

We used to live in the Bay area and would take our kids to a large park in Sunnyvale. Part of the park consisted of a large, fenced-in dog park, which was very popular with the dogowners. At any given time, there would be several large dogs running around and playing in there, having a great time.

At the same time, the park was probably the most popular park in Sunnyvale for families. On a typical Saturday, there were probably 50+ kids playing on the play structures, playing ball on the ballfields, playing in the water feature, etc. It did not appear that anyone was bothered by the proximity of the dogs in the dog park (the gate to the dog park was probably about 50 ft. away from the main picnic/barbecue area).

On the many occasions we took our kids to the park, I never noticed any problem barking, nor did I ever see any poop left around. Apparently other parents felt the same, since plenty of them came to the park every day.

I think this proves that a dog park and play/picnic area can be very compatible.

[camay2327]

YES, the people around/near Catlin Park did not want a dog park. Most of us were against it and let it be known. We saw a lot of dog crap all over the park as it was and did not want any more. I contacted the city and asked them to put up doggie stations in Catlin Park north. It took quite some time but finally they did put up doggie stations with the plastic bags, etc. I have not been down there for quite some time so I don't know if people are using them or not. At least I tried. No I do not have dogs. I have quiet rabbits in my back yard. They have their own hotel. AC in the summer and heat in the winter, if they need it. How lucky they are.

If they do put a dog park in the area that is being suggested, good luck. There will be crap all over the place and the dog owners will not pick up after themselves. Well of course a small percentage will.

People don't even pick up after their dogs when they walk them down the street/sidewalks.

OK, put a fence around it and charge a dollar a dog and get someone to keep and eye on it and clean it up at the end of the day. Make it pay for itself.

My comments...

Build a dog park south of 50...

[NRB]

I understand your concern over dog poop. It infuriates me to no end to see poop lining the trail around Willow Springs lake even though I had the city install a dog waste station nearby. I can't stress enough that people who don't pick up after their dogs are being irresponsible! How hard is it to put a plasic baggie in your pocket before you leave on your walk? If you forget, be responsible and go back to get it later. I've had to do this and it's not fun or convenient but it's what responsible pet owners do!

Dog parks are primarily used by responsible pet owners and I can gaurantee that the responsible dog owners will make sure that people pick up after their dogs at the dog park.

Since you don't use a dog park you don't understand the dynamic within a dog park. There is almost always a core group of users that will help enforce the rules. If you didn't see your dog go, they'll tell you where to pick it up! If your dog becomes aggressive, they'll show you the door! They don't tolerate anyone breaking the rules. Our dog park wont be any different. Do you really think that we would work so hard and so long to get a dog park and then let some irresponsible pet owners ruin it for the rest of us!

If I was an irresponsible dog owner I wouldn't be working so hard for this park. I would let my dogs run off-leash where ever I saw fit with no regard for the law or public safety. What we are trying to do here is create a place where we can legally run our dogs, off-leash WITHOUT INFINGING ON THE RIGHTS OF OTHER PARK USERS! (Not yelling, just trying to stress a point.)

Will this decrease the amount of crapola that you encounter on your walks around town? I hope so. A lot of people that walk their dogs for exercise may now chose to go to the dog park instead. Thus reducing the waste they usually leave behind. Since we wont let them get away with not picking it up at the dog park, perhaps they will learn to be more responsible and start picking it up on their walks as well.

Will it increase it? Absolutley not!

[Steve Heard]

NRB and you other dog lovers, 1000 apologies, as I did not read the part that says that you are using only a fenced in portion of the park.

Having said that, I do believe that there will be crap left behind, and the potential for encounters with kids.

I don't have a lot of dog park experience, but I do have a lot of park experience where dogs were present.

I remember in particular having dogs run through the play areas, digging in the sand, drinking from the kids' water fountains, all to the mutual delight of the owners, who saw no difference between their animals and the children who were terrified of them, and who drank from the water fountain.

The thing is that so many dog lovers think the world of their dog, and they should, and think their dogs have the same rights as people.

Everyone says it's not their dog that craps in the park, or runs off the leash, or terrorizes people, but those dogs belong to someone.

Man, you're making me sound like a dog-hater. I am not. I've had dogs before. I don't right now.

I don't think we had dog parks in my area in the late 70's and early 80's.

I do know people who own dogs and do not use dog parks because there are too many dogs! Or, they worry about fleas, or the potential of their little dog getting bit by one of those friendly non-biting dogs everyone swears they own.

Anyway, as I said, I am not opposed to your dog park, I just wanted to throw in some perspective.

At least we got the board moving.

[NRB]

All the more reason to get them into their own, fenced in area...to help minimize the encounters you described above.

Oh, and thanks for your clarification. The park will most definetly be fenced in with a double gated entry to prevent escapees!

[bordercolliefan]

Interesting you bring up what things were like in the 70's and 80's. I have often thought how different things were back then (with respect to dogs, in particular).

I'm sure I'm going to get pilloried for this... but hopefully you can indulge me in a little nostalgia.

I grew up in the 70's in New England. In those days, it was pretty much the norm for many neighborhood dogs to be off leash most of the time. Mostly, they lazed around in their front yard or driveway. Sometimes, they would go on their own little strolls around the neighborhood.

The neighborhood kids tended to know the neighborhood dogs. When we saw Joker the collie coming around, we knew, "Oh, that's Michael Foley's dog..." Everyone knew our mutt, Jingles, and she had various houses she would go 'round to for a biscuit or treat. Sure, there was the odd person who didn't like dogs -- such as the neighborhood villain, old "Mr. Frucci." Seemed like everyone's dog came home wet once in a while, having been sprayed by Mr. Frucci with his garden hose. But these people were the exception, not the rule.

When we went with our friends to the park behind the school, some kids' dogs would come. When we went sledding, the dog was there. Think "My Dog Skip" -- a wonderful book that describes a way of life that simply could not happen today.

For all of the dogs around, I do not remember any child ever getting bitten by a dog. Nor do I remember any child running away screaming in terror from a harmless, friendly dog -- a sad sight one sees all too often today. I think kids understood dogs (and dog safety) better because there were more dogs around, and dogs were better socialized (and thereby friendlier) because they were allowed to be around people more.

Oddly enough, we had a dogcatcher in our town, "Frank." When Frank would find our dog, Jingles, wandering afield, he would pick her up and give her a ride home in the front seat of truck. He seemed to regard his job more as facilitating dogs' safety than enforcing leash laws. We were never fined for having Jingles off leash, and I don't know anyone else who was ever fined, either. Evidently the town was satisfied with Frank's approach, as he held that job for years and years.

It seems like America used to be more of a "dog country." Personally, I think life was richer and more enjoyable for both kids and dogs back then.

And yes, StevetheDad, sometimes everyone would find a poop here or there on their front lawn. (Probably more dispersed since dogs had more places to go). People weren't so obsessed with dog poop back then -- if you saw some on your lawn, you cleaned it up and that was that. Now and again a kid might accidentally step in it -- and guess what, no one died from it.

Anyone else remember a more dog-friendly past???

[Steve Heard]

I don't think the world was more dog-friendly, I think enough people got bit to the point that cities started enacting leash laws.

My dad was a mail man, and was bitten several times by off-leash dogs.

I grew up in San Francisco, and there were many stray dogs and their piles allover the place.

I had my share of encounters with them, as did all of the kids in my neighborhood.

In recent years, the papers have been full of stories of kids attacked by off leash dogs. When I think about it, that's been happening for years.

It was always the popular attack dog of the day, for a while, it was German Shepherds, then Dobermans, then Pit Bulls. Whenever a dog bites someone, you usually hear the same excuses:

1) It never did that before, so the kid must have provoked it
2) It wasn't used to being around kids
3) It was just using its natural protective, defensive, chasing, fighting instints

You never hear anyone say, 'Yes, my dog is mean, only loves me, and will bite others'.

I don't ever recall taking one of my dogs out for a walk without a leash. Even when I did, I saw how people would cross the street, or walk more cautiously when I approached.

[bordercolliefan]

Steve, your post got me thinking. Of course, there have always been some instances of dog bites, but as a kid, I don't remember reading of "dog maulings" as one does these days, nor did I ever know any kids who were bitten despite all the kids and dogs wandering around our neighborhood (generally unsupervised!).

I did a little internet research and found some interesting facts. There was a 37% increase in dog bites requiring medical treatment from 1986-1994 (the only years I could find data for). Several websites stated the problem of dog bites is "increasing." They attribute this to the increase in the population of certain breeds of dogs, primarily German Sheperds, Rottweilers, Pit Bulls, Huskies, Doberman Pinschers, and Chow Chows, and to the decrease in socialization of many dogs (i.e., "backyard dogs").

Interestingly (and particularly relevant to the dog park issue), the vast majority of dog bites are NOT situations where a strange dog runs up to an adult or child and bites him/her (as you seem to fear, StevetheDad). Indeed, nearly 80% of bites are by pet dogs known to the person who was bitten. The majority of bites occur on the dog owner's property. Furthermore, half of all bites are defined as "provoked" -- with greatest frequency of provocation caused by boys aged 5-10 (girls are less frequent "provokers").

One website stated that a problem with certain breeds is that a large number of their bites/attacks are unprovoked. For pit bulls, the figure was 94% of bites are unprovoked.

So... where does this leave us. Here are some conclusions I draw:

1. Things really were different in the past... it's not my imagination that kids and friendly dogs mingled, generally without problems, in the suburbia of "America past"...

2. The dog bite issue is not really relevant to the dog park. If anything, the dog park may help by providing an opportunity for socialization for the dogs.

3. People need to be educated and responsible about what kinds of dogs they buy and/or breed. Forget about buying a dog to make yourself look tough.

Anyway, I just thought these statistics were interesting.

[NRB]

Thanks bordercollie. Steve, you may also want to look at the differences in the places that you grew up. San Fran is a highly populated and condensed city where people and dogs live on top of eachother. Where as bodercollie had a more suburban upbringing complete with yards!

Something else that has changed over the years is our sense of security. We didn't used to have to lock our doors at night. (Possiblly not true of S.F.) We felt safe in our homes. But now people are paranoid (can you say "too much media?") and feel the need for gaurd dogs. Thus the increase of the breeds mentioned above. By the way, most maulings I've heard of are when the kids have entered the dogs domain/yard. Not an excuse just an observation. But this really doesn't have anything to do with a dog park because well socialized dogs are not the dogs you hear about on the news!

[bordercolliefan]

Good points, NRB.

One of the websites specifically stated that many of the problems with the increase in aggressive dogs are concentrated in urban areas, where people are keeping dogs for guard or attack purposes. They specifically mentioned the rise in pit bulls kept in urban areas.

I think it is clear that the kind of people who are keeping aggressive dogs in urban areas for attack or guard purposes are irresponsible, unknowledgeable dog owners who (perhaps intentionally) fail to train and socialize their dogs appropriately. --Not the kind of people who will bother to bring their dog to a dog park for a little healthy exercise and socialization!

By the way, I don't mean to demonize certain breeds of dog. I understand that there can be well-bred, well-trained German Shepherds, Rotties, and yes even pit bulls who are not aggressive. I will say, however -- something that Steve alluded to -- when a particular breed of dog becomes the fashionable "tough" dog (such as the pit bull now), that encourages breeders to select for aggressiveness in breeding. It also encourages indiscriminate breeding (regardless of temperament) to make a quick buck. For these reasons, I do think a person needs to be extremely cautious in purchasing a dog that has lineage from one of these breeds. At least, one needs to meet the parent dogs, meet the breeder, and make sure there is no history of aggression in the "family tree."

Another interesting point -- according to the data, the large majority of dog bites come from unneutered and unspayed animals. Get those dogs fixed, folks!!

[Steve Heard]

Although dog bites are NOT my biggest concern, I will address your comments.

You say, and perhaps correctly, that the 80% of dog bits are by pet dogs known to the person who was bitten. That makes sense, in the same way that most murder victims are killed by someone they know, and most are murdered at home. Your stats mean that of the 800,000 reported dog bites last year, 20%, or 160,000 were stranger bites, or bites occurring away from the dog's home. That's a lot of bites.

Most dog bites are a result of provocation? That makes sense, too. What provokes a dog? Walking near it. Touching or approaching its master. Attempting to pet or hug it, stooping down to look it in they eye. Yes, provoked dogs do bite, but the things that provoke dogs seem innocent enough, especially to kids.

This is kind of going off topic, as I already said I understand and do not oppose the dog park.

Also, as I said, though, bites are not my only or major concern. Really, it's about quality of life issues. The owner of the dog usually enjoys and enhanced quality of life. They love their dogs, and often want to share them with the world.

I want non-dog owners to understand how their dogs affect others, and that their dogs can impact their quality of life in a negative way. For example, the dog next door that barks whenever one of the neighbors goes into their own back yard, and continues to bark while they are back there. Or the dog that barks all day and night when the owner is away. The flies that come into my yard because of the dog crap of the neighbors' dogs. The dog that comes to pee on my azaleas. These are not small issues to the victims.

While your sweet dog may be lovable, not everyone wants to pet him/her or wants them jumping on them, or running through the playground, while their kids are playing. You may know your dog to be harmless, but when it is growling, barking or snarling at me as I walk by or go out for a job, I have to wonder if I'm about to be attacked.

You generally don't have to fear the same from my daughters.

Dogs are animals, and not as predictable, or as clean as humans. I know, a dog's mouth is cleaner than a human's, kids don't wash their hands, etc.

Still, be considerate of the non-owner. Several dog owners here in Folsom have voiced their opposition to the dog park. Some, because they don't want the big dogs to hurt or intimidate their small dogs (why is it different when a person doesn't want to be intimidated?), and others because they feel they should be able to bring their dogs anywhere they choose.

You say, "Things really were different in the past..." I agree, a 37% increase in dog bites coinciding with a 2% increase in dog ownership is cause for alarm.

"The dog bite issue is not really relevant to the dog park." Agreed. If the owners keep their dogs on leash and away from strangers while going to/from or while visiting the park.

"People need to be educated and responsible about what kinds of dogs they buy and/or breed. Forget about buying a dog to make yourself look tough."

True, even for the dogs that aren't tough looking.

By the way, when I owned dogs I was living in the suburbs. If I had acreage today, I might consider dog ownership again.