Benefeit Dog Park

I think dog parks are a good idea. Dogs need alot of exercise and play time. Many cites and urban areas just dont have the room for that to happen. But there are optoins there many open unused lots, and empty building that could be torn down to create these places. I am a dog owner myself i live in the country were open space is abundant. My dog Neno can run a play all he wants it's good for his health and mental state. When he doesn't get out he gets cranky and chews thing around the house. I grew up in a city of five millon, so i know how hepful a dog park can be to dog owners. You should always have your dog around other people, and animals,

Families that use off-leash dog parks are able to thoroughly help and develop their dogs for a better life. Off-leash dog parks allow both pets and owners to learn and grow through exercising and socializing without constant worry of infringing someone else rights. It benefits dogs as they are given adequate space to run and use as an outlet meanwhile, recognizing certain behaviors of more respectable and mature pets through socializing. Properly exercising dogs allow them to relieve tension and unbend; this potentially changes them from being noisy and irritable into more quite and friendlier animals. There have been numerous accounts within my neighborhood where the local residents have filed noise complaints on local dog owners. In the recent study, “On the Fence: Dog Parks in the (Un)Leashing of Community and Social Capital,” authors Taryn Graham and Troy Glover of the

Muscatine, Iowa, do not build a dog park! Building a dog park would endanger the lives of your people living in the city. Pets are their owner's responsibility and dogs are loud. A dog park would drive home owners away.

Before you jump to the hasty conclusion that I’m opposed to a dog park because I do not have a dog, let me assure you I do have a dog and am aware of my responsibilities as an owner. The principal argument for a dog park is “exercise is important to dogs’ mental and physical health.” I would take this argument a step further and state exercise is also

This first statement is followed by the opinion that it would be a lawsuit waiting to happen and a burden on taxpayers. In the second paragraph the author starts off by stating that some cities require dog owners to obtain a permit in order to allow their dogs off-leash in a dog park. The author provides no citation for their data and it sounds like a false statement. They then go on to explain that most cities rely on people respecting the park rules but the rules are often not heeded. Once again; the author provides no citation, proof, or data to back up their statement. They then explain that if a dog is off leash in a park and acts out violently and bites a person or another dog then the victim can rightfully sue the owner of the dog and the city as well. Once again: no data to support the statement. In the thrid paragraph the author finally starts providing data to support their cause. The explain that an average dog barks at about 75 decibels and large breeds at 100. They then state that noise levels around dog parks have caused issues in cities in Virginia and Arizona. In the fourth paragraph the author states that taxpayers should not have to fund a project such as a dog park because the fence alone will cost $70,000. They then state that dog owners should not be able to pressure the city to build a dog park just so they can excercise their pets. They then state that they own a cat but they don't pressure the city to build a catnip garden. They leave off with a statement saying that people's pets are their own responsibility and not that of the community. They also state that if dog owners want a park then they sould build it themselves, with their own money, far out of

The town has a scarce amount of public space for recreation so I believe that when things are created they should equally serve all the towns people. The town already has a very low amount of public goods and for the goods that are available they're too pricey for everyone to attend. I feel that it would be a good idea to make a dog park, but they should also split it into two and make another park that's usable for the towns people and children. That way nobody will feel left out and they can make the best use of the small public space availability. Also the local schools would be very close to the dog park so the children could make use of the park if it was for both pets and

Dogs should have their own parks,because when dogs aren't getting the physical and mental excercise that they need, their behavior tend to get worse. ASPCA has a study that shows the rate of dogs biting humans went down drastically in places where they're dog parks. ASPCA also believes that if dogs had a park then their would be less incidents of dogs attacking humans,barking, and destroying things. Many dog owners have given their dogs up , because they started to act like''bad dogs'', this is because they don't have a dog park to excercise all their energy everyday. Dogs need a park just like humans.

I believe most if not all cities should have a public dog park. Since I was nine years old I have always owned a dog. I have lived the city all of my life as well. Living in the city there is many apartment buildings with little to no yard space. To keep a healthy and friendly dog the dog needs exercise and play dates. Because most pet owners in the city have no yard space for these activities. a public dog park is the perfect solution.

In the first passage " A Dog Park Benefits All", they are stating their opinion for a need for a dog park. Stating that rental units make up at least 68 percent of the cities residents. Leaving them with little to no private yard space to accomodate pet owners needs. Also they state that lack of exercise and socialization negatively effects dogs.

Dog Park in Muscatine, IA I think a dog park would be a great idea for the city. Exercise is very important for a dogs' mental and physical health. Socialization is also another great reason to have a dog park. Its also a good way to raise the property values of a community. I believe that a dog park would be good for not only the dogs, but for the owners as well. Exercise, socialization, and love are the key things a dog needs to be happy. The ASPCA says dogs with no exercise can act out by barking and destroying things at home. My friend had a dog that spent most of the time in his kennel, and she got rid of him because he was too hyper and destructive while he was out. Bad behavior caused by dogs being lonely and poorly exercised is partly responsible for 2 million dogs that end up in U.S. shelters every year. So why not

Dogs shouldn't have to held hostage within their own home, then act like wild beast when their walked. Having a do park will teach a dog to socialize and also interact with other people and dogs just as metioned in the passage. Researchers referred to in the passage gave a fact about how, New York City allow the citizen to let their dogs roam the park with no leash in result of that the dog-bite reports went from 40,000 to less

In conclusion, I disagree with the person from the first passage because building a dog park could allow off-leash dogs to attack other animals or people. I also think that building a dog park would be a burden for who evers live nect to it. Finally I think that building a dog park would be a massive waste of time, money and

Public dog parks should be built in every city in the US. People with dog should know that a dog that is will exercise well be more friendly. In the passage its says that "dogs that dont get exercise can act out by barking and destroying things". this explains alot because you would want to walk in to your home with friends/family while your dog is destroying eveything. Now if the dog reguly exrcised the dog wouldnt do that at all.

Permitting all factors are accounted for, and the ratio of dog-owners to non-owning citizens is enough of a considerable amount, the installation of a dog park can be beneficial to any city. One should not let the cost scare them, for they can be quite the cost-saving

The writer in the first essay menched how dogs would be less agresive to other dogs and other people. This writer fermly beiles that this dog park will be a wonderful benifet to the city. This gives dogs a place to run and play, lets the owners play fech with dogs and posibly something