Dog Park Analysis

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

Opportunity costs of building this park would include less land for outdoor recreation or public recreation. The town is very limited on public spaces and land so creating the dog park would consume further parts of the land making even less of space for

To many complications will come from a dog park. Such as situations like a dog attacking another dog or even attacking someone else. This can cause a lot of upset owners. Also many painful court cases. Dog parks will bring up a lot of legal issues that we don't need.

In this large populated area, the on going noise of barking dogs and yelling owners can become a bit annoying. This is essential for those that enjoy the peace and quiet of their community. Therefore, building a dog park in a more isolated area, would be more ideal.

In the city of Muscatine, Iowa there is a debate going on. A debate on whether a dog park spanning over one acre of land should be built or not. It is very important for dogs to run and play for mutiple reasons. Resons such as to release all that extra energy they have aslo, excercise is shown to lower bad behavior in dogs, but this dog park is not a good idea.

The second passage "No Dog Park for Muscatine", is clearly against having a dog park in the community. Their opinion is that it is a waste of tax payer money and they should not be forced to pay for it. It is also believed that it would cause a noise ordinance issue since a large dog's bark can reach up to at least one hundred decibels. They believe that a dog owners should be responsible

I fully support the idea of building a dog park. As many cities have leash laws which keep the dogs from getting the excersize and socialization they need. When a dog does not get the space and socialization it needs, its behavior can waver. Dogs can become agressive as stated in the passage, "A Dog Park Benefits All". Therefore getting a dog park would keep dog related injuries on the lower end of the spectrum.

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

Dog parks in the city would help dogs get daily excercise and it would help them get in shape and it would also help to calm them down beacuse it is proven that dogs that get daiy ecercise tends to be more playful,less noisy,and isin't mean. but the cost of building a dog park would cost up to 70,000$ just for the fence thats not including a building permit and all the work. Most dogs would benifit from having a local dog park but the federal cost of funding a dog park would be outrageous even though it was proven dogs that get daily excercise tends to be more happy and less viceous. There was approximitly 40,000 dog bites a year from New York after they received a dog park the number dirasticly dropped to 4,000 a year. Accordin to the ASPCA

Both passages have valid points,But here's how I see it I feel that a dog park would be A good place for A community because. Dogs need sometime out of the day to play and run around and exercise. And A tiny private yard Isn't enough for a Dog at all dog parks provide the freedom to your dog to run around and play and exercise. And A dog park would also benefeit the dog owner by letting your dog go out and exercise and play, and training there dog it will become more obidient. And training your dog will help when say for instince your trying to go to sleep because you have to work in the morning and you your dog to be quiet with training it'll take one command and the dog will sit and be quiet or go to sleep as well. So i feel there should

Well, here we have two differentes points of view, the first one expones very good arguments about it, and the second mmm.... it seems only like a personal opinion, not strong enough, obviosly one loves dogs and the other one does not. Lets go and check this.

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.

A dog park can be very beneficial to a community. Many people own dogs and need a place for there dog to excerise and interact with other dogs, but they aren't the only ones benefiting since the property values could also rise.

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