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. 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 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,
My city or anyother city could do without a dog park if they don't already have one. In "No Dog Park for Muscatine" it say that "It would be a burden for taxpayers and a lawsuit waiting to happen." I agree with this the citizen in my town would have to help fund this project no matter if they support it or not.
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
One one hand, the general benifits of a dogpark in an area like Muscatine is incomparable to those of any other public service facility. With a whopping 68% of citizens living in close proximity, such as appartments or rental units, there just isn't much space to let dogs run free. It would be easy for a dog to let that energy build up with no release. This play space would not only help ease the struggle of a yappy next door neighbor, but allow the dog's owner peace of mind as well. I know from experience that coming home to a fuzzy, wound up ball of energy can be exausting day to day. A place to exert all of that energy is benificial to all.
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
The assertion that “our city is in desperate need of a dog park” strikes me as overly dramatic. I would go so far as to say no city “needs” a dog park, but many owners certainly “want” a dog park. The alarming canine conditions cited in “A Dog Park Benefits All” can be addressed without an unnecessary tax burden assumed by pet and non-pet owners for the construction of a dog park in Muscatine.
Taxpayers which are all of us will be funding the construction of this dog park. As stated in the passage it will cost over $70,000 just to bulit the fence. That is just something i can not agree with.
According to one article '' That 37% of americans who own dogs often look for a dog park when choosing for a place to live''. With dog parks everyone would benefit. Without a place to take dogs they may never socialize much and can become aggresive.Though a good point can be made that dog parks can be loud at times. I still believe that dog parks are needed.
We as a comunity have to deside if we can use a dog park. I live in Kalispell Montana and in my case we dont have a dog park. I believe that Kalispell does not need a dog park because of the population. In my exsperince we never needed a dog park we have many parks that you can take your dog to so he/she can run around. When my family and I got my blue nose pit he needed lots of room to rome and play. I took my dog named Spike on long walks, long boarding trips, and
Studies show that roughly 2 million pet dogs end up in the shelter every year from lack of exercise or being lonely. That alone should be a hint that building a dog park could benefit us. You can even think of the park as a therapy treatment for your companion. It can also benefit a lot of citizens from Muscatine, because nearly 70% of their residents live in Rental units(mostly buildings), which means there is very limited space and areas to where you can bring your pet. The less freedom the more you risk giving your dog the chance to act out, destroy furniture, etc.. and you don't want that.
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
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
We all love animals and want the best for them and there health as we do every person. Dogs require land and open space to run and play, They need time to socialze a dog park would provide this.
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
However, some of us aren't as excited about the the building of a dog park. This would be paid for by all of us taxpayers, including some who do not even own dogs. A dog park would bring more people; traffic, as well as noise levels, would both increase. Reports of noise near Reston, Virginia and Chandelier, Arizona prove this fact. While it is true the ASPCA says that dogs who do not get adequate amounts of exercise destroy things or often act out, there are other risks to a dog park being