Can we talk about the law against dogs in Lakewood parks?

[Ivor Karabatkovic]

Valerie,


Another reason is that other cities aren't as heavily populated as Lakewood. Well, maybe now that the city has lost so many residents, it might not be the densest city between Chicago and NYC. That's a lot of people and a lot of dogs, hypothetically speaking.

.

The last city I lived almost had more dogs than people and was just as dense as this one. Another city I lived in that had a lot of dogs (I didnt have one at the time) and was very dense was San francisco. I dont buy the density argument because if you look at the parks dept website, it lists all of the parks. If you take the people population and potential dog population, I would surmise that there is enough space to go around where the density issue would not come into play.

Alright, we can throw that one out the window.
It still doesn't validate changing the law when a free, clean solution is 15 minutes (or less) away.

It's either costing the city and it's taxpayers more money and (potentially) more officers off the streets for changing this law and enacting an ordinance or it's keeping the law the same and not opening any new cans of worms or checkbooks. Because of the state of our City, keeping City Hall's checkbooks closed and making dog owners put a bit more effort into keeping their dogs happy is the more logical choice. Why should it be City Hall's problem if the owner can't find an extra half hour of free time during their evening?

That's like me blaming the city for being late to class because the light on Warren and Athens takes too long. Or, it's like me complaining that I can't drive across town to Nature's Bin to get fresh food and demanding that a grocery store be built on the corner of my street. There are ways around everything if a little bit of extra planning and effort and yes, time, is put into it.

[Ed Dickson]

You can throw out the law because it's ridiculous. Name ONE other city in this area that doesn't allow dogs in the parks. So much talk on this board about the pride we should have in this city. How much pride should we have when we're told we aren't responsible enough to take our dogs in public? So far, all the arguments I have seen for this law seem a little off. Go to the Metroparks and stay out of your own city's parks? Not really inducing civicpride for my city. People don't clean up after the dog? Many, many other cities have put faith in residents that they will clean up and even provide clean up stations for them. guess what? People actually use them when provided!
I have lived here for quite awhile and have always thought this was ridiculous. I just thought I was the only one. Thanks Valerie for speaking up!

I do plan on bringing this up as I continue my opposition to the proposed Pit Bull ban.

[Mike Deneen]

I know that councilman Bullock is exploring this issue, so I suggest that folks contact him with their concerns.

He can be reached via PM, or at his Malley's meetup event next Tuesday (see the announcements page).

I have had dogs for ten years, and the park ban has been in place as long as I can remember. I've never had strong feelings either way, since I don't live close to any city parks.

However, I know that Impett Park (the Cleveland Park near my home) allows dogs and it is not full of dog poop.

[Lynn Farris]

I don't currently have any dogs, but I too have always found this a curious rule. If I recall they do allow dogs in once or twice a year. First to chase the geese away and second for the doggie swim.

But I would love to see dogs at the park. When I had dogs, I took them to rugby games and baseball games and they would always sit nicely and enjoy being with people.

I like Jim's suggestion. Put the fine high enough that no one would even think about not cleaning up after themselves.

But more important than dogs, I would love to see the hoops put back up. We are racing into summer and it is a good way to keep kids busy. Busy kids don't get into trouble. We heard in the past that a skate park would attract "bad kids" and the kids have policed themselves very well and it is one of the most popular venues in our parks. I don't think kids that play basketball our bad either.

[Rhonda loje]

There is a great park in Rocky River that also has beach access. They allow dogs in the park and on the beach. The park and the beach is not full of poop. Everyone takes care of their own. It is full of kids playing and people enjoying a picnic....all with dogs too. If Rocky River can do it.... I certainly think we in Lakewood can too!

We all know we are much more civilized on this side of the river!

Rhonda

[Ivor Karabatkovic]

There is a great park in Rocky River that also has beach access. They allow dogs in the park and on the beach. The park and the beach is not full of poop. Everyone takes care of their own. It is full of kids playing and people enjoying a picnic....all with dogs too. If Rocky River can do it.... I certainly think we in Lakewood can too!

We all know we are much more civilized on this side of the river!

Rhonda

Yep, right off of Lake. Travis Hafner of the Indians can be found walking his little dog with his wife (Amy, if I remember). I would always eat lunch there and see Travis, we'd chat for a bit and then two hours later I'd see him again at the Jake for batting practice.

I just did a series of Senior Portraits at that park for graduating LHS students. It's a beautiful park.

Elmwood park in River is also pretty neat. It's secluded but that park is filled with "land mines".

[Stephen Eisel]

Could a section of the park be fenced off just for dogs and their owners? The city could sell a special dog tag for the park to help raise money for the expenses. Also, how about a doggy wash to help raise money? just a suggestion (i would just pick one park)

[Shawn Juris]

Just to recap, are dogs not permitted in any park in Lakewood or are they prohibitted at Lakewood Park alone. Are there restrictions to the school areas and smaller parks.
Oddly, this makes the earlier suggestion about how unkind to dogs it is to have a very active dog in Lakewood. It hadn't occured to me before when I referred to small yards that other than walking a dog on a leash on sidewalks there were few other options other than the metroparks.

There certainly are some odd restrictions on the books in town. The interesting thing though is how they have been revised very quickly over the past few years even. I remember being told how banners could not be hung to promote events and how impossible it would be to close off Detroit Ave for any sort of street party (with the exception of the Arts Festival which somehow all ways got a pass). The other one that still hangs things up at Lakewood Park is the absolutely no alcohol rule. How many events have been thwarted because, even with controls in place the city is unwilling to bend? Sand Volleyball tournaments on the Lake at the Park sponsored by Bud Light? Nah that wouldn't draw a crowd and generate fun and money. Again, though things have loosened even in the 5 years that I've been asking.
So clarify this topic for me. What are the costs and benefits of changing the rule? Other than shifting from an ordinance that favors visitors without pets to visitors with pets, how would the city be better because of a change?
I'm not following the reasoning that because the police initiative afforded more patrols to ensure safety was maintained at the parks that they should be used for low priority offenses like doggy duty. This argument of "the public isn't responsible enough" seems to come up in other areas like why we don't have public area recycling. It seems condescending for the city to hold onto an attitude like that, but I suspect that there's some validity to it and wonder what the course of action would be to test the public and get to a point that we can have nice things here. Could it be that maybe the reason goes beyond simply stepping in poop and is more about setting up Lakewood park to be a place where kids can play and you can have a picnic without worrying about a dog who's owner let them off their leash? Were there maybe bites or complaints years ago that initiated this ordinance? Could it be that Lakewood Park sits on Lake Rd and that dogs were dashing away from the owners and running into the street? Was it something that the homes around the park requested? Just some thoughts.

[Ivor Karabatkovic]

Could a section of the park be fenced off just for dogs and their owners? The city could sell a special dog tag for the park to help raise money for the expenses. Also, how about a doggy wash to help raise money? just a suggestion (i would just pick one park)

Stephen,

Then you'd have another Dog Park.

We already established that some dogs don't like dog parks.

[Stephen Eisel]

Thanks Ivor.. I did noknow that...

[ryan costa]

it is a bad law. the law must be destroyed!

[Valerie Molinski]

making dog owners put a bit more effort into keeping their dogs happy is the more logical choice. Why should it be City Hall's problem if the owner can't find an extra half hour of free time during their evening?

Hmm, so now I am lazy and don't care about my dog because I am not willing to pack my kids up each night after working 40 plus hours a week into the car to drive across town to use a metropark each night?

I'd rather spend that time walking with my kids and dog that have my butt in a car, sorry. I still don't get why 'there is _____ 15 minutes away' as a good reason why this city doesnt allow me even to pass through the park.

I'm not following the reasoning that because the police initiative afforded more patrols to ensure safety was maintained at the parks that they should be used for low priority offenses like doggy duty. This argument of "the public isn't responsible enough" seems to come up in other areas like why we don't have public area recycling. It seems condescending for the city to hold onto an attitude like that,

I am not saying that either. I am saying that it's not needed if dog owners police OTHER dog owners. And again, they had enough time to come up to me and my SIL at the park AND chase down the dude just passing through with his dog while I was there. Four cruisers, doing what? Looking for people with dogs to take their names down?

I see no reason for this rule when I believe most dog owners can be trusted to control and pick up ater their dogs. I just don't get it. As more young families move in, you are going to find this becoming a bigger issue and a big turn off to people. Trust me.

[Valerie Molinski]

Just to recap, are dogs not permitted in any park in Lakewood or are they prohibitted at Lakewood Park alone. Are there restrictions to the school areas and smaller parks.

I thought it was just some of the parks, but apparently it is ALL. Even that would make more sense to me.... just some of them would allow dogs to be in the park, on leash at all times of course.

But, no....

[Brad Hutchison]

http://www.poopbags.com

It can't be that expensive to put up dispensers at the entrance(s) to each park.

[Shawn Juris]

Has any of this speculation been confirmed that dogs are not allowed in the parks because of the potential problems created by owners not cleaning up after their dogs?