|
|
|
Uploaded: Wednesday, November 21, 2007, 2:50 PM
Residents, pet sitters fight over dog park
|
| If some residents get their way, pet sitters who show up at the Shoreline dog park with up to a dozen dogs each will be forced to go elsewhere -- or limit the size of their pack to three.
Shoreline dog park users like Chris Hildebrandt say the .78-acre dog park isn't big enough for both them and the pet sitters. The sitters typically use the park between 10 a.m. and 2 p.m., and Hildebrandt says most come from other Peninsula cities. According to a staff report, most of those cities, with the exception of Sunnyvale and Palo Alto, have already imposed similar restrictions at their dog parks.
Caught off guard by the controversy, the parks and recreation commission tabled the issue Wednesday. Commissioners heard testimony from three people who work as pet sitters, upsetting local residents who thought the restrictions would be a slam dunk. The commissioners did, however, recommend a new height limit for dogs in the "small dog" area of the park: 18 inches.
— Daniel DeBolt Are you receiving Express, our free daily e-mail edition? See a sample and sign-up for Express.
|
|
| Comments
|
Posted by Ann Curlee, a resident of the Shoreline West neighborhood, on Nov 28, 2007 at 5:14 pm The article titled, "Residents, pet sitters fight over dog park" written by Daniel DeBolt got it all wrong. DeBolt did not report the facts. A majority of the residents of Mountain View attending the meeting supported the city councils decision to not restrict the number of dogs at the park. What we witnessed was a council acting on behalf of the majority of its constituents in a responsible manner. Why is the Mountian View voice against pet owners and their dogs? Why is the Mountain View Voice attacking the city council? This is irresponsible reporting and doesn't belong in Mountain View. One disgruntled pet owner should not dictate the voice of all pet owners in Mountain View and the Voice should not be so unwise to not report the facts of the meeting. Residents and pet sitters were in agreement at this meeting. People expressed that they only go when the pet sitters are there because they know that their dogs are really good dogs. There aren't a lot of dog parks where people can be sure that they are bringing their dogs into a safe environment. More and more we need to have a dual income in order to live in this city. What happens when we have to go off to work during the day and we have a dog? We aren't allowed to have someone take care of our dogs and take them to the dog park? Is the dog park all about people and not our dogs? The pet sitters are providing a wonderful service that not only gives the dogs exercise but reinforces their training as well. This city council meeting was harmonious and the council stressed that they are going to work diligently on creating a permit system for pet sitters who will be able to bring more than 3 dogs to the dog park. The pet sitters will have to display openely their permit number so a citizen can file a complaint about a pet sitter they think is acting in a non-professional manner or who is being negligent with their dogs. In my opinion, this is a very peaceful resolution to an issue that has become extremely tense. Let's give our city council the support and patience it needs to act toward solving this problem.
|
|
|
| |
|
Send this story
Print this story
