ianmac47 wrote:
Quote:

Vigilante wrote:
Quote:

OlataPhagyna wrote:
Quote:

Vigilante wrote:
The problem with your statement is that it doesn't reflect what actually happens in the park. The other day I was walking my dogs on leash where I am allowed to be when this young daddy starts giving me sh*t. "Hey, can't you read"? Blah, blah, blah. I offered a wager of "any amount of money" that I was allowed to be there and that I would wait right there while he called the police. Instead he got all huffy and stormed off. He was totally in the wrong as have been several people over the last couple of years. They don't understand the signage and the signs have been purposely left in that ambiguous state just to provoke reactions from the misinformed. I will probably end up altering them myself. For instance, "This Garden is a Pet Free Zone".

Come on Vigilante, you?re not being entirely accurate here. Only one of your dogs was on a leash, you were asked a question not ?harassed?, and my husband isn?t really that young, but I?m sure he?d appreciate the compliment. What you are accurate in is that the signs are misleading. I didn?t think they would need to put signs in a gated garden stating that it is pet free. It seemed absurd that you would have to tell dog owners to keep their dogs out of the plants. So I had to assume it meant the whole area. If that?s not the case, well then yes, we were misinformed. I will be sure to bow down and kiss your feet next time I see you for setting us straight.

Fair enough. Your husband could have been more polite. The question he asked was "Can't you read"?! In any case I am glad you now understand my point. The signs in the garden should be for keeping both man and beast out. Children have done a lot more damage to plants and trees than any 50 dogs. Also, soccer players of all ages have been doing damage to the lawns. In my opinion an adult male with a soccer ball should be held just as responsible as an adult male walking a dog. Also, from my point of view your husband is young.

On or off a leash, a soccer ball will never bite you.

Vigilante wrote:
Quote:

OlataPhagyna wrote:
Quote:

Vigilante wrote:
The problem with your statement is that it doesn't reflect what actually happens in the park. The other day I was walking my dogs on leash where I am allowed to be when this young daddy starts giving me sh*t. "Hey, can't you read"? Blah, blah, blah. I offered a wager of "any amount of money" that I was allowed to be there and that I would wait right there while he called the police. Instead he got all huffy and stormed off. He was totally in the wrong as have been several people over the last couple of years. They don't understand the signage and the signs have been purposely left in that ambiguous state just to provoke reactions from the misinformed. I will probably end up altering them myself. For instance, "This Garden is a Pet Free Zone".

Come on Vigilante, you?re not being entirely accurate here. Only one of your dogs was on a leash, you were asked a question not ?harassed?, and my husband isn?t really that young, but I?m sure he?d appreciate the compliment. What you are accurate in is that the signs are misleading. I didn?t think they would need to put signs in a gated garden stating that it is pet free. It seemed absurd that you would have to tell dog owners to keep their dogs out of the plants. So I had to assume it meant the whole area. If that?s not the case, well then yes, we were misinformed. I will be sure to bow down and kiss your feet next time I see you for setting us straight.

Fair enough. Your husband could have been more polite. The question he asked was "Can't you read"?! In any case I am glad you now understand my point. The signs in the garden should be for keeping both man and beast out. Children have done a lot more damage to plants and trees than any 50 dogs. Also, soccer players of all ages have been doing damage to the lawns. In my opinion an adult male with a soccer ball should be held just as responsible as an adult male walking a dog. Also, from my point of view your husband is young.

OlataPhagyna wrote:
Quote:

Vigilante wrote:
The problem with your statement is that it doesn't reflect what actually happens in the park. The other day I was walking my dogs on leash where I am allowed to be when this young daddy starts giving me sh*t. "Hey, can't you read"? Blah, blah, blah. I offered a wager of "any amount of money" that I was allowed to be there and that I would wait right there while he called the police. Instead he got all huffy and stormed off. He was totally in the wrong as have been several people over the last couple of years. They don't understand the signage and the signs have been purposely left in that ambiguous state just to provoke reactions from the misinformed. I will probably end up altering them myself. For instance, "This Garden is a Pet Free Zone".

Come on Vigilante, you?re not being entirely accurate here. Only one of your dogs was on a leash, you were asked a question not ?harassed?, and my husband isn?t really that young, but I?m sure he?d appreciate the compliment. What you are accurate in is that the signs are misleading. I didn?t think they would need to put signs in a gated garden stating that it is pet free. It seemed absurd that you would have to tell dog owners to keep their dogs out of the plants. So I had to assume it meant the whole area. If that?s not the case, well then yes, we were misinformed. I will be sure to bow down and kiss your feet next time I see you for setting us straight.

Vigilante wrote:
The problem with your statement is that it doesn't reflect what actually happens in the park. The other day I was walking my dogs on leash where I am allowed to be when this young daddy starts giving me sh*t. "Hey, can't you read"? Blah, blah, blah. I offered a wager of "any amount of money" that I was allowed to be there and that I would wait right there while he called the police. Instead he got all huffy and stormed off. He was totally in the wrong as have been several people over the last couple of years. They don't understand the signage and the signs have been purposely left in that ambiguous state just to provoke reactions from the misinformed. I will probably end up altering them myself. For instance, "This Garden is a Pet Free Zone".

JCbiscuit wrote:
Quote:

dtjcview wrote:
The vote was rigged to be pro-kiddies/playgrounds and anti-dogs/dog runs. You reap what you sow.

wait...what?! there are two huge dog runs in Hamilton Park. they're the size of the basketball court. or the tennis court. or a good portion of the playground. how the heck is that anti-dog?

and I ask this as a childless dog person who doesn't play basketball.

dtjcview wrote:
The vote was rigged to be pro-kiddies/playgrounds and anti-dogs/dog runs. You reap what you sow.

dtjcview wrote:
Ahhh rules. Follow the rules and everyone is happy. I was just pointing out that I used to walk my dog fairly regularly aroud Hamilton Park. I do so no longer because of the histrionics in recent years, and the anti-dog antagonism generated within the HP community. I've personally called in multiple car and home burglaries over the past 15 years, while walking my dog. Just saying I don't walk my dog near HP because of the anti-dog sentiment.

No tears from me mate over your cars nor houses :)

Chill - you get what you ask for.

Bobblehead wrote:
Quote:

dtjcview wrote:

I think the brat-pack got their way with the HP redevelopment. I'm more than happy to see them suffer the loss of dog owners going anywhere near HP. Let them deal with increased muggings, break-ins and other serious crimes without having the neighborhood watch that dog owners used to provide.
. . .


Chill Neighbors.

Yeah, those two statements don't seem to mesh. You're more than happy to see the supposed chaos that is coming, yet you think your neighbors should "chill"?

Seriously, the "I'm a dog person, those folks with kids are ruining the neighborhood that WE keep safe" are just as bad as the "I have little kids, those filthy animals should be banned from the park" crowd. I hate bratty kids and the parents that enable them; I also hate the self-righteous dog owners who can't peacefully co-exist.

It's a public park in a city, there are rules for sharing the space, stop being such crybabies.

ianmac47 wrote:
The unleashed dogs in the park really are a problem, not just because of pooping and pissing everywhere or because dog claws rip up grass, but because some people want to use the park without worrying about an unleashed dog running up to them. People afraid of dogs or uninterested in meeting your unleashed mut should be able to use the park.

On the other hand, the folks who ran the whole "vote for the plan you want" really f4cked up the vote. The two plans with the largest dog runs -- and the two plans most likely to prove attractive to dog owners who tend to let their dogs roam off leash -- had different feature sets. The "dog vote" was split while the "precious little snowflake" vote concentrated on the single plan with the oversized playground layout.

So yeah, it kind of sucks that dogs are still running around unleashed all the time, but the park plan vote was rigged for the breeders. Now everyone gets to suffer.

Bobblehead wrote:
Quote:

dtjcview wrote:

I think the brat-pack got their way with the HP redevelopment. I'm more than happy to see them suffer the loss of dog owners going anywhere near HP. Let them deal with increased muggings, break-ins and other serious crimes without having the neighborhood watch that dog owners used to provide.
. . .


Chill Neighbors.

Yeah, those two statements don't seem to mesh. You're more than happy to see the supposed chaos that is coming, yet you think your neighbors should "chill"?

Seriously, the "I'm a dog person, those folks with kids are ruining the neighborhood that WE keep safe" are just as bad as the "I have little kids, those filthy animals should be banned from the park" crowd. I hate bratty kids and the parents that enable them; I also hate the self-righteous dog owners who can't peacefully co-exist.

It's a public park in a city, there are rules for sharing the space, stop being such crybabies.

dtjcview wrote:

I think the brat-pack got their way with the HP redevelopment. I'm more than happy to see them suffer the loss of dog owners going anywhere near HP. Let them deal with increased muggings, break-ins and other serious crimes without having the neighborhood watch that dog owners used to provide.
. . .


Chill Neighbors.

Vigilante wrote:
Quote:

jersey_girl72 wrote:
Quote:

dtjcview wrote:
I no longer bring my dog to Hamilton Park, mostly because I don't need the drama as illustrated on this thread. And that drama is needless imo.

I think the brat-pack got their way with the HP redevelopment. I'm more than happy to see them suffer the loss of dog owners going anywhere near HP. Let them deal with increased muggings, break-ins and other serious crimes without having the neighborhood watch that dog owners used to provide.

On the OCD-crowd, I'd just say, your tyke is more likely to contract diseases like MRSA from other kids on your playground equipment, or Lepta from wild/feral animals than from any dog's faeces/urine. You may not have noticed, but there are feral cats, groundhogs, skunks, possums and squirrels that can't read the "Pet-Free" signs in HP. If you are looking for a germ-free lawn for your babies, it's not any HP lawn.

Chill Neighbors.

I'll be damned if I let anyone annoy me to the point of not using the park. I can't wait to tell someone to F@CK off if they mess with me and my dog.

I never realized that I have some anger issues.

+1000. It's my park poo, I mean too.

jersey_girl72 wrote:
Quote:

dtjcview wrote:
I no longer bring my dog to Hamilton Park, mostly because I don't need the drama as illustrated on this thread. And that drama is needless imo.

I think the brat-pack got their way with the HP redevelopment. I'm more than happy to see them suffer the loss of dog owners going anywhere near HP. Let them deal with increased muggings, break-ins and other serious crimes without having the neighborhood watch that dog owners used to provide.

On the OCD-crowd, I'd just say, your tyke is more likely to contract diseases like MRSA from other kids on your playground equipment, or Lepta from wild/feral animals than from any dog's faeces/urine. You may not have noticed, but there are feral cats, groundhogs, skunks, possums and squirrels that can't read the "Pet-Free" signs in HP. If you are looking for a germ-free lawn for your babies, it's not any HP lawn.

Chill Neighbors.

I'll be damned if I let anyone annoy me to the point of not using the park. I can't wait to tell someone to F@CK off if they mess with me and my dog.

I never realized that I have some anger issues.

dtjcview wrote:
I no longer bring my dog to Hamilton Park, mostly because I don't need the drama as illustrated on this thread. And that drama is needless imo.

I think the brat-pack got their way with the HP redevelopment. I'm more than happy to see them suffer the loss of dog owners going anywhere near HP. Let them deal with increased muggings, break-ins and other serious crimes without having the neighborhood watch that dog owners used to provide.

On the OCD-crowd, I'd just say, your tyke is more likely to contract diseases like MRSA from other kids on your playground equipment, or Lepta from wild/feral animals than from any dog's faeces/urine. You may not have noticed, but there are feral cats, groundhogs, skunks, possums and squirrels that can't read the "Pet-Free" signs in HP. If you are looking for a germ-free lawn for your babies, it's not any HP lawn.

Chill Neighbors.

o73o2 wrote:

we do not take out the kids to pee and do their stuff in the park ... kids are in the park to play. i have yet to see a parent to take out their kids in the park to go potty ... but almost every single dog owner (a/k/a dogparent) takes out fido to potty ...

Vigilante wrote:
Too many parents think the world revolves around their kids and thus are raising a generation of entitled brats.

o73o2 wrote:
my god ... you certainly make your parents proud!

JCbiscuit wrote:
Quote:

o73o2 wrote:
Quote:

Moto wrote:
Quote:

There is a huge difference between dogs peeing in the children's playground and kids peeing behind a tree.

What is the huge difference between dog urine and kid urine? I've never seen a dog pee in the children's playground, but I've seen one too many children pee behind a tree! It's weird and a bad example of what society expects of a person. You are doing your child no favor.

i don't see your point, unless you are valuing a child less than a dog. and in that case, you must have made your parents proud.

urine is urine, and the kids who are taught that peeing anywhere is okay are the kids who are gonna grow up and pee in your doorway after one too many at the Hamilton Ale House.

but you won't mind, because at least it's not dog pee.

o73o2 wrote:
Quote:

Moto wrote:
Quote:

There is a huge difference between dogs peeing in the children's playground and kids peeing behind a tree.

What is the huge difference between dog urine and kid urine? I've never seen a dog pee in the children's playground, but I've seen one too many children pee behind a tree! It's weird and a bad example of what society expects of a person. You are doing your child no favor.

i don't see your point, unless you are valuing a child less than a dog. and in that case, you must have made your parents proud.

Moto wrote:
Quote:

There is a huge difference between dogs peeing in the children's playground and kids peeing behind a tree.

What is the huge difference between dog urine and kid urine? I've never seen a dog pee in the children's playground, but I've seen one too many children pee behind a tree! It's weird and a bad example of what society expects of a person. You are doing your child no favor.

There is a huge difference between dogs peeing in the children's playground and kids peeing behind a tree.

Tali wrote:
Quote:

o73o2 wrote:
Quote:

Tali wrote:
Just because you have a dog, doesn't mean all all dog owners are irresponsible. Since moving here, I've been pleasantly surprised at how many dog owners really care about the neighborhood, picking up their dog poop and love DT JC because of the park. Since I've moved here, I was shocked to see 2 separate incidences of kids urinating on the grass and were encouraged to do this by the parents, who must have been too lazy to find a loo. How is that okay? Does anyone complain about kids urinating on the grass where we picnic? Seems to me the dog folks are the "eyes and ears" of the neighborhood and make it a safer place. When I'm walking home from work after dark, I do feel more comforted seeing so many people out with their dogs. Don't think it makes sense to single them out and make the park so unavailable to them.

you may not be aware of the fact that there are no public restrooms in the park or in its vicinity. just sayin' :

True, no public restrooms. But there is a portable one by the basketball courts... they're probably not optimal for kids, but still I don't think its cool for kids to urinate on the lawn.

o73o2 wrote:
Quote:

Tali wrote:
Just because you have a dog, doesn't mean all all dog owners are irresponsible. Since moving here, I've been pleasantly surprised at how many dog owners really care about the neighborhood, picking up their dog poop and love DT JC because of the park. Since I've moved here, I was shocked to see 2 separate incidences of kids urinating on the grass and were encouraged to do this by the parents, who must have been too lazy to find a loo. How is that okay? Does anyone complain about kids urinating on the grass where we picnic? Seems to me the dog folks are the "eyes and ears" of the neighborhood and make it a safer place. When I'm walking home from work after dark, I do feel more comforted seeing so many people out with their dogs. Don't think it makes sense to single them out and make the park so unavailable to them.

you may not be aware of the fact that there are no public restrooms in the park or in its vicinity. just sayin' :