3 Factorial
The homepage of Laser the dog also contains a section devoted to A2, containing such observations as, “If something is expensive enough round here, it automatically becomes pretentious and hence desirable.” Wait, we thought that if something here is pretentious enough, it automatically becomes desirable and hence expensive. Whereas in normal cities, if something is desirable enough, it automatically becomes expensive and hence pretentious. Or is it the other way around? Now we’re confused. There are only six ways it could be. Maybe everything here is automatically expensive, and if it’s pretentious enough it becomes desirable?
Ding ding ding ding ding!
posted by Dale on June 24th, 2005 at 9:17 amI’m sure Laser would like Ann Arbor a lot more if it had its own dog park. There’s probably a plan to have a series of meetings to discuss the possibility of a suggestion to propose a dog park, but somehow that doesn’t quite do it for the average canine.
posted by Dog park deprived on June 24th, 2005 at 10:52 amWell, actually, DPD, there were plans underway to create a dogpark, but then some folks complained that, because of planning studies underway, floodway remappings, and sunspots - all of which will make a huge impact on the decision about a dogpark, of course - further discussion of dog parks should be put off for a few decades.
posted by Murph. on June 24th, 2005 at 12:53 pmBut there IS a dog park in Ann Arbor. Granted, it’s private and you dog has to be temperament tested, but it’s a great park, they’re always adding more stuff for the dogs to do, and, because of the temperament testing, you don’t have to worry about your little fluff-ball getting eaten by an ill-bred, mass-produced pug–or whatever the dog of the moment may be. Carolyn over at the Dog-o-Mat runs it with her boyfriend. www.annarbordog.com
posted by BlogLurker on June 24th, 2005 at 4:24 pm“Welcome to Ann Arbor Dog: the beginning of my dog service empire.”
Oh, for fuck’s sake….
posted by Boris on June 26th, 2005 at 2:54 am(reads annarbordog.com) One remedy to the urgent if heretofore unheard-of problem of dogs developing “snow balls” in their paws is to let them inside for a while in the winter. Works for my dog.
But that’s a free remedy, ergo neither pretentious nor desirable.
posted by Laura on June 26th, 2005 at 1:55 pmGod, there are plenty of atrocious things about AA — why would you rip on one of the few non-mass-produced, locally-owned, and fun-related businesses in the area? God-forbid someone make a living doing something creative and that they love. No, you’re right, everyone should just own a coffee shop in that provincial little hellhole.
posted by Anna on June 26th, 2005 at 2:51 pmWe need a hamster park.
posted by Dave on June 27th, 2005 at 9:19 amA hamster park! What a great idea. Can we make it right next to the cat park?
posted by Andrew on June 28th, 2005 at 9:28 pmAnna wrote: “why would you rip on one of the few non-mass-produced, locally-owned, and fun-related businesses in the area?”
My off-the-cuff response has to do with the fact that Carolyn Kinsler started the private dog park with a ban on all breeds that are portrayed in the media to be aggressive or known for fighting. There is a debate on her own website about this now.
posted by Lizz on June 29th, 2005 at 12:33 amHer ban includes the pit bulls and the akitas, yet there are many german shepherds that cannot be around other dogs (many police dogs) and they are not banned from her park. I have a real problem with this. The bully breeds are put under intense scrutiny by nearly everyone because they are representing all dogs of their particular breed and if you work really hard at training and are then told you aren’t welcome at the private dog park, then that is ridiculous.
With that said, I do hope Carolyn is doing well with her park. There is a particular group of people she can cater to (specifically, those with the money) and since I am not in that group, I continue to push for a public dog park after 3 years of long, hard work. We will have a park, say all of the parks planners and commissioners, it is just a matter of every municipality agreeing on the details. This will be the first go for most of the County (except the pseudo-park in Saline) and they don’t want to f— this one up. That is what is taking so long. Not to mention that some of the parks people still don’t want to see this park happen, so they are stalling.
I could go on, but I’d rather save it for my own weblog on the issue.
ps. I’d love a cat park. But if my dog broke in, she would try to eat all of the cats since she isn’t all there.
As a dog owner and a friend of Carolyn’s I will tell you that the public dog park idea has been around for over ten years — long before the private park opened — and has yet to happen. I will be very surprised (but happy) if it does — dog owners are taxpayers, too, and I see no reason why childless dog-owners should be expected to support a school district (over half the town budget in most places) not to mention numerous playgrounds for kids but be seen as unreasonable for wanting a small public space where dogs are allowed to be off-leash.
I just don’t really understand your attitude about her park — she’s not getting rich doing it, so I don’t know how you can criticize her for “catering to those with money” — or perhaps you think she ought to buy land, pay for the insurance, maintain and advertise it, and then offer it all for free. Do bars around Ann Arbor also cater to those with money? What about the cable company? What about ISPs? And given that ultimately she’d be held legally responsible if something went wrong, I think she’s right to be cautious about what dogs she takes on.
posted by Anna on June 29th, 2005 at 10:55 amAnna- you are kidding right? A comparison between kids and dogs? A good school system, which Ann Arbor has, is an asset to the community. A dog park on the other hand, contributes very little if anything.
posted by David on June 30th, 2005 at 1:47 pmPlus, a public dog park would never work…who would pick up all the dog crap? Obviously not the owners. Ever been to one of the local schools and seen the signs pleading with pet owners to pick up after their dogs?
A dog park is as attractive to an urban couple with no kids as a good school is to a family with or planning on kids. A couple signs is all that’s necessary in my experience to encourage people to scoop.
Here in DC, a private cemetery sells memberships to dog owners who live on the hill and they scoop after their own dogs. It’s very popular (50k in revenue/year) at $150 a year. You should see how many Dogma-type stores there are on the Hill.
posted by Dale on June 30th, 2005 at 2:02 pmAs for Laura and her snowball-free dog, she must have a wimpy short-haired breed that’s too precious to play in the snow for hours. There isn’t much my Bouv would rather do than to spend the afternoon in the snow, and she does get snowballs compacted between her toes. Carolyn’s goo works, my dog is much happier, and we get to play longer in the winter. If you saw the bottle with the packing-tape affixed laser-printed labels, you’d agree that pretentious it ain’t.
As for Lizz and her “bully dog” issue, if it were my name on the title and I had to pay for the insurance, I’d certainly do the same thing. Depending on how it’s legally structured, Carolyn could be opening herself to serious liability issues if one of the ill-bred dogs goes on a rampage; I don’t blame her one bit. Do I agree that certain breeds have gotten a bad rap solely on the reputation of a few bad examples? Absolutely. Is that fair? No.
posted by BlogLurker on June 30th, 2005 at 8:49 pmWhen we first arrived in Ann Arbor, we regularly visited the unofficial dog park on Wagner Road. It was a good way to meet a cross-section of the community, and learn about the many wonderful aspects of this Paris of the Midwest. It’s too bad it closed down.
A cat park only makes sense if there were leash laws for cats. Ann Arbor is the kind of place that would try to regulate feline mobility, so maybe there is a cat park in the distant future.
There were rumors months ago about a possible Ypsilanti dog park, but I’ve not heard anything more about that recently. I was hoping that Ypsilanti would show the way …
posted by Dog park deprived on June 30th, 2005 at 9:20 pmI have lived in two places with public dog parks and they work just fine — the dog owners pick up the crap. Does every owner? No, but the others pitch in so as not to have the space taken away. The ‘park’ doesn’t have to be huge — in one place I lived there was a fenced-in area in one part of an existing (and under-used) park.
And no, I wasn’t kidding. There are plenty of town ammenities in plenty of places — town parks, town beaches, tennis courts, basketball hoops, skate parks, schools, etc. You don’t have to equate kids with dogs to think that it’s not unreasonble for dog owners to have access to ammenities, especially if there is a critical mass and if the cost to the town isn’t great (I would submit that it costs less than a tennis court, which can only be used by 4 people max at a time). By saying that schools are over half the town budget (often a lot more than half), I am simply saying that people spend a LOT of money educating other peoiples’ kids; it’s not a lot to ask for a very tiny fraction of that for a place where dogs can play.
posted by Anna on July 1st, 2005 at 4:37 pmWe LOVE our dog Gem, but Ann Arbor does not have a dog park. And please don’t give me any burbling about Paw Run. First of all, it’s a private club with expensive fees. Because it is a priviate club, it can make up its own rules - which is fine - as long as you accept them. For a “liberal” town, the rules involve pre-judging a dog on breed rather than the individual dog’s personality (breed bias occurs before any behavioral assessment is made) - apparently all breeds are not created equally and that leads me to suspect that the private owners are also burdened with a set of prejudices I don’t really want to know about and to which I certainly don’t want my family (including my dog) exposed.
For a “learned” community, I am saddened by the knowledge that such bias exists and I will continue to drive all the way to the oakland county park, which doesn’t require a pre-approval process and steep fees for a “private” club.
Before someone reads this and says, “She must have been turned down,” please note that I didn’t apply. It’s the principle that I simply won’t support the ignorance of illogical arguements. Even german shepherd is not the same, they - like humans - vary by nature and nurture. The fallacy that all x behave like y is insane. When we view dog shows, note that the judges may only assess the dog to the breed standard - BUT NO DOG is required to perform the task for which it was originally bred. None of the retrievers demonstrate retrieving, not of the herding breeds herd. None of the water dogs swim. And poodles certainly don’t demonstrate why they get such a ridiculous cut. Therefore, dog show judges can only determine whether the dog in question meets the shape, look and walk of the breed - and all dog’s don’t. Therefore if all dogs don’t look nor walk like the standard for their breed, why would anyone make the leap that all dog’s of a certain breed would act alike? Even if we followed the argument that “some” dogs of a certain breed bite, all dogs have teeth and all dogs “might” bite. Following the thinking of Paw Run, no dogs of any breed should be allowed in the dog park because they all are a potential danger.
Bottom line, it’s easy to single out a group for “all X act like Y” but its that kind of thinking which is stupid and dangerous. I’ll have no part of it.
posted by stacey on July 9th, 2005 at 6:39 pmRight on! Fight the good fight!
posted by Dale on July 9th, 2005 at 9:16 pmIt seems like maybe some people are a little too, how shall we say, emotionally invested in their dogs. Dogs are great. Dog parks are great. But all this anxiety and breathless pleading is a little embarrasing to have to watch. Like when your dog licks himself in front of company.
posted by Parking Structure Dude! on July 11th, 2005 at 1:54 pmIf x = labrador retriever, and y = dog chasing a ball, then: throw a ball at a dog park => all x behave like y.
This isn’t a fallacy, but it is insane. If the human wanted the ball, why throw it away?
posted by Dog park deprived on July 11th, 2005 at 9:15 pmYes, insane. Truly insane.
posted by Parking Structure Dude! on July 12th, 2005 at 11:23 amParking structure dude, I feel the same way about peoples’ attitudes toward their kids. I mean, why all the pictures and crap? Fine, give ‘em food, give ‘em some water, but keep them the hell out of the restaurants where others are trying to enjoy a quiet meal, and for god’s sake, don’t take them to see War of the Worlds.
posted by Anna on July 12th, 2005 at 12:16 pmPretentious? Prejudiced? O.K. you can’t call the Dog-O-Mat either and if you had met me there, we could discuss my prices and breed bans. I was a member of the original dog park initiative years ago and I know how the city had little interest in providing us a dog park.
Am I making tons of money? In my dreams, but not in any reality. The fees are as little as I can manage and still pay the rent, the insurance, the gas for the tractor, etc. Is it too much for some people? It may be but there is a certain cost to owning a dog.
As to the breed bans, that was a business decision, based on the cost of insurance and the desires of my members. Am I breedist? In this case I am. While I will leave it to individuals to decide if they want to own Pits, Akitas, etc., I believe that they are dogs that belong at a dog park. They may do fine in other environments, but the possibility that their fighting instincts may be set off in the romps that often happen at Paw Run is too great for me to risk.
As to the dog show comment, as someone who has shown in both breed and obedience, I realize that “dog shows” do not have to do with work the dogs were breed to do directly, but the breed standards often have parts about temperament and I am sure if you were to read the standards of the banned breeds the temperament part is far different than the temperament parts of non-banned breeds. Do you know that in terrier classes they frequently have the dogs stand face to face to get them riled up and trying to intimidate each other so they can get a certain desired look? And there are also a great number of other dog events that are designed to display what dogs were breed to do, did you know this?
Finally, as to my dog empire comment, it seems that some people cannot spot irony. But people believe what fits into their own preconceived world view.
posted by PawRun on October 16th, 2005 at 6:19 pmwould I be allowed to bring my dog to the dog park if I put the leash around my neck and had the dog walk me?
posted by Real Big on October 17th, 2005 at 1:41 amMy family is moving to Ypsilanti in a few weeks. We are coming from phoenix az and are huge fans of the dog parks in our area. Oh and the dog loves it too! I am shocked to see that ann arbor has a dog park that requires fees and bans certain breeds. The parks here are beautiful most are paid for/sponsered by Pet Smart or Pet Co. (are these stores in your area?) All breeds are allowed and I have never had any problems with aggresive dogs. I think the focus of the rules should be directed at the dogs owners. If a dog is acting with bad behavior then the owner should act appropriately….thats how it is here. Im dissapointed to find out we are going to have to pay for our dog to go to the park:(
posted by Jennifer on June 23rd, 2006 at 1:29 amFor the life of me, I cannot understand what’s so complicated about the concept of a publicly-funded and -managed dog park. We’re talking about putting up a fence, a couple extra trash cans, and signs stating the rules. We just moved to Ann Arbor from Portland, Oregon, where there are several public dog parks that function without problem. Waste management was never an issue, nor was fighting.
While I grasp the concept, I think that the comparison of schools and a dog park is absurd. Again, we’re talking about a fence, trashcans, signs - pretty simple shit.
I fully understand and appreciate Carolyn’s ban on certain breeds - in our litigious society, insurance considerations require it. I don’t think we’ll pay $220/year to take our dog there - I’d rather put that money toward building a fence around our property.
posted by Tom on July 28th, 2006 at 6:28 pmI wish we had a dog park too, but there are some activist-types in town who always shoot it down (liability). Lame.
posted by OFWinsurgent on July 28th, 2006 at 8:57 pmWe are moving from Madison, WI to Ann Arbor this summer. I cannot believe that there isn’t a public dog park. Our dog parks in Madison are wonderful, and basically self-run. As has been written before, it just takes a fence and a couple of trash cans. The ideal spot would be in the corner of an existing park. The parks in Madison work wonderfully, and there’s a registration fee for dogs that covers the minimal costs ($20/year). It just sounds like the AA city council is dysfucntional.
posted by Alon K. on June 9th, 2007 at 2:52 pmI am a long-time resident of Ann Arbor who owns a collie-shepherd mix named Lobo. We’ve been to a number of parks, the informal Wagner park that nolonger exists, the dog park up in South Lyon, and now Paw Run.
In my experience we are pretty good about picking up our poop. Dog owners who go to dog parks simply learn to do this.
I am not yet sure how much safer a private park is over a public park, but I have to say I feel safer. Lobo got into a nasty scrum with a pit-bull at the South Lyons park which led to a hospital visit. My sister had a similar incident with her dalmatian at a public park in Philadelphia. At the Wagner park, which I really enjoyed, I felt a greater need to be vigilant than I do at Paw Run.
I do support the creation of a public Ann Arbor dog park. Everyone who has spoken here deserves one. I am sorry to hear anyone discounting it’s importance in our community.
posted by Eric on September 23rd, 2007 at 1:05 amits, not it’s. i won’t touch our poop. (ew.)
posted by peter honeyman on September 23rd, 2007 at 10:30 pm