Plan for Dog Parks Makes the Fur Fly

Dogs may offer companionship, protection and some stress release for urban-dwelling humans, but a city does not offer much for dogs, their owners and advocates say.

A recent proposal being floated by the city’s Parks Commission would greatly expand the number of off-leash canine recreation areas in Los Angeles.

But the proposal has some residents worrying that humans might get the wet end of the stick.

While no formal proposal has gone to the City Council, parks officials are reassuring neighborhoods that such an expansion would not be at the expense of human activities and would be accomplished largely with private donations.

Does Los Angeles need more dog parks?

Steve Soboroff, Parks Commission president:

San Francisco has 35 [dog parks] and we have three. . . . In the San Fernando Valley, [the one] at Laurel Canyon Park, and the new one [at Sepulveda Dam Recreation Area] are the Rolls-Royces of off-leash exercise areas. When we’re talking about more of these, we’re talking about Chevrolets . . . more like $20,000 to $30,000 as opposed to $300,000 . . . We’re not going to take away recreational programs from people and give them to the dogs.”

Gerald Silver, president, Homeowners of Encino:

“That’s a sad comment if they can get private donations for dog parks and can’t raise the money for people. . . . Most of the parks in the city are dead parks. They are not parks that people feel safe to bring their children and families to. . . . We need to take a better look and revitalize these parklands and make them safe and clean. . . . I think parks should be for people first.”

Madeline Bernstein, executive director of the Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Los Angeles:

“I think the key with well-run dog parks is that the people that use the park need to understand the dog should be well-behaved, be vaccinated, and, clean up after the dog. And the dog should be spayed or neutered. If the dog tends to be aggressive, then really the dog park is not for you. . . . I don’t know if spending money on a park where people bring their dogs is any different than spending it on a park where the people don’t bring their dogs.”

Laura Chick, Los Angeles city councilwoman:

“I think we have to be careful to balance the needs of the children and families for recreational facilities along with the need for people with dogs. . . . It’s not the easiest thing to do to access full, private-sector funding. Part of the difficulty is in finding the land. . . . [But] I firmly believe in not saying how we can’t do something, but finding a way that we can.”

Michael Bell, Encino, coordinator for Californians for a Humane Los Angeles:

“It deals with the welfare of the pets and the pet owners. Most people who live in small homes don’t get a chance to do any more than take their dogs on a walk. This gives the dogs the opportunity to do what comes naturally to them and that is to communicate with other dogs. “

On the Issue appears every Tuesday. Please send suggestions for possible topics to On the Issue, Los Angeles Times, 20000 Prairie St., Chatsworth 91311. Or fax them to (818) 772-3338. Or e-mail them to valley@latimes.com Please include your name and daytime phone number.