.
Feedback

Small Dog Park Lists New Exercise Area Rules

A new sign has been posted at the Alameda Small Dog Park stating some new rules and regulations for dog handlers. What do you think of them?

The Alameda Recreation and Park Department recently posted a new Dog Exercise Area Rules sign at the Alameda Small Dog Park near 8th Street and Portola Avenue.

A few new rules have been added and some have been tweaked.

Among them:

  • Dogs must be vaccinated and legally licenced.
  • Handlers must by at least 15 years old.
  • Children under the age of 8 are not permitted in off-leash dog areas.
  • Children ages 9 to 15 must be accompanied by an adult. The previous sign, which can still be found at the dog park for larger dogs just states that those under 18 must be accompanied by an adult.
  • Violating these rules is considered a misdemeanor and can result in citations and/or expulsion from the park.
  • The City of Alameda is not responsible for injuries or illnesses of dogs and/or their handlers. The signs say to enter at your own risk.

To compare the two signs, check photos of them shown above.

What do you think of these new rules? Are they necessary? What have your experiences at the Alameda dog parks been like?

Like Alameda Patch | Follow Alameda Patch | Blog on Patch | Get Free Patch Newsletters | PostEvents | Post Announcements

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from Alameda Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Loading comments ...
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Allen S. May 20, 2013 at 03:03 pm
Take a picture of him and see of he's a registered sexual offender by comparing on the website.Read More However, just to be fair, is it 'fair' to call him a 'creeper' if he possibly has been hired to do a job? Has it occurred to you that possible he's a Private Investigator 'tailing' either or both of the subjects being watched? Could be insurance fraud, unemployment fraud, WC fraud, galavanting lovers cheating on a spouse, the company checking up on staff, or the military or investigative arms of any agency following subjects for review of moral character? Could be anything. And yes, as creepy as it may sound, maybe this person has a legitimate role in watching the couple. Why not ask him?
Jeff Mark May 20, 2013 at 12:16 pm
OK, so here's a hopefully-reasonable suggestion. Lion's Mane, next time you see our creepy peeper,Read More call the police. Describe what you see, then let them, the professionals, who get their legal advice elsewhere than reality TV, tell you whether they think they need to check it out. Isn't that what they're for? Mane, please let us know if there are any newsworthy developments.
Lion's Mane May 20, 2013 at 11:26 am
Craig, who said anything about exhibitionists? I said one couple was "amorous," but thatRead More doesn't mean they were "near-sex making out" or anything else inappropriate or even bordering on it. I couldn't see *exactly* what they were doing, and I don't care. From my vantage point, it appeared that they were lying on a blanket, cuddling, talking, sleeping whatever. There were other in the vicinity--it was a warm Saturday afternoon--and no one else seemed to be paying attention to their behavior. The other couples he was spying on were all just sitting or lying together on their blankets. I get that it's probably not "illegal," which is why I haven't called the police, and I would never consider calling 911 for this matter--so that's why you should "believe" I "haven't already," Reeko. I don't think "daring to go out in public" means that you should be subjected to this behavior. Turnstile, I just may do that. I was toying with the idea, but my phone camera isn't very good. Who's to say he doesn't have a camera, too? Let's be clear here...this is not a guy just "out on the beach" with binoculars. I was also wondering when someone would be silly enough to ask why I was "watching him." I'm in my home, and I can see him very plainly from all of my windows and balconies--I'm not creeping on him. If I inadvertently see a guy crouching in the bushes watching people with binoculars, it's going to capture my attention. THOMAS PEREZ, I'm not even going to justify your comment with a response--though I've got a great one queued up--other than to LOL and move on. Please answer me this...why doesn't this guy just go out on the beach and openly sit near them or stand next to them and blatantly watch them? Good grief...I guess when one posts a question in a public forum, one must expect the requisite ignorant responses.
Jeff Mark May 20, 2013 at 01:39 pm
Y'know, Anna, I certainly sympathize with your, well, nostalgia. But thinking about it, it occurs toRead More me that were I a younger, more entrepreneurial-oriented type, and wanted to start a local retail type of business, a franchise of some sort would be a relatively low-risk mode of entry, as opposed to starting all over from scratch myself. I was surprised, for example, to find that the calendar and tzotchke store in the mall that was open for about two months last year was a franchise. I believe SubPar Golf is a franchise. That's kinda the way "starting a business" works these days. Not that something isn't lost, but that's always the case. I would also point out, at the risk of being contentious, the several new establishments that have *opened* on Park St. in the past few years, restaurants like Angela's, the kids-supplies stores, as well as the local chains (dunno how you feel about those) like Red Onion and Burgermeister. And that's just off the top of my head. "Life is change, how it differs from the rocks" — Jefferson Airplane said that.
Ben Newman May 20, 2013 at 09:45 am
So let me get this straight Anna, you'll go to Emeryville 16, and take your business to the massiveRead More chains located around it like Barnes and Nobles, Fudruckers, etc and then you bemoan the small businesses on Park Street that close? Sounds like you're throwing the baby out with the bathwater because what someone wrote in the local newspaper hurt your sensibilities.
Gevin Says May 19, 2013 at 11:57 pm
Jeff - It's GEVIN NOT GAVIN
http://youtu.be/RhRFhyneFcw
Vicster May 18, 2013 at 08:36 am
I'm so glad he hadn't wandered away! I bike home from the ferry along Santa Clara and I kept an eyeRead More out for him. Sounds like he had himself a nice time, the cheeky monkey!
Analisa Harangozo (Editor) May 17, 2013 at 05:51 pm
Yay! I'm glad! Thanks for the update Suzanne.
Suzanne Chenier May 17, 2013 at 05:48 pm
Found!!! He followed me into my downstairs neighbor's house. I went to borrow some eggs. My neighborRead More was at work. I didn't know he followed me in, didn't see or hear him, got the eggs and left. I called that brat for over three hours. He raided my neighbor's garbage can and a bachelor nap on his sofa! Yay. I'm glad he's home and safe. Thank you everyone.
Cynthia May 20, 2013 at 10:03 am
Really? "Poopsie"? Besides that gripe, it makes me sad that we have no beach front thatRead More the dogs can go onto.
Jenna May 19, 2013 at 08:48 pm
I absolutely wish we had some beach frontage in Alameda for the dogs to enjoy the water, but no wayRead More would I take them onto the beach when it's not allowed. The signage is perfectly clear and the fine is probably several hundred dollars.Instead we head up to Point Isabel or Albany Bulb. I've counted 25 dogs in the water on a really nice day at Point Isabel. We're going to Disneyland!
Lion's Mane May 18, 2013 at 03:31 pm
Good point, Gevin! Forgot about the dog park!! Recently a woman with a big, off-leash Rott stoodRead More by and watched him take a huge dump at the water's edge, then she continued on her way without cleaning it up. The park police got here in time and paid her a visit, and she was none to happy about that...made my day. Unfortunately, a family with 2 little kiddos set up their blanket right in front of the Rottie's toilet spot shortly after she walked away, and I'm sure the kids were all over it. The no-dogs allowed ruling was probably inspired, at least in part, by irresponsible pet owners like her.
Gloria Guerra May 20, 2013 at 11:43 am
Alameda Police Havier Quintero beat me up on December 16, 1990 and he gut away with this.
bette page May 20, 2013 at 11:10 am
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Time-Eat-Dog-Sustainable-Living/dp/0500287902
bette page May 20, 2013 at 11:09 am
Time to Eat the Dog?: The Real Guide to Sustainable Living
Kimberlee MacVicar May 17, 2013 at 02:36 pm
Thanks for the info about your experience. I'm starting to hear the same story from about 7 peopleRead More now and I'm sure there are more. Store has been closed all week. Still no sign on the door. At a loss as to what to do to find out what's going on or what to do next.
bette page May 17, 2013 at 07:01 am
Good luck with that. I stopped patronizing them a year ago after some shifty practices with my highRead More end items: wouldn't give me a receipt and then my items sat untagged for three weeks. Completely missed the xmas shopping season.
bette page May 20, 2013 at 11:11 am
They are not open yet. Based on the signage I am assuming that it will be an Asian bakery.
photo originally posted by Dennis Domingo
Analisa Harangozo (Editor) May 15, 2013 at 07:15 pm
Carol, posted this on Facebook and got some responses so far:Read More https://www.facebook.com/AlamedaPatch/posts/666500700043838?comment_id=32723444&offset=0&total_comments=2
An accident occurred Monday, May 13 on Westline/8th Street turning into Crown Beach. Credit: Jessica McMahon
Carol Parker May 15, 2013 at 11:02 am
It is really dangerous coming out of the dog park/tennis court parking lot. We never try to turnRead More left coming out of it, always right - and even then you have to be super careful because cars just come speeding down the street.