Watching your dog interact with other canines can turn an afternoon into a fascinating lesson in pack
behavior. The best place for this interaction is a “dog park.” These parks are fenced areas set aside for
dogs to meet and play under the watchful eyes of their owners.
With more and more municipal parks prohibiting dogs off leash, it becomes more difficult to find a place
where your dog can stretch its legs canine style. Dog parks solve this problem. If your community has
not discovered the benefits of accommodating its canine residents, print out the proposal compiled by
DOG-PAC of Santa Barbara. It can be adapted for your community.
Prepared for the Special City Subcommittee on Dogs
City of Santa Barbara, California
Dog PAC, SB
P0 Box 3716
Santa Barbara, CA 93130
Table of Contents
| Topic I. Purpose
III. Dog Ownership
IV. Dogs in the Community
V. The Santa Barbara Community
VI. Concerns with Off-leash Dog Areas
VII. Dog PAC, SB Recommendations to the dog
VIII. Future Considerations
The purpose of this position paper is to clarify the needs of responsible dog owners for access to public
open space, to improve the understanding of the benefits of such access, and to recommend ordinance
changes that reflect principles that accommodate responsible dog ownership.
The public open space management environment has changed dramatically in the last twenty years.
The range of recreational activities in which people are engaged has expanded while budgets and
resources have contracted. At the same time, conflict in public parks appears to have increased
although not necessarily because of a higher incidence of problems. Dog owners have not been immune
from these changes. Increased restrictions are being placed on their use of public open space.
The benefits of pet ownership are becoming clearer as more studies and case histories become available.
Pets are now being recognized for their physical and mental health benefits, for their role as companions
and social facilitators, and in helping children learn responsibility and how to share.
The field of urban animal management has emerged to ensure that pets are appropriately managed
in the urban environment. The number and range of programs being developed and implemented
reflects increased community, professional, and academic interest in urban animal management.
There now exists a broader and more soundly based body of knowledge on which to make judgements
about managing domestic pets as well as more effective ways of disseminating new ideas and knowledge.
That dogs should be allowed access to public open space is a basic premise of this position paper.
As a principle we believe open space access should be incorporated into both urban animal management
strategies and open space/ recreation plans. In fact, such planning has already occurred in dozens of
cities in California. 2 Undeniably, problems exist, but it has been demonstrated that the benefits outweigh
the disadvantages. Unduly restrictive access policies are inequitable and likely to be counter-productive
in managing conflicts and varying demands.
The benefits of dog ownership are becoming clearer as more studies and case histories become available.
Dogs are now being recognized for their physical and mental health benefits, for their role as companions
and catalysts for human social interaction, and in helping children learn responsibility (Annual Review of
Public Health, 1996; Psychological Reports, 1996). For many single and elderly people a dog not only
provides companionship but often is the only source of home and personal security. Beyond this, dogs
play a vital role working in society in numerous ways such as assisting the handicapped and working for
the military, police departments, and search and rescue teams.
The benefits of allowing dogs access to public open space are not self-evident and warrant closer
examination. It is important to understand that they apply not only to dogs and their owners but also
to the wider community as well as to those responsible for urban animal management.
The most obvious reason why dogs need access to public open space is because of their popularity.
Dog owners are a substantial group of park users: a conservative estimate is that there are 3 almost
29,000 dog owners in the city of Santa Barbara and approximately 17,000 dogs. For the county, these
figures are considerably higher, with an estimated 71,000 dogs and 122,000 dog owners. Other groups -
skateboarders, lawn bowlers, and hang gliders, for example – have been given special consideration
in view of their unique park needs. The overwhelming numbers of dogs and dog owners would seem
to warrant specific consideration for them as well.
The second reason has to do with the link between open space for dogs and promoting acceptable
behavior from dogs. Dogs need to be properly socialized in appropriate behavior (Canine Behavior, 1965).
They also need regular outings to reduce boredom and pent-up energy at home. Access to a park close to
home is the safest and most effective way to ensure that owners socialize their dogs and provide them with
on-going experiences in the outside world. This not only benefits the dog and its owner but also neighbors
who are affected by unacceptable behavior at home, other park and street users, and authorities responsible
for urban animal management.
The third reason why dogs need access to public open space is for the positive effects it can have on
their owners. Owning a dog encourages people to exercise and visit their local park. Taking a dog out
has also been found to stimulate social interaction with other people (Journal of Nutrition and the
The final reason is that a balanced approach to accommodating dog owners in public open space may
achieve higher levels of compliance by dog owners with relevant laws. If dog owners perceive laws to
be unfair it may elicit a defiant rather than a compliant response from dog owners – they may ignore the
laws in protest. If, on the other hand, laws are perceived to be fair people will be more likely to voluntarily
comply. However, the impact of these programs can only be limited without an access policy that is
perceived to be fair by dog owners.
Dogs in the Community
Open Space Planning
The entire subject of urban and suburban animal management is so new that only those cities
expanding into undeveloped land have an opportunity to take advantage of planning ideas that
incorporate recreational areas exclusively for dogs. Cities like Santa Barbara, with in-fill
development only, must look to more creative solutions within the boundaries of existing recreational
land. Several of Santa Barbara’s neighboring communities have established leash-free parks or
leash-free areas within parks. The city of Santa Barbara, with its abundant parks, beaches, and trails
can surely find solutions that are equitable for all that use these open spaces.
To this end, creating leash-free open spaces for responsible owners and their dogs in existing recreational
areas should be based upon the following premises:
That dog owners are as legitimate as any other special interest group, and that their needs
should be taken as an integral part of the city’s decision making process.
That integrating dog activities with other park users allows for a more efficient and equitable
distribution of resources, whereas separation and restrictions concentrate potential conflicts into
isolated areas, increasing the likelihood of overuse.
That dogs allowed to exercise off-leash – running with other dogs, catching a ball, chasing a
Frisbee, or working at obedience training – are happier and healthier dogs.
That exercised dogs make better next door neighbors than under-exercised dogs. Puppies
and dogs that get enough exercise through vigorous play are less likely to create a nuisance,
bark excessively, destroy property, or learn anti-social behavior.
That in an era when people are often reluctant or afraid to approach or converse with a
stranger, off-leash exercise areas bring people together and create a greater sense of
That unduly restrictive access policies are inequitable and likely to be counterproductive in
managing conflicts between law enforcement and the large number of citizens who own dogs.
Further, punitive leash laws generally result in non-compliance. If dog owners perceive an
ordinance to be harsh or unfair, it may elicit a defiant rather than a compliant response. On
the other hand, if dog owners understand the reasons for restrictions relating to access and
accept them as reasonable, they will be more likely to comply voluntarily.
That access to a public park or beach close to home is the safest and most effective way to
ensure that owners socialize their dogs and provide them with on-going experiences in the
That dogs provide a measure of security, both perceived and real, to single women and
elderly or handicapped persons who most often fall victim to crime in parks.
California City Dog Ordinances
Santa Barbara’s municipal code currently states that “No dog is permitted upon a street or other public
place unless on a leash not in excess of six (6) feet in length and under the immediate care and control
of the owner or other person having the care and custody thereof.” (Section 6.08.020(B).
Several California cities have amended their ordinances to allow for off-leash areas by exempting
such areas from leash law requirements where the dog is under the control of the owner. The task
of designating those parks which are off-leash, and creating rules for such areas, is left to the
Department administrating the municipality’s parks, or to the City Council by resolution.
For example, Santa Monica’s ordinance states that dogs which are properly tagged and licensed
are allowed, without a leash, “on any duly designated off-leash public park area… if the dog is in
the custody and control of a competent person.” (Santa Monica Municipal Code section 4.04.150).
Santa Monica’s general restriction against dogs in many locations in that city includes an exemption
for “dogs in any area designated by Resolution of the City Council for use by dogs if the person having
custody or control of the dog is in compliance with posted rules governing the use of the designated
area.” (Santa Monica Municipal Code section 4.04.160).
The city of Davis follows a similar approach. Its Code defines a dog “at large” to be a “dog off
the premises of its owner and not under restraint by leash controlled by the owner or custodian
of such dog.” The section includes the following exception: “Dogs are not ‘at large’… when they
are in public areas expressly provided and designated for exercise; provided, they remain under
the control or direction of their owner or custodian.” (City of Davis Municipal Code section 4-9).
The off-leash areas are typically governed by posted regulations such as:
– Dogs shall be under voice control
– Owners or custodians shall carry a leash
– Aggressive dogs are not allowed and/or must be leashed
– Dogs shall not dig or disturb park resources
– Feces shall be immediately removed.
Other cities take a more comprehensive approach by way of ordinance. Although the actual designation
of those parks which shall be off-leash is accomplished by administrative decision or resolution, some
of the rules regulating those areas are set forth in the ordinance itself.
For example, in 1996 the city of Claremont added an ordinance establishing off-leash areas which includes
specific rules as well as a waiver of liability. That ordinance requires that
– Dogs must be under the care, custody, and control of a person age 13 or older;
– No person may have more than two dogs in the off-leash area at one time;
– All dogs must be under voice. control;
– Dogs which are sick, in heat, or aggressive are not permitted;
– Persons in charge of the dog shall quiet them if they bark;
– Persons in charge of the dog shall “promptly” remove litter (Claremont Ordinance
In many cities, dog owners police themselves, sometimes through official citizens groups. The Sepulveda
Dam Recreation Area, in Los Angeles, for example, is policed by the Dog Advisory Group, whose members
wear red tee-shirts and patrol the park for violations. It also organizes dog-doo clean up days. A similar
organization helps maintain the Pt. Isabel dog park in Alameda County.
Santa Barbara is a unique community known not only for its moderate climate and beauty but also for
the diversity of cultures, races, languages, resources, and opportunities. This city is a natural draw for
those who love outdoor recreation, and for those who own dogs, it’s ideal. Beyond this, the citizens of
Santa Barbara are committed to the humane treatment of animals, dogs and cats especially, in a way
that is rivaled by few other communities. The City/County Animal Shelter is a virtual “no-kill” shelter
staffed by volunteers that is now being studied by communities around the country. In addition,
money generated through dozens of veterinary facilities, grooming shops, pet supply houses, grocery
stores, boarding facilities, and obedience schools is in the millions.
Concerns with Off-leash Dog Areas
There are a number of potential concerns with the establishment of off-leash areas for dogs in our
community. In this section, a number of these concerns are considered.
Dogs are a danger to people using the park. Dog attacks are the most serious potential problem and
there is always a great deal of interest in the issue. Though attacks can occur against humans, other
dogs, and other animals, most dogs don’t bite people or other dogs (Domestic Dog, 1995; Canine Behavior,
1965). Dog attacks are more likely to occur in the dog owner’s home or immediate vicinity than they are
in public open space. In one study of aggression in dogs it was found that from 65% to 93% of dog
attacks occurred in or near the dog owner’s home (Poderbercek & Blackshaw, 1990). According to the
Journal of the American Medical Association (January 22, 1997), the vast majority of dog bites occur
on a dog’s territory. When dogs bite people who are off the dog’s property, it is usually the result of
a lack of supervision or ignorance on the part of the owner. Attacks that occur on private property
typically happen when a dominant, protective, or injured dog is not adequately supervised. These
triggers are not present when a dog is in the neutral territory of a public park.
Without wanting to underrate the seriousness of dog attacks in either the private home or public open
space, they need to be kept in perspective. People are concerned about dog attacks but the extent to
which the mass media amplify isolated problems out of proportion needs to be questioned. We need to
understand how the triggers to aggression vary in different settings and avoid simplistic management
- Dog feces are unsightly and a health hazard. This is a fact. However, it must be recognized that
dogs defecate whether or not they are on a leash. Dog PAC is committed to changing the attitude
of those who allow their dogs to defecate on public property without picking-up afterward. Further,
Dog PAC, S13 supports ordinances that would apply onerous fines to this kind of irresponsible behavior.
- Free-running dogs will interfere with those using the parks for other recreational activities. Children’s
playground areas must remain dog free. Picnic areas must remain “dogs on leash only.” Dog PAC
supports additional signage and enforcement of these stipulations. Beyond this, conflicting use of
recreational areas has not been a significant problem in the past; nor should it be in the future -
responsible dog owners are vigilant about potential conflicts and use common sense in this regard.
- Dogs are inherently dangerous to Santa Barbara park wildlife. Human use, park maintenance staff
and their machinery, and development of open park space are likely to have as much or more impact
on wildlife than dogs.
- Some off-leash areas are a safety hazard for the dog. The intent of off-leash privileges is to provide
free running areas for dogs that are “under control.” There are no perfect solutions to prevent accidents
for adult recreational users or dogs, though dog safety should be a consideration when choosing
- The City of Santa Barbara may be liable for negative incidents involving dogs. The City is legitimately
concerned that legalizing the use of public property for off-leash recreation creates the risk of public
liability. The experience of other municipalities indicates, however, that the risk is minimal. For
example, the Point Isabel Regional Shoreline is a 21 acre, off-leash park located at the border of the
cities of Berkeley and Richmond, California. According to the park supervisor, the park averages
730,000 dog visitors each year. The attorney for the East Bay Regional Park District reports that the
district has had no claims and has not been named in any litigation regarding dogs during the seven
years he has been attorney for the agency.
Laguna Beach has had off-leash areas for over two years with no claims. The Sepulveda Dam Basin, which is
the largest off-leash area in Los Angeles, also reports no claims or litigation over dog incidents.
At least one reason for the lack of claims is legal: the “dangerous condition” immunity from public liability
probably relieves the public agency of liability, especially for the acts of third parties using the public property
(Gov’t. Code section 830 et. seq.; Jones v. Czapkay (1960) 182 Cal.App.2d 192).
Nevertheless, the City should take precautions to protect itself (and the taxpayers) from potential liability. There
are several ways to limit liability, including:
A. Express assumption of liability and indemnification by users of the off-leash areas
This can be accomplished by conditioning the issuance of dog licenses on an express indemnification
agreement, or by a “permissive use” ordinance change. The city of Claremont chose the latter approach.
Its off-leash ordinance states in part:
“The use of an off-leash area by a dog owner or other person having care, custody, or control of that shall
constitute agreement by the dog owner and the person having care, custody, or control of that dog to… a
waiver of liability of the city, and his or her agreement to protect, indemnify, defend and hold harmless the
city from any claim, injury, or damage arising from or in connection with such use.” (City of Claremont
B. Signage: Full and complete signage, both advising visitors that the park is an offleash area and that
they use the area at their own risk, and advising dog owners of their assumption of liability and hold
C. Insurance: Purchase a commercial insurance policy specifically protecting the City from dog-related
Dog PAC, SB Recommendations to the Dog Subcommittee
Dog PAC proposes that ordinance changes be made that designate specific parks and public areas as
appropriate for off-leash exercise and training of dogs. The recommendation of particular parks is based
on four criteria: historic use, demographic data, diversity of location and terrain, and appropriateness of
individual spaces for offleash dogs.
Dog owners have enjoyed Santa Barbara’s parks and beaches for generations, often exercising and training
their dogs without leashes in these areas. One valuable byproduct of this fact is that through their consistent
use dog owners have established areas where the off-leash exercise of dogs is normative. Through a long
process of trial and error, dog owners have learned which locations are appropriate – and which are not – for
off-leash dog exercise.
Factors contributing to the establishment of “dog appropriate” areas are public safety, dog safety, the
accommodation of multiple user populations, the variety of terrains, and population density. For example,
due to heavy equestrian use and an abundance of snakes, dog owners have typically not exercised their
dogs at Parma Park. Similarly, locations such as Hale Park are too remote for the bulk of dog owners in
Santa Barbara and parks with high-use recreational or playground facilities are not viewed as ideal for dog
exercise. Thus, there are many lessons to be learned from the historic dog use patterns of Santa Barbara’s
public areas. These lessons should be treated as a resource in determining which parks are appropriate for
off-leash exercise of dogs. Doing so will facilitate a smooth transition of public areas and make public
education efforts easier, introducing minimal changes in the park system in general.
In a survey of Dog PAC members, such historic use data were collected. Members were asked to list the
parks where they most often took their dogs for off-leash training, socialization, and exercise. It is important
to note that while these data are indicative of Dog PAC members, they may not be generalizeable to the entire
dog population. Table 1 summarizes the responses.
Table 1. The top 20 city of Santa Barbara public parks and areas most frequently reported as used for
off-leash exercise of dogs [data from survey of Dog PAC members].
Name of Public Area Ranking of Use of Area
|Arroyo Burro Beach||1|
|Douglas Family Preserve||2|
|Las Positas Park||5|
|Area Hiking Trails||6|
|La Mesa Park||10|
|Mesa Lane Steps||13|
|Andree Clark Bird Refuge||14|
|Chase Palm Park||16|
The American Veterinary Medical Association calculates that 32% of California households have dogs.
A recent Gallup poll found that 45% of homes in the United States have dogs, with over half of the
households in the most heavily dog populated states of Texas and California having at least one dog.
Thus, estimates of the percentage of households with dogs in California range from approximately one-third
to one-half. Combining these estimates with U.S. Census data, this translates to a conservative estimate
of approximately 122,000 dog owners in Santa Barbara county. 4 The estimated number of dog owners in t
he city of Santa Barbara is 29,000, with approximately 17,000 dogs currently living within the city limits.
Such large numbers of dogs and dog owners require an open space plan that recognizes the potential
effect of a large number of dogs and accommodates their special needs appropriately. Simply put, dog
owners need open space for off-leash dog exercise in a fair proportion to their numbers: this would translate
to between 32% and 50% (between 18 and 28 of the city’s 55 parks) of Santa Barbara’s parks and open spaces.
Diversity of Location and Terrain.
Among the considerations that must be taken into account when determining which parks and public
areas are to be designated for the legal off-leash exercise of dogs are the diversity of location and
terrain. Diversifying the locations of off-leash parks helps to guard against dog overcrowding, to lessen
the impact of vehicle parking problems, and to enable more members of the community to access a park
within a reasonable distance of their own home. Such considerations are particularly important to the
elderly and to less mobile citizens.
Diversity of terrain is important to dogs and to dog owners. All dogs do not have the same needs. For
example, dogs bred to run (e.g., Greyhounds) need large open spaces to do so. Dogs who are naturally
water dogs (e.g., Golden Retrievers) need access to water in order to get proper exercise. In addition,
dog owners themselves have varying abilities to enjoy areas that may prove physically challenging to
It is not reasonable to expect that all of these concerns – convenient access, diversity of locations,
and variety of terrain – can be met perfectly for all community residents. However, a strategy that
embraces the principles behind these types of access can go a long way toward accommodating the
vast majority of dog owners.
One effective strategy for accommodating dog owners’ needs is to attempt to provide a hierarchy of
open space options that provides dogs and their owners daily, regular, and occasional use areas for
off-leash dog exercise and training. By doing so, we can take a creative approach toward providing
park and public area access that considers the needs of dog owners.
Daily opportunities should be scattered throughout the community. Daily areas are those that provide
everyone the opportunity to access an open, public space within a reasonable walking distance from
one’s home. Demographic data must be considered in choosing such areas in order to ensure that such
parks are readily accessible regardless of where one lives.
Parks providing regular opportunities may be spread more widely apart, perhaps within a short drive or
long walk from one’s residence. Such areas are intended to accommodate dogs with special needs (e.g.,
especially active or water dogs that require large open areas or water access) that may or may not be
readily available in one’s own neighborhood. In this way, regular areas accommodate a diversity of
terrains that may be required for different breeds and types of dogs.
Occasional use areas are non-typical areas where the needs of dogs and dog owners are more heavily
catered to. Such areas might boast of specific resources (e.g., dog wash facilities) that accommodate
dogs and offer special services to dog owners. These areas provide dog owners with quite specific
facilities for dogs that accommodate large dog populations.
In order to identify the distribution of dogs in Santa Barbara, dog registration data were analyzed and
sorted by the geographic indicator of postal zip codes. Such an analysis provides a reasonably accurate
overview of dog population by geographic location which, in turn, suggests where off-leash parks
should be located in order to provide dog owners park access within a reasonable distance of
their homes. Figure I summarizes these findings.
Figure 1. Percent of Dog Population by Zip Code. [source: City of Santa Barbara, Animal Control data]
1 [county land too]
93110 – 93109 93101 93103
(3%) (19%) (26%) (21%)
[county land too]
Figure I reveals that dog ownership is relatively evenly distributed, especially when considering the size
of the postal zip code areas. The apparent exception to this is in the downtown area (zip code 93 10 1),
where there is a large concentration of dogs in a relatively small area. In addition, it is worth noting that
3 of the 4 most heavily populated zip codes border the beach. These data suggest that (a) off-leash dog
areas should be spread throughout the city in order to provide space for dog owners living in all areas
and (b) a large proportion of dog owners could benefit from off-leash, beachfront open spaces.
Appropriateness for Off-leash Exercise
All spaces are not created equal. Not all parks and public spaces are appropriate for dogs without a
leash. Consideration for traditional park use and safety to dogs are factors that make certain areas
generally inappropriate for dogs without a leash. For example, the Andree Clark Bird Refuge is not
an appropriate location for off-leash dogs, given the potential conflict with birds. As already mentioned,
Parma Park might not be the best choice for off-leash dogs in view of the heavy equestrian traffic there.
Such considerations should be taken into account when selecting parks and open spaces that are
Specific Park Recommendations
Based on historic use, appropriateness for off-leash exercise, demographic data, and diversity of location
and terrain, the following public areas are recommended as appropriate for off-leash exercise and training
of dogs in Santa Barbara.
A. Parks and areas recommended as appropriate for off-leash dogs:
| 1000 Steps
Alameda Park (south half)
All hiking trails
Douglas Family Preserve
Honda Valley Park
La Mesa Park
Mesa Lane Steps
|Mission / Rose Garden Park
San Roque Park
Thornbury ParkBeach Area: the section of beach from the bottom of the steps of park to that point where the beach meets county property at Arroyo Burro Beach
B. Parks and areas recommended as inappropriate for off-leash dogs:
| Alameda Park (north half)
Alice Keck Park Memorial Garden
Andree Clark Bird Reftige
Cabrillo Ball Field / Pavilion
Chase Palm Park
De La Guerra Plaza
Dwight Murphy Field
Eastside N eighborhood Park
Los Robles Area
Morton Bay Fig Tree
Recommendations as to which specific places be established as legal, off-leash dog exercise areas are
based on historic use, demographics, diversity of location and terrain, and appropriateness. Considering
these factors enables us to take into account present park use patterns, the needs of dog owners, the
needs of those who may not want dogs off-leash in parks, and the safety of dogs. Establishing these
off-leash areas serves all members of the community by (a) accommodating dog owners in an evenhanded
and balanced manner and (b) leaving the vast majority of parks with leash requirements, in consideration of
those why may have a preference for leashed dogs.
It should be noted that although Dog PAC, SB offers the above list of parks as those appropriate for off-leash
dogs, it is not a list of our own members’ preferences. Reconciling the list of appropriate parks with those
where our members most frequently take their dogs will show that we have attempted not to demonstrate
biases in our choice of parks. Instead, as stated, areas recommended as appropriate for off-leash exercise
are based on which parks best address the needs of the community as a whole.
The following issues are agenda items for future consideration for Dog PAC and this subcommittee:
• Dog PAC volunteer services – dog waste cleanup efforts in parks
• Public Education – consumer education regarding breeding, spay and neuter programs, and
responsible dog ownership
• Dog licensing – currently only 25% of dogs in Santa Barbara are licensed
• In-service training for Animal Control – community relations resources
• Control irresponsible, commercial breeding practices and sales
1. This document draws from text and information from A Guide to Integrating Domestic Pets into
New Residential Development, by Planning & Development Consultants Harlock Jackson Pty Ltd.,
available through PETNET at http://www.petnet.com.au/
2. For instance, some of the many places that have off-leash areas for dogs in California are: San
Diego, Laguna Beach, Costa Mesa, Los Angeles, Venice, Napa, Sonoma, Berkeley, Santa Monica,
St. Helena, Huntington Beach, Davis, Laguna Niguel, Claremont, Redondo Beach, Redwood City,
Santa Clara, Foster City, and San Francisco. Other California cities with such parks are available
from Dog PAC on request.
3. The following data were used in the estimation of dog and dog owner populations for the city and
county of Santa Barbara:
Santa Barbara county
(a) Population: 381,401 [source: 1996 US Census data]
(b) Average Household Size: 2.84 [source: 1990 US Census data]
(c) Number of Households: 134,296 [source: calculation; (a / b)
(d) % of households with dogs: 32%[source: American Veterinary Medical Association. Note:
this is the more conservative of 2 reliable estimates; a Gallup poll estimated that over 50%
of households in California have at least one dog.]
(e) Number of households with dogs: 42,975 [source: calculation; (c * d)]
(f) Number of dog owners: 122,049 [source: calculation; (b * e)]
(g) Number of dogs per dog-owning household: 1.65 [source: City of Santa Barbara Animal
Control data = 1.33; American Veterinary Medical Association = 1.96; the mean of these
two measures was taken, although the AVMA estimate is likely much more reliable, due
to the sampling procedure. This yields a more conservative estimate, calculated as (1.33 + 1.96) / 2]
(h) Number of dogs: 70,909 [source: calculation; (e * g)]
The City of Santa Barbara
(a) Population: 90,200 [source: Santa Barbara News-Press]
(b) Average Household Size: 2.84 [source: 1990 US Census data]
(c) Number of Households: 31,761 [source: calculation; (a / b)]
(d) % of households with dogs: 32% – [source: American Veterinary Medical Association. Note:
this is the more conservative of 2 reliable estimates; a Gallup poll estimated that over 50%
of households in California have at least one dog.]
(e) Number of households with dogs: 10,164 [source: calculation; (c * d)]
(f) Number of dog owners: 28,866 [source: calculation; (b * e)]
(g) Number of dogs per dog-owning household: 1.65 [source: City of Santa Barbara Animal Control
data = 1.33; American Veterinary Medical Association = 1.96; the mean of these two measures
was taken, although the AVMA estimate is likely much more reliable, due to the sampling procedure.
This yields a more conservative estimate, calculated as (1.33 + 1.96) / 2]
(h) Number of dogs: 16,771 [source: calculation; (e * g)]
4. Please refer to endnote 3 for these and other demographic data.
GOOD MANNERS: TIPS FOR DOG
…No choke chains; keep a buckle collar and tags on your dog before releasing it into enclosure.
…Bring fresh water and a drinking bowl.
…Take along plastic dog-doo bags and pick up after your dog.
…Bring some old towels to cover the car seat after the park.