|
|
 |
|||
 |
||||
|
|
||||
|
(special to the 'Issues' section) |
||||
|
The Unequaled Benefits of Off-leash Dog Parks |
||||
|
- GoodPooch.com founder, Marjorie Darby As an experienced dog trainer, I know the benefits of properly socializing dogs. Well-socialized dogs have learned how to interact appropriately with anyone they meet. They certainly don't feel threatened in any non-threatening situations. Public off-leash dog parks are a convenient, economical way to maintain a dog's socialization throughout its life by ensuring it meets dogs (and people) of all sizes, shapes, and personalities. They're great fun for both dog and owner. Owners can network. Dogs can also get a pretty good workout, too. Common sense reigns supreme when it comes to taking dogs to dog parks. It's as though some would have everyone believe all dogs are "ticking time bombs" or are unpredictably vicious. Yet nothing could be further from the truth. Serious (and even minor) incidents at dog parks are not common. This fact, alone, tends to refute the naysayers. Aside from being a responsible dog owner, the kinds of things you need to know about dog parks are, quite frankly, very similar to taking children to playgrounds. The following video shows a typical winter day at an off-leash dog park in Toronto, Canada. Note the 'pit bulls', Basset Hound, Great Danes (2 of the 3 were with me), mixed breeds, both large and small, all get along just fine. This is typical, and indicative of what most dog park-goers experience. (This particular off-leash area is part of a much larger, public park. The off-leash area is comprised of a large, open area - shown, as well as a wooded trail system.)
There are those who claim dog parks are unsafe. They claim dogs don't need to be socialized with other dogs or people. They say they're "too smart" to take their dogs to off-leash parks. But is this true? In the 1980's, I was a participant in a university student's year-long study to compare disease and injury rates amongst dogs who regularly attend dog parks, and those who never attend dog parks. The results of that research certainly didn't support the theory dog parks are dangerous. If anything, it seemed dogs who never attend dog parks suffered just as many injuries, just as many communicable diseases, and were more likely to be involved in dog-on-dog aggression incidents.
The study also found no difference in the rates of contraction of communicable diseases among the two groups. Dogs were no more or less likely to acquire a communicable disease by going to a dog park, according to the study results. (i.e. both groups had the same rate of communicable disease infection.) To date, I have yet to find a reputable scientific study which contradicts these findings. My personal experience supports it, as well. At best, the worry over dogs interacting at public dog parks appears to be more theoretical, than practical. Dog park detractors can't deny millions of dogs around the world attend off-leash dog parks every day, without consequence. What does this say about their fatalistic conclusions? Of course those who openly admit to never taking their dogs to off-leash parks can't possibly know what goes on there or how often problems arise. Accordingly, their theories about the dangers of dog parks are just that: theories. Regular visitors to dog parks can confirm those theories are not well-founded. The cornerstone of responsible dog ownership Being properly socialized with other dogs is the cornerstone of responsible dog ownership. If your dog is to be part of society, then it must behave appropriately, no matter who it might encounter. I specialized in re-training aggressive dogs for a decade. Dogs that came to me with dog-aggression issues would remain that way UNTIL I re-socialized them with other dogs. Not too surprisingly, public, off-leash dog parks played a crucial role in this success. I dare say the dogs would never become reliable, without the opportunity to interact with strange dogs. Only allowing them to socialize with a few dogs I knew well wouldn't help these dogs once they were out in the real world, where they WOULD meet dogs of every description.
Naturally, I agree. But these aren't things I taught her. Effective doggie communication is only acquired by interacting with other dogs. I merely provided her the opportunity to meet other dogs, so she could learn how to communicate in ways other dogs will understand. Failure to learn how to communicate with other dogs can lead to all sorts of misunderstandings. It's no less inappropriate (and can even be dangerous) for a dog to display fearful signals in the presence of a non-threatening dog, as it would be to stand there, oblivious to the aggressive signals another dog might exhibit. Running from a very dominant or aggressive dog could incite its prey drive and lead to injury. Standing one's ground, in the face of a clearly aggressive dog, could incite a fight, as well. Properly socialized dogs know how to respond in ways that won't elicit an aggressive response. Dogs only learn this through interactions with other dogs, though. And they only get really good at it through regular interactions with other dogs. Here's a terrific example that happened to me:
Some people imagine that dogs "pack up" instantly at dog parks, making their actions highly unpredictable. I have not found this to be the case at all. I've attended off-leash dog parks almost daily, in several countries, for at least a decade. While it is not uncommon for a few dogs to gang up on a dog that is exhibiting weakness or excitability, it rarely ends in tragedy. More importantly, properly socialized dogs typically don't behave in ways that would elicit such a response. Additionally, well-socialized dogs simply don't behave aggressively unless actually threatened. Real threats are rare at public dog parks, leaving dogs to have fun and enjoy their surroundings. Making good choices What problems do arise in dog parks are invariably the result of poor owner choices. I'll never forget an interaction with the owner of two, leashed Shiba Inus. The woman was worried that my off-leash dog was going to approach one of her dogs.
When I was clearly puzzled by her questioning, the woman explained that one of her dogs was aggressive. As calmly as I could, I pointed out that aggressive dogs were not allowed in the off-leash area. I explained that the rules were listed on a huge sign right at the entrance to the off-leash trails (where we were), and aggressive dogs were strictly prohibited...for obvious reasons. The woman became defensive and vehemently protested. That is when I realized she actually thought it was okay to bring her admittedly aggressive dog(s) to the off-leash park, as long as she kept them leashed. The mind reels. Unfortunately, common sense isn't so common, as the saying goes. And you might just meet up with people like this at public parks. On the plus side, your well-socialized dog will avoid an aggressive dog like the plague, and certainly won't incite an attack. In the case of the two Shiba Inus, my dog didn't even really notice them. She's like that. She recognizes the signals dogs give when they want to meet her. If they don't display those signals, she ignores them. That's what having a well-socialized dog is all about. It should go without saying, though, that aggressive dogs have no place at a leash-free park. It's important for owners to recognize the signs of escalating aggression (stiffened body posture, staring, menacing barking, growling, raised lips, lunging, attempted bites, and finally successful bites). It's important for owners to be honest about their dogs' behaviour. It's equally important for owners to expect that their dogs can be well-socialized, and set about a training regimen which will achieve that goal. Allowing dogs to behave aggressively is a recipe for disaster. Many people believe that aggression towards other dogs is acceptable, and doesn't mean that people are in danger. Nothing could be further from the truth. It's an old wives' tale that aggression is always species-specific. Many years of research definitively debunked the myth that dogs who only show aggression towards other dogs today, aren't a danger to humans. In fact, where a dog successfully bites a person for the first time, and has shown no aggression towards humans in the past, it is most common for that dog to have behaved aggressively towards other dogs, prior. There are so many cases, it would be impossible to present them all here. The owners often lament sentiments similar to, "We had no idea he'd ever behave this way. He'd only ever behaved aggressively towards dogs before." One little girl, for instance, was mauled to death by a neighrour's dog described as having no history of aggressive behaviour. In reality, the dog had not only behaved aggressively towards other dogs, but had actually killed two neighbourhood dogs in the months previously. In another case, a dog savagely attacked a young boy. The owner pleaded to police officers that her dog had never behaved aggressively towards people..."only other dogs." A young boy narrowly escaped death after being mauled by the dogs he'd been enlisted to care for during the owner's absence. According to the owner, the dogs had never behaved aggressively before. According to local police, there had been many complaints against the dogs, including aggression towards other dogs, and actually having killed a neighbour's dog earlier in the year. Like the majority of dog biting incidents, these incidents took place on private property...not in public dog parks. A dog's first bite against a human happening after a history of aggression towards other dogs is actually extremely common. People unfamiliar with actual dog bite data still like to perpetuate the myth that aggression in dogs is reliably species-specific, and that aggression towards dogs means people are safe. They're not. More importantly, it shows the importance of properly training and socializing dogs. Where dogs learn that other people and dogs are rarely, if ever, a threat to them in any way, they don't feel threatened, thus don't develop or exhibit aggressive behaviours. ...Just more ways socializing dogs in off-leash parks benefits society. Social benefits of dog parks Because off-leash dog parks help dogs achieve the highest levels of socialization by ensuring they meet all kinds of other dogs and people, there is likely a correlating decrease in the number of biting incidents committed by these dogs. The more dog parks, the more dogs are likely to have these socialization opportunities. Years ago, I said this, "When the studies are done, we'll find that cities with ample access to off-leash areas for proper socialization and training will be the cities with the lowest incidence of dog bites." The studies haven't been done, but a few examples suggest my prediction may be correct. The city of Toronto, for instance, has about 30 off-leash dog parks, serving a human population of around 5,000,000 (and a dog population arguably anywhere from 500,000 to 1,000,000). The number of reported dog bites each year is exceedingly low, for a city of its size. The city of Calgary has both the largest number of off-leash parks in Canada (over 100) and the lowest dog bite rate of any major Canadian city. Naturally, I can't help but feel there is a huge correllation between the two. Even representatives of Calgary's animal control department have publicly stated their belief the ample access to off-leash areas for socialization and exercise means more dogs in Calgary are likely to be well-socialized and adequately exercised, resulting in fewer frustrated and poorly-socialized, aggressive dogs. Large vs. small There are those who suggest small dogs are in particular danger from visiting dog parks. The worry is the small dogs are likely to be injured by larger dogs, either because they're viewed as weak, or just accidentally, as a function of play. Those who preach the "need" to separate large and small dogs arrogantly position themselves as being much more knowledgeable and savvier than the inconsiderate or ignorant dog owners to whom they preach. If the owner of a smaller dog can see a larger dog, the larger dog's owner can also see the small dog. Why the presumption of problems? I've always found that people who presume dogs are dangerous (in any context), without any supporting evidence, are not terribly experienced with dogs and have a very skewed view of dog behaviour, overall. It should be noted that cities with long-running, successful dog park communities typically don't segregate dogs by size. And they have no marked problems resulting from dogs of all sizes interacting with each other. Toronto, for example, with 30 off-leash parks, has no dog parks segregated by size. I believe the same is true of Calgary, with over 100 leash-free parks. If cities with successful, long-running dog park programs have no need to segregate dogs by size, why do some suggest it is necessary? Rather than studies showing smaller dogs being inordinately victimized at off-leash parks, the worry seems to be more theoretical. Of course it is reasonable to be worried about the welfare of tiny dogs, amongst very large dogs who might be jostling and running at top speed, and not paying the closest attention to the little guys. The question is, how often are small dogs seriously injured, either intentionally or accidentally, by much larger dogs? Unless one has a verifiable answer to that question, it is inappropriate to draw summary conclusions. Common sense and ensuring all dogs are properly socialized goes a long way in mitigating the worry. I find much of the debate about small dogs versus large dogs in off-leash areas is based on hysteria, which is not conducive to the educational process. As a lifelong owner and fancier of Great Danes, I've watched my well-mannered dogs play especially gently with small or fearful dogs. Well-socialized dogs can differentiate. In fact, it's the definition of proper socialization: the ability to communicate with dogs of all different types. What should be obvious is when dogs are kept from positive socialization experiences with other dogs, based on any superficial qualifier, including size, it pretty much guarantees they will never learn to interact with them appropriately. Real-world experience supports this conclusion. It is extremely common for the owners of large dogs to have run-ins with dogs which aren't properly socialized with larger dogs. The dogs behave aggressively towards the larger dogs, and the owners dismiss it by saying, "Oh he doesn't like large dogs." Of course, the owners of medium to large sized dogs are equally responsible for ensuring their dogs are well-socialized, and can meet and interact appropriately with dogs of all sizes, too. Unwarranted aggressive behaviour is unacceptable in a dog of any size. The owners of very small dogs have an additional duty, in that they need to resist the urge to frequently pick up their little ones, even though it may seem reasonable to do so. What they're doing is interfering in their dogs' socialization, especially with larger dogs. It is all too common for poorly-socialized, little dogs to behave more like prey, than other dogs. Funny enough, when small dogs are afforded the opportunity to learn doggie communication skills, they typically have no difficulty keeping even the largest dogs in line. It is only natural to worry about the welfare of tiny dogs amongst larger ones. But restricting them from these socialization experiences tends to create the precise kind of precipitating factors that lead to small dogs being injured. Common sense will ensure dogs of all sizes have a positive experience at the dog park. A city's first off-leash park With so many theories, myths, and "Chicken Little: the sky is falling" views of dog parks floating around (in particular, on the Internet), it's clear there are many misunderstandings about the purpose of off-leash parks; what is acceptable behaviour; and what to expect. This is most notable when a city opens its first, off-leash, dog park. If the first dog park has recently been opened, it's almost a guarantee most of the initial users will be inexperienced with dog park etiquette, as will their dogs. This can lead to some bumps in the road. A good set of user guidelines can help minimize problems after the new dog park opens. While not specific to off-leash dog parks, consider the points at GoodPooch.com's article, "Dog walking etiquette" For the most part, dog parks should discourage the use of toys or food treats, within the park. This can encourage some dogs to become competitive. Aggressive dogs, of course, should be forbidden from entering the off-leash area. Any owner who witnesses his/her dog behaving aggressively should immediately leash the dog and exit the off-leash area. Females in season should also be prohibited from the off-leash area. Any dog with a known, communicable disease is prohibited from the dog park. Dog park users are encouraged to have their dogs' vaccinations up-to-date. Of course, dog owners must pick up after their dogs. A telephone number should be clearly posted, for any complaints, concerns, or suggestions. It's human nature to be somewhat apprehensive in new situations. It's important to calm those fears with adequate research and consultation with experts. In areas where dog parks have been successfully used for many years, the worries expressed by the developers of new dog parks can seem almost comical. With adequate consultation, reasoned decisions, and cool heads, dog parks typically become the most successful parks in the region. Fenced vs. unfenced Dog park placement, within a municipality, is an important consideration. Aside from community approval and the appropriateness of any given location, there is debate about whether the off-leash area should be fenced. I am not opposed to fencing off-leash areas. Done correctly, it can only be a good thing. Unfortunately, fences can be detrimental, while the lack of a fence can be disastrous. If the dog park is located in an area where there is no barrier between the outer limits of the off-leash area and busy roadways, environmental hazards, or residential neighbourhoods, errant dogs can cause problems, or even find themselves in danger. Preferably, an unfenced dog park should be located within some natural barriers, such as rugged terrain, rivers or streams, or away from populated areas. Fences, on the other hand, can be expensive and unsightly. Ruining the aesthetic of the park can cause some resistance to an off-leash area. Properly-built fences can be costly, and municipal governments often balk at the price of installation and maintenance. For these same reasons, the necessity of a fence can dramatically limit the size of an off-leash area. Preferably, a fenced dog park is large, and incorporates both an open field, and wooded trails. The large open areas of dog parks are great for meetings and group play, as well as high-speed chase games which many dogs greatly enjoy. Wooded trails invariably become the most prized part of a dog park. Owners typically admit they like meeting up with other dogs and owners, but then going their own, separate ways. A trail system is much more mentally stimulating than the open field type, where everything can be seen in advance, and there is little to do but stand around when not actively playing with another dog. Complaints Such is life, in that no matter what is proposed, there will (probably) be opposition. People who live near a proposed dog park may have serious concerns about noise or parking. Others may have concerns about increased dog fouling. Others will have unique concerns about the development of a dog park in their area. Park placement is critical. To alleviate these concerns, the process should be public and open to consultation. Opponents should be reassured that park guidelines will discourage repeated barking, and that most dogs don't bark a great deal in those environments. Parking should be clearly marked and enforced, making park users responsible for observing those guidelines. The public should be made aware there is a clearly posted telephone number for complaints. Dog park developers should create, in advance, an objective strategy for resolving complaints about the dog park. Other park user guidelines should adequately address fouling, being off-leash outside the designated area, aggression, and so on. The creation of a new dog park is a golden opportunity to promote higher levels of responsible dog ownership in the community. Education about the benefits of proper socialization, as well as dog owners' responsibilities while using dog parks, can result in a better, overall understanding of responsible dog ownership tenets. Naturally, dog owners need to have some level of verbal control over their dogs, at off-leash parks. Dogs must already have some level of socialization before they're permitted to interact with other dogs, off-leash. These kinds of minimum expectations for dog park use tend to promote higher levels of responsible dog ownership, overall. Dog owners are taxpayers, and typically pay additional fees, such as licensing, for the privilege of owning a dog. Increasingly, more and more families have pet dogs, and many couples have pet dogs and no children. With all the benefits that come from ensuring dogs are well-socialized and adequately exercised, and given that municipalities should provide recreational outlets for as many citizen groups and interests as possible, the development of off-leash dog parks is really a no-brainer. Dog park opponents There are some general commonalities amongst outspoken dog park opponents. Not all possess every trait, of course. But, in my experience, dog park opponents share some things in common. First and foremost, the most adamant dog park opponents tend to be those who support the keeping of dogs for aggression purposes, whether that be protection training, guarding, or similar duties. It's so common, it's almost expected that men (in particular) who call themselves "dogmen" or use the term "k9" to describe their training methods, will be opposed to properly socializing dogs with other dogs at off-leash parks. They openly raise dogs to behave aggressively. They're actually proud of it. No wonder their dogs don't know how to get along with others. Another common trait of dog park opponents is their sanctimony. Many will look you square in the eye, and "explain" all the "dangers" of dog parks, as though they're infinitely more knowledgeable than you. When juxtaposed with their admission they rarely attend dog parks, it would make anyone wonder why they fancy themselves such "experts" on the subject. It is also quite common for dog park opponents to have extremely limited experience in raising dogs. They tend to have owned, much less raised and fully trained, fewer than, say, ten dogs. Because they don't have personal experience properly training many different kinds of dogs, they may base their views of dog behaviour on just the few dogs they've owned. If they didn't properly train or socialize them, that is likely to skew their view of all dogs. Dog park opponents are likely to have never raised many (if any) well-socialized dogs. They tend to be the types of owners who, at every meeting between their dogs and others, keep a tight leash and exhibit a great deal of anxiety over the outcome of the meeting. They tend to imagine the worst. Part of that may be due to past experiences, where their poorly-socialized dogs have acted out. They usually don't view dog-on-dog interactions as positive encounters. Dog park opponents typically relay their concerns about off-leash areas based on things they've heard or read, rather than years of personal experience honestly trying to get the most out of dog parks, and being overwhelmed with multiple dangerous or disease-ridden dogs at every turn. In short, it's not that they, themselves, have experienced the pitfalls they profess about dog parks. They've merely heard these things can happen, and the (limited number of) times they went to a dog park, they had bad experiences. Basing one's views of dog parks on limited personal experience, and the opinions of other people, is not particularly fair or accurate. Invariably, the millions of dog owners who regularly attend dog parks never, or rarely, experience the concerns raised by those most strongly opposed to them. As the old saying goes, "The proof of the pudding is in the eating." Dog fights at dog parks It does happen. When dogs have access to each other, sometimes they will fight. The worry over a fight breaking out at an off-leash park is incredibly overblown, in most discussions. While it does occasionally happen, where two dogs will actually fight at a dog park, it is much more common for dogs to get into fights on or near their owners' property. The dogs involved in dog-on-dog aggression incidents are primarily made up of dogs who are not well-socialized and rarely, if ever, are taken to off-leash parks. A common scenario for a dog-on-dog attack is when one dog escapes its yard and attacks another dog nearby. Owner-permitted territorialism is the most common cause for dogs to behave this way. Dogs rarely feel territorial about public parks. Even more common is for dogs living in the same home to injure each other during a squabble. Displays of dominance can lead to squabbles, but rarely actual fights. Too many dog owners are not experienced enough to differentiate between a mere disagreement, and an actual fight, even though the two look nothing alike. It should be noted that when fights do occur at dog parks, they primarily take place at first meeting. It is unusual, to say the least, for two dogs to demonstrate their ability to get along with each other, and then suddenly break out into an actual dog fight. In all likelihood, what's being labeled "a fight" is probably just a heated squabble, if the dogs had previously been getting along well. Again, many dog owners confuse simple miscommunication or minor disagreements with what are recognizably frightening and vicious dog fights. Dogs are lightning fast in their ability to bite. If they mean to cause real harm, they're usually successful. The spread of disease One of the common "reasons" for avoiding dog parks is the theory they spread communicable diseases among dogs. This is, of course, entirely possible, yet relatively unproved. For instance, most puppy buyers are cautioned to avoid dog parks until after the last set of puppy vaccinations are complete, especially to avoid potentially deadly diseases like 'parvo'. Yet, even though most puppy buyers do restrict their young dogs from park visits, many still contract 'parvo'. Young puppies are susceptible to a host of diseases that can be contracted in many ways. Making dog parks the biggest villain is not entirely honest. There are a number of other diseases which are highly contagious, yet they, too, show no decrease simply by restricting dogs from dog park exposure. Alternatively, there is no scientific evidence that healthy adult dogs (the most common dog parks users) regularly contract contagious diseases from other dogs at off-leash parks. Dogs can pick up a number of diseases through any outdoor exposure, and not necessarily exclusively transmitted by other dogs or at dog parks, such as leptospirosis or giardia. Dog owners should be aware of common diseases in their regions, and vaccinate against them, where appropriate. More dog park benefits In addition to providing dogs the opportunity to learn how to interact appropriately with strange people and dogs, off-leash dog parks also allow dogs to run and play in ways that simply aren't possible on-leash, and significantly unlikely in one's own yard. Dogs need adequate exercise. Leashed walks provide mental stimulation and some physical release. However, they don't provide enough of a physical outlet for most dogs. The current veterinary protocol for daily exercise is 45 minutes of muscle-working activity, twice a day, for most healthy, adult dogs. Leash-free parks make this much easier, for the average dog owner. When combined with the roughhousing and general freedom of movement, dog parks are unequaled in their ability to provide sufficient exercise opportunities for dogs. When dogs are adequately mentally and physically stimulated, they are typically less anxious, better-behaved, and less-reactive than those with pent-up energy and anxiety. These better-behaved, less-reactive, and generally 'spent' dogs are much less likely to be involved in unprovoked biting incidents. Despite years of dog bite research, I didn't find a single dog involved in an unprovoked attack and was well-socialized and who regularly attended off-leash parks. Well-socialized dogs don't bite unprovoked. Adequately exercised dogs are typically better-behaved. Friendly, well-behaved dogs are an asset to society. Constant physical restraint can lead to aberrant behaviours in dogs. Conditions such as 'frustrative aggression' can be caused or exacerbated by constant physical restraint. Providing dogs with regular off-leash exercise and socialization can significantly alleviate the likelihood of them developing these kinds of restriction-based behaviour problems. Dog park alternatives There are alternatives to public dog parks, to be sure. Anywhere dogs can meet and interact in a natural way are alternatives to public dog parks. Dog clubs or even informal neighbourhood get-togethers could suffice. The tricky bit is allowing for the natural behaviours of dogs (which isn't possible entirely on-leash) and the regular introduction of strangers. Many people participate in dog sports where the dogs have a marvelous physical outlet and learn to control their own behaviour and communicate with other dogs. Flyball, agility, and countless other activities could be more than adequate alternatives to public dog parks. The key is ensuring the dog meets enough strangers, so it is adequately prepared to participate in society. It is unacceptable to keep aggressive dogs in civilized society. Aggressive dogs are a danger to everyone they encounter. And no innocent person or pet should feel threatened when acting lawfully in society. Unfortunately, dog clubs and friendly groups can limit a dog's socialization. Clubs and training groups can be costly for some owners. Many are not conveniently located. Community dog parks answer all these problems. They're free, and hopefully not too far from home. Dogs meet strange people and other dogs, so they learn how to interact appropriately with them. Instead of being managed via physical restraint, off-leash dogs learn to control their own behaviour around others. With adequate mental and physical stimulation, dogs are typically less anxious and better-behaved than they would be if they weren't afforded those opportunities. Best of all, well-socialized dogs are extremely unlikely to bite unprovoked, making them a welcome asset to any community. There are common sense concerns about dog care. None of them preclude the use and enjoyment of leash-free parks. Indeed, when compared to the alternatives, public dog parks are unequaled, in terms of access and benefits to the community. Send in your scientific studies proving dog parks are dangerous, and we'll post them here, for readers to make up their own minds. The following Information supports the theory public, off-leash, dog parks are dangerous:
|
||||
|
© 2007-2008 GoodPooch.com |
||||
The
research found the vast majority of injuries dogs suffer take place on the
owner's property. Overwhelmingly, dogs injured by other dogs were injured
by other dogs inside the owners' homes or in the community. It was
actually uncommon to find dogs intentionally injured by other dogs at off-leash
parks. What injuries were reported at dog parks were either admittedly
accidental, or self-inflicted. (i.e. dogs accidentally ran into each other
or a stationary object, pulled a muscle while running, etc.) There was
only one deliberate injury reported, and that was a relatively minor 'bite &
release' during what could be described as little more than a squabble between
two dogs. According to the researcher, there were a few anecdotal reports
of other, more serious, injuries that had occurred at dog parks in the past, but
there were none during the study period. 
My own dogs
have always been the picture of socialization. Other dog trainers I've met
have commented on how well-socialized they have been. In regards to my
current dog, I've heard them say
things like, "Look how she turns here head away from that pushy dog," and
"Her fake yawn
is making that fearful dog feel more comfortable."
One remarked, "She's the embodiment of every calming signal
in the book!"
Should someone
who's worried about his/her dog's behaviour take it to a public, off-leash dog
park? Probably not...but it depends. One must know one's dog.
And one must be honest about its past behaviour. Too many dog owners
minimize their dogs' inappropriate behaviours. Some even dismiss them,
entirely. It seems to be a condition of dog ownership, in that so many dog
owners refuse to accept responsibility for the actions they allow of their dogs.
It's always someone else's fault or problem.