FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W1199769081> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W1199769081 abstract "Dog parks have emerged in the last decade or so as places for pet owners living in suburban and urban areas to exercise their dogs. Providing a safe environment for both dog and human is a tremendous challenge. If done correctly a dog park can be that place. In the 1950s and 1960s, some state and regional parks had liberal policies and permitted dogs to run free or off-leash on certain trails, but in most cities and other urban areas, dog owners were required to keep their dog on-leash when the animals left their own premises. The concept of a dog park, an enclosed area devoted exclusively to canine activity, evolved in California in 1979. Dog parks are now found in every state, but Alaska, and in at least six Canadian provinces. These parks generally consist of one or more acres of open grassland surrounded by a chain-link fence. Unfortunately, legal ramifications, design considerations, social and behavioral patterns of dogs, and environmental and health issues relating to dogs and humans have not been adequately addressed in the design of many of these dog parks. The goal of this paper is to provide guidance for those who may want a dog park developed in their town. I have gathered and synthesized information from designers, veterinarians, environmentalists, dog trainers, and a dog behaviorist to develop an approach and tools that the novice dog park implementer will need to execute a project. Six dog parks have been used as case studies to demonstrate what problems may exist and what forethought should go into the design of an optimal dog park. A photographic study has been taken to help demonstrate some of the problems and solutions. Questions given to dog park patrons to help demonstrate the reasons why people take their dog to a 5 dog park and what things can be done to improve the experience. Burlington City, New Jersey was used as a sample urban area that might be in need of a future dog park. Questions were given to a random sampling of Burlington City residents to help determine if a dog park might be needed in the town and what the residents’ opinions were about the concept. Disciplines Environmental Sciences Comments Presented to the Faculties of the University of Pennsylvania in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Environmental Studies 2007. This thesis or dissertation is available at ScholarlyCommons: http://repository.upenn.edu/mes_capstones/18 DOG PARKS: BENEFITS AND LIABILITIES ENVS 699 – MES Capstone Seminar Laurel Allen May 29, 2007 Photo credit, Laurel Allen The author’s collies, from left to right, Ruby, Max and Jake." @default.
• W1199769081 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W1199769081 creator A5072275325 @default.
• W1199769081 date "2007-01-01" @default.
• W1199769081 modified "2023-09-26" @default.
• W1199769081 title "Dog Parks: Benefits and Liabilities" @default.
• W1199769081 cites W2130932777 @default.
• W1199769081 cites W2475057900 @default.
• W1199769081 cites W2588819535 @default.
• W1199769081 cites W560584599 @default.
• W1199769081 cites W601951987 @default.
• W1199769081 cites W632551229 @default.
• W1199769081 hasPublicationYear "2007" @default.
• W1199769081 type Work @default.
• W1199769081 sameAs 1199769081 @default.
• W1199769081 citedByCount "1" @default.
• W1199769081 countsByYear W11997690812014 @default.
• W1199769081 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W1199769081 hasAuthorship W1199769081A5072275325 @default.
• W1199769081 hasConcept C127413603 @default.
• W1199769081 hasConcept C159047783 @default.
• W1199769081 hasConcept C205649164 @default.
• W1199769081 hasConcept C2776849203 @default.
• W1199769081 hasConcept C2779652578 @default.
• W1199769081 hasConcept C2780768461 @default.
• W1199769081 hasConcept C66938386 @default.
• W1199769081 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W1199769081 hasConcept C91375879 @default.
• W1199769081 hasConceptScore W1199769081C127413603 @default.
• W1199769081 hasConceptScore W1199769081C159047783 @default.
• W1199769081 hasConceptScore W1199769081C205649164 @default.
• W1199769081 hasConceptScore W1199769081C2776849203 @default.
• W1199769081 hasConceptScore W1199769081C2779652578 @default.
• W1199769081 hasConceptScore W1199769081C2780768461 @default.
• W1199769081 hasConceptScore W1199769081C66938386 @default.
• W1199769081 hasConceptScore W1199769081C71924100 @default.
• W1199769081 hasConceptScore W1199769081C91375879 @default.
• W1199769081 hasLocation W11997690811 @default.
• W1199769081 hasOpenAccess W1199769081 @default.
• W1199769081 hasPrimaryLocation W11997690811 @default.
• W1199769081 hasRelatedWork W10577944 @default.
• W1199769081 hasRelatedWork W1496193129 @default.
• W1199769081 hasRelatedWork W150948960 @default.
• W1199769081 hasRelatedWork W1526745987 @default.
• W1199769081 hasRelatedWork W16916858 @default.
• W1199769081 hasRelatedWork W2075284315 @default.
• W1199769081 hasRelatedWork W2082490422 @default.
• W1199769081 hasRelatedWork W229702887 @default.
• W1199769081 hasRelatedWork W2331891142 @default.
• W1199769081 hasRelatedWork W2337454801 @default.
• W1199769081 hasRelatedWork W255686874 @default.
• W1199769081 hasRelatedWork W2557903370 @default.
• W1199769081 hasRelatedWork W2922298810 @default.
• W1199769081 hasRelatedWork W2955709157 @default.
• W1199769081 hasRelatedWork W2956390990 @default.
• W1199769081 hasRelatedWork W2965409678 @default.
• W1199769081 hasRelatedWork W3028173835 @default.
• W1199769081 hasRelatedWork W3083389171 @default.
• W1199769081 hasRelatedWork W567188149 @default.
• W1199769081 hasRelatedWork W881328618 @default.
• W1199769081 isParatext "false" @default.
• W1199769081 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W1199769081 magId "1199769081" @default.
• W1199769081 workType "article" @default.