Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our street only has a sidewalk on one side, so the strip of land that's in between the sidewalk and the street is only on one side. Every dog owner on the side with no sidewalk crosses the street to walk their dog and let's them go on that strip of land (which yes, technically is city property, but is still in front of someone else's house). There are a few houses on the sidewalk side that have dogs that live across from them (sidewalkless side) where that strip has turned completely brown and muddy (all the grass has died off) due to the dogs across the street using that spot 3-4 times a day. While technically the owners aren't doing anything wrong, and the dogs do not go on the grass between the sidewalk and the house, it is still frustrating that that strip has completely died. But what does one do in this situation - and who is in the wrong?

That’s weird, I don’t get why they take their dogs to the exact same spots to pee, multiple times per day. If they’re leaving their own property, why aren’t they walking their dogs more than just across the street? If I lived on the side without a sidewalk, I’d still walk my dog on my side of the street.

I don’t know how common this is in the DMV, but in my neighborhood, the HOA has contracted with a landscaping company to maintain those grass strips between the sidewalks and the streets. Homeowners don’t mow or maintain them, so we don’t feel any ownership of them.

They walk on the sidewalk and the dog goes on the strip. They don't just cross the street and come back, they go for a walk, but the dogs tend to relieve themselves on this same strip at the beginning of the walk and other dogs also find the scent so also pee there.

If you would walk on the sidewalkless side of the sidewalk do you let your dog pee in people's yards then?

I’d walk him on the street and mostly stay off the grass, but I would let him pee on the edge of a lawn. He wouldn’t be allowed to just wander into yards.

I think this is much worse than peeing on the strip. I would not want a dog peeing on the edge of my lawn.

If you don't have a sidewalk, the edge of "your" lawn is probably the county easement (aka not actually your property).

If you do have a sidewalk, it may/may not be your lawn. You'd need to pull the boundary info.

This is such an entitled, stupid myth. I own my land up to the street ok? I chose to grant an easement to utility companies in exchange for needed services. The land is still mine, and there's no easement granted to your poopy dog

It’s not yours, though. If you proof, try revoking your easement you so graciously granted to the utility companies…

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Every suburban neighorhood needs a damn dog park with a track course for the four leggeds to run around to get "their bowels moving" or get their exercise so they can poop in that same dog park where a shitting area should be made. Get the dogs off other people's lawns and sidewalks! Not in my front yard (NIMFY) movement!

Who cares if they walk on sidewalks, as long as they’re leashed and their owner has them under control?

Because they don't just walk on their side of the sidewalk like most sensible humans do. They will sniff the hell out of an entire area along whatever side of the sidewalk they want, bushes and trees they peed on before or to sniff other dogs' pee. And often with a damn leash that takes up the width of the sidewalk. Walkers are forced to accommodate them forcing them to go onto a road just to get by that portion of the area. Sidewalks are not that wide.

You clearly just hate dogs. Yes there are some clueless dog owners out there but many of us have total control over our dogs when walking. It’s no different than passing other people or bikers or people with strollers on sidewalks. I step aside with my dog as do many others. You don’t own the sidewalk either you know.

Will look for places to live in YOUR neighborhood. Do share where it is so all those who love dogs but not in dogs in their butts on a narrow sidewalk can move to your hood.

There is no neighborhood that will satisfy you. You are clearly a self-centered person suffering from a pathological need for control. If it wasn’t dogs, it would be kids, or the elderly, or…

Lol furthest from that. Try again.

Nope, pretty sure I nailed it. Only petty, miserable, controlling people complain about the audacity of their neighbors walking their dogs on public sidewalks.

Clearly many dog owners don't realize the meaning of PUbLiC. The audacity of those dog handlers to force walkers onto roads because their dog takes up the entire sidewalk is NOT being a neighbor. Try looking up neighbor.

Nobody has ever forced you onto the road, Karen.

Oh, goody. You again. Do you realize you sound ridiculous with this 'Karen' crap? It's like early-gen brainrot at this point.

The statement stands, Karen.

This is so ridiculous. What's "Karening" about an anon telling you business you should already know? Nobody's calling the cops on your dumbass (would that we could...). It's not even the correct usage of the term. Do you think you sound cool? Edgy? Misogynist in a way that earns you bro points? Because you sounded like an idiot the first time and your insistence on continuing to call anons "karen" (when so many better, more-relevant insults might exist) just makes it look like your one orange brain cell is malfunctioning (again).

Karen PP is a daydrinking white woman. I bet my life on it.

Go start your own Karen thread if you have nothing to add to the discussion on this topic, Kenneth.
DP.

Sorry, "Kenneth". She's a frequent flyer here. A lot of us are tired of her mess.
DP

LOL you morons know lots of people call miserable old control freaks Karens, don’t you?

And please provide the video evidence of your neighbor forcing you into the road or STFU with your idiotic hyperbole. Nobody’s buying it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our street only has a sidewalk on one side, so the strip of land that's in between the sidewalk and the street is only on one side. Every dog owner on the side with no sidewalk crosses the street to walk their dog and let's them go on that strip of land (which yes, technically is city property, but is still in front of someone else's house). There are a few houses on the sidewalk side that have dogs that live across from them (sidewalkless side) where that strip has turned completely brown and muddy (all the grass has died off) due to the dogs across the street using that spot 3-4 times a day. While technically the owners aren't doing anything wrong, and the dogs do not go on the grass between the sidewalk and the house, it is still frustrating that that strip has completely died. But what does one do in this situation - and who is in the wrong?

That’s weird, I don’t get why they take their dogs to the exact same spots to pee, multiple times per day. If they’re leaving their own property, why aren’t they walking their dogs more than just across the street? If I lived on the side without a sidewalk, I’d still walk my dog on my side of the street.

I don’t know how common this is in the DMV, but in my neighborhood, the HOA has contracted with a landscaping company to maintain those grass strips between the sidewalks and the streets. Homeowners don’t mow or maintain them, so we don’t feel any ownership of them.

They walk on the sidewalk and the dog goes on the strip. They don't just cross the street and come back, they go for a walk, but the dogs tend to relieve themselves on this same strip at the beginning of the walk and other dogs also find the scent so also pee there.

If you would walk on the sidewalkless side of the sidewalk do you let your dog pee in people's yards then?

I’d walk him on the street and mostly stay off the grass, but I would let him pee on the edge of a lawn. He wouldn’t be allowed to just wander into yards.

I think this is much worse than peeing on the strip. I would not want a dog peeing on the edge of my lawn.

If you don't have a sidewalk, the edge of "your" lawn is probably the county easement (aka not actually your property).

If you do have a sidewalk, it may/may not be your lawn. You'd need to pull the boundary info.

This is such an entitled, stupid myth. I own my land up to the street ok? I chose to grant an easement to utility companies in exchange for needed services. The land is still mine, and there's no easement granted to your poopy dog

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Every suburban neighorhood needs a damn dog park with a track course for the four leggeds to run around to get "their bowels moving" or get their exercise so they can poop in that same dog park where a shitting area should be made. Get the dogs off other people's lawns and sidewalks! Not in my front yard (NIMFY) movement!

Who cares if they walk on sidewalks, as long as they’re leashed and their owner has them under control?

Because they don't just walk on their side of the sidewalk like most sensible humans do. They will sniff the hell out of an entire area along whatever side of the sidewalk they want, bushes and trees they peed on before or to sniff other dogs' pee. And often with a damn leash that takes up the width of the sidewalk. Walkers are forced to accommodate them forcing them to go onto a road just to get by that portion of the area. Sidewalks are not that wide.

You clearly just hate dogs. Yes there are some clueless dog owners out there but many of us have total control over our dogs when walking. It’s no different than passing other people or bikers or people with strollers on sidewalks. I step aside with my dog as do many others. You don’t own the sidewalk either you know.

Will look for places to live in YOUR neighborhood. Do share where it is so all those who love dogs but not in dogs in their butts on a narrow sidewalk can move to your hood.

There is no neighborhood that will satisfy you. You are clearly a self-centered person suffering from a pathological need for control. If it wasn’t dogs, it would be kids, or the elderly, or…

Lol furthest from that. Try again.

Nope, pretty sure I nailed it. Only petty, miserable, controlling people complain about the audacity of their neighbors walking their dogs on public sidewalks.

Clearly many dog owners don't realize the meaning of PUbLiC. The audacity of those dog handlers to force walkers onto roads because their dog takes up the entire sidewalk is NOT being a neighbor. Try looking up neighbor.

Nobody has ever forced you onto the road, Karen.

Oh, goody. You again. Do you realize you sound ridiculous with this 'Karen' crap? It's like early-gen brainrot at this point.

The statement stands, Karen.

This is so ridiculous. What's "Karening" about an anon telling you business you should already know? Nobody's calling the cops on your dumbass (would that we could...). It's not even the correct usage of the term. Do you think you sound cool? Edgy? Misogynist in a way that earns you bro points? Because you sounded like an idiot the first time and your insistence on continuing to call anons "karen" (when so many better, more-relevant insults might exist) just makes it look like your one orange brain cell is malfunctioning (again).

Karen PP is a daydrinking white woman. I bet my life on it.

Go start your own Karen thread if you have nothing to add to the discussion on this topic, Kenneth.
DP.

Sorry, "Kenneth". She's a frequent flyer here. A lot of us are tired of her mess.
DP

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When I pulled into my driveway this evening, two people walking dogs were fully on my lawn. What the hey??

Once after school drop off, came back to find three different dog owners and 5 total dogs having a full blown discussion on lawn as if they couldn't do it four houses down at one of their own front yards. Entitled people.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our street only has a sidewalk on one side, so the strip of land that's in between the sidewalk and the street is only on one side. Every dog owner on the side with no sidewalk crosses the street to walk their dog and let's them go on that strip of land (which yes, technically is city property, but is still in front of someone else's house). There are a few houses on the sidewalk side that have dogs that live across from them (sidewalkless side) where that strip has turned completely brown and muddy (all the grass has died off) due to the dogs across the street using that spot 3-4 times a day. While technically the owners aren't doing anything wrong, and the dogs do not go on the grass between the sidewalk and the house, it is still frustrating that that strip has completely died. But what does one do in this situation - and who is in the wrong?

That’s weird, I don’t get why they take their dogs to the exact same spots to pee, multiple times per day. If they’re leaving their own property, why aren’t they walking their dogs more than just across the street? If I lived on the side without a sidewalk, I’d still walk my dog on my side of the street.

I don’t know how common this is in the DMV, but in my neighborhood, the HOA has contracted with a landscaping company to maintain those grass strips between the sidewalks and the streets. Homeowners don’t mow or maintain them, so we don’t feel any ownership of them.

They walk on the sidewalk and the dog goes on the strip. They don't just cross the street and come back, they go for a walk, but the dogs tend to relieve themselves on this same strip at the beginning of the walk and other dogs also find the scent so also pee there.

If you would walk on the sidewalkless side of the sidewalk do you let your dog pee in people's yards then?

I’d walk him on the street and mostly stay off the grass, but I would let him pee on the edge of a lawn. He wouldn’t be allowed to just wander into yards.

I think this is much worse than peeing on the strip. I would not want a dog peeing on the edge of my lawn.

If you don't have a sidewalk, the edge of "your" lawn is probably the county easement (aka not actually your property).

If you do have a sidewalk, it may/may not be your lawn. You'd need to pull the boundary info.

This is such an entitled, stupid myth. I own my land up to the street ok? I chose to grant an easement to utility companies in exchange for needed services. The land is still mine, and there's no easement granted to your poopy dog

Anonymous wrote:When I pulled into my driveway this evening, two people walking dogs were fully on my lawn. What the hey??

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our street only has a sidewalk on one side, so the strip of land that's in between the sidewalk and the street is only on one side. Every dog owner on the side with no sidewalk crosses the street to walk their dog and let's them go on that strip of land (which yes, technically is city property, but is still in front of someone else's house). There are a few houses on the sidewalk side that have dogs that live across from them (sidewalkless side) where that strip has turned completely brown and muddy (all the grass has died off) due to the dogs across the street using that spot 3-4 times a day. While technically the owners aren't doing anything wrong, and the dogs do not go on the grass between the sidewalk and the house, it is still frustrating that that strip has completely died. But what does one do in this situation - and who is in the wrong?

That’s weird, I don’t get why they take their dogs to the exact same spots to pee, multiple times per day. If they’re leaving their own property, why aren’t they walking their dogs more than just across the street? If I lived on the side without a sidewalk, I’d still walk my dog on my side of the street.

I don’t know how common this is in the DMV, but in my neighborhood, the HOA has contracted with a landscaping company to maintain those grass strips between the sidewalks and the streets. Homeowners don’t mow or maintain them, so we don’t feel any ownership of them.

They walk on the sidewalk and the dog goes on the strip. They don't just cross the street and come back, they go for a walk, but the dogs tend to relieve themselves on this same strip at the beginning of the walk and other dogs also find the scent so also pee there.

If you would walk on the sidewalkless side of the sidewalk do you let your dog pee in people's yards then?

I’d walk him on the street and mostly stay off the grass, but I would let him pee on the edge of a lawn. He wouldn’t be allowed to just wander into yards.

I think this is much worse than peeing on the strip. I would not want a dog peeing on the edge of my lawn.

If you don't have a sidewalk, the edge of "your" lawn is probably the county easement (aka not actually your property).

If you do have a sidewalk, it may/may not be your lawn. You'd need to pull the boundary info.

This is such an entitled, stupid myth. I own my land up to the street ok? I chose to grant an easement to utility companies in exchange for needed services. The land is still mine, and there's no easement granted to your poopy dog

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our street only has a sidewalk on one side, so the strip of land that's in between the sidewalk and the street is only on one side. Every dog owner on the side with no sidewalk crosses the street to walk their dog and let's them go on that strip of land (which yes, technically is city property, but is still in front of someone else's house). There are a few houses on the sidewalk side that have dogs that live across from them (sidewalkless side) where that strip has turned completely brown and muddy (all the grass has died off) due to the dogs across the street using that spot 3-4 times a day. While technically the owners aren't doing anything wrong, and the dogs do not go on the grass between the sidewalk and the house, it is still frustrating that that strip has completely died. But what does one do in this situation - and who is in the wrong?

That’s weird, I don’t get why they take their dogs to the exact same spots to pee, multiple times per day. If they’re leaving their own property, why aren’t they walking their dogs more than just across the street? If I lived on the side without a sidewalk, I’d still walk my dog on my side of the street.

I don’t know how common this is in the DMV, but in my neighborhood, the HOA has contracted with a landscaping company to maintain those grass strips between the sidewalks and the streets. Homeowners don’t mow or maintain them, so we don’t feel any ownership of them.

They walk on the sidewalk and the dog goes on the strip. They don't just cross the street and come back, they go for a walk, but the dogs tend to relieve themselves on this same strip at the beginning of the walk and other dogs also find the scent so also pee there.

If you would walk on the sidewalkless side of the sidewalk do you let your dog pee in people's yards then?

I’d walk him on the street and mostly stay off the grass, but I would let him pee on the edge of a lawn. He wouldn’t be allowed to just wander into yards.

I think this is much worse than peeing on the strip. I would not want a dog peeing on the edge of my lawn.

If you don't have a sidewalk, the edge of "your" lawn is probably the county easement (aka not actually your property).

If you do have a sidewalk, it may/may not be your lawn. You'd need to pull the boundary info.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Every suburban neighorhood needs a damn dog park with a track course for the four leggeds to run around to get "their bowels moving" or get their exercise so they can poop in that same dog park where a shitting area should be made. Get the dogs off other people's lawns and sidewalks! Not in my front yard (NIMFY) movement!

Who cares if they walk on sidewalks, as long as they’re leashed and their owner has them under control?

Because they don't just walk on their side of the sidewalk like most sensible humans do. They will sniff the hell out of an entire area along whatever side of the sidewalk they want, bushes and trees they peed on before or to sniff other dogs' pee. And often with a damn leash that takes up the width of the sidewalk. Walkers are forced to accommodate them forcing them to go onto a road just to get by that portion of the area. Sidewalks are not that wide.

You clearly just hate dogs. Yes there are some clueless dog owners out there but many of us have total control over our dogs when walking. It’s no different than passing other people or bikers or people with strollers on sidewalks. I step aside with my dog as do many others. You don’t own the sidewalk either you know.

Will look for places to live in YOUR neighborhood. Do share where it is so all those who love dogs but not in dogs in their butts on a narrow sidewalk can move to your hood.

There is no neighborhood that will satisfy you. You are clearly a self-centered person suffering from a pathological need for control. If it wasn’t dogs, it would be kids, or the elderly, or…

Lol furthest from that. Try again.

Nope, pretty sure I nailed it. Only petty, miserable, controlling people complain about the audacity of their neighbors walking their dogs on public sidewalks.

Clearly many dog owners don't realize the meaning of PUbLiC. The audacity of those dog handlers to force walkers onto roads because their dog takes up the entire sidewalk is NOT being a neighbor. Try looking up neighbor.

Nobody has ever forced you onto the road, Karen.

Oh, goody. You again. Do you realize you sound ridiculous with this 'Karen' crap? It's like early-gen brainrot at this point.

The statement stands, Karen.

This is so ridiculous. What's "Karening" about an anon telling you business you should already know? Nobody's calling the cops on your dumbass (would that we could...). It's not even the correct usage of the term. Do you think you sound cool? Edgy? Misogynist in a way that earns you bro points? Because you sounded like an idiot the first time and your insistence on continuing to call anons "karen" (when so many better, more-relevant insults might exist) just makes it look like your one orange brain cell is malfunctioning (again).

Karen PP is a daydrinking white woman. I bet my life on it.

Go start your own Karen thread if you have nothing to add to the discussion on this topic, Kenneth.
DP.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our street only has a sidewalk on one side, so the strip of land that's in between the sidewalk and the street is only on one side. Every dog owner on the side with no sidewalk crosses the street to walk their dog and let's them go on that strip of land (which yes, technically is city property, but is still in front of someone else's house). There are a few houses on the sidewalk side that have dogs that live across from them (sidewalkless side) where that strip has turned completely brown and muddy (all the grass has died off) due to the dogs across the street using that spot 3-4 times a day. While technically the owners aren't doing anything wrong, and the dogs do not go on the grass between the sidewalk and the house, it is still frustrating that that strip has completely died. But what does one do in this situation - and who is in the wrong?

That’s weird, I don’t get why they take their dogs to the exact same spots to pee, multiple times per day. If they’re leaving their own property, why aren’t they walking their dogs more than just across the street? If I lived on the side without a sidewalk, I’d still walk my dog on my side of the street.

I don’t know how common this is in the DMV, but in my neighborhood, the HOA has contracted with a landscaping company to maintain those grass strips between the sidewalks and the streets. Homeowners don’t mow or maintain them, so we don’t feel any ownership of them.

They walk on the sidewalk and the dog goes on the strip. They don't just cross the street and come back, they go for a walk, but the dogs tend to relieve themselves on this same strip at the beginning of the walk and other dogs also find the scent so also pee there.

If you would walk on the sidewalkless side of the sidewalk do you let your dog pee in people's yards then?

I’d walk him on the street and mostly stay off the grass, but I would let him pee on the edge of a lawn. He wouldn’t be allowed to just wander into yards.

I think this is much worse than peeing on the strip. I would not want a dog peeing on the edge of my lawn.

If you don't have a sidewalk, the edge of "your" lawn is probably the county easement (aka not actually your property).

If you do have a sidewalk, it may/may not be your lawn. You'd need to pull the boundary info.

+1 I grew up in a neighborhood without sidewalks and people walk dogs there too. This is how it’s done.

Just please understand that the "county easement" is probably only about 3ft, max, off the gutter/curb line. A lack of a sidewalk doesn't entitle you to walk all the way up someone's law, which is trespass, and if your dog messes on their lawn, it may also be destruction of property.

In short, get off my lawn.