Is it considered trespassing if you let your pet go on someone else’s property but you don’t go on it yourself?

Great question.

I don't think I've ever seen a thread on TOTV regarding..."a pet going on someone else’s property."






:1rotfl:

Some pets are hard to control, I was thinking of cats in particular. In my city it is considered trespassing. You need to leash your cat... not many people try to. It is suggested mostly for the cats’ safety so they won’t get run over by cars. They are also supposed to be kept indoors. That could be part of the reason why we have a current rat infestation. Dogs are also considered trespassing but the first few feet of your property belongs to the city.
Wlife such as rats, raccoons and skunks are not considered trespassing. I guess they have no owners to sue.

In my city they get eaten by coyotes. Why would anyone let a can run loose in TV???

Maybe, maybe not. In any case, no one can claim a right to use land that belongs to someone else. And that seems to be the case here. Ok. It was a convenient place for a long time. But it will soon no longer be available to you. TBFY.

...

Here's a fairly recent map of this area.....white property are owned by individuals; blue by the District; purple by the developer; grey are utilities (the power lines that go through this area)

That is useful. Thanks.

So where the street access for all the owners? that’s problem it never was developed into trailer park, but plots were sold. Now it’s SAFU!. District only has control over the broken down fence, which is on going to be BB gun firing range. So no access from Rio grand.

I guess the next step would be to plead a case to the developer and see if the previously sold properties and suitable access could be obtained. If you will pardon the pun, I have no dog in this, I am a cat person, but looking at the map, it MIGHT be possible. Perhaps a few people representing the larger group can approach the developer and see if there are any options.

They will have to get a handle on the poop left out in the field. That seems to be the BIG problem. Kind of hard though to get people to behave even when their dog is in the fight. These big dogs will suffer quite a bit not being allowed to run.

There is something on the site that must not be named about this but it sounds like the lawyer that the Villages developer uses put the breaks on any large piece of land being carved out of from there for a new dog park.

From my reading a small dog park could be set up there....?

In the best interest of those big dogs. their needs and their owners - perhaps the owners will have to travel to TV's other dog parks to see if their dog's needs can be met...and as a last resort will have to buy a membership to Doggie Doo Run Run. No need for a dog to suffer because a wrong is being corrected, eh?

Maybe it’s me but at what point when you were looking at homes in the Villages and the postage size lots did you say to yourself, yep, this will be perfect for my dog?

There are actual official dog parks. But that's what confounds me. Knowing that there is an actual official sanctioned dog park nearby that they can take their dogs to, why would they choose to trespass on private property instead? And then get upset when they're told they can't do that anymore?