Some of the dog parks are quite adequate in size and quite nice. I just think a nice enhancement to be made would be creating shade of some sort, as well as a little water play- such as splashing around in a shallow "something" and/having a sprinkler to run through.

the truth
 

Despite using the number of dog parks as a selling point, the parks they have are really kind of pathetic. The park in Wildwood is superior in many ways and from what I understand, they just put a fence around an area already being used. It has large trees for shade, grassy areas, is huge and the benches aren't covered with metal--you can actually sit in them on a sunny day. I was hoping when they announced Atlas that it would be a true dog park in keeping with the nice amenities of the Villages. Instead, they made a flat area with no shade whatsoever. As for the park between 466 and 466a--aka the side of the hill...a group there recently asked for some simple changes that would help some of the owners who had mobility problems get in easier and they were told the current entrance meets ADA requirements. They basically said if the people complained too much, they could close it altogether. The Villages is no pet friendly as far as the parks they provide. They have done it grudgingly and it shows. I understand it wasn't developed as a dog community, but it's proven that pets have become more important than ever in people's lives, especially older ones. They improve health and keep people social. What would it have taken to put a few trees in one area of Atlas with some non-metal benches under them? I've started going to Wildwood, it's nicer than any of the Villages parks.

I guess I have missed any advertising of The Villages that says it has dog parks.

it's there
 

it's when they list all the things here: number of pools, number of rec centers, number of dog parks. It's also in the rec news every Thurs. under parks. Anyone considering moving here reads that and would assume there are nice dog parks here. When you get here you discover the one on the historical side is all dirt, the one in Mulberry requires considerable walking to get to it unless you can go by cart, Brinson-Perry is a fall hazard waiting for someone to take a tumble, and Atlas is too hot to go to during the day. There was no thought put into them at all.

And if it hadn't been for the lobbying of the Responsible Dog Owners Association, IMHO Atlas dog park wouldn't have happened.

Me too.

But I have not missed many folks who need;

The public sports pools cooled in the summer.
An indoor pool.
Striping and more lighting of golf paths.
Another dog park.
The entertainment to start later and stay open longer in the summer.
Fast food on the golf courses.
More police presence, except when they get a ticket.
The Villages own Police Force.
Higher speed limits.
Real gates.
No gates.
Non chain restaurants with their favorite dishes cooked at a reasonable price.
Haute Cuisine Restaurant with high prices and a "good pour".
No dogs on the squares.
Parking patrol at the mail drop.
A way to recognize golf carts and an office to dispense and monitor the way to recognize golf carts.
Deed police so people don't have to report deed restrictions themselves.
Chair police.


:oops::oops::oops:

Don't forget our feline population. Not one cat park!
http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/2016...e933689647.jpg

If the Villages was to develop a dog park with all of the whiz-bang amenities dog owners seem to want - small/medium/large dog areas. fencing, shade, grass, cool benches, water feature, people and dog drinking fountains, pooper scooping, golf cart access, etc would dog owners pay to use such a grandiose facility or do they think even residents who do not own dogs should subsidize the additional cost and maintenance of a facility they would not use with amenity their fees?

It's right there in the brochure with the indoor swimming pool.

http://hikeswithdogs.com/wp-content/...ParkWater2.jpg

http://www.visionsoftravel.org/wp-co...al-areas-6.jpg

I can tell you that the Bark Central park we take Mookie isn't free. The cost is either $10 a visit or you can choose to pay $30 a month or $300 for the year. I sometimes wonder if Mrs. Bosox & I are some of the not many willing to travel and pay for the exercise our buddy needs. We sure would like something similar closer than Inverness . We do use the Atlas park as our last run of the day park for Mookie around a half hour before dark.Before we found Bark Central we did go to Brinson Perry because there's shade there although it's very small.I believe if it weren't for us dog owners voice our needs for dog parks The Villages hierarchy would be fine with no dog parks. I find it sad they don't see the need for a "real" dog park like Bark Central. You know they have the land but refuse to give up the acreage needed to provide such a place. This would cut in to the amount of houses that could be built!! I wonder how many of us dog owners in the villages would be willing to pay to use a place like Bark Central if it were here.

:shocked:

There are lots of people here that pay for amenities they don't use.You know this when you buy in to this community!! There are folks that not only don't golf but don't have a golf cart and they still pay for the paths. Some don't play softball, bocce,billiards...etc and we all pay for these things. So please this argument doesn't hold water!!

How great is this post.:agree:

Yep. An old, stale, zero-merit argument.