Seaport Neighborhood - Infill and Discussion

[dennismulder]

lol yea after I read that I was gonna say, a majority of who have what??? That's definitely not my lived experience seeing friends, family, neighbors. That said, I do think people walking their dogs helps otherwise quiet somewhat antisocial neighbors become acquainted with others, especially the newbies with longtimers. A couple more small dog parks in my area of Dorchester would do wonders to help consolidate some of the externalities everyone's speaking of. Even if someone scoops the poop, I'm not very happy about poop residue and pee in my front lawn/garden. We put up a fence and they now just pee along the fence... But I'm a cat person, so a bit biased.

The majority of households have dogs? Not in Greater Boston: it's 26%. And I can't find any data suggesting a majority of households nationally own a dog. I don't think one can in good faith state that "a majority of people" desire dog ownership, especially in urban areas. Cities should not be bending over backwards to accommodate dog owners, who comprise a minority of households. By all means cities should plan for the presence of dogs and regulate/price them accordingly to mitigate the downsides. But cities should be prioritizing making cities more liveable for families and kids first and foremost, not dogs.

U.S. Pet Industry Reaches $158 Billion in 2025, Poised for Continued Growth in 2026

U.S. Pet Industry Reaches $158 Billion in 2025, Poised for Continued Growth in 2026

americanpetproducts.org

^according to this study, % of households with dogs increased from 51% to 53% last year.

According to census data, 37% of boston area households have a dog. According to the animal rescue league of boston, over 75% of millennial or gen Z report that they want a dog, but many don’t have one now due to financial barriers or housing restrictions. with our top notch housing crisis, it’s no surprise that our region’s lower dog ownership rate i yet another livability consequence (notwithstanding the personal benefits for the few curmudgeons in society who are anti-dog)

 

[jklo]

The main reason why apartments/condos ban dogs is the Dog Bite liability. Dogs tearing up the place is also an issue.

Having noisy kids for neighbors is not a negative economic externality that impacts society at large, and even assuming it was, dogs can be just as loud and as much of an irritation for apartment living than kids, if not moreso.

That's true. Dogs are also very noisy.

 

[Blackbird]

Kids don't poop in the grass (usually).

And don't run around and bite people. Usually.

Fwiw, I am both pro-kid and pro-dog. I just can’t imagine how you can argue with a straight face that one is a burden on society and the other isn’t.

 

[BronsonShore]

Fwiw, I am both pro-kid and pro-dog. I just can’t imagine how you can argue with a straight face that one is a burden on society and the other isn’t.

Kids are a critically necessary part of society -- you cannot have a society at all without them -- ergo they cannot be a burden on it.

 

[stick n move]

View this content on Instagram

View this content on Instagram

 

[BronsonShore]

View this content on Instagram

View this content on Instagram

If this is anything like Cosm in LA and Dallas, then this is going to be a massive hit.

 

[JS38]

We need a COSM in Boston! Would be great market for it here...

 

[bdurden]

I respectfully disagree. The issue is more than individual behavior and not just related to dog waste. If you make it more expensive and onerous to register/have a dog in the city, fewer people will have them, which in turn means fewer "bad" dog owners will have them, which in turn means fewer of the issues discussed in this thread. Trying to control human behavior through enforcement is very difficult and not particularly effective, so I am not optimistic any sort of campaign aimed at changing the behavior of bad dog owners or litterers will have much impact. Generally if you have a negative externality, whether traffic congestion, carbon emissions, smoking, or speeding, the most effective way to mitigate that externality and reduce the harm is a tax on the externality (e.g. congestion pricing, carbon tax, cigarette taxes, automated fare enforcement, respectively). I would submit it is the same with dogs in cities. There are many reasons why we should discourage dog ownership in urban areas, and to do so, I believe the most effective way would be to increase the price of dog ownership in urban areas.

Pricing people out doesn’t target the actual behavior, it ignores that responsible owners would be punished more than negligent ones only to bend to the whims of a likely small but loud citizenry who just don’t like dogs.
The negligent ones aren’t going to register their dogs, anyway. Ultimately it would lead to community policing, where the biggest headache in the neighborhood isn’t dog poop, rather the titular chair of the dog registry police.