This story disappeared for a little bit, but the discussion about having a dog area portion of Martin Luther King Park in South Minneapolis has still been ragging on. Supporters of the area, who are mostly white, think the dog park will help them get to know their neighbors (who also own dogs). Opponents, who are mostly African Americans, are upset because of the connection of dogs to the suppression of the Civil Rights movement in South. Tough call. Both sides, however, show their admiration for Dr. King.
January 7, 2011 at 11:00 am
ridiculous.
January 7, 2011 at 11:20 am
As a dog owner, and someone who lives very close to MLK park, I think they dog park people should stop their nonsense. People are offended with the idea of having a dog park because of the preceived disrespect to Martin Luther King. Add to that the fact that it will be a tiny little park and pretty much useless for people who want to actually exercise their dog, not just stand around and socialize with other dog owners. Additionally, the other dog parks have natural features such as space and trees to distance the noise from home owners, this park does not. It was a bad plan to begin with, and now people are offended by the disrepect shown to MLK, so they should just stop. I can bring my dog to one of the other parks.
January 7, 2011 at 11:28 am
The dakota dog park in SLP is near a neighborhood and isn’t too big but it’s plenty of space. My dogs love it and I go nearly every day.
Also it’s across the street from homes but theres a dog across the street that’s tied up and barks way more than any of the ones at the dog park.
January 7, 2011 at 11:30 am
change the name of the park – problem solved.
Welcome to MPLS PARK #38
January 7, 2011 at 11:34 am
it’s not a “tough call”. it’s a stupid argument made by ridiculous people.
January 7, 2011 at 11:36 am
Also between freeway noise and airport traffic – barking dogs should be the least of your worries.
January 7, 2011 at 11:42 am
Right, because changing the name of the park, that has a memorial for Dr. King in it, right in the middle of where the dog park was proposed, wouldn’t cause any problems.
Older African Americans in my community feel offended by having a dog park in the MLK park. That’s enough for me to take their side. The poorly conceived park is just icing on the cake. There are lots of parks in Minneapolis, choose one not named after a black civil rights leader.
January 7, 2011 at 11:54 am
Is this really more about the fact that Kingfield is essentially ground zero for the gentrification push towards lake street along the 35 corridor?
January 7, 2011 at 12:02 pm
No, I think that part of Kingsfield has already been gentrified. I’d say Blackbird Cafe area a few blocks North is really the dividing line. And interesting business mix with Blackbird and ACE Hardware on one side of 38th and Latino Sapor and the chicken wing place on the other side. Though ACE has long catered to all communties.
January 7, 2011 at 12:08 pm
step 1 insert coffeshops
step 2 insert farmers market
step 3 insert yuppie restaurants
step 4 insert dog park
step 5 remove Kmart replace with co-op and thru street
January 7, 2011 at 12:19 pm
Honestly, what you just described, @ryanol, is my dream. But I know that would hurt so much of my neighborhood. But yes, that Kmart has got to go! But it will hopefully be replaced with another Kmart, but one facing Nicollet which will once again be a thru street.
January 7, 2011 at 12:32 pm
I wanted to blog about this, but I lost steam. I was thinking mostly about the dynamics of the conversation ((white) proponents have been largely dismissive and disrespectful of (black) opponents point of view, and that’s partly because white folks don’t actually know how to grok it even though they want to and are well-intentioned) and the process, but kcmpls makes a really good point about the quality of the dog park. Although, there’s something to be said for letting your dog socialize even if there’s not a lot of exercise happening; wears ’em out mentally if not physically. But my dog’s still just a puppy and needs that socialization time, so maybe that’s not most people’s concern.
January 7, 2011 at 12:35 pm
I never saw the actual dimensions but the Dakota park in SLP is fairly small. Like throw a tennis ball from one side to the other…but it’s plenty for the dogs who mostly run in circles.
January 7, 2011 at 12:46 pm
I’m also fascinated by the dynamics, and if a co-op and thru street showed up, that would be awesome
January 7, 2011 at 12:56 pm
Erica, I clearly have different requirements for exercise for my dog that you do, with Jeff weighing 115 and Peanut weighing about 20.
I think the main thing is that we have one park named after a black man and many, many named after white men. If the African American community feels it is disrespectful to have a dog park in the ONE park named after a black man, then they win. No further discussion. If we had 25 parks named after black men/women, it may be a totally different conversation.
January 7, 2011 at 1:06 pm
Dog parks. (sigh) Possibly a less relevant government endavour than golf courses.
January 7, 2011 at 1:12 pm
kwatt- one could argue it is a public safety thing. Having specific places for dogs to exercise means they don’t run free in parks, keeping dogs, motorists, bicyclists, etc free from harms way. Plus, I believe they are completely paid for with user fees.
January 7, 2011 at 1:18 pm
If dogs are that dangerous…
January 7, 2011 at 1:50 pm
Apparently you’ve never hit a loose dog with your bike…
January 7, 2011 at 1:55 pm
Are there dog parks now in other Minneapolis parks?
January 7, 2011 at 2:00 pm
“If the African American community feels it is disrespectful to have a dog park in the ONE park named after a black man, then they win. No further discussion. If we had 25 parks named after black men/women, it may be a totally different conversation.”
It’s not like we don’t have dog runs in the parks named after white guys.
Kevin, it’s just as much a matter of keeping the dogs safe as it is protecting us from the dogs.
January 7, 2011 at 2:32 pm
I believe there were civil right violations on grassy areas in the past, so grass should not be allowed in a park named after MLK either. If the black people think so then we must agree, no sense in engaging in any thought about it whatsoever.
January 7, 2011 at 2:45 pm
noodleman- there are dog parks in Minnehaha, Loring, Lake of the Isles, Columbia parks. One is Seward along the river. And I hear one on the North side, though I’m not sure where it is.
January 7, 2011 at 3:31 pm
The one across from the Columbia Park golf course (Bam double wammy Kevin) is massive. It’s must be a couple of hundred yards long. I don’t bring Remus (Italian Greyhound 19 lbs) there, too many big dogs and I have a fenced in back yard.
January 7, 2011 at 3:48 pm
we probably ought to get rid of water fountains while were at it?
January 7, 2011 at 4:06 pm
white guys? I thought all the other parks were named after Rosa. *confused*
January 7, 2011 at 4:59 pm
What did we do with dogs before dog parks?
January 7, 2011 at 5:03 pm
“What did we do with dogs before dog parks?”
God forbid we make improvements on our (and our pets’) lives. We don’t need no stinking progress.
January 7, 2011 at 5:13 pm
noodleman- there are dog parks in Minnehaha, Loring, Lake of the Isles, Columbia parks. One is Seward along the river.
Then, really, I don’t see why there is a problem … beyond the stated psychological association a certain breed of dog has with regard to the civil rights movement. How do the opponents feel about fire hoses being used in their neighborhoods by firefighters? 😉
January 7, 2011 at 5:15 pm
I can tell you that if you look at park utilization you won’t find a better use than a dog park.
Fields are great but they only really get used for a third of the year. The dog park will get utilized every single day of the year. I know I was out with about 7 other folks and their dogs the other night in 9 degree weather. Did see a lot of action on the jungle jim that night.
January 7, 2011 at 5:15 pm
Now if the city had named it “Bull Connor Memorial Dog Park,” I could see the problem….
January 7, 2011 at 5:15 pm
What is the problem–doesn’t Barack Obama own a dog? Aren’t dog parks better than living near bars, liquor stores and X-rated movies? Think about it.
January 7, 2011 at 5:21 pm
didn’t that is supposed to read.
January 7, 2011 at 5:24 pm
The city of Corvallis, Oregon has a Martin Luther King, Jr. Dog Park.
January 7, 2011 at 5:31 pm
There are also dog parks named after Martin Luther King, Jr. in Sausalito and Oakland.
January 7, 2011 at 5:35 pm
I’m just sayin’, we seemed to get along fine as a society before dog parks. Let’s stick to the important stuff, eh?
January 7, 2011 at 5:43 pm
I agree w/@kwatt – free healthcare for all dogs in MLK dog park
January 7, 2011 at 5:44 pm
we got aloong fine without 90%+ of our technological advances.
We certainly got along fine without the iPhone/smart phone. How about we ditch those?
It seems your a bit clear on the concept of progress, Kevin.
January 7, 2011 at 6:11 pm
Smart phones to dog parks is silly comparison. But it appears the damn things are self sustaining financially. You have to pay to use them, so maybe they pay for themselves.
January 7, 2011 at 9:47 pm
I’m pretty sure “conservatives” are completely against progress. As well as actually conserving anything other than the wealth of the richest.
January 8, 2011 at 12:19 pm
I would just like to point out that there is some sort of hideous tennis dome monstrosity currently residing in that park. Where were these people when the yuppies were getting that built?
January 10, 2011 at 12:18 pm
Thanks to you guys collectively and to EagerOwl and Noodleman specifically for exactly illustrating my first point. JFC.
January 10, 2011 at 12:22 pm
Yes, I am in agreement with you.