I think the full quote was "After an exhaustive search of the published literature on the issue of dog waste and its impact on water quality, they found no evidence that dog waste had a negative impact on water quality. Instead, they found it was geese poop that was creating a problem with water quality.” This might be specific to the Cambridge site and may or may not apply to Lincoln.
In any case, I think this shows how much research based information is available that can inform these decisions. > Hello Linda, > > I suspect what they were conveying to you is that dog poo was not a problem > at this particular site. Your statement “After an exhaustive search of the > published literature on the issue of dog waste and its impact on water > quality, they found no evidence that dog waste had a negative impact on > water quality”, is incorrect. While the operative thing is the degree of > pollution, dog poo, like many other animal excrements, does negatively affect > water quality. This is especially the case where paved surfaces allow water > and pollutants to runoff into water bodies. > > These two flyers, while basic, explains well: > https://cfpub.epa.gov/npstbx/files/slc_petwaste.pdf > <https://cfpub.epa.gov/npstbx/files/slc_petwaste.pdf> > https://cfpub.epa.gov/npstbx/files/Pet%20care%20fact%20sheet.pdf > <https://cfpub.epa.gov/npstbx/files/Pet%20care%20fact%20sheet.pdf> > > Regards, > > Donald
-- The LincolnTalk mailing list. To post, send mail to Lincoln@lincolntalk.org. Search the archives at http://lincoln.2330058.n4.nabble.com/. Browse the archives at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/. Change your subscription settings at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln.
