Seattle has one of America's best park systems. For dogs, it's one of the worst.
99% of Seattleites live a 10-minute walk from a park. 9.6% live that close to a dog park. This site is a sourced, reproducible public-data reference on Seattle's off-leash area (OLA) system — and what has gone wrong with it. Every chart links to its source. The opinion page is clearly marked; everything else is factual.
OLAs in Seattle, 2025
14
Fully-fenced, dedicated off-leash areas
OLAs opening fall 2026
+2
West Seattle Stadium, Othello Playground
Dog parks per 100K residents
1.82
Portland: 5.74 · SF: 5.03 · Vancouver BC: 5.44
Off-leash citations, 2014–2019
4,803
SPR Animal Control, via public records request
The reports, in short
Each report below reopens a specific claim Seattle Parks & Recreation has made about the OLA system, checks it against primary sources, and publishes the data behind the check. In order:
Part I — The Gap.
Seattle has added one net dog park since 2009. The city's population grew 34% over the same window. Per-capita, Seattle runs at one-third of Portland and San Francisco's OLA density.
Part II — Access.9.6% of Seattleites are within a 10-minute walk of an OLA. (TPL says 99% are within a 10-minute walk of any park.) Seven of 14 OLAs are below the AKC 1-acre minimum. Only 1 has water; only 3 have lighting.
Enforcement.4,803 off-leash citations (2014–2019). Six of the top ten cited parks have zero designated OLA. The empirical pattern is simple: citations cluster where OLAs aren't, or where the OLA that exists is too small to matter.
Budget.
SPR's total budget has roughly tripled since 2018 to $507M proposed. The dedicated OLA line peaked at 0.064% of SPR's total in 2018 and has been smaller in percentage terms ever since.
Opinion & Recommendation.
Author's policy recommendation: a time-zoned shared-use model for existing parks (NYC-style off-leash hours), with enforcement redirected to clean-park compliance. Six principles, three opinions, and seven steel-manned counterarguments — all signed.
This site favors explicit methodology over headline-friendly numbers. Every derived number on every page links back to its underlying CSV and, where applicable, to the script that produced it. The master reference is METHODOLOGY.md — the "show your work" index. A few caveats readers should also carry:
Walkshed (now network-based). Previously a straight-line estimate of ~33% of residents; replaced April 2026 with a proper network-distance analysis: 9.6% of Seattle residents live within a 10-minute walking path of an OLA, computed via scripts/compute_walkshed.py (osmnx against Seattle's full OSM walk network) and scripts/population_coverage.py (2020 Census block-group overlay, area-weighted). SPR's published 2.5-mile standard covers 79.4%.
Peer-city OLA counts differ in definition. Seattle counts only fully-fenced dedicated OLAs; Portland includes unfenced voice-control areas; Vancouver BC includes time-restricted shared-use areas. Direct comparison requires caveats.
OLA-specific budget. SPR's Park District "Maintaining Parks & Facilities" line funds both OLAs and P-Patch community gardens and is not broken out. The $100K/year Cycle 1 figure is OLA-only because SPR stated it publicly; Cycle 2 figures are combined.
Dog population. Seattle does not universally license dogs. Estimates range from 150,000 (conservative floor) to 400,000+ (SPR 2023 Expansion Study). This site uses 150,000 for floor calculations.
Corrections and contributions welcome
This site deliberately flags where the underlying data is incomplete, approximate, or stale. If you spot an error, have a better primary source, or can fill in one of the known data gaps — especially around current dog-population counts, SPR's internal methodology, or per-OLA usage observations — please get in touch at [email protected] or file an issue on the repo. The site will be updated.
How this site was built
The data analysis, primary sources, public records requests, methodology choices, and editorial claims on this site were collected and verified by Andre Vrignaud, a Seattle resident and long-time off-leash-area advocate. The site's HTML, CSS, charting, and prose were built with substantial assistance from Claude Code (Anthropic). Every factual claim on this page links to its primary source; every derived number links to a CSV in the public repo and the script that produced it (see METHODOLOGY.md). AI was used as a writing and engineering partner, not as an autonomous researcher; Andre reviewed the analysis, placed the primary sources, and stands behind the claims. Errors are his, and corrections are welcome via the block above.