I wonder where this factoid comes from.

Sometimes it's a trivial fact which raises doubts. I was browsing Professor Bainbridge's who  linked to this article on the election by anonymous Lexington in The Economist . It contained this passage:

Second, the Democratic Party is ceasing to be a mom-and-pop party. Phillip Longman of the New America Foundation points out that the fertility rate in the Kerry states is 12% lower than in the Bush states. Vermont, the home of Howard Dean and perhaps the most left-wing state in the country, produces an annual average of 49 children for every 1,000 women of child-bearing age; in Utah, where 71% of the population voted for Mr Bush, the figure is 91. In deep-blue cities such as San Francisco and Seattle you find more dogs than children. (italics added)

Putting aside whatever other critique one might make of the use or importance of the "facts," I was struck by the last sentence. "...more dogs than children." It would seem to be easily verifiable as it is offered as a significant (even somewhat sinister) fact. Moreover, as dogs and children (I associate them) are indicia of comfortable cities, I figured that this issue is part of City Comforts Blog's core mission.

But interestingly enough, statistics on "How many dogs in ___________?" (name your city) are not easy to find. The "Quick Information" desk at the the Seattle Public Library could only offer guesstimates. Mr. Longman has not yet responded. (Of course it's the holidays etc etc.) There is nothing available on Google. Anecdotally, I spoke with someone who is in the animal control business and it is his firm impression that, nationwide, there are more dogs in households with children than the other way around.

And of course the key question is not if there are more dogs than children in Seattle but if that ratio -- whatever it is -- is significantly different in Red and Blue cities, metropolitan areas etc.

I'll be looking into this issue and if anyone has any suggestions for hard data, please let me know. And the reason I am looking into it is because while everyone is free to have a creative opinion  when I sense a creative fact I get curious as it is sometimes a tip-off to essential rot deep-down in the core argument.

Comments

[greg claxton]

You might try the American Vetinary Medical Association US Pet Ownership & Demographics Sourcebook:
http://www.avma.org/membshp/marketstats/sourcebook.asp

That's a contents page with ordering information, but you might find it in a university library. Or you could try to sweet talk the AVMA into giving you a few specific numbers.

[David Sucher]

Greg Claxton is correct. But I understand that this AMVA Sourcebook does not disaggregate the data down to the city level i.e. it is only at the State and Region level. That might be useful but since, for instance, Washington State has a lot of Red areas, I wonder how helpful it would be.

Nevertheless I will try to get down to the Reference Desk (they have it but it is on reserve) at the Seattle Public Library and see if it helps.

[Tommer]

The Seattle Animal Shelter reports the number of licenses issued each year. Of course these will be only the legal doggies, not all the doggies. Or, you can annoy your least favorite member fo the City Council,by asking them instead.

Animal Control ED, Don Jordan's number is (206) 386-4286.

This from their Strategic Plan:

Quantitative

As requested, Animal Shelter will submit the following statistics and information to the Mayor's Office, City Council or other executive staff:

* the individual parks patrolled
* number of patrols made in each of the parks
* number of citations and warnings issued
* number of reported dog bites in parks
* number of loose animals impounded in parks
* number of pet licenses sold

[Geenius at Wrok]

Funny that he should accuse Seattle of having "more dogs than children." I recently took a three-day trip to Seattle and did a LOT of walking while I was there. On Sunday morning after being greeted on the street by two exceptionally friendly housecats, I remarked to my companion, "You know, back in Chicago, we would have seen AT LEAST three or four people walking their dogs by now." We hadn't seen any, and we didn't for another hour or so. The whole day, I think we spotted two.

You want to see an utterly dog-crazy city, look at Chicago. As a non-dog-lover, I find Seattle's dogs-to-people ratio considerably more appealing.

[David Sucher]

I checked with Animal Control. By their own assessment, they do not have good numbers.