Study suggests dogs favor grass over artificial turf
Bottom line
A small new study in Animals suggests dogs may prefer natural turfgrass surfaces over artificial turf in outdoor recreation spaces, while also underscoring a heat-safety concern for synthetic surfaces. In the July 6, 2026 paper, researchers Arieli D. Da Fonseca, Nathaniel J. Hall, and Joseph Young observed 10 dogs across 10 structured play sessions in an experimental area containing natural grass, stabilized grass, and artificial turf. Overall, dogs spent more time on the two natural turfgrass surfaces than on artificial turf. The study also found artificial turf ran consistently hotter, with a mean surface temperature of 25.2 °C versus 19.4 °C for natural grass, and reached as high as 63.8 °C, while the natural turfgrass surfaces stayed below 40 °C under the same conditions. The authors noted artificial turf held up better to traffic and seasonal change, but it was also harder than the grass-based surfaces. (mdpi.com)
Why it matters: For veterinary professionals, the paper adds early behavioral data to a familiar practical issue: surface choice affects both comfort and safety. The study is small and the authors caution that location within the test area may have influenced behavior, so it shouldn't be overread as definitive proof of preference. Still, the findings align with broader heat-safety guidance that artificial grass can become hot enough to injure paw pads and contribute to overheating, especially when ambient temperatures climb. That makes surface temperature, hardness, drainage, sanitation, and traffic tolerance relevant talking points when clinics advise pet parents, shelters, trainers, or municipalities designing dog exercise areas. (mdpi.com)
What to watch: Larger, controlled studies will be needed to confirm whether dogs truly prefer grass-based surfaces, and whether those preferences change by breed, season, age, or heat tolerance. (mdpi.com)
Key facts
- Study
- Published July 6, 2026, in Animals
- Question
- Whether dogs prefer artificial turf or natural grass
- Sample size
- 10 dogs
- Design
- 10 structured play sessions in a 12.2 m² test area with natural grass, stabilized grass, and artificial turf
- Main finding
- Dogs spent more time on the two natural turfgrass surfaces than on artificial turf
- Heat finding
- Artificial turf averaged 25.2 °C, versus 19.4 °C for natural grass, and reached 63.8 °C
- Natural surface temperature
- Natural turfgrass surfaces stayed below 40 °C under the same conditions
- Limitation
- Small study, and plot location may have influenced behavior
A new study published July 6, 2026 in Animals takes on a simple but surprisingly under-studied question: given a choice, where do dogs want to play and rest, artificial turf or natural grass? In a controlled experimental setup, the answer appeared to lean toward grass-based surfaces. The researchers found dogs spent more time on natural and stabilized turfgrass than on artificial turf, while synthetic turf also posted markedly higher surface temperatures and greater hardness. (mdpi.com)
That matters because artificial turf has become a common feature in dog parks, daycare yards, training facilities, and even residential pet relief areas, largely because it tolerates heavy traffic better than natural grass and can reduce mud, bare patches, and erosion. But the tradeoff has long been a practical welfare question: whether synthetic surfaces are less comfortable, hotter in summer, or harder on paws and joints. Until now, there has been little direct behavioral evidence in dogs to help answer that question. (mdpi.com)
In the study, 10 dogs participated in 10 structured play sessions in a 12.2 m² test area divided into nine equal plots arranged in a 3 × 3 design. The plots were randomly assigned to one of three surface types: natural grass, stabilized grass, or artificial turf. Dogs had unrestricted access to all surfaces during sessions, and behavior was measured before and after play using 10-second scan sampling. Before play, dogs showed more active behavior on stabilized grass than on natural grass or artificial turf. After play, passive behaviors increased across all surfaces, but were observed more often on the natural turfgrass surfaces than on artificial turf, which may suggest dogs were more inclined to rest there. The authors ultimately concluded that, overall, dogs spent more time on the two natural turfgrass surfaces than on artificial turf, though they also flagged a possible confounding effect from plot location. (mdpi.com)
The thermal findings were among the clearest results. Artificial turf averaged 25.2 °C, compared with 19.4 °C for natural grass and 20.0 °C for stabilized grass, and in the hottest conditions reached 63.8 °C. Under those same environmental conditions, the natural turfgrass surfaces remained below 40 °C. The paper explicitly cautions that pet parents should be careful using artificial turf areas when environmental temperatures exceed 25 °C because the turf may cross thresholds associated with burn risk. The surface also proved harder than either natural turfgrass treatment, while the stabilizing grid did not reduce soil compaction as the researchers had expected. (mdpi.com)
Outside the paper, that heat concern is consistent with mainstream canine safety guidance. The American Kennel Club notes that artificial grass, like asphalt, can become hot enough to cause discomfort, blistering, and paw-pad burns, and warns that hot ground can also contribute to heat stress. AKC guidance also advises that if air temperatures are 85 °F or higher and the ground hasn't had a chance to cool, the surface may be unsafe for walking, and recommends the hand test as a quick field check. (akc.org)
Why it matters: For veterinary professionals, this study is less about declaring a winner in the turf debate and more about sharpening risk-benefit conversations. Artificial turf may still appeal to facilities that need durability, drainage control, and lower day-to-day lawn maintenance, especially in high-traffic canine settings. But the new data suggest those operational benefits can come with welfare tradeoffs, particularly heat load and surface hardness. For clinicians, that may inform advice on summer paw injuries, heat stress prevention, environmental enrichment, and recovery recommendations for dogs with orthopedic disease, brachycephalic breeds, puppies, seniors, or any patient with reduced heat tolerance. It also gives veterinarians a more evidence-based way to discuss outdoor design choices with pet parents and commercial animal-care operators. (mdpi.com)
The study also has clear limitations. With only 10 dogs in a single experimental environment, it should be viewed as an early signal rather than a final answer. The authors themselves note that location may have influenced behavior, and the design doesn't resolve whether dogs were responding primarily to temperature, texture, odor, cushioning, familiarity, or some combination of those factors. Even so, the paper opens a useful line of inquiry for veterinary welfare research, especially as more communities and facilities weigh synthetic surfaces against natural ones. (mdpi.com)
What to watch: The next step is replication at larger scale, ideally across different climates, breeds, ages, and use cases, with more direct measures of comfort, gait, paw health, and heat exposure. For now, expect this paper to feed into practical discussions about shade, cooling, watering, cleaning, and material selection in dog parks and other canine recreation spaces, rather than trigger any immediate regulatory change. (mdpi.com)