1. Allergies to pets is a good reason alone to have animals stay at home always. I am super allergic to cats, but I know people that are the same way with dogs. I don't think it is fair to impose that on anyone.
2. Not to mention, why bring SOMETHING ELSE into the equation when your mind needs to be focused. No matter how good of a dog you have, it will be on your mind just a little, and that is distraction enough to cause trouble.
While I voted 'no' in the poll, I think people with dog allergies are well enough aware that people bring their dogs on the trail and to the crag, so they need to take care of themselves and bring along some allergy medication.
Someone who has never owned a dog and doesn't like them is a non-dog person. They will be much more likely to want to ban all dogs at the crags, instead of wanting to do something about the minority of dogs/owners that cause a problem.
And dude, what the hell were you doing registering at rockclimbing.com on 9/11/2001?
I've owned many dogs over the years, and I don't want dogs at the crag either (If I'm ever in a position to own a dog again, I will - housing and current lifestyle prevent it at the moment). Yeah, they're friendly and fun and blah blah blah, but I can handle problematic climbers. Problematic dogs are more difficult to handle, particularly when the owner is 60 feet in the air and the dog knows this.
Not all dogs are bad. Not all dog owners are bad. The opposite is also true. Even good owners who have good dogs don't have 100% control over their pets all the time. (If you do, then you've done a great job of letting your dog develop its own, happy personality ). For me, its about eliminating an easy-to-deal-with potential problem. A lot of climbing is about taking personal responsibility. It's difficult to take personal responsibility when a dog decides it wants to get a whiff before forming an opinion.
Saying the world is divided is a bit shortsighted. It depends on the person's priorities. I'd be willing to bet there are few people in this world who claim to be "dog people" actually have their dog as their #1 priority.
1. Allergies to pets is a good reason alone to have animals stay at home always. I am super allergic to cats, but I know people that are the same way with dogs. I don't think it is fair to impose that on anyone.
????! One person is allergic to dogs to the whole world has to leave their dogs at home. LET THE ALLERGIC ONE STAY HOME, that's much easier and far more practical!
In reply to:
2. Not to mention, why bring SOMETHING ELSE into the equation when your mind needs to be focused. No matter how good of a dog you have, it will be on your mind just a little, and that is distraction enough to cause trouble.
You're giving some dog owners far too much credit, lol.
I prefer to see older dogs at a crag... they're usually very laid-back, don't wander too much and really just chill, watching things go by and occasionally leaning against you for a bit of a pat.
1. Allergies to pets is a good reason alone to have animals stay at home always. I am super allergic to cats, but I know people that are the same way with dogs. I don't think it is fair to impose that on anyone.
I am super allergic to morons.
I ask that you please stay at home always. I don't think it is fair that you impose yourself on anyone.
At the crag she is either way deep in the woods, roaming and running, laying next to my feet as I belay, sitting at the base looking longingly up the rock as I climb, or trying to find some way to scramble up to where I am. She touches NO food...
Your dog laying at your feet when you are belaying is your idea of good crag dog behavior?
I agree with devkrev. Dog owners in general are blind to the risks their dogs pose at the crags. Even the best crag dog occasionally needs attention from its owner, and if the owner is belaying when the dog needs attention, it's a distraction to the belayer and an unnecessary risk to the climber.
At the crag she is either way deep in the woods, roaming and running, laying next to my feet as I belay, sitting at the base looking longingly up the rock as I climb, or trying to find some way to scramble up to where I am. She touches NO food...
Your dog laying at your feet when you are belaying is your idea of good crag dog behavior?
I agree with devkrev. Dog owners in general are blind to the risks their dogs pose at the crags. Even the best crag dog occasionally needs attention from its owner, and if the owner is belaying when the dog needs attention, it's a distraction to the belayer and an unnecessary risk to the climber.
Same goes for young children.
Jay
And pretty girls. Or shirtless dudes. or loudtalking.
Or grunting or infintile screaming.
Goddamn but there are a LOT of distractions in rock climbing. Its a wonder anyone is alive at all!!!1111
At the crag she is either way deep in the woods, roaming and running, laying next to my feet as I belay, sitting at the base looking longingly up the rock as I climb, or trying to find some way to scramble up to where I am. She touches NO food...
Your dog laying at your feet when you are belaying is your idea of good crag dog behavior?
I agree with devkrev. Dog owners in general are blind to the risks their dogs pose at the crags. Even the best crag dog occasionally needs attention from its owner, and if the owner is belaying when the dog needs attention, it's a distraction to the belayer and an unnecessary risk to the climber.
Same goes for young children.
Jay
And pretty girls.
The pretty girls don't curl up at your feet when you're belaying (at least they don't at mine).
At the crag she is either way deep in the woods, roaming and running, laying next to my feet as I belay, sitting at the base looking longingly up the rock as I climb, or trying to find some way to scramble up to where I am. She touches NO food...
Your dog laying at your feet when you are belaying is your idea of good crag dog behavior?
I agree with devkrev. Dog owners in general are blind to the risks their dogs pose at the crags. Even the best crag dog occasionally needs attention from its owner, and if the owner is belaying when the dog needs attention, it's a distraction to the belayer and an unnecessary risk to the climber.
Same goes for young children.
Jay
And pretty girls.
The pretty girls don't curl up at your feet when you're belaying (at least they don't at mine).
Someone who has never owned a dog and doesn't like them is a non-dog person. They will be much more likely to want to ban all dogs at the crags, instead of wanting to do something about the minority of dogs/owners that cause a problem.
If the world IS divided why is your next paragraph filled with so many hedges? What about someone who has owned a dog but still agrees they shouldn't be at the crag (there are an enormous amount of those people represented in this thread). What about someone who hasn't owned a dog, likes them, but just doesn't want to be bothered with them when they are climbing?
I think the stance taken by a majority of people here is not a dichotomous one at all. It's not dog people vs. non-dog people (a-la UFC 100) or ban dogs vs. don't ban dogs. It's challenging what some climbers see as a default assumption: bringing a dog to the crag is acceptable.
I think the middle-ground consensus that is getting lost as extremists battle for moral superiority (yes, pull on those hind legs; sure, Spot has never pee-ed on a rope and he solos 5.14 in good style) is that most people just want dog owners to be a bit more courteous and not make this assumption. Similarly, dog owners are saying that other owners need to be more responsible. This same level of etiquette goes for bringing kids, loud friends, music, foul language, smoking, french language (ALLEZ! ALLEZ!), and german nudity.
And yet the poll doesn't lie. There are almost double the amount of people who don't want your dog there. Try to rationalize it all you want. You are imposing on well more than 1/2 the people at any crag you bring your dog too. I would venture to say, far more than 1/2.
Yes, it does lie. I am only imposing on the well over half of people in the RC.com echo chamber who had nothing better to do than bitch about dogs. I have never read of an accident caused by an errant dog. Mellow out.
I witnessed a belayer drop his partner because of his dog. Ironically, he was anticipating that his partner was going to fall, and momentarily looked down to make sure his dog wasn't in his way. The climber fell at the instant that the belayer looked down. This was a damned good crag dog and a damned good belayer, too.
So, now you've read about an accident caused not by an errant dog, but actually by a very well-behaved one. I look forward to reading how you will rationalize not changing your mind about dogs being acceptable at the crag.
Someone who has never owned a dog and doesn't like them is a non-dog person. They will be much more likely to want to ban all dogs at the crags, instead of wanting to do something about the minority of dogs/owners that cause a problem.
If the world IS divided why is your next paragraph filled with so many hedges? What about someone who has owned a dog but still agrees they shouldn't be at the crag (there are an enormous amount of those people represented in this thread). What about someone who hasn't owned a dog, likes them, but just doesn't want to be bothered with them when they are climbing?
I think the stance taken by a majority of people here is not a dichotomous one at all. It's not dog people vs. non-dog people (a-la UFC 100) or ban dogs vs. don't ban dogs. It's challenging what some climbers see as a default assumption: bringing a dog to the crag is acceptable.
I think the middle-ground consensus that is getting lost as extremists battle for moral superiority (yes, pull on those hind legs; sure, Spot has never pee-ed on a rope and he solos 5.14 in good style) is that most people just want dog owners to be a bit more courteous and not make this assumption. Similarly, dog owners are saying that other owners need to be more responsible. This same level of etiquette goes for bringing kids, loud friends, music, foul language, smoking, french language (ALLEZ! ALLEZ!), and german nudity.
You pay to climb at the gym... every visit... do you bring your dog with you? After all, you are a paying customer...
Contrary to popular belief, very few of your taxes support the NFS. Timber sales and mining account for a huge amount of their budget, at least half of which is used for fighting fires, with a lot of the rest going to new land purchases, publication of educational materials, maintaining trails and infrastructure and enforcing existing regs. Ask the average ranger how they feel about Fido. My guess is your gonna see that 2/3 figure all over again.
As for private land... unless the landowner has specifically sanctioned your dog, you have NO RIGHTS regarding your pet.
Period.
So leave them home or go some place on public lands and rejoice in your freedom to treble your invironmental impact and annoy the hell out of 2/3 of the crag.
Just don't be surprised if someday, somewhere, someone decides to feed Flash/RP/Lucky/etc a doggie biscuit soaked in antifreeze or a gainesburger mixed with D-Con...
Which is a shame, really, because it ruins the taste- unless you use a lot of Texas Pete on the burritos...
Someone who has never owned a dog and doesn't like them is a non-dog person. They will be much more likely to want to ban all dogs at the crags, instead of wanting to do something about the minority of dogs/owners that cause a problem.
If the world IS divided why is your next paragraph filled with so many hedges? What about someone who has owned a dog but still agrees they shouldn't be at the crag (there are an enormous amount of those people represented in this thread). What about someone who hasn't owned a dog, likes them, but just doesn't want to be bothered with them when they are climbing?
I think the stance taken by a majority of people here is not a dichotomous one at all. It's not dog people vs. non-dog people (a-la UFC 100) or ban dogs vs. don't ban dogs. It's challenging what some climbers see as a default assumption: bringing a dog to the crag is acceptable.
I think the middle-ground consensus that is getting lost as extremists battle for moral superiority (yes, pull on those hind legs; sure, Spot has never pee-ed on a rope and he solos 5.14 in good style) is that most people just want dog owners to be a bit more courteous and not make this assumption. Similarly, dog owners are saying that other owners need to be more responsible. This same level of etiquette goes for bringing kids, loud friends, music, foul language, smoking, french language (ALLEZ! ALLEZ!), and german nudity.
I assume you meant this for glowering.
I agree with you.
Yep - for glowering and others that see the a dog non-dog world.
As one of the most outspoken leave your dog at home people,you might be surprised to learn I don't dislike dogs.I don't want one myself,of course,being a cat and all.I think it less likely you can divide the world into good dogs and bad dogs than dog and non dog people.
I've never seen a fall caused by a dog yet,but I have seen people shortroped badly twice,just shy of falling,because someones loose dog was all wrapped up in a flaked out rope..
By and large,I think there is no hope that responsible people can bring their dog,and people less so,or with misbehaving dogs will leave theirs home.If people see a dog at the cliff,next time they bring theirs.
For me personally this comes down to a few issues.One is people who personify their dogs,and because they treat them like people,think everyone else should.In thirty years of climbing I've seen probably a thousand dogs at the crag,maybe fifty kids,and only a couple kids that were misbehaving.I haven't seen any kids shit,or piss,or dig up the soil,or fight with other kids,or steal sandwiches.The kids may well grow up to be climbers,the dogs won't(I know you are cueing up your picture of Fido halfway to the launch pad right now).
The third is,after thirty years of climbing and witnessing the effects of the sport's ever increasing popularity,why stress the crag enviroment any more than we need to.Fido is just as happy in Central Park,take him there.
My point is that many of the people who don't like dogs don't want to compromise, they don't want any dogs at the crags no matter if they cause a problem or not.
You do understand that the reverse is also true, don't you? Many of the people who do like dogs don't want to compromise. They do want dogs at the crags no matter if they cause a problem or not. If your point is that you believe being uncompromising is bad, know that there are some "dog people" who are just as uncompromising as the people you criticize.
If there isn't a law against them being there, then the "non-dog people" will have to accept Spot's presence. But the dog owners who do decide to bring Spot along should have enough *@#$ courtesy to give a @#% whether Spot is a pain in the @#%.
Yes! Someone gets it!!
The people that are too much dog-people and bring ill-behaved dogs to the crag or don't supervise their dogs are MUCH more of a pain to me than the non-dog-person who doesnt' want any dogs at the crag. The problem people that bring problem dogs to the crags are the ones ruining it for everyone.
A lot of people are brining other examples into it: people bringing kids, people who yell, people who smoke, all of these people should have the courtesy to not signicifantly effect other climbers, but the other climbers should have the courtesy to understand the majority of kids/smokers/dogs will not bother them at all unless they are looking for something to be pissed about, then fuck them.
And as far as there being dog-people and non-dog people does everyone likes dogs the same? There are also dog-people and cat-people. I'm a dog person, but also have a cat. There are sport climbers and trad climbers, same thing it's a continuum, some people are very anti-bolt, some will bolt next to cracks, some are in the middle.
(This post was edited by glowering on Feb 20, 2009, 5:55 PM)
And yet the poll doesn't lie. There are almost double the amount of people who don't want your dog there. Try to rationalize it all you want. You are imposing on well more than 1/2 the people at any crag you bring your dog too. I would venture to say, far more than 1/2.
Yes, it does lie. I am only imposing on the well over half of people in the RC.com echo chamber who had nothing better to do than bitch about dogs. I have never read of an accident caused by an errant dog. Mellow out.
and a damned good belayer, too.
So if a belayer can drop their climber and still hold the classification of a "damm good belayer", what constitutes a bad belayer? Short of killing your partner I can’t think of many things that would be worse...
69 /
36%
). For me, its about eliminating an easy-to-deal-with potential problem. A lot of climbing is about taking personal responsibility. It's difficult to take personal responsibility when a dog decides it wants to get a whiff before forming an opinion. 
