Yeah ADK,just ten times.I live twelve minutes from Cathedral and Whitehorse,so not too much reason to head over there.They are not federal parks either,nor Crawford,nor Cannon.So fucking what?
Not a reason in the world to think access will be threatened by a ban on dogs,quite the opposite,nice try at panic though.
Leashed dogs create plenty of problems.I've seen a few nearly strangled when tied at the base of the cliff,with the owners two pitches up.In this case,at the base of Recompense,they had two dogs tied up,and then left all their shit yardsaled to the extent we couldn't flake a rope or put a pack down.
I've watched a couple epic because some jackass left their dog barking endlessly,while leashed to a tree,and they could not communicate over the constant barking.A few other people on the cliff trying to relay messages for them.
My ex brother in law,ex Marine,doesn't like dogs because a German Shepard ripped part of his face off when he was seven.He probably should have pulled on the dogs tail.Tends to tense up when your puppy comes running.But you don't care right?It's your God given right to bring your pet to the cliff right?
Another friend has been bitten four times.
Can't tell you how many times I've been hiking with my kids,and some asshole has their dog,or dogs running ahead on the trail,dog barking,growling at my kids,somewhere off in the distance one of you jackasses yelling"he won't bite".
Next time you go to the cliff,remember,whether anybody confronts you about your inability to leave your dog home,two thirds of the people you are looking at wish you did.
We can all take it that you just don't like dogs then? And BTW: the Dacks are how many acres of solitude? Maybe you should go and get a pet rock. I heard they get into fights all the time but it's easy to break up those fights.
Actually something really great came out of this discussion.I looked at dog regulations here in New Hampshire,and lo and behold,they are not permitted at Whitehorse or Cathedral.Not that you'd know it by the numbers of people that bring them,so I'll be doing something about that.
I try as much as I can to go to places where having my dog off leash isn't an issue. I try really hard.
But I also understand that people don't like dogs. When I lived in cities without leash laws and somebody comes down the sidewalk in the opposite direction, I make my dog sit and stay till the person walks by.
YOU DON"T KNOW HOW PEOPLE WILL REACT TO YOUR DOG. I'm clearly a dog person but recognize that not everybody is. I always am thanked by people when I make my mutt sit for people.
Same goes at the crag. I am bring my dog if its allowed. Period. End of story. But I do realize that not everybody want dogs there and I do what I can to accommodate within reason. I also have seen dog access severely limited and/or taken away due to people violating leash laws. Be realistic.
Like I said, my dog is stilling going with me. But I am going to be responsible about it. If there are a bunch of people around I ask if they mind my dog off leash. If they say no or they say yes and give the evil eyes at some point, she goes back on leash.
You can't really take the "moral high ground" AND break the law at the same time......
Here is the law in California on tethering: I bet you many if not most dog owners violate this law while taking their dog climbing.
In reply to:
California
Health and Safety Code, Division 105, Part 6
Chapter 8. Dog Tethering
122335. (a) For purposes of this chapter, the following terms shall have the following definitions: (1) "Animal control" means the municipal or county animal control agency or any other entity responsible for enforcing animal-related laws. (2) "Agricultural operation" means an activity that is necessary for the commercial growing and harvesting of crops or the raising of livestock or poultry. (3) "Person" means any individual, partnership, corporation, organization, trade or professional association, firm, limited liability company, joint venture, association, trust, estate, or any other legal entity, and any officer, member, shareholder, director, employee, agent, or representative thereof. (4) "Reasonable period" means a period of time not to exceed three hours in a 24-hour period, or a time that is otherwise approved by animal control. (b) No person shall tether, fasten, chain, tie, or restrain a dog, or cause a dog to be tethered, fastened, chained, tied, or restrained, to a dog house, tree, fence, or any other stationary object. (c) Notwithstanding subdivision (b), a person may do any of the following in accordance with Section 597t of the Penal Code: (1) Attach a dog to a running line, pulley, or trolley system. A dog shall not be tethered to the running line, pulley, or trolley system by means of a choke collar or pinch collar. (2) Tether, fasten, chain, tie, or otherwise restrain a dog pursuant to the requirements of a camping or recreational area. (3) Tether, fasten, chain, or tie a dog no longer than is necessary for the person to complete a temporary task that requires the dog to be restrained for a reasonable period. (4) Tether, fasten, chain, or tie a dog while engaged in, or actively training for, an activity that is conducted pursuant to a valid license issued by the State of California if the activity for which the license is issued is associated with the use or presence of a dog. Nothing in this paragraph shall be construed to prohibit a person from restraining a dog while participating in activities or using accommodations that are reasonably associated with the licensed activity. (5) Tether, fasten, chain, or tie a dog while actively engaged in any of the following: (A) Conduct that is directly related to the business of shepherding or herding cattle or livestock. (B) Conduct that is directly related to the business of cultivating agricultural products, if the restraint is reasonably necessary for the safety of the dog. (d) A person who violates this chapter is guilty of an infraction or a misdemeanor. (1) An infraction under this chapter is punishable upon conviction by a fine of up to two hundred fifty dollars ($250) as to each dog with respect to which a violation occurs. (2) A misdemeanor under this chapter is punishable upon conviction by a fine of up to one thousand dollars ($1,000) as to each dog with respect to which a violation occurs, or imprisonment in a county jail for not more than six months, or both. (3) Notwithstanding subdivision (d), animal control may issue a correction warning to a person who violates this chapter, requiring the owner to correct the violation, in lieu of an infraction or misdemeanor, unless the violation endangers the health or safety of the animal, the animal has been wounded as a result of the violation, or a correction warning has previously been issued to the individual. (e) Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to prohibit a person from walking a dog with a hand-held leash.
Bottom line, at the most liberal interpretation for CA you could in theory get away with a 3 hour tether while climbing assuming that an animal control officer agreed that 3 hours was reasonable. Most likely I bet they would say less in a typical rock climbing environment.
Most states have similar laws if dog owners could be bothered enough to look them up. But instead, most just choose to ignore them.
You can tell who is a dog person and who isn't by the replies. "Why would you bring a dog to the crag" could only be written by a non-dog person.
It sucks that irresponsible owners ruin it for everyone. I like seeing appropriate dogs at the crags. They are fun to pet, and a great conversation starter with new people. I'd say less than 1 in 5 dogs I see at the crag cause any problem. But yes when they cause a problem it's lame. What about the 1 in 5 climbers that cause problems though? That party of 3 clusterfuck on a popular route taking 2 hours per pitch, should we ban them? If you polled the general public probably 2/3 of them would rather not have climbers around at all, placing bolts, leaving trash, chalk, smoking, etc. So I guess we should respect them and not climb right?
I used to have a dog, Irie, who was well trained and even more importantly was BORN with a mellow, super easy to get along with personality. He was devoted to me and didn't care about or approach anyone else, he would run away from agressive dogs no matter how small they were. Sometimes I would let him OFF LEASH at the crags, oh the horrors. Even when it was ILLEGAL OMG! Because he was a large and powerful I'd get the stink eye from frightened people. But I did what I wanted because I do what I think is right and honorable, I'm not as concerned with laws and people being upset because of their own predjudices.
I've had two dogs since then. I don't take either one to the crags, they could manage fine, but it wouldn't be as fun for me to have to worry about them. I don't care how many people say they don't want dogs around, Irie was better behaved, more honorable, more selfless, than most people at the crags.
I'd prefer people didn't smoke cigarettes at the crag. Sometimes I get a whiff of their smoke, sometimes the leave butts on the ground. But living in a free society I respect their right to do what they want.
Here is the law in California on tethering: I bet you many if not most dog owners violate this law while taking their dog climbing.
In reply to:
California
Health and Safety Code, Division 105, Part 6
Chapter 8. Dog Tethering
122335. (a) For purposes of this chapter, the following terms shall have the following definitions: (1) "Animal control" means the municipal or county animal control agency or any other entity responsible for enforcing animal-related laws. (2) "Agricultural operation" means an activity that is necessary for the commercial growing and harvesting of crops or the raising of livestock or poultry. (3) "Person" means any individual, partnership, corporation, organization, trade or professional association, firm, limited liability company, joint venture, association, trust, estate, or any other legal entity, and any officer, member, shareholder, director, employee, agent, or representative thereof. (4) "Reasonable period" means a period of time not to exceed three hours in a 24-hour period, or a time that is otherwise approved by animal control. (b) No person shall tether, fasten, chain, tie, or restrain a dog, or cause a dog to be tethered, fastened, chained, tied, or restrained, to a dog house, tree, fence, or any other stationary object. (c) Notwithstanding subdivision (b), a person may do any of the following in accordance with Section 597t of the Penal Code: (1) Attach a dog to a running line, pulley, or trolley system. A dog shall not be tethered to the running line, pulley, or trolley system by means of a choke collar or pinch collar. (2) Tether, fasten, chain, tie, or otherwise restrain a dog pursuant to the requirements of a camping or recreational area. (3) Tether, fasten, chain, or tie a dog no longer than is necessary for the person to complete a temporary task that requires the dog to be restrained for a reasonable period.
You don't bold part (2) in Section 597t of the Penal Code, which specifically says you can restrain a dog in a recreational area, according to its stipulations.
That said, many California areas I have been to do not allow dogs, straight up. Then again, they are also usually anti-weed and open container, as well as probably a whole host of other practices common to climbers. I guess I don't climb with the litigious crowd though, even though I climb with several lawyers?
What people really need to control are their fucking kids. Little rock chuckers. Next time I see one next to my rope, I'm kicking it in the head.
(This post was edited by zeke_sf on Feb 18, 2009, 5:15 AM)
You don't bold part (2) in Section 597t of the Penal Code, which specifically says you can restrain a dog in a recreational area, according to its stipulations.
That said, many California areas I have been to do not allow dogs, straight up. Then again, they are also usually anti-weed and open container, as well as probably a whole host of other practices common to climbers. I guess I don't climb with the litigious crowd though, even though I climb with several lawyers?
What people really need to control are their fucking kids. Little rock chuckers. Next time I see one next to my rope, I'm kicking it in the head.
You show me a climbing area that has a specific "tethering" rule and I'll concede that there is possibly one are in CA that actually will allow you to tether your dog outside of the general CA law. Good luck finding one.
Next to the rope may be a bit of a stretch, but assuming they are on your rope, pissing on your pack, or taking a shit in the middle of the trail, by all means feel free if they are mine, though my daughter would probably kick your ass Zeke, so I'd be careful around her :P
Yeah, you're right, CA is kinda fucked for dogs at the crag. My point with the kid thing is that nine out of ten times I find dogs to be a welcome to non-consequential thing at the crag while young children are a problem more often than not. I think it's the kid owners that are the problem though. I speak as a completely unbiased nonowner of either dogs or children.
i'd rather have every man and woman at the crag stare at my ass all day long than have a dog lick me.
Right on!
I don't like dogs at all and most of that attitude has come about because of people that let them roam around. I'm a cyclist and a runner and have been chased and bit more times than I can count.
So gotta love it when I'm at the base of a climb, roping up and along comes someone with their numb dog. And they're all smiles like you're just supposed to instantly adore their dog, why? As the dog is trying to lick me, sniff me, jump on me, get in my pack, walk on my ropes.
And yeah, just great when you're 2 pitches up the climb and have to listen to them bark nonstop. Makes for a real enjoyable time and great communication.
Leave your dumbass dog at home...they'll stay busy eating the cat shit.
(This post was edited by tradchick on Feb 18, 2009, 12:36 PM)
122335. (a) For purposes of this chapter, the following terms shall have the following definitions: (1) "Animal control" means the municipal or county animal control agency or any other entity responsible for enforcing animal-related laws. (2) "Agricultural operation" means an activity that is necessary for the commercial growing and harvesting of crops or the raising of livestock or poultry. (3) "Person" means any individual, partnership, corporation, organization, trade or professional association, firm, limited liability company, joint venture, association, trust, estate, or any other legal entity, and any officer, member, shareholder, director, employee, agent, or representative thereof. (4) "Reasonable period" means a period of time not to exceed three hours in a 24-hour period, or a time that is otherwise approved by animal control (b) No person shall tether, fasten, chain, tie, or restrain a dog, or cause a dog to be tethered, fastened, chained, tied, or restrained, to a dog house, tree, fence, or any other stationary object. (c) Notwithstanding subdivision (b), a person may do any of the following in accordance with Section 597t of the Penal Code: (1) Attach a dog to a running line, pulley, or trolley system. A dog shall not be tethered to the running line, pulley, or trolley system by means of a choke collar or pinch collar. (2) Tether, fasten, chain, tie, or otherwise restrain a dog pursuant to the requirements of a camping or recreational area. (3) Tether, fasten, chain, or tie a dog no longer than is necessary for the person to complete a temporary task that requires the dog to be restrained for a reasonable period. (4) Tether, fasten, chain, or tie a dog while engaged in, or actively training for, an activity that is conducted pursuant to a valid license issued by the State of California if the activity for which the license is issued is associated with the use or presence of a dog. Nothing in this paragraph shall be construed to prohibit a person from restraining a dog while participating in activities or using accommodations that are reasonably associated with the licensed activity. (5) Tether, fasten, chain, or tie a dog while actively engaged in any of the following: (A) Conduct that is directly related to the business of shepherding or herding cattle or livestock. (B) Conduct that is directly related to the business of cultivating agricultural products, if the restraint is reasonably necessary for the safety of the dog. (d) A person who violates this chapter is guilty of an infraction or a misdemeanor. (1) An infraction under this chapter is punishable upon conviction by a fine of up to two hundred fifty dollars ($250) as to each dog with respect to which a violation occurs. (2) A misdemeanor under this chapter is punishable upon conviction by a fine of up to one thousand dollars ($1,000) as to each dog with respect to which a violation occurs, or imprisonment in a county jail for not more than six months, or both. (3) Notwithstanding subdivision (d), animal control may issue a correction warning to a person who violates this chapter, requiring the owner to correct the violation, in lieu of an infraction or misdemeanor, unless the violation endangers the health or safety of the animal, the animal has been wounded as a result of the violation, or a correction warning has previously been issued to the individual. (e) Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to prohibit a person from walking a dog with a hand-held leash.
good job dude. except that everything you bolded below the purple text is expressly ALLOWED.
and that only applies to state owned lands and lands upon which state laws apply AND to which other laws/regulation don't suspersede them (i.e. an off leash dog park as set up and regulated by the state/cit/county....). many federal owned lands have other laws/regulations.
tell you what though. we'll ignore that. the quotation means exactly what you said it means. only, i won't agree to follow the letter of the (fake) law next time i'm in california until you:
1)NEVER GET 1 MPH above the speed limit. ever 2) Never roll through a stop sign. 3) Never have a beer in the parking lot after a long day 4) etc
Most (though granted not all, but I would wager upwards of 99% of us-see #1) break the law. And relatively often at that.
I have been so reasonable. SOOOOO reasonable in my stance. I know all dog owners aren't, and thats really too bad.
But for all you no-dog people, take a good look at yourself and: 1) STFU if you're using roughster's type of logic going to the letter of the law for areas to which those laws may not even apply AND you never EVER EVER have EVER broken ANY law 2) STFU up if you have annoying actions at the crag. most of you won't own up to it- but look at the "that guy" thread. some of you stick up for the actions but most don't. should we be able to banz you from the crag? or how about the "screaming foul language thread?" should we be able to banz you because you piss me off? or should the euros be able to banz you from europe cause it apparently annoys an entire continent?
glass houses is all- realize that you are either breaking the law and/or annoying other people (probably at the same time) much of the time. just take a good look at yourself and how much of a prick your being. all ya'll (and PLEASE keep in mind, I am not of the mind that all dogs off leash all the time- if you look at my posts i am quite reserved and considerate of others when my dog is with me- i would expect this kind of action on behalf of god owners all the time....)
But for all you no-dog people, take a good look at yourself and: 1) STFU if you're using roughster's type of logic going to the letter of the law for areas to which those laws may not even apply AND you never EVER EVER have EVER broken ANY law 2) STFU up if you have annoying actions at the crag. most of you won't own up to it- but look at the "that guy" thread. some of you stick up for the actions but most don't. should we be able to banz you from the crag? or how about the "screaming foul language thread?" should we be able to banz you because you piss me off? or should the euros be able to banz you from europe cause it apparently annoys an entire continent?
glass houses is all- realize that you are either breaking the law and/or annoying other people (probably at the same time) much of the time. just take a good look at yourself and how much of a prick your being. all ya'll (and PLEASE keep in mind, I am not of the mind that all dogs off leash all the time- if you look at my posts i am quite reserved and considerate of others when my dog is with me- i would expect this kind of action on behalf of god owners all the time....)
dude, the poll, at least doesn't say anything about "banzing" dogs. just do you think people should bring them. i, and a few others, think the answer is NO unless the dogs meet a very specific set of behavioral characteristics. among other things, the dog owner needs to be aware that not everyone is going to like your dog, and you shouldn't let the dog go up to people and sniff and lick them. that right there is my biggest complaint, 9 times out of ten. i'm not really into dogs, i hate the way they smell and i hate being licked. if you keep your dog from doing that, we'll start off on neutral footing. i'm probably not going to pet it, but i am not going to spend all day glaring at you either.
but another point- you realize that annoying dogs and annoying climbers don't get treated the same way because dogs don't have human rights, right? dogs aren't people. and that is my other beef about the unreasonableness of dog owners. it is a dog, it is not your child. it doesn't get the same consideration as other sentient beings, because it isn't one. it has the right to not have cruelty inflicted on it, and that's about it. but no, we can't compare annoying climbers to annoying dogs because dogs aren't people, a point which really seems to get lost on some dog owners.
furthermore, we were talking about annoying dogs in preference to annoying people in this thread, because the thread is about dogs. funny how that works.
but yes, sometimes dogs ruin things for everyone, like at torrent falls. that sucks. i really liked that place. and my weekend to weekend interactions with dogs don't do much to improve my opinion of them.
Great now I have RABIES...rRRRRRrrrrrrRrrrrr. Foaming rRrrrrrrrrr. Well I am off to get my 3000 shots in the belly. Thanks for the heads up. Oh and dont worry I shot the dog and the girl friend last night just in case they had RABIES too. I let My new crag monkey live though. Yall are going to be pissed when he sends your projects. and throw's shit at you.
it is a dog, it is not your child. it doesn't get the same consideration as other sentient beings, because it isn't one.
Whether or not animals are sentient is not a concretely decided issue as you state. In many philosophies and religions, a dog is without a doubt sentient. What are your criteria that rule out a dog from sentience?
I agree with you Adatesman. she was an only dog in the house hold for a long time. She is currently is living with a pitbull a mutt and another great dane. She is getting a better attitude. But if she's on a leash she has a different demeanor. She goes into work mode. Protecting mostly my girlfriend on walks. Off the leash she does not have an aggressive demeanor. Its the leash thing. Also at a crag I will not let her loose due to the fact that she is BIG. she walks up to people and they get frightened. She is a good dog w/ some flaws. Most peoples little angels can not do wrong. Mine does on occasion. So home it is for her.
RE: Crag Monkey - Saw a news story last night about a 200 lb chimpanzee that was killed; he was mauling a person. In CT. Lots of links, go find them yourself... But pretty gruesome, if you can get a link to the 911 recording. Those folks may have been in CT but those accents are WAAAAY Long Island....
RE" Traumatized by past incident - There are people who have a fear of dogs, whether it is from that awful incident mentioned above, or something so benign a person can't even know where it came from. the fact remains, they have a fear of dogs.
As a dog handler, it really is common courtesy to recognize that fear in people who may be approaching your vicinity. They will visibly tense up, and may move as far aside as they can. Some have it worse than otehrs; I have seen grown men, in groups with their friends, freak out and go "Wooooahhhh" as they cower behind one of them.
They simply are having a body reaction beyond their ability to control. The size of the dog does not matter. The fact the dog is wagging it's tail and smiling in anticipation of the handler's affection doesn't matter.
I have found that by my showing I have my dog under control and that I acknowledge their situation, it helps a LOT.
Never belittle a person having such a reaction, if you're handling a dog. That is not helpful.
What I do, is shorten my leash up, guiding my dog right to my side. At the same time, I will say to the person in fear Don't worry; I have him."
Depending on their level of discomfort, I will adjust the level of show. Some kids really get so scared they might be peeing their pants. In a case like that, I will squat right to my dog, making myself at the same level. Right up there, holding the dog imobile.
I will then repeat the "I got him" and up the level with "I won't let him near you. You are okay." If someone in their group does the "It's just a little dog" BS, I will counter that. "I know how you feel. Don't worry. I've got him and won't let him near. We'll give you plenty of room."
In a case like that, I will hold my dog as they continue on their way. The kid WILL be looking back, because they are still afraid the dog will get them. What a relief, for them, to see me still holding the dog, not having left the spot, and acknowledging their fear again.
You would not believe the amazing results I have had with this. Children who were near tears - become visibly relieved. They smile at me.
RE: Crotch Sniffing - Dogs "nose" people to get a sense, pun intended, of who they are. This is a fact, not much one can do about it. Some dogs do it more than others. Some handlers handle it better than others. There simply IS no one way.
And so - the SMART thing, is to take responsibility for ourselves. We may WANT dog handlers to not allow their dogs near us, but wishing it so won't change anything. It's sort of like wishing you had pro, when the fact is that you have to move unprotected. Wishing for it is a waste of energy.
If you don't want a dog who is acting gregariously(a potential sign your crotch might get sniffed) - move away, outr of leash range. Problem averted. No leash, or an idiot letting the dog continue at you? Place your hands in front to block the dog from honing in.
An intelligent, aware handler can easily see if their dog is about to sniff snatch, and also can tell when the sniffee prefers privacy(like.....99.999% of the time. duh). But - if the handler isn't dealing with the situation, one can simply say "Please - I don't like getting sniffed."
If they get an attitude? Who the hell cares. That's their problem. Don't engage with them.
Out of the hundreds of dogs I have had come up to me in the past year or so, only once has one come a sniffing crotch. But, dogs do love to smell smelly things and unfortunately, the musk of our genital area can be quite attractive, especially if we have been exerting ourselves and sweating, and especially especially if we've been without shower for a couple days.
RE: Dogs Not Being Sentient Beings - I know better.
I agree with everything you said. Like I stated before, I invested lots and lots and lots of time to ensure my dog behaves. I completely understand that not everybody likes dogs, and I respect that fact.
Its annoying to see people be so blanket about their 'dog views'. I guess I just need to remember that I do what I can to be accommodating and move on.
And roughster, I win. Sorry. Not fighting about it. That clause does say what I say it does. Eh. Peace. I'm outa here.
Thank you happiegrowl! You've provided an excellent litmus test that others in this thread seem to be clamoring for. Are you pro-dog or anti-dog? It simply depends on your attention to the musk of your genitals. If you're batting 1 out of a hundred, I'd have a tough time classifying you as pro-dog.
happiegrrrl wrote:
Out of the hundreds of dogs I have had come up to me in the past year or so, only once has one come a sniffing crotch. But, dogs do love to smell smelly things and unfortunately, the musk of our genital area can be quite attractive, especially if we have been exerting ourselves and sweating, and especially especially if we've been without shower for a couple days.
I find it laughable that people are resorting to the logic of "there are dog people and non-dog people" or "you just must not like dogs." No, people are simply annoyed by a lack of courtesy and if you're the dog owner, it is your lack of courtesy NOT the dog that causes the annoyance.
And roughster, I win. Sorry. Not fighting about it. That clause does say what I say it does. Eh. Peace. I'm outa here.
You may think you won, but your reading comprehension failed:
A person may do any of the following
Tether, fasten, chain, or tie a dog no longer than is necessary for the person to complete a temporary task that requires the dog to be restrained for a reasonable period.
You may tether no longer than is necessary...for a reasonable period (3 hours at max within a 24 hour period).. As I mentioned, reading comprehension for the win!
Now the real question, do you know the state and local laws for the areas for where you frequent? Yup, that's what I thought...
69 /
36%
