Hey, there! Log in / Register
Should dogs be allowed to run wild in state parks?
By adamg on Fri, 12/01/2006 - 10:20am
DogBoston is aghast at the possibility the state might require dogs to be leashed at all times in state parks. Instead, the group wants certain areas in parks set aside so dogs can form killer packs socialize and frolic.
As a non-dog-owner, I have to say, short of finding an opossum staring at you from your trash, nothing quite stuns you into sudden wakefulness like having a giant, unleashed dog bound right at you on what you thought was a peaceful saunter along a path in the woods at Millennium Park (which granted, is not a state park, but still).
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
unleashed dogs
As a long time dog owner, I love finding places where Byron can interact with other dogs off leash. Giving dogs places where they can play and socialize without their attached human helps them be happier calmer dogs.
The person who allowed their dog to run at you was not being a responsible dog owner. Any person who does not have total voice command over their dog as I do, is not ready to allow their dog off leash play.
Sadly, one irresponsible person with an out of control dog can ruin a good day for everyone.
You sound dog phobic, as a friend, could I help you loose your dog phobia by spending time with my dog.
Dog-phobic?
Nah. I've had dogs in my day. I just don't like walking in the woods, listening to the birds and looking out at the Charles and just generally minding my own business only to have this giant mound of fur bound around a bend and come galloping at me.
You, sir, are clearly
You, sir, are clearly caninist.
LET THE PEOPLE VOTE ON DOGS!
More dog owners than not in
More dog owners than not in my experience tend to act absurdly about their dogs. "Oh, he doesn't bite." Um, that assurance doesn't make me feel any better about your unleashed (or loosely-leashed) dog having been allowed to come right up to me and startle me with his sudden appearance and loud bark or to rub himself up against me. Certainly these owners wouldn't be afraid a young child would bite them, but they sure wouldn't want a strange child to out of nowhere run up to them and start yelling or to rub his snotty face and sticky hands all over them.
As for parks, yeah, no. Dogs are not children, are not humans. They relieve themselves everywhere and have big teeth. People are allergic to them. They do not have the understanding of the norms of human social interaction. Why the hell should the be allowed to run free in public space?
Not all or nothing. . .
There really should be room for compromise here. It is a great benefit to responsible dog owners to have open areas for dogs to explore off leash. Public land exists for many kinds of recreation - snow mobiles, camping, jogging, biking. We should be able to make room in this list for people and their family pets out for a nice walk.
"Public land exists for many
"Public land exists for many kinds of recreation - snow mobiles, camping, jogging, biking."
Those are all for humans.
Sure, people can take a nice walk with their dogs, but the dogs should be leashed and leashed-well and owners should be responsible.
Dog Boston Reply
Adam - I agree - there's some dog owners that let their dogs run wild and ruin it for the rest of us. This includes biters and just plain wild dogs.
But in my post, here's the fine print:
"We are asking that the DCR include in the regulations a provision for off-leash recreation in designated areas."
We are not asking state parks to turn into giant dog parks.
Dog owners want to have a right to have fun with their dogs in the park, and that can be a dedicated dog park or a designated area within an existing park (effectively turning it into it's own, dedicated dog park).
Like a basketball court or a tennis court at your local park, why isn't a dog park a good idea?
B