Should the burden of dealing with off leash dogs rest with their owners, or hikers that encounter them in NFS Wilderness

[bobby49]

"I cannot imagine dogs on the Whitney trail."

I shot a photo of a Beagle on the Whitney Trail at about 13,000 feet. That was about ten years ago, but the image is still stuck in my mind.

[Gogd]

I personally would prefer no dogs and already stated the reasons in an earlier post, elsewhere. But I am a realist and take my lead from history.

I am not talking about the history of dogs in the Sierra. That history is irrelevant in the current context. I am talking about how the political process that lead up to the establishment of the parks operate, and how support thereof occurs in today's world. Back in the 1980s there was a US senator who shall remain unnamed herein, who used to enjoy taking his family on outfitter hosted equestrian trips into the Sierra. The Senator was a strong advocate of wilderness access and the park and forestry services. The Sierra Club in a fit of environmental political correctness had a reform campaign to tighten up regulations. One of their objectives was curtailing equestrian access into the high Sierra. This project lead me to dropping my membership, and redirecting my support to the Nature Conservancy, regardless I am not a horse person. But I digress. I thought the Sierra Club was committing an incredibly naïve act, potentially losing the support of the Joe Sixpack horse packers out there. We need as much support as possible to make these resources available. But more significantly the Sierra Club policy was confrontational to one of their staunch allies in Congress who rallied on their behalf and voted funding for the park and forest service programs. The Sierra Club eventually backed off from their zero-tolerance stance, and settled on tighter regulation of equestrian activities in the Sierra. But significantly, horses are still permitted. They were accommodated. The point being: dog owners in the Sierra may be a minority and many folks may dislike K-9 presence in the BC, but keep in mind they are still on our side, as part of the coalition that advocates funding and access to these open spaces. Certainly there is enough open spaces for all of us to get along.

(edited for spelling, grammar)

Ed

[John Harper]

I regularly pick up multiple bags of dog poop on my daily walks through my neighborhood. Explain that one. Someone goes to the trouble to pick up a steaming stool, put it in a nice little bag, and leave it for someone else to transport to the trash can. There's a reason a lot of dog owners get a bad rap, they earned it.

John

I've seen bags of dog poop on the trail through Little Lakes Valley. I was offended by this, but it occurs to me now that maybe they were deposited on the way out and the plan was to pick them up on the way back.

I used to think that too, until I see the same bags in my neighborhood still there after a couple days. No excuses. They lost the "benefit of the doubt" with me a long, long time ago.

And, I don't hate dogs. Owned a German Shepherd for 13 years, RIP. Just sick of selfish dog owners.

John

[erutan]

I dropped out of South Lake today, there were probably a dozen or so dogs (Saturday, easy dayhike trail to a few destinations etc).

Interestingly half or so of them were on six foot leashes. The other half were off leash dogs that generally stayed within 2-3 feet of their owners. I would step aside for all of them (aside from a woman who restrained her off leash dog, who I thanked!) but wasn't overly concerned. On our way up there was a dog that was clearly waiting for it's owner in the parking lot as we were dropping off food in the bear locker, and kept near their side when they passed back down from a dayhike when we were entering.

One dog was slowly walking ahead of it's owners then veered over and circled me. It was mellow, but after being attacked in July I kept my poles between me and it and mentioned to the owners that I wasn't comfortable being approached by off leash dogs as one had recently attacked me - not aggressive or angry, but letting them know that not everyone enjoys their dogs as much as they do.

I'm curious if "I believe that to always have a dog leashed, and stuck at our own paltry pace, is a refined and inexcusable form of torture!" is a common attitude amongst dog owners? By that standard, the only person that WASN'T torturing their dog was the group let their dog approach me while they were ~20feet away. There's HST members that leash their dogs because they don't want them chasing wildlife etc (someone pointed out a recent trip report from red mountain basin) - are they inexcusably torturing their pets?

Arguments of the utility of different domesticated animals aside, it's interesting that 59% of the responses are to be stricter than current regulations, 22% status quo, and 19% looser.

[erutan]

A lot of relevant points by Wandering Daisy (vs whether cats or dogs have more utility), so I’ll respond to some of them.

The term "well trained dog" can vary a lot in what specifically they were trained to do. For example, not all "well trained dogs" can do what police dogs do, or dogs that care for disabled. A well trained wilderness dog should have come in contact with a wide variety of wildlife as part of their training. This training is done small steps at a time. It is a gradual process. And it never ends. Every trip you take your dog on is also a training session. Basic training is obeying his master. More complex training involves behavior in situations even when his master is not present. I suspect that Harlen's dogs have had experience with many forms of wildlife and could likely appropriately behave even when Harlen is not right beside them. I also bet that Harlen and his dogs go days without seeing any other person. I also think Harlen would put his dog on a leash if needed.

re: leashing them when necessary, Harlen will restrain them for the children or elderly but won't go beyond that. I've indicated privately multiple times that if we meet I don't want his dogs approaching me, and his stance hasn't changed from engagement being up to his dogs, not me or him.

He essentially rewrote his entire response here a day later (the one edit on it).

Originally his dogs would run up to me if they saw me, which was changed to they may choose to approach me. Behavior when doing so changed from wagging their tails to having their ears down in a clear sign of submission. The comments about them being under specific voice control were added later, where originally they needed to be restrained from approaching people. That's a lot of training to happen in one day even given that it's an ongoing process!

I didn't see that it was rewritten until writing this post when I went back for quotes, but the general argument of "should I have to interpret his dogs, or should he call them back" still stands IMO.

I do agree that varying interpretations of what "trained" mean are a general issue, but the poll options are long enough as is. The official definition as according to Inyo NFS Supervisor’s Office is:



“Our law enforcement officers describe a dog under voice control looks exactly like an invisible 6 foot leash. If the dog is farther than 6 feet from the owner, does not respond to a voice command immediately the first time command is given, the dog is not under control.”

The "rule" that your dog is always right at your side is unrealistic. Yes, when on busy trails. A moot point when you are where you seldom see others.

What should a reasonable maximum distance be? If a dog is well enough trained should it be allowed out of line of sight of the owner?

I’ve taken a stab at recommending clearer / updated regs to Inyo (for whatever that’s worth!). What do you think of the following?

viewtopic.php?f=9&t=22503&p=174831#p174831

I would assume that the further a dog is from their owner the less control the owner has, and I've seen dogs exhibit behavior that is out of character with some external stimulus. Friends have a friendly mellow dog that I like (I've housesat for them a few times as one of their other dogs is a reactive rescue and I'm basically the only family member it won't be aggressive towards) that once was jumping up at a window and barking at me because another dog nearby was barking at something else. Once she realized it was me she was very sheepish (which was cute), but in that case I had an existing relationship for that behavior to change.

Given that it is a lot of work to have a really well trained wilderness dog, leashes are wise for most backpackers with dogs. I really think most owners fully know if their dog is well trained. A lot are not and if the owner is honest, they will leash their dog around people and wildlife.

Dogs can sense when a person fears them or does not like dogs. So maybe other backpackers need to let the dog owner that they are not "dog friendly". Like say "heads up- dogs do not like me, be careful with your dog". Or perhaps some better wording.

I see a decent amount of dogs leashed, and vast the majority that aren't are within 6 feet of their owners on trail. A small amount of people genuinely think that having their dog run up to people is fun for everyone and don’t do anything to try and stop that from happening. In such cases the dog is generally mellow, but I have no idea of whether that will change or not and how well trained the dog is.

An issue with asking dog owners to leash or restrain their dogs without that being a regulation is that it's not uncommon for them to get defensive and refuse to do so (this isn’t just my experience). I find it easier to step aside and keep my poles between me and them when there is room to do so vs trying to engage with the owner.

Screen Shot 2022-09-18 at 1.35.41 PM.png

I do agree with you that dog owners that keep their dogs leashed because they know they are not adequately trained (and some dogs never will be for whatever reason) are being responsible and not engaging in inexcusable torture.

And a trail over-run with dogs can be a big problem. I have had issues with the number of dogs on the trails out of Rock Creek. The solution to this is perhaps to allow dogs on more trails to spread out the use.

Given that they are allowed on all NFS trails (as far as I know), are you advocating that they be allowed on trail and in wilderness in national parks? There’s a LOT of NFS trails as is that aren’t overrun with dogs (in and out of wilderness), as well as dedicated dog parks, BLM land, etc.

So was that bite out in the wilderness or in town? How old was the dog? What provoked the bite?

My dog has been attacked by another dog that WAS on a leash. This whole issue is more complex than just the leash.

I agree that just keeping a dog on a 6 foot leash doesn’t solve them being aggressive, especially as there are times (on switchbacks etc) where you can’t avoid getting within 6 feet of a dog. Having them be restrained whenever someone is near seems like the only 100% solution to prevent attacks. Ironically domesticated dogs are the only animals I’m concerned about in the Sierra attacking me unprovoked - black bears just want food, coyotes are skittish, etc.

update: edited in some more sources & info, fixed some typos.

[michaelzim]

It is WET up here in Ukiah CA! Just 10 days ago it got up to 117° so this is very welcome. It also means I’m twiddling thumbs wondering what to do with the day…so a HS Topix member suggested I write up a very unique (some may say ‘weird’) viewpoint on this “Dogs in the Wilderness” topic.

I have hesitated for quite some time on this as have discovered the “dogs thing” can get messy. [A real live example is I have not visited my brother in Las Vegas since 2006 solely due to their 3 small Yorkie dogs. They are excitable, have piercing high-pitched ‘voices’, bark at any new occasion, team up for in-house sports, etc.]
As a medical reality I cannot handle the noise of all this. And that fact has coloured my whole relationship to dogs (and humans) as a result. In short, I go on “super high alert” whenever dogs are around – be it town, country, or the wilderness. The wilderness though is my ultimate refuge as I do not have to wear earplugs to protect myself and can relax. Well, until someone hiking with a dog comes along, then I remember my affliction and the adrenaline goes up.

So yes I have a viewpoint about dogs in the wilderness but hopefully it is so unique that it will not be one anyone else on HS Topix has. The condition I am talking about is called “Hyperacusis” + along with it severe “Reactive Tinnitus” (commonly known as ringing in the ears).

When a dog barks near me and I am not protected (with earplugs or fingers in my ears) I can get “zapped”…a painful, nerve-deep, audial shock-wave down into my hearing system. That is bad enough, but the real fear is that it will increase the already ‘deafeningly loud’ tinnitus/ringing I already have. Which is no idle threat, as I have now had four permanent increases in said volume. Yeah…it is absolutely crazy making until my brain adapts somewhat over the years.

No doubt you are asking how this came about. Well, here’s the 0.0001% short version. Giardia (and a few other evil twins along with it) c/o contaminated water. Despite the increasing severity of a wide range of goofy stuff that happened to my body, it took almost 3 years to diagnose. BAD medical care indeed.
Worse was what happened after numerous cocktails of antibiotics trying to rid me of these critters – which had become entrenched by then. One was very well known as a highly ototoxic (hearing damage) med so was pure medical dereliction as far as I can tell.
This caused very loud ringing in my ears and along with it the much worse to live with Hyperacusis. This hypersensitivity to even medium loud sounds is very challenging and permanently turned my whole life upside down. I am never out in the world without two sets of earplugs in my pocket. I use them in all public situations.

Humans are noisy.
Kids are even more so.
Babies are a huge danger zone.
Dogs are not far behind.

One bark too close can destroy me. So you can probably guess what my view of dogs in the wilderness is!

At best it is riddled with “high caution” (as I also had a huge German Shepherd put its jaws around my thigh on a hike – I was saved by using my African bush-craft of absolutely freezing and not twitching a muscle).
Owners are of course the key, and as long as they have their dogs restrained and quiet I can kinda live with that. Even with my fingers in my ears I can get pretty darn freaked out if a dog is barking at me.

Hats off to the @erutan for broaching this sensitive subject and I will look out for a guy wearing a Marmot Republic hat. For you dog owners, if you see a guy standing by the trail with his fingers in his ears, that’s me. Please have your dog sit quietly and say Hi…I don’t bite.

Best ~ Michaelzim

[Wandering Daisy]

And then there is the veteran, with PTS, who NEEDS his dog to settle his nerves. I feel for both ends of the spectrum.

Seriously, people can be as noisy and disruptive in the wilderness. It seems like the new "thing" is to pound your chest and hoot and holler when reaching some arbitrary goal. I have noticed that being loud in the wilderness is becoming more acceptable nowadays.

I agree that yappy dogs should stay home, but not all dogs are yappy. Barky dogs have nothing to do with leash or no leash, which is an entirely different issue.

The issue is uncontrolled dogs vs well controlled dogs, trained dogs vs untrained dogs, and responsible owners and irresponsible owners. A dog on leash is not necessarily a well-behaved dog. In fact, when I walk my dog, the most aggressive ill-behaved dogs are the ones on the leash. Being off leash does not mean letting the dog run all over the place but giving the dog a zone where they can go their own pace, sniff at will, and just be a dog. Their human still needs to pick up their poop, keep voice control, and pay attention to other oncoming backpackers.

As I have said before, I would like to see permits and quotas for dogs just like for people. There can be too many dogs on a trail same as too many people.

It just dawned on me that the title of this post is skewed in the first place. The wording of "burden of dealing with off-leash dogs" definitely skews to the anti-dog stance. Well behaved off-leash dogs are not a burden to either owner or other backpackers.

[rlown]

Hmmm. Good thing these kinds of discussions hardly ever change policies.

Given that you might encounter a dog on the trail, it would seem to me to be easier to at least take a guess at what a dog might do in prep for a potential meet and greet. They are all different just like every person, horse, etc. I've ever met in the backcountry. If you act scared or anxious around a dog or horse, they will read that and test a bit. On the other hand, most dogs just want to sniff you, get bored and move along to the next interesting scent. If you ignore the dog, they tend to ignore you as well.

[balzaccom]

Hmmm. Good thing these kinds of discussions hardly ever change policies.

Given that you might encounter a dog on the trail, it would seem to me to be easier to at least take a guess at what a dog might do in prep for a potential meet and greet. They are all different just like every person, horse, etc. I've ever met in the backcountry. If you act scared or anxious around a dog or horse, they will read that and test a bit. On the other hand, most dogs just want to sniff you, get bored and move along to the next interesting scent. If you ignore the dog, they tend to ignore you as well.

True enough, but most dogs are not ALL dogs. I've had one dog become VERY agressive in the Carson-Iceberg Wilderness...literally barking furiously and nipping at our heels for at least half a mile, while the owner tried unsuccessfully to catch him, apologized, and tried to explain that it was the dog's first experience out in the woods. Shame on that owner...

And another suddenly leap at me as I walked by at Lake Thomas Edison--no warning at all. The owner just barely grabbed him before he clobbered me.

And I've had two pit bulls sit quietly by the trail while we passed by, under clear and complete command of their owner.

The problem is that regulations need to be for all dogs, not just most dogs. And it only takes one really bad experience with a dog to change the dynamics a lot for a lot of people.

[Wandering Daisy]

There is regulation and then there is enforcement. The current regulation that dogs be in control by their owners should be sufficient. A ranger encountering an off-leash dog that is out of control already has the authority to cite the owner. I would hate to see this become an enforcement by vigilantism which would sour everyone's wilderness experience.