View Full Version : Dog Poll...Should they be allowed on the AT?
.....That footbridge over the Toccoa isn't anywhere near the AT........
I'm curious, how far do you think the area was from the AT???
the goat
07-14-2006, 10:16
The dog attack on the Toccoa river in 1998 was a tragic event. However, the event has little to do with allowing dogs on the AT. Ridge, first of all you know better than to use that article to say the event happened on the AT. That footbridge over the Toccoa isn't anywhere near the AT. If that is news to you then you are not the seasoned hiker I believe you to be. The article has it wrong and you are showing your colors by saying the attack happened on the AT. Also, the dog did not belong to hikers or the fishermen that you placed your bet on. The article states the fishermen turned the dog over to the Forest Service. The article says the dog was a local dog who followed the group from the hwy. Also mentioned in the article was that nobody knows for sure what happened, and that it was possible the dog was provoked by the child.
So I have to ask, what does this article have to do with allowing dogs on the AT. How would banning dogs from the AT prevented this little boy from being hurt. Ridge, you are very gifted in sensationalism. You should work for a political party where this kind of crap is expected.
thanks for setting the facts straight.
it's becomming harder & harder to believe anything ridge says.
Two Speed
07-14-2006, 10:33
thanks for setting the facts straight.
it's becomming harder & harder to believe anything ridge says.Well, don't know that I'd completely discount everything Ridge posts, but I do plan on taking anything he posts with a large grain of salt.
BTW, so far the poll is generally in favor of continuing to allow dogs on the trail, in spite of the "neutral" tone of the question. :-?
I'm curious, how far do you think the area was from the AT???What's your point? You stated the event happened on the AT, and that was wrong. However, to answer you question I KNOW the footbridge is on the BMT/DRT about 9 miles north of where the BMT splits from the AT. It is 3 miles south from the first GA60 crossing. I have hiked over the bridge too many times to remember, as well as canoed the river multiple times.
What's your point? You stated the event happened on the AT, and that was wrong. However, to answer you question I KNOW the footbridge is on the BMT/DRT about 9 miles north of where the BMT splits from the AT. It is 3 miles south from the first GA60 crossing. I have hiked over the bridge too many times to remember, as well as canoed the river multiple times.
Point is, I didn't care where it happened, just the fact the attacked happened to a kid, and his trip ruined and possibly disfigured for life all because someone refuses to do what it takes to restrain a dog. And, if you want to get picky the bridge is actually closer to 6 miles from the AT and about 8 from three forks parking on the AT. Three forks to GA60 is just a tad over 11miles. I know the trail and the trails around these parts better than you give me credit.
the goat
07-14-2006, 19:53
Point is, I didn't care where it happened, just the fact the attacked happened to a kid, and his trip ruined and possibly disfigured for life all because someone refuses to do what it takes to restrain a dog. And, if you want to get picky the bridge is actually closer to 6 miles from the AT and about 8 from three forks parking on the AT. Three forks to GA60 is just a tad over 11miles. I know the trail and the trails around these parts better than you give me credit.
ok, lets take every event that has occurred with 6 or 8 or 11 miles from the AT, and start characterizing them as events that occurred on the AT.....that makes perfect sense.:confused:
wow, do you realize how many DUI's there have been on the AT?:rolleyes:
And, if you want to get picky the bridge is actually closer to 6Since you seem to want to get picky I decided to go to the BMT web site and the exact mileage by their trail description is 7.5. I guess that puts it directly between 9 and 6.
Give me a break Ridge, for us fat guys everything seems longer on the trail.:D
Which side of the river has better camping Ridge?
I wasn't trying to give the article any weight by it being on the AT, as far as I'm concerned its close enough, if it had been a "Blue Blazed" trail would it have counted???? Some would say yes, Lot of people take blue blazed trails and then claim they have thru-hiked the AT. Is this correct or is it like FatMan says "That footbridge over the Toccoa isn't anywhere near the AT" I actually believe he thinks the Toccoa River was in or near the town of Toccoa, Georgia for which has no river, the closest is the Tugaloo R feeding Lake Hartwell.
And, as I said in an earlier post I should have said NEAR or AT. I only concentrated ON the parts of the article describing the attack and the first aid given, and the article could have said they were on the AT, doesn't really matter.
Well, since you all think I screwed up so bad, you dog hikers can use that as an excuse to hike with loose dogs.
Which side of the river has better camping Ridge?
I'm sure its the side that the AHS uses.
I wasn't trying to give the article any weight by it being on the AT, as far as I'm concerned its close enough, if it had been a "Blue Blazed" trail would it have counted???? Some would say yes, Lot of people take blue blazed trails and then claim they have thru-hiked the AT. Is this correct or is it like FatMan says "That footbridge over the Toccoa isn't anywhere near the AT" I actually believe he thinks the Toccoa River was in or near the town of Toccoa, Georgia for which has no river, the closest is the Tugaloo R feeding Lake Hartwell.So even after my post clearly locating the bridge you still believe I think the Toccoa River is near Toccoa? Or are you simply attempting to discredit me by highlighting the statement followed by your insulting comment in hopes others won't read my previous reply.
Here's the problem with your inclusion of that article Ridge. Your Poll is about banning hiking with dogs on the AT. And you knowingly used an article that incorrectly placed a very unfortunate dog attack on the AT with the intent to sensationalize the event. And then you insinuated that the dog belonged to two fishermen and that too was not correct as stated within the article. You are losing credibility through your sensational writing. The facts are the incident did not happen on the AT and involved a dog who followed hikers in from the access point. The dog should not have been on the trail at all and I am sure you not find any sane person here to believe otherwise. The ATC and every government agency could have banned people from hiking with dogs in 1997 and that tragic event would have still occured. There is no corrolation between the article and hiking with dogs.
...... There is no corrolation between the article and hiking with dogs.
What would be the difference if the fisherman where the owner and the dog walked in with them??? Dogs leave their hiker-owner chasing some animal on the trail all the time, thats why lost dog posters end up at trailheads. While the owner is out of sight their is plenty of time for an attack. The owner of the dog that tore up my hand and jacket was at the top of Albert Firetower, in sight and in voice range, I've got a scar and a destroyed jacket to show. If I'd been a small child the Rottweiler would more than likely have killed me before they could have drug him off. So don't give me this "no correlation" crap. Bottom line, since dogs are allowed, they ALL should be on a leash 100% of the time.
I'm sure its the side that the AHS uses.
Why can't you just answer a simple question? It has nothing to do with my employer.
Did you use any Blue Blazed trails on your thru-hike?
Did you use any Blue Blazed trails on your thru-hike?
Yes, of course. Now how about answering my question? I might want to camp there.
...So don't give me this "no correlation" crap. Bottom line, since dogs are allowed, they ALL should be on a leash 100% of the time.I thought this thread was about banning hiker's dogs on the AT, not leashes. No hiker's dog was present. Therefore no correlation to hikers with dogs on the AT. The unfortunate attack could have just as easily occured while the scouts were selling popcorn door to door by a dog that followed them down the street. This incident has nothing to do with hikers hiking with their dogs.
Based upon your bottom line above, am I to understand that you have conceded to the Poll results and you have now moved on to the topic of whether dogs should be leased 100% of the time? That is a much worthier argument than wanting to ban dogs from the AT. I'm not sure that I agree that 100% of the time is necessary, but I can understand your position.
And Ridge, I am very sorry you were attacked by that dog. I hope the dog was destroyed and you were not satisfied with the owner's restitution you sued them. I assure you that responsible dog owners feel the same way.
I often hike with my dog, Savannah. Many hikers know and love her. Her heritage goes back to Rusty's--through whom she wound up with me.
I always hike with her on-leash. Have since 2002. Even in camp she is tethered to something or another.
Obviously, I support hiking with (leashed) dogs; I wish all dogs in the backcountry were on leashes. Because the first thing a small minority of unleashed dogs go after, long before they think about attacking a human, is another dog. I want Savannah to live a long life, and when it's her time to go, that she do so of natural causes.
Let me correct my typo above. I left out the "if" between "and" and "you" in the last paragraph. It should read:
I hope the dog was destroyed and if you were not satisfied with the owner's restitution you sued them.
Yes, of course. Now how about answering my question? I might want to camp there.
So you're not an AT thru-hiker then?
Next question, so you've never hiked the DRT?
..... Because the first thing a small minority of unleashed dogs go after, long before they think about attacking a human, is another dog. ........
I've said this too, someone with a leashed dog stands a better chance of getting into an attack situation than a solo hiker. The reason you don't have hardly any dog-hikers, like yourself, saying anything about it, is because you're probably in the 5% that do hike with a leashed dog.
I've said this too, someone with a leashed dog stands a better chance of getting into an attack situation than a solo hiker. The reason you don't have hardly any dog-hikers, like yourself, saying anything about it, is because you're probably in the 5% that do hike with a leashed dog.
Based on over a dozen years and almost 8,500 trail miles hiking and backpacking (much of it with my current dog, or deceased-of-natural-causes dog before that), I really have to quarrel with your percentage of 5%. I think it's probably between a third and a half...but I don't have any more solid research than you do, only personal observation.
In reality, neither of my dogs has ever been attacked by another hiker's dog--leashed or unleashed. But I know our luck could run out next trip, which is why I'm for leashes.
My dogs' only two serious run-ins with dogs, to date, were:
•A dog belonging to a horse owner in a parking lot of the Virginia Creeper Trail attacked my former dog. I stood in between them until the owner could get his under control. Got a minor bite out of it myself.
•A pack of about half dozen dogs--probably homeless--encountered us just north of the Priest Shelter near sunset one night. I had to pick up a stick and smack one upside its head to get it away from my dog. It, and the others, retreated.
..... I think it's probably between a third and a half...but I don't have any more solid research than you do, only personal observation.......
Is your dog leashed 100% of the time while you are actually hiking?
With your 1/3 to 1/2 figures, do you mean that these represent who hike 100% with a leashed dog, and are you talking about a thru hike, a section, or a day hike with these numbers?? Lot easier to hike for a day with a dog on a leash than months on a trail.
What would be the difference if the fisherman where the owner and the dog walked in with them??? Dogs leave their hiker-owner chasing some animal on the trail all the time, thats why lost dog posters end up at trailheads. While the owner is out of sight their is plenty of time for an attack. The owner of the dog that tore up my hand and jacket was at the top of Albert Firetower, in sight and in voice range, I've got a scar and a destroyed jacket to show. If I'd been a small child the Rottweiler would more than likely have killed me before they could have drug him off. So don't give me this "no correlation" crap. Bottom line, since dogs are allowed, they ALL should be on a leash 100% of the time.
Now I understand your reason for starting this thread. You were bitten by a dog while on the AT. Most sorry for you and I can somewhat understand the hard feelings you now have but your opinions show high emotion to the point of losing credibility as shown in your post regarding the boy who was attacked by the river.
Now I understand your reason for starting this thread. You were bitten by a dog while on the AT. Most sorry for you and I can somewhat understand the hard feelings you now have but your opinions show high emotion to the point of losing credibility as shown in your post regarding the boy who was attacked by the river.
The attack wasn't as bad as having to worry about the chance of getting Rabies, an expensive treatment, I was told it could easily reach 5000 for everything. People worry about bears, hogs, snakes. The only thing I've been attacked by has been another hikers dog, and then he took off as fast as possible offering no help, or to pay for the expensive jacket I had own which was destroyed. Yea, I got an attitude, not for the dogs, but their owners. I'm also concerned what they do to the wildlife, reasons GSMNP and Baxter don't allow dogs. About the post about the boy NEAR the AT, as I've said where it happened didn't matter, loose dogs shouldn't be on the trail, no matter where they come from. The guy that actually owned the dog, since he lived right at the trailhead has probably hiked to the river with dog in toe many times, and I would guess without a leash, since he's running loose. I could be wrong, the dog could have gotten out of his pin and thats another story.
the goat
07-15-2006, 02:13
Yes, of course. Now how about answering my question? I might want to camp there.
So you're not an AT thru-hiker then?
Next question, so you've never hiked the DRT?
he's obviously never been there. :rolleyes:
the goat
07-15-2006, 02:16
The attack wasn't as bad as having to worry about the chance of getting Rabies
ridge - you've been whining for days about how you were worried whether or not you were going to get rabies.
which is it? did it really happen?
....you make it very hard for people to believe you.
ridge - you've been whining for days about how you were worried whether or not you were going to get rabies.
which is it? did it really happen?
....you make it very hard for people to believe you.
No I did not contract Rabies, and It seems I have to reply to every one and explain what happened, someone just posted they didn't know I had been bitten, people don't go back and try to read the volumes of post about dogs. I don't blame them. Before I got attacked, I didn't think a thing about dogs running loose, although I never liked them in shelters.
Is your dog leashed 100% of the time while you are actually hiking?
With your 1/3 to 1/2 figures, do you mean that these represent who hike 100% with a leashed dog, and are you talking about a thru hike, a section, or a day hike with these numbers?? Lot easier to hike for a day with a dog on a leash than months on a trail.
Yes, Savannah is leashed 100% of the time I'm hiking with her. It's a pain sometimes, but necessary.
As for the 1/3 to 1/2 guesstimate, that would encompass all backcountry hikers--including thru-hikers, based on personal observation. Disclaimer: My view may be skewed a little as I live near, and hike in, SNP a lot where it is required that dogs be leashed at all times (wish they all were!).
What the ATC says about "Hiking With Dogs"
Leashes ARE REQUIRED on more than 40 percent of the Trail, including:
Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area, Pennsylvania and New Jersey
Maryland (entire state)
Harpers Ferry National Historical Park, West Virginia
Shenandoah National Park, Virginia
Blue Ridge Parkway, Virginia
500+ miles of A.T. land administered by the National Park ServiceIn practice, it can be difficult to tell when you are on NPS-administered A.T. lands. We recommend dogs be leashed at all times, as a matter of courtesy to other hikers and to minimize stress to wildlife.
http://www.appalachiantrail.org/site/c.jkLXJ8MQKtH/b.795337/k.9784/Hiking_with_Dogs.htm
The Old Fhart
07-15-2006, 18:19
FYI, what Hike-NH.com has to say about hiking with dogs.
Dogs are allowed on the WMNF, but must be under verbal or physical restraint at all times. Be considerate of other hikers. Carry a leash not longer than 6 ft. and use it when around other people. Please remember to clean up after your dog.
The longer answer is more complicated. For starters, dogs are NOT allowed in New Hampshire State Parks. Secondly, not everyone likes dogs. Both Chris and Rob grew up with dogs, so we love them (although even we get fed up with them sometimes . . . read Rob's Pawtuckaway review). But, dogs can have a tremendous impact on the backcountry. The following is from an important book that everyone should read (available for purchase on our books page) titled:Leave No Trace. A Guide to the New Wilderness Etiquetteby Annette McGivney. © Backpacker Magazine 1998. pp 79-80:
Although pets are banned from most National Park trails, it is common to see people traveling and camping with their dogs in most other wildland areas. For the dog, roaming about in the backcountry is a great thrill and beats a boring city park any day. However, bringing these domestic animals into a wild area often disturbs other users and it has a negative impact on the environment. Dogs chase other people's dogs, they harass wildlife (which can have serious consequenses with a threatened species like bighorn sheep), they bark, they disrupt water sources, and they deficate on the trail and at campsites.
But with all this being said, some people (women backpacking alone, for instance) find that a well-trained dog is a faithful trail companion and is worth taking the extra precautions to minimize the animal's impact on the environment. If after weighing the pros and cons, you decide to take your dog with you into the backcountry, follow these guidelines to keep your dog and its inevitable impacts in check:
* Try to choose a rarely visited destination where there will be little chance of contact with other users.
* Regardless of where you are, keep your dog on the trail and restrained from chasing wildlife.
* Restrain your dog from barking at and jumping up on other hikers.
* When your furry friend leaves a little doggie pile, pull out your trowel and bury it away from the trail and water sources in a cat hole just as you would human feces.
* Instead of allowing your dog to romp through springs and ponds--which will likely scare away area wildlife from a critical water source for some time--scoop the water into a bowl and let Fido lap it up 200 feet away.
* Prevent your dog from defecating in [or near] water. Dogs, like beavers and other animals, can carryGiardia and thus can contaminate water.
* In camp, keep your dog restrained or have it trained to stay within the site; a wandering dog will disturb wildlife and perhaps other campers.
* Dog food is very aromatic and will attract wildlife. Secure it with your own food.
* Keep your dog from barking
As you can see, there are some great considerations. We would add two things. First, many trails in the WMNF have decent size rocks that need to be climbed. Depending on the size of your dog, you may actually end up carrying/lifting it as much as it as much it walks by itself. Second, most people drastically underestimate the amount of water that they need to drink when on the trail and they never think about their pets. Make sure you carry extra water for the dog -- along many trails in the WMNF there are no springs or puddles to get water from. I suggest a special doggie pack -- let the dog carry its own supplies. Oh yeah -- remember that in NH, it is also against the law for a dog to travel unrestrained in the open back of a vehicle. This includes pick-ups and JEEPs with the top down. It is also against the law to leave a dog in a parked car with the windows up.
Good post OF. However, sometimes I believe myself and others who try to relay messages like this are just "PREACHING TO A DEAF CHOIR".
Folks take their pets because they enjoy it, they just confuse their dogs bloody paws and limping as being enjoyment, rather than what it really is: loyalty.
Good post OF. However, sometimes I believe myself and others who try to relay messages like this are just "PREACHING TO A DEAF CHOIR".
Folks take their pets because they enjoy it, they just confuse their dogs bloody paws and limping as being enjoyment, rather than what it really is: loyalty. The Old Fhart's post was excellent. Lot's of great information for hikers who are considering bringing their dog on the trail. But Ridge, this is not the message you convey in your writings so how are both you and OF preaching to a deaf choir. I hear OF loud and clear and his message is the voice of reason. But your message is that dogs don't belong on the trail at all. And if they are on the trail they must be leashed 100% of the time. OF's post does not convey that same message at all. In fact, OF's message is the same as my message: make sure your dog is well trained, kept under control, and is properly conditioned for trail life. And most important, be considerate of other hikers by keeping your distance.
And Ridge, what's up with the bloody paws line? More sensationalism! Hikers who adhere to my and OF's message are just as disgusted about abused dogs on the trail as you are. However, Those few dog owner's actions should not be an indictment of all hikers with dogs on the trail, just as the few out of control hikers should not be an indictment of all hikers on the trail.
So are you saying the ATC recommendation for having a dog leashed ALL the time is wrong, or insensitive?
I don't think dogs should be on any wilderness trail because of the wildlife impact, and because of the trouble they cause. But since they can, they should be leashed ALL the time. And, don't make it sound like just a few don't leash their dog, thats BS.
And, you make it sound like just a few end up hurt or suffering. If this is true, why do so many dog-hikers end up sending them home?
I don't think dogs should be on any wilderness trail because of the wildlife impact, and because of the trouble they cause. But since they can, they should be leashed ALL the time.Ridge, I've stated my opinion and at least you have finally stated your position as an opinion, and not a fact. I'll take that as progress. On that note, I agree to disagree. And if you are still keeping this thread alive in another year and a half maybe I'll spar again with you. BTW, please note that I linked to the same ATC page 1 1/2 years ago on page two of this thread. The ATCs recommendation to keep your dog leashed 100% of the time is a good one. But it is a recommendation, not a requirement. Having your dog under control 100% is more important than being leashed 100% of the time. And those two are exclusive as a dog can be easily out of control on a leash. It is more important to leave dogs that can not be controlled at home. Happy hiking to all...including Fido.
Somebody please close this thread. The horse is dead !
The horse is dead ! I will put money on the horse being alive, and able to take quite a few more beatings.:)
Ed,
Something tells me your going to be right ! :D Unfortunately this poor horse has nine lives !! :D Curse of a cat !! :D
........ The horse is dead !
Probably was a horse in the GSMNP that got bitten by an unleashed Rabid dog slipped in by a dog-hiker..... My attempt at humor.
My attempt at humor.
Keep your day job. ;)
Frolicking Dinosaurs
07-16-2006, 08:57
Somebody please stop the madness
Let's face it, dogs are going to be on the trail. We shouldn't focus on banning dogs, but instead work to keep responsible dog owners on the trail! Making the trail non-dog-friendly will only chase away the responsible dog owners. The irresponsible ones don't care about others anyway. In fact, these irresponsible people seem to feed off of the negative attitude.
One last post to answer the BMT/DRT Toccoa River Footbridge question. Best water source is on the south, best camping on the north. :p:)
One last post to answer the BMT/DRT Toccoa River Footbridge question. Best water source is on the south, best camping on the north. :p:)
North side of Br, SE of the River However.
There's also a "GeoCache" before the before the Bridge (GA60 side or N side of River) Coords: UTM: 16S E 759462 N 3847671
SGT Rock
07-17-2006, 10:11
Somebody please close this thread. The horse is dead !
I've done it before, they only come back. This one isn't as bad as some have gotten.
I wish i could have brought taco my mt.chiwawa but unfortunately he got ate bt cyotes when I was out cutting wood.I personally think dogs are OK as long as people watch them around the shelters,dogs are dogs they act like dogs because thet are!KY
Rain Man
07-17-2006, 12:06
I've done it before, they only come back. This one isn't as bad as some have gotten.
Maybe I'm missing something. No one is forced to read these dog fanatic threads if they don't like them,-- or think the issue is dead. The issue actually is far, far from "dead," which is obvious. Some of the posts are astoundingly self-centered and plain stupid, but the issue is genuine and many posts are genuine and quite reasonable.
:D
I actually read very few threads on WhiteBlaze. Just don't have the time for more. I suppose everyone and anyone is free not to read threads that don't interest them.
Read Your Own Threads? RYOT? Maybe instead of calling live horses dead, we need more RYOTs on WhiteBlaze?!
Rain:sunMan
.
The Old Fhart
07-17-2006, 19:59
Ridge-"Good post OF. However, sometimes I believe myself and others who try to relay messages like this are just "PREACHING TO A DEAF CHOIR""
Fatman-"The Old Fhart's post was excellent. Lot's of great information for hikers who are considering bringing their dog on the trail. ........ I hear OF loud and clear and his message is the voice of reason. ....In fact, OF's message is the same as my message: make sure your dog is well trained, kept under control, and is properly conditioned for trail life."I find it amusing that two people having opposite views can both find that my reference supports their positions! First, the post was NOT my position or opinion but only information, official or not, as to what other informed people think about dogs on the trail. This is no different than the ATC reference on dogs that preceded mine. For either of you to claim that that is my opinion is distorting the facts and misleading.
Since you are concerned about my opinion, I'll tell you what my opinion is but I doubt that either of you will like it. First, I don't think that dogs will be banned from the entire trail and over the years I have met a very few dogs that were under control (read that as on a short leash with a responsible owner) and I enjoyed hiking with them. But even Bill Irwin (Blind Courage-chapter 7) found that Orient, as highly trained a guide dog as he was, was not to be trusted off leash at any time. I have been threatened by dogs on the A.T., seen a pack of dogs chasing a moose on the A.T. in VT, and met an aggressive unleashed dog on the JMT. Whether the pack of dogs (or the one off the A.T. at Toccoa River that attacked the scout) were hiker dogs, or even on the A.T. is immaterial as it goes to the “nature of the beast” and can be used to predict dog behavior under certain conditions, whether on the A.T. or not. I won't even get into dogs meeting pocupines or skunks.
As to Fatman’s statement-“And Ridge, what's up with the bloody paws line? More sensationalism!” Far from it, any experienced hiker in the Whites has seen dogs with bloody pads or dogs being carried out by their owners. The rocks in the Presidentials have sharp edges and anyone taking a dog in these areas is committing animal cruelty-plain and simple. I have been on search and rescue missions for people but to risk the welfare of hikers to carry a dog out is just crazy-dogs do not belong on any rough sections of trails like the Whites, PA, Dragon’s Tooth, etc.. Reread the points listed in post #280 and try to understand what is being said.
What is unfortunate is that a lot of dog owners don’t display much high reasoning ability than their dogs and this will continue to be a big problem. The few dog owners who are doing the right thing go unnoticed. BTW, my dog will stay at home for his own good.
Oh, and Ridge, when you say: “There's also a "GeoCache" before the before the Bridge (GA60 side or N side of River) Coords: UTM: 16S E 759462 N 3847671”, that is not the primary format that geocaching.com uses. The coordinates for the cache you mention, GC2680, Toccoa Suspension Bridge, are N34° 44.293 W084° 09.962.
Uncle Silly
07-17-2006, 20:12
As to Fatman’s statement-“And Ridge, what's up with the bloody paws line? More sensationalism!” Far from it, any experienced hiker in the Whites has seen dogs with bloody pads or dogs being carried out by their owners. The rocks in the Presidentials have sharp edges and anyone taking a dog in these areas is committing animal cruelty-plain and simple. I have been on search and rescue missions for people but to risk the welfare of hikers to carry a dog out is just crazy-dogs do not belong on any rough sections of trails like the Whites, PA, Dragon’s Tooth, etc.. Reread the points listed in post #280 and try to understand what is being said.
I must interject a point here. City dogs, or dogs who have not spent much time in rocky areas, will (read: may) have trouble with their paws and pads. It is the responsibility of the owner to condition the dog for the hike, and maintain a good watch for pad problems.
However, it is not the case that all dogs will get bloody paws on rough trail sections. My dog has had no trouble with any of the rocky areas we've been through so far; this is because she was raised on a rural farm in the NC high country, and her paws were conditioned for that terrain when I got her. I DID check her daily for tenderness in her paws. And I worried a bit about the Whites, LeHigh Gap, Dragon'sTooth, and other rough spots -- but she showed no signs of trouble with any of the terrain we did. (We have yet to do the Whites, so that may prove beyond us. We'll just have to try it, watch those paws, and see.)
Please don't generalize; it's just as bad as sensationalizing.
The Old Fhart
07-17-2006, 21:53
scotsghost-My dog has had no trouble with any of the rocky areas we've been through so far......... Please don't generalize; it's just as bad as sensationalizing.It sounds like you've never bought insurance or gambled. I don't care if your dog is a superdog, if you do a risk analysis of taking a dog over sharp large rocks and boulders for miles on end, the chances are high that your dog will have a problem. What it sounds like is you'd be willing to risk your dog's health to prove me wrong or to prove a point. Reread the reference in post 280 which says almost the same thing as I stated. I'll stand by my previous statement.
[quote=The Old Fhart ....... I'll tell you what my opinion is but I doubt that either of you will like it. First, I don't think that dogs will be banned from the entire trail and over the years I have met a very few dogs that were under control (read that as on a short leash with a responsible owner) and I enjoyed hiking with them. .......................Oh, and Ridge, when you say: “There's also a "GeoCache" before the before the Bridge (GA60 side or N side of River) Coords: UTM: 16S E 759462 N 3847671”, that is not the primary format that geocaching.com uses. The coordinates for the cache you mention, GC2680, Toccoa Suspension Bridge, are N34° 44.293 W084° 09.962.[/quote]
I agree, I also doubt that dogs will be totally banned, I just wished the percentages would reverse and have about 10 % or so unleashed and 90 % or so leashed. Like I said dogs are loyal and they will limp and bleed as long as their owner lets them.
As far as the UTM Coords, Those are just the ones I mostly use and already had that cache loaded in a GPS file, I also use "Lat/Lon hddd.ddddd" format.
I find it amusing that two people having opposite views can both find that my reference supports their positions! First, the post was NOT my position or opinion but only information, official or not, as to what other informed people think about dogs on the trail. This is no different than the ATC reference on dogs that preceded mine. For either of you to claim that that is my opinion is distorting the facts and misleading....The Old Fhart, please do not put words into my posts that don't exist. I never wrote that the message you posted was your opinion or position. In fact I started the post with noting it was information, not your opinion. And good information at that. The message was that of a voice of reason, not a message of bannishment. I find posts that present real information on this forum to be quite welcome and a refreshing change. That is why I posted the link to the ATC information that Ridge linked a year and a half ago way back on page two of this thread. Thanks again for posting your information.
As to Fatman’s statement-“And Ridge, what's up with the bloody paws line? More sensationalism!” Far from it, any experienced hiker in the Whites has seen dogs with bloody pads or dogs being carried out by their owners. The rocks in the Presidentials have sharp edges and anyone taking a dog in these areas is committing animal cruelty-plain and simple. I have been on search and rescue missions for people but to risk the welfare of hikers to carry a dog out is just crazy-dogs do not belong on any rough sections of trails like the Whites, PA, Dragon’s Tooth, etc.. Reread the points listed in post #280 and try to understand what is being said.The Old Fhart, I am a southern boy who has not hiked the AT further north than VA. I agree that mile after mile of a trail bed of sharp rocks present a much different environment than what I traverse. On the forum we often post from different points of reference, in this case geographical. I am a section hiker and base my views on southern trails where the extreme conditions you describe simply do not exist in long stretches. And, as a section hiker 25 days is longest I have been out with my dog at one time. We do most of our trail time every day with day hikes. I know Cooper enjoys the comforts of home as much as I do. This thread is asking if dogs should be allowed on the AT. Not whether dogs should thru hike or hike the Presidentials. Do a poll asking if hikers should take a dog on a thru, and my opinon would be "no". However, with that said I would not ban anyone who properly trained, properly conditioned, and properly controlled their dog from doing so.
As for re-reading your posted informative message #280, I have done multiple times. I find no conflict to my position and opinions.
rambunny
07-18-2006, 11:08
The Question should be-Should irresponsible dog owners be allowed on trail?
The Question should be-Should irresponsible dog owners be allowed on trail?
And.....the answer.?? NO!!!
Amigi'sLastStand
07-18-2006, 12:34
I hiked the DWG section this weekend. It was hot as hell ( 95F ) and dry. Only water to be found was in the valley at that beautiful stream. If you've blueblazed up the mountain to the overlook at Tammany, you know its rocky and steep.
A German couple had hiked the blue trail to the red trail with a BLACK labrador with one 20 oz bottle between them and nothing for the dog. I ran into them halfway up the mountain, me going up, them going down. The owners were clearly dehydrating. The dog would take two steps and fall down. I asked them if they needed anything and mentioned that the dog was close to death if they didnt give it some of their remaining water. The girl looked at me like I crazy and told me to shut up and worry about myself. She was very aggressive, good sign of dehydration anxiety. So, on I moved and said a quick prayer for the dog.
I starting thinking of this thread and its sister thread. I hate rules, but no, dogs should not be allowed on trails if only to protect them from their owners. I'm sure some of you are better than what I saw, but I've most certainly seen more bad than good owners out in the woods, these folks being about the worst.
I hiked the DWG section this weekend. It was hot as hell ( 95F ) and dry. Only water to be found was in the valley at that beautiful stream. If you've blueblazed up the mountain to the overlook at Tammany, you know its rocky and steep.
A German couple had hiked the blue trail to the red trail with a BLACK labrador with one 20 oz bottle between them and nothing for the dog. I ran into them halfway up the mountain, me going up, them going down. The owners were clearly dehydrating. The dog would take two steps and fall down. I asked them if they needed anything and mentioned that the dog was close to death if they didnt give it some of their remaining water. The girl looked at me like I crazy and told me to shut up and worry about myself. She was very aggressive, good sign of dehydration anxiety. So, on I moved and said a quick prayer for the dog.
I starting thinking of this thread and its sister thread. I hate rules, but no, dogs should not be allowed on trails if only to protect them from their owners. I'm sure some of you are better than what I saw, but I've most certainly seen more bad than good owners out in the woods, these folks being about the worst.
That is horrible! I feel very bad for the lab, my favorite breed of dog. Not so sad for the owner(s). This is not a reason to make a new rule for everyone else to follow, however. It is reason to arrest the owner(s) for cruelty to animals and rescue the dog.
Uncle Silly
07-18-2006, 13:42
This is not a reason to make a new rule for everyone else to follow, however. It is reason to arrest the owner(s) for cruelty to animals and rescue the dog.
BINGO. Thanks for the sensible reminder, Skyline. There is such a thing as a "citizen's arrest", however little it gets used; if you see a situation that just ain't right, you CAN do something about it.
What we need is another TV show "The Animal's Court" !!! Dogs are too loyal to their abusive owners, and you won't see a cat taking the abuse.
minnesotasmith
07-28-2006, 18:03
Approximately three plaintive "Dog lost along AT" flyers posted in shelters, along with reward offers and cute pooch photo. All were weeks old at least.
Approximately three plaintive "Dog lost along AT" flyers posted in shelters, along with reward offers and cute pooch photo. All were weeks old at least.
I'll bet they weren't dragging a leash behind them either!!!
at least the owners were trying to find thier dogs.
Approximately three plaintive "Dog lost along AT" flyers posted in shelters, along with reward offers and cute pooch photo. All were weeks old at least.
I'm sure the lost dogs where under "Voice Control", unfortunately the owners just can't seem to yell the orders out loud enough for the dogs to follow. Maybe the owners can get a helicopter with loudspeaker so they can give the dog a return command. At least the dog wasn't leashed so it could enjoy the great outdoors, maybe forever.
whtmthiker
09-16-2006, 15:46
Okay, dog Owner speaking :) The majority of people I meet love my dogs and I always ask if I'm at camp if people are okay with dogs and if they are not, they are leashed up (the dogs, that is). But most people hiking, love dogs... at least what I've encountered. It seems the minority of people are annoyed by them. They are my hiking partners and bring a lot of good feelings for me and I can't imagine my hiking experience without them. I like what some people say about not liking smelly hikers. We all have our likes and dislikes... just need to except them!
I deleated my post becuase its all been said before ;-)
Hope to see you and the pooch (albeit from 5 feet away from me, my stuff and my water) in the Whites-- and many more posts on WB, too.
Dogs are cool...as long as they act human and don't lick, slobber, pee or poop on me or my stuff, otherwise keep them leashed. Additionally, they should not talk loudly or rudely on a cell phone and they should respect both men and women regardless of religion, political party, race, ability, technique or how many miles they walked or how much their pack weighs. Thank you.
They just do what comes naturally unless commanded by their Master.
Note the use of the word "master". Too many dog owners are their "best friend's" "buddy", and let him/her do pretty much what they do naturally - (pee on your tent/pack, eat your dinner - "Hey, what's it doing on the ground, anyway??!!", laying down in the spring to cool off, shaking off inside your shelter on your formerly warm, dry bag, etc. etc. etc.
I've seen all of the above, been part of it.
Note: I voted "Yes" for dogs being allowed on the trail.
Ban stupid owners who refuse to be the leader of "the pack".
I here by vow that if I take my dog hiking on the AT or anywhere else that she will remain at all times on leash (she will anyway because I don't want to lose her) she will not beg you for food, will obey, will not bark, we would NEVER EVER think of coming into a shelter when people were sleeping and wake them with our noise (my father worked swing shift and I was raised to have respect for people who are sleeping) I promise to never, ever have her in a shelter but will sleep in my tent with me, will be tied up in camp, I vow to ALWAYS pick up her poop and make her behave. I also will let anyone and everyone know that if she becomes a problem that they just need to let me know and I will deal with it. I am not like a lot of parents and dog owners that think that my dog can do no wrong, she is a dog and she will mess up.
If it does work out to where I get to thru hike the AT with my dog I promise to consider having her kenneled or ??? while I go through the Whites and other rocky areas that will be harsh on her feet (this is why I am here to pick up on good pieces of information like this)
I have been training her to be a trail dog for about 6 months and take her on trails where there are people and she behaves well and is well liked. I take her all sorts of places where I make her behave and sit until the person who is near us passes US and then if THEY want to pet her I let her befriend them but I never, ever assume that people will love my dog as much as I do.
Alas the truth of the whole matter is that I am poor and on the west coast so it is the PCT we will be section hiking (and not the desert.. for me OR the pup!)
I want each of you that have posted your concerns and stories that they do not go unread or un-noted by me. That's me, Lindy the note taker, ha!
Chaplain
11-03-2007, 23:48
Are dogs good for mice control in the shelters on the AT? I was always against bring my dog but got to wondering about this. I hear stories of folk who have mice run over them. I was on the AT in July in GA and in my HH and so did not face the mice issue. -SunnyWalker
Flush2wice
11-04-2007, 00:31
Mice are not afraid of dogs
Jim Adams
11-04-2007, 22:01
Well I think just the dog being there is enough to send some people over the brink, even without him barking, snarling, etc. Others don't understand dog behavior, hence the "smile at you one minute, and seek their teeth into you the next". And before some of you have grand delusions of kicking/shooting/pepper spray/trekking pole the dog, realize the owner probably views that dog like a child of their own and will respond accordingly.
Then tell them to bring the kids...leave the dog home!
gee
shelterbuilder
11-04-2007, 22:29
I was out this weekend between Eckville and Hamburg, Pa. The number of dogs on the trail was astonishing - it seemed like every group that I passed had at least one. Most were leashed, some were not, none were a nuisance, although many were frightened by the backpack, even after I stepped off of the footpath.
Gee, with the wording of the poll, you don't suppose that we're a little opposed to dogs on the trail, now, do you?
Then tell them to bring the kids...leave the dog home!
gee
Some people will object when you spank your kids and most people would throw a fit when you tie them to tree when they get over excited. Seems like the dog would be easier to handle. :-?
The Wicked Lobstah
11-05-2007, 11:51
Are dogs good for mice control in the shelters on the AT? I was always against bring my dog but got to wondering about this. I hear stories of folk who have mice run over them. I was on the AT in July in GA and in my HH and so did not face the mice issue. -SunnyWalker
Mice are not afraid of dogs
I beg to differ, Flush2wice -
I thru'd in '04 with my dog Buddy. My shelter mates and I had NO mouse encounters when he was present but they ren all over us (literally) when he was not (GA and Smokies). Even in shelters where the log was singularly focused on tales of brazen mouse attacks, they would lay real low when Buddy was around.
He also treed a racoon who tried to steal food one night and kept him there til' morning.
Also, I got to see a lot more bears with Buddy as my hiking partner - it seems that many bears were happy just to hunker down and hide as a hiker passed by, but when Buddy and I would pass shortly thereafter, they'd jump up and make their presence known.
Buddy's thru hike was a real success story for him, me, and countless others along the trail that year, but it takes a really, really special dog to do it and thru-hiking with a dog really complicates things.
TWL
cowboy nichols
11-05-2007, 12:12
Of course people should be allowed to bring dogs on the trail.
However; if you fail to control your dog I have no problems with killing and grilling. :)
Kagogi yum yum!
Tu
The owner !!!!:rolleyes:
minnesotasmith
11-06-2007, 01:32
Either A) bring pictures of your pooch to tide you over til you get home, or B) go home.
On the leash, or on the grill; owner's choice. :D
i frequently backpack solo and always take my 2 dogs, both of which are on leads, even thogh they will follow commands including heel. one is 95# and i feel safer with my dogs. i always clean up after them which is more than i can say for a lot of humans on the trail. i very much want to switch to a hammock. how do i decide which one? i want to be able to sleep as level as possible. any used ones fo sale? i live in missouri.
Either A) bring pictures of your pooch to tide you over til you get home, or B) go home.
or C) Slap the glasses off of the guy whining about your pooch.:D
On the leash, or on the grill; owner's choice. :D
Black dog best.
mss5864, your question would more likely get answered in the Hammock Forum.
i frequently backpack solo and always take my 2 dogs, both of which are on leads, even thogh they will follow commands including heel. one is 95# and i feel safer with my dogs. i always clean up after them which is more than i can say for a lot of humans on the trail. i very much want to switch to a hammock. how do i decide which one? i want to be able to sleep as level as possible. any used ones fo sale? i live in missouri.
Where will your dogs sleep? On the cold, misty, windy, unlevel ground underneath the hammock?
I am sure your dogs will appreciate you decision to crawl into a warm hammock while you leave them exposed to the elements.
:rolleyes:
I agree w the quote by Edward Abbey.People carry far more diseases than animals,and are by far more discusting.People will destroy the earth not the animals.Remember, were more intelligent, we are the only ones that inhale smoke.
Flush2wice
11-06-2007, 09:28
I beg to differ, Flush2wice -
I thru'd in '04 with my dog Buddy. My shelter mates and I had NO mouse encounters when he was present but they ren all over us (literally) when he was not (GA and Smokies). Even in shelters where the log was singularly focused on tales of brazen mouse attacks, they would lay real low when Buddy was around.
He also treed a racoon who tried to steal food one night and kept him there til' morning.
TWL
Are you saying you actually let your dog IN the shelter? Did you ok that with your shelter mates?
Was your dog quiet and respectful of everyone's desire for a good night's sleep when he had that racoon treed all night?
I know there's no law against having your dog on the AT, but I hope all dog owners look at these poll results and see that nearly half of folks don't want them on the trail (much less in the shelter). IMO if you bring a dog, you should tent up and the dog should go in the tent with you.
An indoor hiking trail with fancy motorized footpaths, climate control, bug and animal free (mice excluded), and sleep isolation booths for everyone.
Are you saying you actually let your dog IN the shelter? Did you ok that with your shelter mates?
Was your dog quiet and respectful of everyone's desire for a good night's sleep when he had that racoon treed all night?
I know there's no law against having your dog on the AT, but I hope all dog owners look at these poll results and see that nearly half of folks don't want them on the trail (much less in the shelter). IMO if you bring a dog, you should tent up and the dog should go in the tent with you.
Who gives chit. If you choose to stay at a shelter, you have to deal with the best and worst of everyone, if you don't want to take the good with the bad, isolate yourself far away from the shelters, they're not your property.
Iagree.I would rather have a treed coon than it in my sleeping bag or after food.Oh they ,the coon, are after the peoples food and scraps,so whos to blame.
Flush2wice
11-06-2007, 10:07
Who gives chit. If you choose to stay at a shelter, you have to deal with the best and worst of everyone, if you don't want to take the good with the bad, isolate yourself far away from the shelters, they're not your property.
I do, and for that exact reason. My point was- don't kid yourself into believing your doing everyone a favor by bringing a dog into the shelter. That's just ignorant dog owner thought. This is about common courtesy. Anyone who chooses to use a shelter knows that they will be dealing with mice, not dogs. Anyone who chooses to bring their dog on the trail should have the common courtesy to keep it out of the shelter. Do you also think it's OK to let your dog lie down in the spring? Springs are public property just like the shelter so what's the dif?
Iagree.I would rather have a treed coon than it in my sleeping bag or after food.Oh they ,the coon, are after the peoples food and scraps,so whos to blame.
Why would a coon get in your sleeping bag?
Learn to hang your food properly and no varmint will get it. You don't need a dog to keep your food safe.
Dog owners think it's ok for their dog to keep everyone awake while it barks at a racoon all night?
I do, and for that exact reason. My point was- don't kid yourself into believing your doing everyone a favor by bringing a dog into the shelter. That's just ignorant dog owner thought. This is about common courtesy. Anyone who chooses to use a shelter knows that they will be dealing with mice, not dogs. Anyone who chooses to bring their dog on the trail should have the common courtesy to keep it out of the shelter. Do you also think it's OK to let your dog lie down in the spring? Springs are public property just like the shelter so what's the dif?
I actually don't have a dog now, and never implied that a dog owners would be doing someone a favor by bringing a dog into a shelter.
Suppose, I think snoring due to obesity is rude and inexcusable. Why should I be bothered, because someone won't maintain a healthy weight to control their snoring. I think such snorers should have the common courtesy to not sleep in the shelters, they didn't have to bring the fat with them after all.
If I saw a dog or one of the obese snorers wallowing in a spring, potentially putting someone's health at risk I'd tell them to get out.
Shelters are public property, if you don't like the situation at one, go set up your tent.
The food is from the careless hikers , eating in the shelters ,spilling their stuff all over the place.And dont say it doesnt happen I seen people eat poptots and drop crums all over the shelters up and down the AT. Thats why rodents are a problem.However ,I respect your right to dislike dogs,and would keep the animal far away from anyone who dislikes them.Im pitdog do I have sleep on the trail like spookboy.
Flush2wice
11-06-2007, 10:45
I actually don't have a dog now, and never implied that a dog owners would be doing someone a favor by bringing a dog into a shelter.
Wicked Lobstah thinks so. See his post above.
Suppose, I think snoring due to obesity is rude and inexcusable. Why should I be bothered, because someone won't maintain a healthy weight to control their snoring. I think such snorers should have the common courtesy to not sleep in the shelters, they didn't have to bring the fat with them after all.
Fat people, like mice, should be expected in shelters. Not dogs. This thread is about dogs on the trail and in the shelters.
If I saw a dog or one of the obese snorers wallowing in a spring, potentially putting someone's health at risk I'd tell them to get out.
So you think it's ok for a dog to be in the shelter regardless of what anyone else in the shelter thinks, but it's not ok to let a dog in the spring? Both are rude, nasty, inconsiderate and unsanitary.
Thats the point, today its dogs, tomorrow it will be something else like race or if ones over weight or not,it wont stop,freedom for the USA.Send the fashists and commies back home.
Fat people, like mice, should be expected in shelters. Not dogs. This thread is about dogs on the trail and in the shelters. Fat people rarely have a solid excuse for their weight. I don't want to hear them struggling to breathe at night. They should stay out, if dog owners have to.
So you think it's ok for a dog to be in the shelter regardless of what anyone else in the shelter thinks, but it's not ok to let a dog in the spring? Both are rude, nasty, inconsiderate and unsanitary.So are fat snorers.
Lone Wolf
11-06-2007, 10:55
Thats the point, today its dogs, tomorrow it will be something else like race or if ones over weight or not,it wont stop,freedom for the USA.Send the fashists and commies back home.
shelters are for people only. maybe maintainers could build a few mutt houses at shelter areas
shelters are for people only. maybe maintainers could build a few mutt houses at shelter areas
and besides, shelters suck ;)
Lone Wolf
11-06-2007, 11:01
and besides, shelters suck ;)
well yeah. only fools stay in them
On the leash, or on the grill; owner's choice. :D
Last year others echoed the same sentiments about you.
Flush2wice
11-06-2007, 11:03
well yeah. only fools stay in them
...and their dogs.
Do the other animals drink from the spring too.I thru hiked in 1997 and left my dog at home,because of big miles,and respect for others.Although at race mtn. shelter a thru hiker and sally the beagle were sleeping in the shelter and a thru hiker had to sleep under the shelter.He was bummed.I hike the midstate trail ,and I go to one of the shelters sometimes with my dog ,and hes never a problem.But there is hardly anyone there.Make signs that tell the coons to find there water else where.
Flush2wice
11-06-2007, 12:01
Why the whining then?
That was a joke.
I'm not whining, I'm just pointing out that contrary to dog owner's beliefs, not everyone wants to spend the night with their dog. I think it's pure arrogance for someone to take their dog into a shelter and think everyone's going to be happy about it.
I smoke cigars, but I wouldn't smoke one in a shelter. And I sure as hell wouldn't smoke one in a shelter and expect everyone to be happy and then bitch about someone that complained about it.
You seem to think I should be able to fire one up and say "hey, this is public property, if you don't like it you can go away."
This is about common courstesy.
That was a joke.
I'm not whining, I'm just pointing out that contrary to dog owner's beliefs, not everyone wants to spend the night with their dog. I think it's pure arrogance for someone to take their dog into a shelter and think everyone's going to be happy about it.
I smoke cigars, but I wouldn't smoke one in a shelter. And I sure as hell wouldn't smoke one in a shelter and expect everyone to be happy and then bitch about someone that complained about it.
You seem to think I should be able to fire one up and say "hey, this is public property, if you don't like it you can go away."
This is about common courstesy.
Agreed. My well behaved dawgs, the current one and the now-deceased one, have hiked with me a lot. They both carry/carried their own packs, and the current pooch even has her own dog-house size tent which is typically put up next to mine. We would never stay in a shelter.
Lone Wolf
11-06-2007, 16:29
and the current pooch even has her own dog-house size tent which is typically put up next to mine. We would never stay in a shelter.
you're one of the very few considerate dog owners/hikers
you're one of the very few considerate dog owners/hikers
Hey LW remember that guy from '97 that had that had a tarp for his black lab? I forget his name, he was cool.
i love dogs and dogs love me, i had a Rottweiler, my father had a tiger striped Boxer, now he has a 12 year old Doberman.
the thing is that depending a little on the dog breed , dogs tend to copy the owners character so is simple as this:
-- if the owner is nice and smart the dog is nice and smart
-- if the owner is ... ... ... the dog is ... ... ...
and if you need a true friend buy a DOG
Lone Wolf
11-06-2007, 17:55
and if you need a true friend buy a DOG
no need to BUY a dog. shelters are full of pups waitin' to be adopted
Uncle Silly
11-06-2007, 18:21
no need to BUY a dog. shelters are full of pups waitin' to be adopted
amen brother! mutts tend to be better adjusted than full-breeds anyways!
Appalachian Tater
11-06-2007, 18:45
Dogs should be allowed on the trail. Irresponsible dog owners should not be.
Dakota Dan
11-06-2007, 19:53
.......On the leash, or on the grill; owner's choice. :D
Now, That made me laugh...out loud.
Uncle Silly
11-06-2007, 19:57
Now, That made me laugh...out loud.
Yeah, the thought of minnesotasmith on a leash makes me laugh too. :D
I do wonder how his ewe would hold the handle, tho.... :eek:
Dogs should be allowed on the trail. Irresponsible dog owners should not be.
Exactly. And irresponsible hikers in general shouldn't be on the trail.
Uncle Silly
11-06-2007, 20:07
Exactly. And irresponsible hikers in general shouldn't be on the trail.
Tho blocking them at the trailhead won't be easy. It's really hard to tell irresponsibility levels before they get on trail.
Dakota Dan
11-06-2007, 20:14
I'll bother. Drove a hiker with massive AT miles to Katahdyn this September, with his therapy dog.
What is a THERAPY DOG? New one on me. Is there a college degree involved here?
What is a THERAPY DOG? New one on me. Is there a college degree involved here?
Try Google.
shelterbuilder
11-06-2007, 20:37
What is a THERAPY DOG? New one on me. Is there a college degree involved here?
A therapy dog is one who is trained to provide comfort to people in hospitals, retirement homes, and other institutional settings, and in disaster areas. Check wikipedia for more info.
Dakota Dan
11-06-2007, 21:01
A therapy dog is one who is trained to provide comfort to people in hospitals, retirement homes, and other institutional settings, and in disaster areas. Check wikipedia for more info.
The way the statement "provide comfort to people in hospitals" sounds, I envision the dog pushing a patients wheel cheer out onto a sunny patio. Then maybe softly barking a few passages from the Bible to them.
Seems to me the trail and all the beauty that surrounds would do just as good, I wouldn't say its anywhere near a disaster area or anything like that, of course some of the shelter areas may occasionally look like it.
Sounds like any ole dog that won't bite would qualify as a "Therapy Dog". Maybe, I'm wrong. Are "Therapy Dogs" allowed in Post Offices, Restaurants, how bout the GSMNP?? I don't remember reading anything about a Therapy Dog, only Service Dogs or Seeing Eye Dogs.
Cosmo Rules
11-06-2007, 22:05
I'd rather hike with a dog than hike with you.
minnesotasmith
11-06-2007, 22:34
or C) Slap the glasses off of the guy whining about your pooch.
That people who let their dogs loose on PUBLIC (e.g., for use by other people, too) land to freely f*** with other hikers are so blind to the effects of what they do, that when an innocent hiker begins to take the most minimal, reasonable self-defense steps against their animal's aggression, that the owner will blame the victim for the fracas, instead of using a mirror to locate the culprit.:-?
When a hiker bear-sprays a dog, it's best to save some to use on the owner; he'll probably need it.
Dakota Dan
11-06-2007, 22:37
A therapy dog is one who is trained to provide comfort to people in hospitals, retirement homes, and other institutional settings, and in disaster areas. Check wikipedia for more info.
I was curious as to what the difference was between a "Therapy" and a "Service" Dog. Big Difference when it comes to travel.
"Therapy dogs do not provide direct assistance, do not have legal rights to travel everywhere, and must be invited by institutions"
That people who let their dogs loose on PUBLIC (e.g., for use by other people, too) land to freely f*** with other hikers are so blind to the effects of what they do, that when an innocent hiker begins to take the most minimal, reasonable self-defense steps against their animal's aggression, that the owner will blame the victim for the fracas, instead of using a mirror to locate the culprit.:-?
When a hiker bear-sprays a dog, it's best to save some to use on the owner; he'll probably need it.
Did you not read that I don't own a dog:rolleyes:
skskinner
11-06-2007, 23:49
Dogs neen not be banned, but they should be banned from the shelters. If a hiker brings a dog, let him bring a shelter.
Uncle Silly
11-06-2007, 23:53
Dogs neen not be banned, but they should be banned from the shelters. If a hiker brings a dog, let him bring a shelter.
YEAH!!!
Oh, wait...
NO!!!!
Nightwalker
11-07-2007, 02:34
That people who let their dogs loose on PUBLIC (e.g., for use by other people, too) land to freely f*** with other hikers are so blind to the effects of what they do, that when an innocent hiker begins to take the most minimal, reasonable self-defense steps against their animal's aggression, that the owner will blame the victim for the fracas, instead of using a mirror to locate the culprit.:-?
When a hiker bear-sprays a dog, it's best to save some to use on the owner; he'll probably need it.
If you ever do anything to my dog, you'd better have a damned good reason. And a hell of a lot more defense than bear spray.
It's a miracle that you survived to finish a hike, with your anti-social attitude and all.
It's a miracle that you survived to finish a hike, with your anti-social attitude and all.
Thanks for my morning chuckle!
CoyoteWhips
11-07-2007, 08:08
My vote: no they should not be banned. That said, I got some good tips for dealing with uncontrolled dogs on WhiteBlaze. Helped me in an uncomfortable situation when a couple of large mix-breeds charged me at a trailhead while their bicycling owners looked on in surprise.
The alpha dog thought twice about charging into the tip of my hiking pole. Also heard from the owners it was the third time they'd menaced a hiker -- their theory was because they don't like hats.
I am in favor of banning people who can't control their dogs.
Appalachian Tater
11-07-2007, 08:21
Also heard from the owners it was the third time they'd menaced a hiker -- their theory was because they don't like hats.
I am in favor of banning people who can't control their dogs.
No doubt the owners of the dogs are in favor of banning hats as that is where the problem lies.:banana
I guess some people just dislike animals,and that says alot about themselves.That said,some people have pets that are out of control.I would dislike dogs jumping around on expensive gear.So,If anyone ever hurt an aminal in front of me,no matter what,it would discust me.On my thru hike, I left my dog home with respect for others,but I wish he could of hiked w me.H e is more loyal than half of the hikers I met on the trail.The half im talking about are the ones that didnt like Ward Leonard,and from what I hear and read,and had him banned from the AT. Whats next native americans.freedom is the answer.
nitewalker
11-07-2007, 08:33
i dont mind dogs on the trail as long as the dog is with the owner and the dog has no issues with strangers. the dog is usually a product of its owner so basically if you find a crazed dog going near you im sure the bozo who owns him would not see things in the manor they should. the dog and owner will surely have a problem when i stick it with my ice pick pole and hopefully prove a point..dog owners need to keep their dogs under control and if not who knows what the outcome maybe. bear spray, knives, guns, feet, poles are some of the defenses against a nit wit dog or owner..
Lone Wolf
11-07-2007, 08:38
I guess some people just dislike animals,and that says alot about themselves.That said,some people have pets that are out of control.I would dislike dogs jumping around on expensive gear.So,If anyone ever hurt an aminal in front of me,no matter what,it would discust me.On my thru hike, I left my dog home with respect for others,but I wish he could of hiked w me.H e is more loyal than half of the hikers I met on the trail.The half im talking about are the ones that didnt like Ward Leonard,and from what I hear and read,and had him banned from the AT. Whats next native americans.freedom is the answer.
ward is one of the few thru-hikers whose company i enjoyed
So many tough-guys afraid of dogs. Wish I was afraid of dogs and then I'd be a badass too.
Lone Wolf
11-07-2007, 09:43
So many tough-guys afraid of dogs. Wish I was afraid of dogs and then I'd be a badass too.
well obviously you don't hike much. it ain't about fear, it's about protecting your space and right to be on a trail and not have dogs wanna bite you. this summer on the trail, 3 times in one day 3 sets of day hikers were out with their doggies. none were on leashes and way out in front of the owners. one dog came running right at me with his hair up and snappin'. i kicked the bejeesus out of him. off he went yelping. biff and buffy arrived and asked what happened, i told them and they said people with packs scare him. that was it. no apology. f vckin dog owners
Jim Adams
11-07-2007, 09:48
So many tough-guys afraid of dogs. Wish I was afraid of dogs and then I'd be a badass too.
Not afraid...just have common sense and common coutesy!
I love dogs and have been an owner in the past...wish that I could have one now.
I have only met two totally responsible dog owners on the trail who truely cared about their dogs AND the other hikers...Mr. Bill Irwin and Nean.
geek
You kicked the dog because you were scared you were going to be bitten, not to protect your space. Understandable.
I've dealt with plenty of dogs, people pooches in The States aren't bad 99% of the time. If they were roaming packs of homeless strays, popular in Central America, Africa, Central Asia and other dumps, then they'd be a problem.
I'll add boots to the list of things for preemptive strikes though.
bear spray, knives, guns, feet, poles +boots
Rocks or a car antenna work well too.
Lone Wolf
11-07-2007, 09:59
squirt gun with ammonia
I love dogs and have been an owner in the past...wish that I could have one now.
Me too
........
Thats the point, today its dogs, tomorrow it will be something else like race or if ones over weight or not,it wont stop,freedom for the USA.Send the fashists and commies back home.
Oh jeeeeeeez! :rolleyes:
OK... you were joking, right? :-? :D
CoyoteWhips
11-07-2007, 10:05
Signal whip. Mushers already know that dogs respect the cracker. A whip crack will turn a pack of hunting dogs. PETA protesters use them in England to disrupt fox hunts.
shelters are for people only. maybe maintainers could build a few mutt houses at shelter areas
Tear down all the shelters and build mutt houses for all those poor dogs that really don't have any choice on whether or not they want to be out there.
I agree!
:banana
Tear down all the shelters and build mutt houses for all those poor dogs that really don't have any choice on whether or not they want to be out there.
I agree!
:banana
I like that ideal.
How many people do you think would stay home because of it?
I did my first backpacking trip ever 2 weekends ago with Phreak from the whiteblaze. I'm hooked! During the day I probably passed 6 different dogs along the trail and all were very well manored. If you wanted to pet them they would let you if not they just went about their business. Phreak also took his 2 dogs (maggie and suzi) and I really enjoyed hiking with them. They never bothered anyone. So I for one don't mind dogs on the trial at all.. That being said, I also think they should be well manored and trained. I have a dog I'd love to take but that want happen. She listens to me about like my wife does........he he :banana
Tear down all the shelters and build mutt houses for all those poor dogs that really don't have any choice on whether or not they want to be out there.
I agree!
:banana
Change the signs from "Shelter" to "Dog House" and save everyone a lot of time and aggravation.
minnesotasmith
11-07-2007, 12:09
You kicked the dog because you were scared you were going to be bitten, not to protect your space. Understandable.
I've dealt with plenty of dogs, people pooches in The States aren't bad 99% of the time. If they were roaming packs of homeless strays, popular in Central America, Africa, Central Asia and other dumps, then they'd be a problem.
I'll add boots to the list of things for preemptive strikes though.
bear spray, knives, guns, feet, poles +boots
Rocks or a car antenna work well too.
I was menaced by loose dogs (e.g., strays) multiple times while thruhiking last year, over 6 times seriously. The large end of my hiking staff tapped or was swung against dog skulls at least 5 times to end the mutt's inclination to act as stupid as was their owner that lets his animal POS (judging it by his actions as to how little he cares about his own dog) run loose.
A dog under 20 pounds, not totally committed to biting you yet, just make light contact anywhere above the shoulder, and odds are it'll back off. As the dog gets larger and/or more aggressive, a stronger poke or swing is neccessary. I found that poking took less effort for inflicting a given amount of pain than swinging my staff did, and was probably more accurate, especially given the somewhat cramped quarters common along much of the AT (rocks, brush, trees, etc.) WRT swinging room.
A piece of advice 3rd-hand from a vet on when you need to kick a dog in self-defense: try to land body kicks on its underside as much as possible. A dog's build is such that it's easier to injure it there, than on its side or back.
CoyoteWhips
11-07-2007, 12:16
one dog came running right at me with his hair up and snappin'. i kicked the bejeesus out of him. off he went yelping. biff and buffy arrived and asked what happened, i told them and they said people with packs scare him.
If it wasn't scared of people with packs before, it is now.
minnesotasmith, whit all do respect,:
just bring yourself a -pit bull- or a really big dog (a great dane) this way your dog will fight for you... of course i`m joking :D
minnesotasmith
11-07-2007, 12:27
Whose main concern about his dog attacking someone is that they don't want blood staining their precious' fur.
If you ever do anything to my dog, you'd better have a damned good reason. And a hell of a lot more defense than bear spray.
I would HAVE a "damned good reason" for doing something to your dog. Unfortunately, dog owners who set their dogs loose on trails on public land (to do God knows what) give other hikers such reasons on a regular basis.
As far as some craniorectally-inverted dogowner getting p*ssed off at me because I wouldn't let his furry little darling bite me without resisting, and would be motivated to assault me himself, here are the most probable outcomes:
1) You win the fight YOU started, succeed in injuring me, I report you, and you go to jail with huge legal expenses,and Bowser probably gets a one-way ticket to Animal Auschwitz. (Kiss the house, going to more college, getting a job that requires no criminal record, or having your own business goodbye...)
2) I win the fight, you get hurt, I report you for having attacked me twice (once by proxy with Bowser, and once directly), and you still go to jail, have huge legal expenses, and your dog still gets gassed.
3) You kill me, the boys in blue bust a hump to find you, find you, and after bankrupting your family with legal expenses, you get 20 to life, or go to Death Row.
All because you were too f*****g stupid to either obtain and operate a leash, or leave the mutt at home. Instead, we could have just said hi, maybe briefly exchanged info on water sources and terrain/people ahead on the Trail, and parted ways with meeting having been a positive experience for both of us, as it was for thousands of people without loose dogs I have passed coming the other way on the AT, when hiking on it.
Uncle Silly
11-07-2007, 12:39
As far as some craniorectally-inverted dogowner getting p*ssed off at me because I wouldn't let his furry little darling bite me without resisting, and would be motivated to assault me himself, here are the most probable outcomes:
You've forgotten the probable outcome that, unless the dog actually bit you and broke skin (ie, leaves a mark you can prove in court), your vehemently anti-dog posts here get introduced at the trial, and the dog owner is let off the hook because the jury decided YOU instigated the confrontation when you flew off the handle at a dog that hadn't bitten you yet.
I'm all for self-defense. That said, the way you write about dogs, I'm not convinced you aren't making up any aggression from the dog. If you're gonna beat any loose dog, you'd probably better let it bite you first. If you're not already bleeding when the dog owner finds you beating his dog, you probably will be.
Jim Adams
11-07-2007, 12:43
MS,
never met you...only know about you from what I've read on WB but the above outcomes were not only correct and very well written, they also proved a point perfectly.
Thank you!
geek
dixicritter
11-07-2007, 12:45
I am only going to say this once. Any more threats of violence on this thread from anyone and you risk a time out. Such posts are against the user agreement.
GOT IT? Good!
This thread is outside the Dog Forum so debate is allowed here, however y'all do still have to abide by the site rules.
Man!! I really hate it when y'all make me have to make posts like this one!!
Jim Adams
11-07-2007, 12:45
You've forgotten the probable outcome that, unless the dog actually bit you and broke skin (ie, leaves a mark you can prove in court), your vehemently anti-dog posts here get introduced at the trial, and the dog owner is let off the hook because the jury decided YOU instigated the confrontation when you flew off the handle at a dog that hadn't bitten you yet.
I'm all for self-defense. That said, the way you write about dogs, I'm not convinced you aren't making up any aggression from the dog. If you're gonna beat any loose dog, you'd probably better let it bite you first. If you're not already bleeding when the dog owner finds you beating his dog, you probably will be.
WRONG!
The dog owner will immediately be found guilty for letting the dog run off leash.
geek
minnesotasmith
11-07-2007, 13:10
You've forgotten the probable outcome that, unless the dog actually bit you and broke skin (ie, leaves a mark you can prove in court), your vehemently anti-dog posts here get introduced at the trial, and the dog owner is let off the hook because the jury decided YOU instigated the confrontation when you flew off the handle at a dog that hadn't bitten you yet.
I'm all for self-defense. That said, the way you write about dogs, I'm not convinced you aren't making up any aggression from the dog. If you're gonna beat any loose dog, you'd probably better let it bite you first. If you're not already bleeding when the dog owner finds you beating his dog, you probably will be.
"Your Honor! This middle-aged man with a bit of a belly, while carrying a heavy pack, charged uphill through heavy brush at 30 mph, chased down my dog, which was running away from him, and repeatedly hit it on the head with his stick! I want him charged with... Why is everybody laughing?"
If a loose dog of any size has a physical encounter out in a nonenclosed space with a human being (carrying a pack or not), it's a dead cinch the dog chose to have the encounter, not the human, as the dog could easily have run away and avoided the encounter if it chose. The animal being property (and responsibility) of its human owner, if it bites someone while loose on public property, it's on the head of the owner, who after all caused the incident.
Lone Wolf
11-07-2007, 13:13
So, to sum it all up, yes dogs should be allowed on trails. Leashed while walking and tied up when not.
So, to sum it all up, yes dogs should be allowed on trails. Leashed while walking and tied up when not.
nothing else needs to be said
Appalachian Tater
11-07-2007, 14:20
PETA protesters use them in England to disrupt fox hunts.
Not anymore, fox hunts and deer hunt with dogs have been illegal for almost three years. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/4272623.stm
It's also illegal to declaw cats there.
Hmmm...I may have already told this story, so I'll keep it short.
I was headed through MA in 05 with Chuckles & Gottago. We had just stopped for a break at the border. Their was a couple section hiking there with a female German Shepard. I sat chatting with the couple, as did Chuckles from the other side of the trail. The dog was settled quietly on the ground about 20' away. She seemed perfectly fine, and I believe the couple also said she was friendly.
Chuckles stood up to pack up and as he stood the dog suddenly lunged forward, jumped up and placed her paws on his chest and grabbed his forearm in her teeth. She bit him pretty good!
The owners were horrified and said she had never behaved this way before. They tied her to a tree and as we tried to take a very wide path around her, she lunged at us snarling and growling. In a split second it was an entirely different animal!
I love dogs and have raised them all of my life, but this changed my perspective about taking mine hiking, and about dogs belonging to other people. I do notice that mine is more alert and protective in the woods. I always keep her leashed now, and take a wide path around other dogs.
Dakota Dan
11-07-2007, 19:46
.............
I love dogs and have raised them all of my life, but this changed my perspective about taking mine hiking, and about dogs belonging to other people. I do notice that mine is more alert and protective in the woods. I always keep her leashed now, and take a wide path around other dogs.
Dogs owners are under the illusion that strangers should know whats going on in their animals head. When in fact they, the owners, don't even have a clue, they just think they do. And, unfortunately, this is the result of an unleashed, uncontrolled, animal.
musicwoman
11-07-2007, 20:38
I have reserved a beautiful creamy yellow lab pup from a kennel in Florida recently. While I got a lab because we are active people who love the outdoors and water, there is NO way I would bring him on the trail. It could be dangerous for him, I don't feel like cleaning up his droppings over a multimile/multiday hike, and others might not appreciate it.
As for people who don't leash their dogs on the trail, I believe there should be a law against it. If you are going to bring your dog, have it on a lead and clean up after it!!
To not do so is a huge inconsideration of your fellow hikers and very thoughtless indeed.
Dakota Dan
11-07-2007, 20:59
I have reserved a beautiful creamy yellow lab pup from a kennel in Florida recently. While I got a lab because we are active people who love the outdoors and water, there is NO way I would bring him on the trail. It could be dangerous for him, I don't feel like cleaning up his droppings over a multimile/multiday hike, and others might not appreciate it.
As for people who don't leash their dogs on the trail, I believe there should be a law against it. If you are going to bring your dog, have it on a lead and clean up after it!!
To not do so is a huge inconsideration of your fellow hikers and very thoughtless indeed.
Very NICELY put.
musicwoman
11-07-2007, 21:32
Thanks Dan...it seems alot of the offenders are day hikers who live near the AT and take their unleashed dog for walks, leave their dogs mess wherever, and don't even stop to think there are alot of people LIVING on the trail.
That really burns my butt, LOL.
Uncle Silly
11-07-2007, 23:02
Thanks Dan...it seems alot of the offenders are day hikers who live near the AT and take their unleashed dog for walks, leave their dogs mess wherever, and don't even stop to think there are alot of people LIVING on the trail.
Have yet to see, smell, or step in dog poop on the trail. (Heck, I don't even see my dog poop, she runs off the trail to do that.)
I have seen someone sit in human poop. (Well, noone in the group noticed it before sitting down.) It was on a stonework bench at an overlook in PA. I'm sure it's a nice spot when some jacka$$ isn't using it as a privy.
shelterbuilder
11-07-2007, 23:07
Have yet to see, smell, or step in dog poop on the trail. (Heck, I don't even see my dog poop, she runs off the trail to do that.)
I have seen someone sit in human poop. (Well, noone in the group noticed it before sitting down.) It was on a stonework bench at an overlook in PA. I'm sure it's a nice spot when some jacka$$ isn't using it as a privy.
Heck, I've seen human poop in a dry spring empoundment in VA!:eek: :eek: That's one HUMAN that needs to be on a leash!:mad:
minnesotasmith
11-08-2007, 05:12
MS,
never met you...only know about you from what I've read on WB but the above outcomes were not only correct and very well written, they also proved a point perfectly.
Thank you!
geek
I'm glad you found my conclusions accurate. Sadly, the people who most need to learn from such information sources are least likely to be capable of doing so.
An example of this is Peter Jenkin's "A Walk Across America".
He details over the course of most of his book how much he loved his dog, whom he brought with him unleashed during his hike. Leaving aside all the wildlife and domestic animals it terrorized, to PJ's amusement, the dog's end is as instructive as it was sad. The pooch was chasing a squirrel or something, and found its way under the (lawfully operating) wheels of a semi. Dog dies painfully, Jenkins has elaborate dog funeral, weeping over dead pet, and never manages to make the connection that if he'd used a leash to hang onto his dog, it wouldn't have become Purina Tire Chow. He wasn't a dumb guy overall, but just had a bit of canine fece in the logic part of his brain when it came to understanding elementary issues involving dog ownership. So it observably is with too many hikers with dogs, including the vast majority of those who EVER let their dogs off-leash to run loose.
nitewalker
11-08-2007, 08:22
it is the ignorance of the dog owner who knowingly lets his dog loose to roam where it may along the trail. now if the dog has issues then the owner should keep better track of the dog if and when there are approaching hikers in the area[ the owner will know his dogs behavior issues be4 they get to the trail]. if this is the type to let his dog roam around then he is the beanball who will get his dog poked or whacked.. most dogs will show the old wagging the tail deal if they are happy and just looking to sniff or get a nice peting but if the dog approaches in a wqay that is threatening im sure we can all tell when this is happening so if you dog owners fall into the catergory of beanball owners just remember you are the 1s putting the dog at risk... the outcome will never be known until an incident takes place and is over.. whos fault is it if i have a bite mark and a dog with issues now has a puncture wound or some gaff to its body? just know your dog and keep in my that we are all in it to have fun not fend off dogs which will result in a verbal confrontation with the dog owner. whats next a knife fight, geeeez...........peace out , nitewalker
That really burns my butt, LOL.
You know what really burns my butt? A flame about 3.5' tall.
Lone Wolf
11-08-2007, 08:27
You know what really burns my butt? A flame about 3.5' tall.
that and harbenero peppers
"The more I see of man, the more I like dogs."
- Baronne Anne Louise Germaine de Staël-Holstein
Lone Wolf
11-08-2007, 08:39
"The more I see of man, the more I like dogs."
- Baronne Anne Louise Germaine de Staël-Holstein
then go find a genie in a bottle and ask to become a friggin mutt
dixicritter
11-08-2007, 08:53
Look over there ----->>
Let me close this while they are distracted.