PDA

View Full Version : Dog waste/pollution



John B
02-09-2010, 20:26
This Associated Press article (2-9-10) about dog feces on trails in Wyoming and water pollution should stand as a lesson for those who bring dogs on the AT. Treat their waste as you would yours -- dispose of it properly.

Dog waste piling up at Wyoming forest trails




The Associated Press
A smelly problem is piling at trails around Jackson where people go hiking and cross-country skiing with their dogs. How big is this problem? Bridger-Teton National Forest officials say they recently counted 173 piles of dog waste around just one trailhead.
The problem is so bad, it's contributing to elevated bacteria levels in nearby streams.
District Ranger Dale Deiter said the situation is "not acceptable." He's promising to step up enforcement so people clean up their dogs' acts.

Phreak
02-09-2010, 21:12
I'd be curious to see a comparison study of the impact of dog feces vs human feces on hiking trails.

Blissful
02-09-2010, 21:14
I don't know I've seen some supposed dog waste that was actually another animal. Didn't know so many dog lovers frequent those places.

traildust
02-09-2010, 21:21
It was around a trailhead where I am sure a lot of day hikers with dogs pass through. But still, dog owners, and I am one with a pup I am training for a thru in 2011, need to pack it out or bury it.

yappy
02-09-2010, 21:30
Since John and I were talking about the Yukon Quest in another thread I wondered what you guys would think of all those sleddies pooping on the fly ! those dogs don't even stop running they just go.... and sometimes the mushers gets a face full. In fact, most mushers poop and pee on the sled too.

traildust
02-09-2010, 21:33
Since John and I were talking about the Yukon Quest in another thread I wondered what you guys would think of all those sleddies pooping on the fly ! those dogs don't even stop running they just go.... and sometimes the mushers gets a face full. In fact, most mushers poop and pee on the sled too.
Nice! Not!

yappy
02-09-2010, 21:39
LOL it ain't for everyone that is for sure

makoboy
03-30-2010, 12:08
Along this subject line, is it better to bury the dog waste on the side of the trail, or bag it in a bio-degradable bags and toss it in a privy?

Gray Blazer
03-30-2010, 12:16
What do the bears and mice and all the other animals do with their poop? Should we pack theirs out, too? Weasel?

white_russian
03-30-2010, 12:36
Along this subject line, is it better to bury the dog waste on the side of the trail, or bag it in a bio-degradable bags and toss it in a privy?
if they poop on the trail just take a stick and flick it out in the woods. as long as the animal isn't pooping or peeing on a water source it is all good. no different than a deer or a bear.

mister krabs
03-30-2010, 12:37
I just kick it off the trail into the weeds, whether it's my dog's or someone else's. It's just poo, if everyone did this no one would ever be disturbed by it.

Wise Old Owl
03-30-2010, 12:58
I don't see horse riders picking up after themselves.... just saying...

Gray Blazer
03-30-2010, 13:20
I don't see horse riders picking up after themselves.... just saying...

......or their horses either.

Feral Bill
03-30-2010, 13:32
I don't see horse riders picking up after themselves.... just saying...

I've hiked in clouds of powdered horse manure dust. Not real pleasent. I mostly avoid very horsey areas.

Wise Old Owl
03-30-2010, 20:32
I've hiked in clouds of powdered horse manure dust. Not real pleasent. I mostly avoid very horsey areas.


I remember that on that Bright Angel trail in the Grand Canyon....

Jonnycat
04-01-2010, 11:11
Looks like it's a problem at a few very popular/highly advertised trailheads where cityfolk go to experience "nature".

AKA the kind most of us avoid like the plague.

clicker
04-01-2010, 11:25
I have buried before, but usually if my pup is signalling that she has to go we get off trail and away from any water. I bury in areas of high traffic and also if she passes anything that is not biodegradable (she likes to chew plastic) I have packed it out. Carry a few extra ziplocks and it is ok.

Dirty Nails
04-04-2010, 23:16
First: our pet dogs are typically well cared for medically. They are not likely to be carrying many transmitable diseases thanks to modern veterinary care. This is a benefit most wild animals never recieve. So I think there is much more risk from wild beasts. Hell, we rarely hear of anyone contracting rabbies or anything else for that matter, even when bitten by a dog.
Second: I hike a trail near home that is vertually blanketed by horse waste and NOBODY complains about that. Why?
Third: It's still widely held by science that your best chance of getting sick is from poor personal hygene. For example, I see people exiting public restrooms all the time without washing hand, and you know you see it too.
Take a look down the trail, people are still the dirtiest creatures on Earth!
I do, however, use a stick to flip my dog's waste off the trail into the woods so you don't step in it.

SassyWindsor
04-05-2010, 00:26
Good to see LNT (Leave No Trace) rules being used. Flipping waste off the trail ranks right down there with all the other foul habits a majority of hikers have. A few weeks ago I hiked out of ASP (hiking with friends attempting a thru-hike) to hwy 76 (Davenport Gap). The volume of non-LNT hikers has this entire section of trail smelling like a privy. Shelter areas need haz-mat attention. Nasty!:(

Wheeler
04-05-2010, 08:54
The horse manure is pretty bad, especially when it rains. Nope, that ain't ankle-deep MUD. In cities, they have a little bag hooked up. Wonder why people can't use one of those and dump it off the trail? As for LNT, we are animals, too. Take it easy, we belong here. Just keep it tidy.

linn
04-10-2010, 10:54
I'm not really sure (and I'm definitely not someone who picks up my dogs' poop in the woods, since they usually go well off-trail) but I think the difference between dog poop and most wild animals (and horses) is in the type of food that they eat. Horses, dear, and many wild animals eat a primarily vegetarian diet, so their waste decomposes much more quickly and has lower levels of something (Nitrogen?) that isn't good in high levels. (I'm soooo not an expert here, obviously.) Most of our dogs eat meat, and unless we are feeding raw, they are eating meat that has been processed, maybe isn't the best quality, and probably has other preservatives and additives that get passed through. I think this is why dog poop is more like human waste when it comes environmental impact.

Dirty Nails
04-11-2010, 10:46
Flipping the waste into the woods is better, I believe, than breaking-up earth to burry it. If you show me some very real science that indicates otherwise, I could be persuaded. I have never seen a racoon, bear or other wild animal burry it's waste.
It takes little time for the waste to decay.
My dog's waste is perhaps 1-2 ounces. That's much less than 8 pounds from a horse, and still much less than you or I produce.
It still doesn't compare to plastic and other synthetic trash.

Dirty Nails
04-11-2010, 11:24
My dog eats commercial dog food mostly. Who knows how much real meat is in that anyway? I am not so sure that dog waste, or digested meat, if that's what it is, takes any longer to break down than vegitation. Pehaps it is faster to decay. Even if I find a pile in the yard, it's gone in a day or two. And bears, snakes and bobcats certainly eat meat.
That doesn't change the fact that the most damaging creature to the environment is, and will always be man!!! Let's stop using my dog's waste as a reason to complain. There are so many other real issues generated by you and I.

FatMan
04-11-2010, 14:20
Hikers are a bigger problem than dogs when it comes to poo. This year alone I have seen at least a dozen TP blooms within eye site of the trail on my little 10 mile section. And the path to my house has become a popular spot for sure. I'm not saying dog poo is better, but at least they don't leave toilet paper behind.

linn
04-11-2010, 21:32
I just did a tiny bit of research and found this:

"Feces deposited in yards, fields and trails runs off into streams, rivers and even into groundwater. This negatively affects water quality.

Dog waste is estimated to cause between 20-30 % of stream pollution.

Dog Waste contains nitrogen and phosphorus. These nutrients promote algae growth in lakes, ponds, and streams. This limits light available to aquatic plants. As the algae decays it uses up oxygen that is needed by fish.

Runoff containing dog waste also causes bacteria levels to rise in waterways and can make beaches unsafe for swimming."

So the issue seems to be bacteria getting into runoff that comes in contact with poop, which is why it's better to bury than just fling into the woods. For whatever reason (probably diet), dog waste has a different chemical make-up than animals living in the wild, so it does do more damage.

Two Speed
04-12-2010, 07:43
. . . Dog waste is estimated to cause between 20-30 % of stream pollution . . .Really? Link, please.

Pedaling Fool
04-12-2010, 09:09
I just did a tiny bit of research and found this:

"Feces deposited in yards, fields and trails runs off into streams, rivers and even into groundwater. This negatively affects water quality.

Dog waste is estimated to cause between 20-30 % of stream pollution.

Dog Waste contains nitrogen and phosphorus. These nutrients promote algae growth in lakes, ponds, and streams. This limits light available to aquatic plants. As the algae decays it uses up oxygen that is needed by fish.

Runoff containing dog waste also causes bacteria levels to rise in waterways and can make beaches unsafe for swimming."

So the issue seems to be bacteria getting into runoff that comes in contact with poop, which is why it's better to bury than just fling into the woods. For whatever reason (probably diet), dog waste has a different chemical make-up than animals living in the wild, so it does do more damage.
Most waste does and those nutrients (nitrogen/phosphorus) is also among primary nutrients required by all plant life; so unless the dogs are crapping in very close proximity to the water source those nutrients are being consumed by the terrestrial plant life. Not to mention all the fungi and bacteria that makes use of the waste.

There is a hell of a lot more coyotes, raccoons and various other animals out there crapping in the woods (and some directly in the water source), and so dogs are NOT a problem. Nature provides a cure for the problem, no need to stockpile crap in the landfills.

I would also love to see a link to this research, specifically concerning the special chemical makeup of dog poop. If it is so different (i.e. chemically toxic) from other animals than why is it ok to bury.

CrumbSnatcher
04-12-2010, 14:00
i was told years ago, one of the reasons why dogs, are not allowed in the smokies,is because the exotic birds in the park,over a thouand differrent species, more than all of europe combined, will/may eat the dog poop, and its lethal to them. anyone heard of that? and besides horses being grandfathered claused in the smokies.the horses poop does not effect the birds!

CrumbSnatcher
04-12-2010, 14:13
good thing the dogs can't speak! they'd tell us all the **** we did wrong!
i remember my dog always stayed on the center of the trail,thru the big water puddles, i can't say that for most of you hikers! and theres alot of ya! you know you walk around them, to keep your pretty tenna shoes clean. my dog never littered either, not once! & shes even been on a few trail work trips, have you?

Pedaling Fool
04-12-2010, 14:29
Here's what their website says: http://www.nps.gov/grsm/planyourvisit/pets.htm

The very first reason they give is this:
• Dogs can carry disease into the park's wildlife populations.

That's BS, but that's how people justify things, through fear. Not saying that can't happen, but it can happen with people also, but there's no prohibiting people.

Dirty Nails
04-25-2010, 14:39
Dog waste is estimated to cause between 20-30 % of stream pollution

Dirty Nails
04-25-2010, 15:08
"Dog waste is estimated to cause between 20-30 % of stream pollution."

I don't believe this for a second. Estimated by who?

It would take something like 100 people to produce the same waste as 1 dairy cow. Farm livestock causes an unfathomable degree of polution through runoff.
But that doesn't even compare to fertilizers and other toxins that are spilled or dumped regularly.
Consider how much toxic stuff is leaked from a few simple daily drips off the bottom of an auto engine times a zillion cars.
My dog has never pooped ethyl glycol (in antifreeze) or mercury as far as I can tell. And she has never crapped a plastic wrapper or soda bottle.

My dog's waste is nothing more than an annoyance if stepped in. That's why I remove it from the trail. To propose that it accounts for even a measurable portion of the polution found in our streams and lakes is, I think, laughable.

And once again, the likelyhood of contracting disease from a dog is incomparable to that from other people or oneself.

clicker
04-27-2010, 12:28
Dog waste does indeed carry nitrogen, phosphates and other pollutants, as does rabbit waste and squirrel waste (in high quantities). Bird waste is so bad it can damage your car paint. Yet people have an issue with dog waste. This is very puzzeling to me. More pollutants are leached into the environment everytime rain falls on our roads, and when people fertilize their lawns with chemical fertilizers.

Anyways, I find it annoying to step in poo, so I make sure it is not on the trail for the next hiker, beyond that I am not to concerned about it.

Lilred
04-27-2010, 12:42
Dogs carry fleas, and it's those fleas that carry disease into our parks. Your dog's fleas could carry a disease that your dog is immune to, but other animals in the park are not. The Smokies is a very fragile ecosystem, and your dogs do not need to be there. That is why they aren't allowed in the smokies, not cause of their poop or disease they might have, but because of the diseases their fleas might have.

Jack Tarlin
04-27-2010, 15:22
In 15 seasons on the Trail, when it comes to actually seeing people making an effort to clean up after their dog after it craps, I think I could count these episodes on one hand, and I could do it if I was missing a couple of fingers.

99% of dog owners neither know nor particularly care where their dog is doing its business, and one sees dog crap on the Trail virtually every day.

Dog owners will of course deny this, as they tend to deny ANYTHING negative about their pet's actions or behaviors.

Once again: There are actually very few bad dogs on the Trail.

Bad owners?

Yeah, there's a plague of them.

Nean
04-27-2010, 15:35
In 15 seasons on the Trail, when it comes to actually seeing people making an effort to clean up after their dog after it craps, I think I could count these episodes on one hand, and I could do it if I was missing a couple of fingers.

99% of dog owners neither know nor particularly care where their dog is doing its business, and one sees dog crap on the Trail virtually every day.

Dog owners will of course deny this, as they tend to deny ANYTHING negative about their pet's actions or behaviors.

Once again: There are actually very few bad dogs on the Trail.

Bad owners?

Yeah, there's a plague of them.

I don't think I've ever seen a dog owner who sees his dog poop where it could be stepped in and not clean it up. Every once and a while I'll see what seems to be a dog poo on the trail and in a split second- its not.;)

I've seen more people poop on the trail (in one hunting season) than all the dog poop combined in all my hiking seasons. So there!:D

weary
04-27-2010, 18:17
I'd be curious to see a comparison study of the impact of dog feces vs human feces on hiking trails.
All feces impact the environment, especially when impacted around trail heads, rather than dispersed thoughout an area by the creatures living there.

There may be some intellectual curiosity about which is worse. But if you are preparing to argue that if humans pollute, why shouldn't dogs pollute, you will be making a common, but fallacious logic.

It's on a par with arguing that because some people commit armed robbery, it's okay for everyone to do so. Or if most folks litter, why why shouldn't everyone. Or if some wilderness areas have been damaged by the construction of condominiums, why shouldn't all wilderness areas be so damaged.

I know, you think such comparisons are ridiculous. But they are no more ridiculous than the arguments voiced on White Blaze when a few of us fought 400 foot high wind energy towers a mile from the trail. I heard again and again that there are worst intrusions in New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and elsewhere along the trail, so why not in Maine.

Weary

SassyWindsor
04-28-2010, 01:11
Tell the Yellowstone Wolf Pups how safe dog poop is. Parvo from dogs has nearly wiped them ALL out.

Tuckahoe
04-28-2010, 07:14
Oh Really? http://www.nps.gov/yell/parknews/09088.htm


YELLOWSTONE NATIONAL PARK NEWS RELEASE
----------------------------------------------------
New Study Shows Distemper Linked To Yellowstone Wolf Pup Deaths
Since wolves were reintroduced in Yellowstone in the 1990s, there have been three years when the pup survival rate was extremely low: 1999, 2005, and 2008.

Canine parvovirus was believed to be the cause of the wolf pup deaths in 1999 and 2005. That was because parvovirus is known to cause a high mortality rate in domestic dogs, and was suspected in the high death rate of wolves at Isle Royale National Park in Michigan in the early 1980s.

Results of newly published research point to canine distemper as the cause of the low pup survival rates.

Researchers took blood samples from wolves and coyotes in Yellowstone National Park. They looked for exposure to a number of canine diseases. The results indicate that some diseases like parvovirus are chronic in the park’s wild canines.

However, signs of distemper appeared only in the years when pup mortality was high. Since distemper weakens the immune system and makes infected animals susceptible to other infections, it can be difficult to determine the actual cause of death.

The research also indicates that the wolf population seems to fare well despite some chronic infections, and rebounds well from periodic exposure to distemper.

While the research was unable to conclusively determine the episodic source of the canine distemper, data suggests it is not linked to the region’s domestic dog population.

The research was conducted by the Yellowstone Wolf Project, the University of Minnesota, and the Yellowstone Ecological Research Center. The findings were recently posted to PLoS ONE, a peer-reviewed online journal which posts reports of original research in science and medicine: http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0007042.

And this -- http://www.nps.gov/yell/parknews/1006.htm



Yellowstone Wolf Population In Transition
Wolf numbers in Yellowstone National Park declined for the second consecutive year. The decline was expected and considered natural.
The Yellowstone Wolf Project reports the 2009 population at 96-98 wolves, down 23 percent from the 124 wolves recorded in 2008. This is the fourth decline since wolf reintroduction began in 1995. A population high of 174 wolves was recorded in 2003. In 2004 and 2007, 171 wolves were counted.

Population declines in 1999, 2005, and 2008 were associated with the disease distemper. So far there is no evidence that distemper was the cause of the 2009 decline. Probable causes for this last decline were wolves killing each other, malnutrition, and mange.

The greatest decline occurred on the northern range, the area with the greatest wolf population density. Wolf numbers there dropped 29 percent, from 56 to 40 wolves.

The decline in the wolf population in the interior of the park was smaller. Those numbers dipped from 68 to approximately 58 animals; off 15 percent from the previous year.

The number of breeding pairs in the park remained the same at 6. This is the lowest number of breeding pairs recorded since 2000 when wolves first met the minimum population requirement for delisting. A "breeding pair" is defined as a male and female with 2 surviving pups. Poor pup survival, due primarily to disease, has kept that number low.

Wildlife biologists affirm that the Yellowstone wolf population has recovered, and that wolf population numbers can be expected to fluctuate as they do for other wildlife species.

Multi-year research projects are underway to help wildlife biologists better understand the impacts of disease and of animal social dynamics on wolf population changes.

The Weasel
05-10-2010, 19:25
First: our pet dogs are typically well cared for medically. They are not likely to be carrying many transmitable diseases thanks to modern veterinary care. This is a benefit most wild animals never recieve. So I think there is much more risk from wild beasts. Hell, we rarely hear of anyone contracting rabbies or anything else for that matter, even when bitten by a dog.
Second: I hike a trail near home that is vertually blanketed by horse waste and NOBODY complains about that. Why?
Third: It's still widely held by science that your best chance of getting sick is from poor personal hygene. For example, I see people exiting public restrooms all the time without washing hand, and you know you see it too.
Take a look down the trail, people are still the dirtiest creatures on Earth!
I do, however, use a stick to flip my dog's waste off the trail into the woods so you don't step in it.

1) There are a number of diseases that dogs can transmit into the wild, particularly from dogs that are not fully immunized. Lack of vaccination is very common in dogs (shame on owners!). Rabies is regrettably common; it isn't as common as the flue, but it's out there. Scat-eating by carrion-feeders (including birds) is a significant disease vector.
2) No one complains about horse waste because (a) no one complains about it, and (b) horse riders are as vehement about their 'right' to ride places as, say, dune buggy riders: Complain at your own rish. As for the former, complain; as for the latter, well, there's no right to foul the environment, no matter how much we try to rationalize it.
3) If there's nothing wrong with dog waste and it's harmless, why not leave it in the trail instead of flicking it into the woods?

TW

Two Speed
05-11-2010, 07:32
3) If there's nothing wrong with dog waste and it's harmless, why not leave it in the trail instead of flicking it into the woods?

TWAesthetics is one good reason.

Pedaling Fool
05-11-2010, 08:13
1) There are a number of diseases that dogs can transmit into the wild, particularly from dogs that are not fully immunized. Lack of vaccination is very common in dogs (shame on owners!). Rabies is regrettably common; it isn't as common as the flue, but it's out there. Scat-eating by carrion-feeders (including birds) is a significant disease vector.
TW
Are you saying that rabies can be transmitted via feces? I could be wrong, but I don't believe that's the case.
http://www.cdc.gov/rabies/transmission/index.html
All species of mammals are susceptible to rabies virus infection, but only a few species are important as reservoirs for the disease. In the United States, distinct strains of rabies virus have been identified in raccoons, skunks, foxes, and coyotes. Several species of insectivorous bats are also reservoirs for strains of the rabies virus.
Transmission of rabies virus usually begins when infected saliva of a host is passed to an uninfected animal. The most common mode of rabies virus transmission is through the bite and virus-containing saliva of an infected host. Though transmission has been rarely documented via other routes such as contamination of mucous membranes (i.e., eyes, nose, mouth), aerosol transmission, and corneal and organ transplantations.


3) If there's nothing wrong with dog waste and it's harmless, why not leave it in the trail instead of flicking it into the woods?

TW
Again...no one is saying there's nothing wrong with fresh poop. But nature takes care of it, all we really have to do is stay away from it, that's why we bury it far away from the trail. Everyone knows that if you get a bunch of it in one location, then you got problems, yet people still crap in those disgusting privies; I stay well away from those nasty holes.

If you want to talk about scary crap then talk about bat caves or even raccoon crap http://nwco.net/044-WildlifeDiseases/4-2-RaccoonRoundworm.asp

How do you catch it?

Raccoons shed millions of the microscopic roundworm eggs in their feces. It takes about a month for newly deposited eggs to develop to the infective stage. The eggs can only develop into worms when they're in an animal's body, but the eggs are hardy and may survive for years in soil, sand, or water.
People may encounter the eggs through direct contact with raccoon droppings or by touching a contaminated area or object. If they don't wash their hands, they may later transfer the eggs to their mouths. Small children are particularly vulnerable because they tend to put their hands, and other objects such as bark, wood chips, toys, soil, or even droppings, into their mouths.
Other animals may become infected by eating an infected animal or through contact with the feces of an infected animal.
Symptoms

Symptoms in people may include nausea, skin irritations, tiredness, liver enlargement, loss of coordination and muscle control, blindness, inattentiveness, and coma.
Raccoons rarely show symptoms of the disease but the species that don't usually play host to this worm (such as woodchucks, squirrels, birds) tend to show abnormal behaviors when infested. They'll tilt their heads and have difficulty walking or climbing. They may lose their fear of people, circle, roll on the ground, fall over, lay on their sides and paddle their feet, or fall into a coma.
Treatment

If someone's been exposed, or even suspects exposure to raccoon roundworm, seek immediate medical care. If the worms can be killed before they migrate through the body, there's a very good chance that the disease will be prevented. But if the condition is not treated early, recovery is less assured. Raccoon roundworm infections are very difficult to diagnose in people.
Protection on the job

If you're working in an area that's contaminated with raccoon feces, wear a proper respirator, rubber gloves, rubber boots, and disposable coveralls. Because the eggs are resistant to common disinfectants, the feces and any contaminated materials should be burned. If that's not feasible, double-bag the materials and bury them deeply.
Contaminated clothing can be double-bagged and discarded, or washed in boiling water with bleach. Scrub rubber boots with bleach and a scrub brush. Clean traps before storing, to remove feces while they are fresh. Traps and other equipment that can withstand the heat can be flamed. If that's impractical, clean with boiling water and bleach.

HIKERJEN
05-19-2010, 23:12
Dogs carry fleas, and it's those fleas that carry disease into our parks. Your dog's fleas could carry a disease that your dog is immune to, but other animals in the park are not. The Smokies is a very fragile ecosystem, and your dogs do not need to be there. That is why they aren't allowed in the smokies, not cause of their poop or disease they might have, but because of the diseases their fleas might have.

Really..... you think only dogs carry fleas?? I guess no wild animal has ever had a flea?!?!
And how are the Smokies any more "fragile" than any other park that does allow dogs? It sounds like you just came up w/this flea idea off the top of your head!

wirerat123
08-16-2010, 12:02
Yeah, I have to really question some of these excuses and motivations for keeping dogs off trail.

Parvo has been an issue in the wild forever, as well as distemper. Fleas? Are you serious? Micro organizms in dog poop that aren't found in the wild? Seriously?

Your dog is FAR more likely to be exposed to something dangerous in the wild than the wild is in danger from your dog.

People trying to justify keeping dogs off trail by these BS excuses are full of it. I can create BS scientific study to support just about any agenda I would like to get across. Believe what you want, but common sense is becoming a long lost survival tool, might consider exercising it before you lose it.....

Fleas?? BWAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAAAAHHHAAAAA! Seriously? Your dog most likely gets it's flease from rodents that are commonly running around in the woods to your house, then it gets eaten by a predator, that gets eaten by another predator, and then next thing you know, one of the fleas on that rodent near your house is sitting smack dab in the middle of the nearest National Park.

There is nothing found in the city that isn't already in the wild. We can stop being silly now...

Sarcasm the elf
08-16-2010, 13:18
To my fellow hikers with four legged companions, I propose one good reason to "properly" dispose of pet waste: to prevent the spread of dog haters on the trail.
I know that logically the necessary measures vary depending on the location and popularity of a trail, but I take a fairly zealous approach to cleaning up after my dog just because I'm sick of people on the trail that hate dogs and it's even worse when they have a justified reason behind it. While I don't like packing poo bags out of popular areas, I consider it part of what is necessary to keep trails welcoming to everyone.

Wise Old Owl
08-16-2010, 13:24
I will just put this out there that Ranger Dale Deiter of the Bridger-Teton National Forest is out of his mind, getting a blurb in the Assoc Press about dog poo when he is responsible for managing a million acre tract of land that is being clear cutted to death. It backs up against Yellowstone and you see the clear cuts in Google Earth. Canada has discovered a better way than clear cutting, that removes more timber and doesn't screw up the land. We are still stuck in the dark ages here in clear cutting.

My dog is trained to poo on the side or off trail.:mad:

http://i250.photobucket.com/albums/gg275/MarkSwarbrick/puppy_tail.gif

NO POO HERE!

kanga
08-16-2010, 14:08
this is the biggest load of crap i have ever read.

Wise Old Owl
08-19-2010, 13:22
this is the biggest load of crap i have ever read.

I second that with a smooth move from EX-LAX:D