Letters to Ranger Stations along PCT

[Sasquatch!]

I sent multiple letters to Ranger Stations along the PCT letting them know to be on the lookout for a scofflaw with a dog trying to thru-hike in prohibited areas.

Unless you require a service animal bringing a dog in prohibited areas like National Parks is likely to lead to ostracism among hikers and arrest via Rangers.

Have Fun! =)

[mattjv89]

You know I was just thinking it's about time for another dog thread that will certainly devolve to page after page of argument before being locked. Obviously you are referring to an individual, just send them a private message if you must get it off your chest instead of involving everyone. I have nothing more to say.

[Dogwood]

I'm all for people policing themselves to do the "right" thing. People's conscious tells them what's right and how to be personally accountable. Be a mensch. I'm all for less gov't intrusion. However, more and more dog owner scoundrels who don't have a REQUIRED service dog are LYING saying they do so they can impose their self absorbed behavior and their dog on others ILLEGALLY. I'm all for a state or Federal certification of service dogs and NEEDING to prove certification when in areas only allowing service animals. As an attitude grows that folks can and will do anything they selfishly desiree so they also behave with their animals. When this behavior reaches the stage where it is criminal authorities and the rest of the public have to step in.

[Wooobie]

Thatll teach em lol.

[Wooobie]

If i could just pay a fine ahead of time that would work better for everyone involved.

[nsherry61]

I sent multiple letters to Ranger Stations along the PCT letting them know to be on the lookout for a scofflaw with a dog trying to thru-hike in prohibited areas.

Unless you require a service animal bringing a dog in prohibited areas like National Parks is likely to lead to ostracism among hikers and arrest via Rangers.

Have Fun! =)

Nothing like trolling for a pointless fight.

Great vocabulary word, by the way. Forcing all those poor rangers to go find a dictionary! You're abusive is all kinds of ways!

For what it's worth Sasquatch, in case it wasn't already glaringly obvious to your trolling mind, you're being an excessively sanctimonious jerk.

[nsherry61]

For what it's worth, I'd rather see dogs on my hiking trails than people.
I've met a lot more people that were inconsiderate jerks than dogs that were inconsiderate jerks.

[AllDownhillFromHere]

I enjoy these threads, as they are an excellent data source for my Ignore list.

[ImAfraidOfBears]

For what it's worth Sasquatch, in case it wasn't already glaringly obvious to your trolling mind, you're being an excessively sanctimonious jerk.

I don't get where hes being a jerk, seems like hes providing a valuable public service. Thanks for taking responsibility for your fellow hikers sasquatch, I applaud your efforts.

[Dogwood]

Why is it sanctimonious for people to observe the law equally and call on authorities to police the outdoor community...particularly when its' obvious there's intentionality to be a criminal? Why should illegal dog activity by dog owners be allowed or as Woobie suggest 'I'll just do as I damn well please' disregarding the law. It's just this type of sanctimonious self righteous imposing activity that Sasquatch called out and that Woobie selfishly advocates that gives responsible dog owners a bad trail rep.

[Dogwood]

Or, is that just being mean to dogs with no reasonable foundational cause?

[gwschenk]

... or as Woobie suggest 'I'll just do as I damn well please' disregarding the law. It's just this type of sanctimonious self righteous imposing activity that Sasquatch called out and that Woobie selfishly advocates that gives responsible dog owners a bad trail rep.

IIRC, Wooobie said he would board his dog for the state an national park sections of the trail.

[Wooobie]

Lol all dog owners have a bad rep on White Blaze. doesnt really matter if we are responsible or not.

[rocketsocks]

Big feet, big shoes...big shoes, big ****!

[Dogwood]

Lol all dog owners have a bad rep on White Blaze. doesnt really matter if we are responsible or not.

That's not the case. That's an excuse. It's a flaming trolling post.

White Blaze is NOT a hostile dog forum. It is a questioning and calling out of irresponsible dog owner's behavior forum. You should note that in the umpteen positive dog posts and dog threads here on WhiteBlaze rather than attempting to excuse irresponsible selfish I'll impose myself on others behavior. Here's an extensive list of threads with responsible dog owners and dog lovers including myself who hikes with a dog on occasion but will call out irresponsible dog owners. https://whiteblaze.net/forum/forumdi...alachian-Trail

https://whiteblaze.net/forum/showthr...before-posting

As Sgt Rock so aptly stated in this 2006 thread, "this forum came about this way because it had to. Every time the topic of how to act responsibly, the thread deteriorated into another battle against dog lovers against the supposed "dog haters". So if you plan to post here, post advice about how to backpack responsibly with the pet as a response to the question or topic."

[yaduck9]

I enjoy these threads, as they are an excellent data source for my Ignore list.

+1....................

[imscotty]

It took me a while to decipher what all this was really about. Wow, what is it about Dog Threads that make people a little bit crazy? The OP sounds like he wants to responsibly care for his dog. He stated that the dog will be boarded through the Sierras. I presume that this will also be done in other places where dogs are prohibited. The OP and his dog are experienced. This may not work out, but it sounds like the OP is ready to deal with that. I think it is premature to contact the authorities.

Sasquatch and Woobie both seem like reasonable and nice guys. Dogs seem to bring out strong emotions in people. How about everybody give this topic a time out and try to approach it in a more measured tone next time.

Spring is Sprung. Take a hike and enjoy.

[Slo-go'en]

I don't think Wooobie ever said anything about trying to get his dog through prohibited areas. There were other concerns about the trail in general which pointed to taking the dog on this hike was ill advised. Be that as it may, time will tell one way or the other.

I think Wooobie is being confused with the other idiot from Texas planning to go to the AT with an abused pit bull and he's the one with no respect for rules and regulations.

As for all the negative comments on the dog forum, that comes from experiences people have had with the many irresponsible dog owners encountered on the AT. It seems the responsible owners are in the majority or the irresponsible ones make a more lasting impression.

[Slo-go'en]

As for all the negative comments on the dog forum, that comes from experiences people have had with the many irresponsible dog owners encountered on the AT. It seems the responsible owners are in the majority or the irresponsible ones make a more lasting impression.

Ops, I meant responsible owners are in the MINORITY, not the majority.

[Kookork]

I don't think Wooobie ever said anything about trying to get his dog through prohibited areas. There were other concerns about the trail in general which pointed to taking the dog on this hike was ill advised. Be that as it may, time will tell one way or the other.

I think Wooobie is being confused with the other idiot from Texas planning to go to the AT with an abused pit bull and he's the one with no respect for rules and regulations.

As for all the negative comments on the dog forum, that comes from experiences people have had with the many irresponsible dog owners encountered on the AT. It seems the responsible owners are in the majority or the irresponsible ones make a more lasting impression.

You said everything needed to be said in one comment. Woobie and the Texan guy have been treated equally when the Texan is just a troll and woobie an experienced dog owner with a dog that has more mile than many of us including me.