Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 50 of 76
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    28

    Wanted: opinions on unleashed dogs.

    Since this was mentioned in another thread last week. I was just wanting to here how others feel about this. Here's an example of why I don't have my dog on a leash in the park from yesterdays ride:

    I was pedaling up the long hill side of the view point trail as far to the right w/o being in the ski track. My dog was running on the other side of the track out of the way just in front of me when we came upon a skier coming down the hill right at one of the corners. With all three of us being in the correct spot while traveling on the trail, if I had my dog on a leash the skier would probably have gotten tangled in it. If he had it probably would not have been too bad since he wasn't going too fast. But, if he was going faster he could have been injured along with my dog. This all could happen with 2 bikers too especially in the summer.

    I could easily have been a runner or a walker with a dog in the same situation so this effects most all trail users. Of course my point of view comes from a dog owner who has a dog who is pretty well mannered on the trail (I have even been told that by bikers and horseback riders). He is a dog though and does have his moments where he gets in the way because he isn't paying attention.

    I do understand where you all that don't agree with unleashed dogs are coming from. It is kind of annoying coming across a dog that gets in the way. I have even been bitten by a dog while riding.

    BTW if I read correctly the only area with trails in the municipality that an unleashed dog is against the law is in the Campell Tract BLM area because it is federal land. On municipality land it is not against the law.

    Of course this is just my point of view. I just want to hear what others think since it affects all trail users.

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    18
    You may think you have the best-behaved dog in the world, and that you can predict every move that it's going to make. But the truth is, you really can't be sure of it. I have heard of people knocked down and even attacked by dogs whose owners swore "He's never done anything like that before."

    My opinion? If the trail has a leash law, put your dog on a leash. Period. If it doesn't, then don't. But people who use leash-law trails have a right to the security that rule provides.

  3. #3
    Diaskeuast
    Reputation: Big Karma's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    575

    Leash 'em

    The leash law is for public safety and to protect enjoyment of the trails by ALL users. To ignore the law is rude and selfish, and signals to everyone else you care only about yourself and have no respect for their experience on the trail. The law is not open to your interpretation based on what you think you know about your dog. The law is clear: Use a leash.

    All dogs are capable of behavior that their owners cannot predict. They can bite people. They can startle and injure people on bikes, skis and horses. I have bite scars on my calf from an unprovoked attack by an unleashed dog in the park. Predictably, the owner swore the dog had never done such a thing, and then she had the audacity to ask me not to report it because she was sure it would never happen again.

    Further, dogs can simply annoy and offend people who choose to not take unleashed dogs (or any dogs) on the trails. No one -- skiers, cyclists, runners, etc. -- should have to be inconvenienced by slowing down because your unleashed animal is clumsily staggering around and getting in their way. The trails exist for the enjoyment of the human users who maintain and pay for them. They are not a playground for dogs.

    There are few things that irk me more than a dog running at me to jump around and try to get me to pet it, and hearing the owner yell, "Oh, it's OK. He's just being friendly." Shocking fact here: Many of us do NOT enjoy your 60 pounds of hairy, drooling, mud-covered friendliness, and it is rude to impose it on us.

    There are public facilities provided for dog owners where they can allow their animals to run around without leashes. To ignore that fact and to let your dog run loose outside of those areas is simply boorish behavior.
    Enjoying the meaningful pursuit of meaningless fun.

  4. #4
    Mr.Secret
    Reputation: R.T.R.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    613
    Except for designated Muni. off leash areas, the Municipality has an ORDINANCE stating dogs must be leashed everywhere else. How bad are you going to feel about your dog if he gets hit ? I know if I hit an unleashed dog, in a leashed area, and if I'm busted up because of it, the doggie owner is going to pay, and I really do like dogs, cats too........How do you feel about stop signs, speed limits, etc. while you're driving your car, are those there just as suggestions for other people and not yourself ? It's kind of no wonder skiiers, bikers, myself scowl at you and your loose dog in a leashed area.

  5. #5
    FatBike Fiend
    Reputation: Wildfire's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    959

    Dogs are people too

    My very friendly but endorphin-addicted dog joyfully accompanies me on most rides with very few problems, those being a couple occasions where other dogs attacked my dog. It's a bit differant here in the valley, I think there's a larger percentage of dog owners out here and most people seem to be dog friendly. A good percentage of people I encounter here have a dog or two along as well. Plus the trails are not generally too crowded so I havn't seen many problems, but I can see how there could be on crowded trails. It seems like the dogs that accompany their owners a lot on bike, ski, or hiking trips become very socialized and get used to encountering other dogs and people in a friendly manner. I've tried biking with my dog on a leash and it's a recipe for disaster. I do clean up after him if he poops on the trail and I'll stop and hang onto his collar and let people go by if I encounter anyone else. So I guess it's up to the dog owners to use discretion where they take their pets, make sure they are well behaved, keep them under reasonable control, and clean up after them. If everybody did that, there wouldn't be any problems.
    Owner, Trailwerx Trails Contracting
    Palmer, Alaska
    www.trailwerx.com

  6. #6
    The devil is an angel too
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    7,330
    Quote Originally Posted by R.T.R.
    Except for designated Muni. off leash areas, the Municipality has an ORDINANCE stating dogs must be leashed everywhere else. How bad are you going to feel about your dog if he gets hit ? I know if I hit an unleashed dog, in a leashed area, and if I'm busted up because of it, the doggie owner is going to pay, and I really do like dogs, cats too........How do you feel about stop signs, speed limits, etc. while you're driving your car, are those there just as suggestions for other people and not yourself ? It's kind of no wonder skiiers, bikers, myself scowl at you and your loose dog in a leashed area.
    Not trying to be a jerk, but are we sure the Muni doesn't allow unleashed dogs on trails? I checked the Muni website and found this:

    17.10.010 Animals in public places.
    A. It is unlawful for any animal to be in a public place unless it is controlled by a
    leash, and in the control of a person competent to restrain the animal except:
    1. Control of an animal by command is allowed if the animal is engaged in
    an activity that precludes it from accomplishing that activity if restrained,
    and the animal is in an area normally associated with that activity, and the
    activity is conducted in a manner that minimizes impact with the general
    public;
    2. A dog may be unconfined in areas sanctioned by the municipality as off
    leash dog areas. The owner or custodian of a dog, unconfined in an off
    leash dog area, must have a leash restraint immediately available for the
    physical control of the dog and be physically capable of controlling the
    dog;
    It could be argued that taking an unleashed dog with you on the trails while you bike is ok, according to 1. Not advocating for unleashed dogs, just seriously confused here.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    28

    Wrong...It is not the law in the Muni.

    A leash is one of five types of control as defined in the municipal ordinance. Refer to restraint and the law http://www.ci.anchorage.ak.us/Healthmsd/animal.cfm#bark

    It is the law on BLM land...It is federal. Refer to dog leash or voice control: http://www.blm.gov/ak/ado/ctfintro.html

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    18
    [QUOTE=FrozenK]Not trying to be a jerk, but are we sure the Muni doesn't allow unleashed dogs on trails?[QUOTE]

    Laws as always are written vaguely enough to find loopholes. But it could be argued that a leash in no way precludes a dog from running alongside a bike. It could accomplish this task just fine with proper restraints. And if the rider has the control of the dog that he thinks he does, it should not be a problem for him either. So I don't think that argument would hold up in court.

  9. #9
    The devil is an angel too
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    7,330
    [QUOTE=Jammin15][QUOTE=FrozenK]Not trying to be a jerk, but are we sure the Muni doesn't allow unleashed dogs on trails?

    Laws as always are written vaguely enough to find loopholes. But it could be argued that a leash in no way precludes a dog from running alongside a bike. It could accomplish this task just fine with proper restraints. And if the rider has the control of the dog that he thinks he does, it should not be a problem for him either. So I don't think that argument would hold up in court.
    Like I said, not trying to be a jerk just honestly confused about this. My understanding was that you are supposed to have dogs on a leash on Muni trails, but after reading the ordinance, well, I can't really tell. It seems like for some things, it may be ok not to use a leash.

    One thing is for sure, if you are just walking Fido on the trails, Fido needs to be on a leash.

  10. #10
    Mr.Secret
    Reputation: R.T.R.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    613
    Quote Originally Posted by FrozenK
    Not trying to be a jerk, but are we sure the Muni doesn't allow unleashed dogs on trails? I checked the Muni website and found this:


    It could be argued that taking an unleashed dog with you on the trails while you bike is ok, according to 1. Not advocating for unleashed dogs, just seriously confused here.
    No offense taken. I'm just guessing here but I think what ord. # 1 might mean is with people training their retreivers, you know, with shock collars. I see people occasionaly doing this sort of thing every once in a while in a very controlled manner, these folks seem to be extremly strict with their dogs behavior, much different than a dog running loose with their owner "somewhere in the vicinity ". I am very certain of one thing though, that being the Hillside trails south and west of Cambell Airstrip Rd. is a leashed area only, so leash ' em or go someplace where it is ok to let 'em run......

  11. #11
    Mr.Secret
    Reputation: R.T.R.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    613
    Quote Originally Posted by AKsledhead
    A leash is one of five types of control as defined in the municipal ordinance. Refer to restraint and the law http://www.ci.anchorage.ak.us/Healthmsd/animal.cfm#bark

    It is the law on BLM land...It is federal. Refer to dog leash or voice control: http://www.blm.gov/ak/ado/ctfintro.html
    I think your understanding of the law is a bit skewed, so therefore why don't you pay attention to the signage that's posted ALL OVER THE HILLSIDE TRAILS and go from there.

  12. #12
    Ologist
    Reputation: Valhalla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    961
    Dogs in the Muni are only allowed off leash at designated off leash parks. Dogs in the State park are only allowed off leash within x distance from the trail and developed areas. I forget the distance but it is somewhere around 1500 ft.

    Last year I was biking on Powerline when many groups became bottlenecked because a moose and calf were not moving off the trail. I chased them off the trail and people began to proceed through and a jerk off and his dogs came flying by without any regard. I yelled for him to please leash his dogs (he was arguable within the 1500ft of the trailhead) as he passed the mooses, and he responded with the typical arrogant Alaskan disclaimer "I have been here for 15 years" or something assanine like that. The reality was that there was a safety issue for all those people in that situation, for the moose, his dog, and his lame a$$. This was not really in repsonse to his proximity to the trailhead but it became a wildlife harassment issue. Any alteration in the moose's behavior induced by the presence of the dog and the owner's arrogance can be a citable offense. yes, hard to establish but it is the law.The guy had no idea that I was a peace officer with ADFG (and I wasn't going to chase him down the trail), but it was his self-centered actions that jeopardized others' experiences.

    I LOVE dogs and I have one. We leash her because she isn't the most socialized of canines. The most frustrating aspect of dogs off leash is when they come running up to you with the owner's disclaimer of "she's friendly". Well that's great but my dog isn't and now I have to peel these two dogs apart!! So again, IMO it is about responsibilty and being aware of others around you. There is nothing better than letting your dog run wild after being cooped up in the house or car, but it is not fair to do so at the expense of others. Unfortunatley, some people don't like dogs and the law/ordinance is there to be fair to all.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    26

    Balance?

    First of all, if you get busted hire Adam to defend you and he will get the "voice command" ordinance sorted out in your favor. Aside from the legal nuances, whether & when to take ht mutt off leash is a matter of common sense, courtesy and your personal risk tolerance for arguing the issue. If you have a dog that is truly under your voice control (i.e. reliably goes "on by" and comes on command and plays instead of fights) - and are willing to rely on the "voice command" exception to the leash rule - taking that dog on trails when & where you rarely see other folks seems reasonable. If you have an independent and/or badly trained dog and are choose to go on popular trails and poplular times you deserve to get busted. For you black & whiters out there, relax, this issue is gray. Besides, some of you black & white folks are (or at least have been) known trail poachers of the first order, leave tracks in the mud, break the speed limit on the way to the trailheads and otherwise bend the rules when it suits your desires which makes some of your posts seem a bit hypocritical. So, while your points are well taken, your point of view is not the only reasonable one to have.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    18
    I don't understand what's black and white about "No Dogs Off Leash," as some trails have specifically posted. If not, fine, let the courts sort it out. But if such a sign appears, don't use poacher tracks through the grass as an exuse to let your slobbering, "friendly" mutt congenially maul whomever they want. I don't care if they're under your "voice control." I don't know that.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    26

    signs

    the assembly makes the laws - having a sign-posting employee post a sign does not change the law . . .

  16. #16
    HowtoOverthrowtheSystem
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    924
    First off, I love doggies.

    Here in Anchorage, I've only had a poodle (big, stupid looking one) chase me so far. Last time I rode a very nice gentlemen had a pit bull mix that ran up to me. It was at the ball field by the Lake Otis tunnel (I think it's a dog park because there are always dogs there). It just wanted to give me it's Kong though. I grew up with American Pit Bull Terriers and American Bulldogs so I don't spook too easy. I know many people are afraid of those breeds and it probably would have really ticked them off.

    I've passed many people along Chester Creek/Coastal Trail with their dogs leashed, but not really controlled and have had them lunge at me. That can be a little scary. I just hope they don't start crying when I lay a skid mark down ol Peek-a-poos back. I've also passed many people with dogs off leash who seem to know how to control their dog.

    That being said, I've been bitten once (not on a bike) by a Doberman (owned by a friend of the family ) that I turned my back to. I was almost bitten by one American Pit Bull that my family tried to rescue (he tried to go after the neighbors Greyhound and when I grabbed his collar he turned and tried to get me. I had to put him on the ground in a choke hold and give him a couple elbows to hold him there until he calmed down. Once he figured out I was the alpha male he chilled out. That dog was ironically named "Psycho" had some serious issues with other dogs and we had to get rid of him.

    Once you get bitten you never forget it and I can see where a lot of these guys are coming from.

  17. #17
    Beware of Doggerel
    Reputation: Adam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    665
    I'm of two minds about this, I love dogs. The guy on my avatar, is long dead, but he was a mischevious nutjob so I wouldn't dream of taking him off leash. On the other hand two weeks ago some A-hole's dog bit me on the foot. So I'm not too happy about the whole dog thing right now. The guy looked amazed as I stopped and let fly a string of profanities at him and is no good piece of crap dog. Was I just supposed to ride away and act like I am honored to have that animal chew on my leg? Good thing I had my heavy duty Lakes on. Idiots.

    I think the Anchorage trails are just too crowded for loose dogs. If it was my dog I'd be afraid of the dog getting hurt by a biker or skier who expects them to get out of the way. It might be okay in the off hours or less popular trails, but Saturday afternoon on the tour trail is just a bad idea.

    Seems simple to either just leash the dog or stay off the tour trial, and moose meadow/ rovers etc.

    Adam
    I wanna say I'm sorry for stuff I haven't done yet, things will shortly get completely out of hand --T.M.G.

  18. #18
    old format's better
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    580
    Problem here isn't the loose dogs, it's the ones tied to a dogsled!

    Ken
    No matter where you go, there you are.

  19. #19
    Mr.Secret
    Reputation: R.T.R.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    613
    I'm tryin' to figure out the reasoning of a couple of the above posts tryin' to rationalize it being OK to allow unleashed dogs into leashed areas. Could you please explain it a little s-l-o-w-e-r ' cause I guess I might be a little slow in understanding WTF it is you're tryin' to say

  20. #20
    Mr.Secret
    Reputation: R.T.R.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    613
    Quote Originally Posted by kgrlaw00
    the assembly makes the laws - having a sign-posting employee post a sign does not change the law . . .
    ARE YOU A CURRENT MEMBER OF THE ASSEMBLY OR WHAT ? AND IF YOU ARE , CAN I TAKE MY MOTORCYCLE ON THE HILLSIDE TRAILS IF I'M REALLY CAREFUL ? IF I DON'T PAY ATTENTION TO THE NO MOTORCYCLES SIGNAGE I'LL BE OK, RIGHT ??? I'LL JUST TELL ' EM YOU SAID IT WAS OK IF SOMETHING BAD HAPPENS AND NOT TO WORRY ABOUT IT ......SOUND RIGHT ??? Adam, make sure you've at least got your Lake's on in case I accidently nail you........ok.?
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Last edited by R.T.R.; 03-29-2007 at 05:17 AM. Reason: NEED TO POST A PIC

  21. #21
    I'm from Utah
    Reputation: Jilleo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    171

    Fun thread

    A lot of emotion on both sides.

    I'm among the large contingent that's been attacked by a dog on a trail. Pit bull. Its teeth went clean through my thigh, almost all the way to the bone. I still have the shorts with the teeth marks in them. The dog's "owner" actually had the audacity to blame the incident on me. She said I was "too quiet," hiking alone along the trail as I was, and I "scared" her dog. I was much too upset and frightened to argue with her. We were in a national park. Dogs weren't even allowed on the trails, leashed or not.

    I won't chime in on my opinion here, since it's obviously more emotionally driven than rational. But I will say, when I see a trail with a sign that says "no dogs allowed" or "all dogs must be on a leash," this makes me very happy. Don't I have a right to happiness, too?

  22. #22
    Mr.Secret
    Reputation: R.T.R.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    613
    [QUOTE=Jilleo]A lot of emotion on both sides
    Last edited by R.T.R.; 03-29-2007 at 05:01 AM. Reason: Nevermind, I better STFU......now

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    26

    Wtf

    see below
    Last edited by kgrlaw00; 03-29-2007 at 09:34 AM.

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    26

    Wtf?

    Quote Originally Posted by R.T.R.
    ARE YOU A CURRENT MEMBER OF THE ASSEMBLY OR WHAT ? AND IF YOU ARE , CAN I TAKE MY MOTORCYCLE ON THE HILLSIDE TRAILS IF I'M REALLY CAREFUL ? IF I DON'T PAY ATTENTION TO THE NO MOTORCYCLES SIGNAGE I'LL BE OK, RIGHT ??? I'LL JUST TELL ' EM YOU SAID IT WAS OK IF SOMETHING BAD HAPPENS AND NOT TO WORRY ABOUT IT ......SOUND RIGHT ??? Adam, make sure you've at least got your Lake's on in case I accidently nail you........ok.?

    The point is that the Assembly passes the ordinances; we read them and interpret them; and, employees are supposed to follow them. If an MOA employee places a sign in the wrong place he or she does not change an ordinance by doing so.

    If an ordinance equates "voice control" to being on a leash, and you have your dog under voice control in a "leash only" area, you would be in compliance. Not saying this is so here, but it appears to be one (but not the only) viable reading of the ordinance quoted by someone else above.

    If an ordinance equated having a dog under voice control to having your motorcycle under voiced control then you could ride it on the hillside. It doesn't, so you can't.

  25. #25
    The devil is an angel too
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    7,330
    Quote Originally Posted by kgrlaw00
    The point is that the Assembly passes the ordinances; we read them and interpret them; and, employees are supposed to follow them. If an MOA employee places a sign in the wrong place he or she does not change an ordinance by doing so.

    If an ordinance equates "voice control" to being on a leash, and you have your dog under voice control in a "leash only" area, you would be in compliance. Not saying this is so here, but it appears to be one (but not the only) viable reading of the ordinance quoted by someone else above.

    If an ordinance equated having a dog under voice control to having your motorcycle under voiced control then you could ride it on the hillside. It doesn't, so you can't.
    The ordinance, as published in the Muni website does not equate voice control to being on a leash. The ordinance is pretty clear that "It is unlawful for any animal to be in a public place unless it is controlled by a leash, and in the control of a person competent to restrain the animal"

    The issue could come on what falls under exception 1, activities the dog can't do if on a leash. I can see arguing that biking with a dog attached to your bike isn't safe it falls under 1, etc... but lets be clear here: the ordinance does not equate voice control to a leash.

  26. #26
    Mr.Secret
    Reputation: R.T.R.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    613
    Quote Originally Posted by kgrlaw00
    The point is that the Assembly passes the ordinances; we read them and interpret them; and, employees are supposed to follow them. If an MOA employee places a sign in the wrong place he or she does not change an ordinance by doing so.

    If an ordinance equates "voice control" to being on a leash, and you have your dog under voice control in a "leash only" area, you would be in compliance. Not saying this is so here, but it appears to be one (but not the only) viable reading of the ordinance quoted by someone else above.

    If an ordinance equated having a dog under voice control to having your motorcycle under voiced control then you could ride it on the hillside. It doesn't, so you can't.
    What exactly is it your trying to say ? I don't get it ......So the trivial number of citations written to people for having loose dogs on the Hillside weren't legal ? And, according to you, it's a free-fer-all in so far as loose dogs go and we can interpret the leash laws however we want?

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    26

    Read the Ordinance

    RTR - if you read the ordinance you will see that, by its terms, there are certain exceptions to the requirement to have a dog physically leashed. No, it is not a free for all - and no one other than you has suggested that it is. IMO many (most) of the loose dogs don't seem to be under "voice control" (or any type of control for that matter) and some of them are unruly & worse and would not come within any exceptions. On the other hand, many dogs are under control and many owners only let them off leash at times, and in places, that are appropriate and would arguably come within the exceptions. Personally, I think taking a dog on popular trails, at poplular times, is not a good choice regardless of the particular dog or the leashing restrictions - but taking one on an obscure trail when & where you are unlikely to meet anyone is fine. The MOA ordinance is what it is . . . and there you have it. Enough.

  28. #28
    Mr.Secret
    Reputation: R.T.R.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    613
    Thanks for clarifying, I'm crystal clear, it's a matter of interpretation, what time of day it is and where you're at in the trail system. Got it..........
    Last edited by R.T.R.; 04-07-2007 at 01:37 AM.

  29. #29
    rio
    rio is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    969

    Sumo vs canine

    Sumo Snaux Bike 2 , Unleashed Canines 0

    From January 2007 to March 29th.

  30. #30
    Caveman
    Reputation: Bearbait's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,002
    Hey RTR, Is that you catching sick air on the motocross bike?

  31. #31
    Mr.Secret
    Reputation: R.T.R.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    613
    Quote Originally Posted by Bearbait
    Hey RTR, Is that you catching sick air on the motocross bike?
    UHHHH no, nice pic though, it was more for effect. That's an Australian rider by the name of Shane Watts. That's at a national enduro in Ore. somewhere around Roseburg, that's the Umpqua Rv. in the background....The first pic is mine, that's at the top of Youngs Creek/ Red Mtn.....The Permanente trail is across the valley...This spring I'm gonna' try and connect the two trails to see if a local, renown race promoter, could have some sort of point to point ultra cycling event out and around that part of Ak......
    Last edited by R.T.R.; 03-29-2007 at 05:15 PM.

  32. #32
    Beware of Doggerel
    Reputation: Adam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    665
    Quote Originally Posted by R.T.R.
    I'm tryin' to figure out the reasoning of a couple of the above posts tryin' to rationalize it being OK to allow unleashed dogs into leashed areas. Could you please explain it a little s-l-o-w-e-r ' cause I guess I might be a little slow in understanding WTF it is you're tryin' to say
    If my comments caused confusion, I’ll clarify. My comment isn’t based on the ordinance. I didn’t even bother to read it. The law, whatever it is, is poorly enforced and given no respect by dog owners. So discussing it is more or less academic. I took the question as asking what we all though of off leash dogs, not whether the conduct of taking an off leash dog on a populated trail was sanctioned by the City.

    Even if it is perfectly legal to have your dog off leash on a busy trail, at peak hours, like the tour trail, Rovers, Moose meadow, etc. its not okay. Its a bad idea, that puts both other people and the dog in danger. This kind of bad judgment can’t be justified simply by saying “... but the government lets me do it...”. I feel pretty strongly about this right now because I just encountered some guys “little sweetheart” biting my foot a few weeks ago.

    But at the same time I have ridden, hiked and skied with people who have their dogs off leash and felt fine about it. Generally this has been up in the State Park. And I more or less don’t mind when people bring dogs along. But then again, I’ve never ridden with anyone who tried to bring their dog on a popular trail.

    So here's my thoughts in a nutshell. Neither the enforcers nor the rule breakers seem to care about the leash law, so I don't either. There’s a time and place for everything.

    On a lighter note:
    RTR,
    I've been up toward's Red Mountain from Kings river and Ruby Lake. Nice country. How long would that ride be ? That area is just begging for an ultra. I'm looking on my map, but I'm not 100% sure which trail is Permanente. For some reason I though it was on the other side of the Kings River.

    Adam
    I wanna say I'm sorry for stuff I haven't done yet, things will shortly get completely out of hand --T.M.G.

  33. #33
    Mr.Secret
    Reputation: R.T.R.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    613
    Quote Originally Posted by Adam
    If my comments caused confusion, I’ll clarify. My comment isn’t based on the ordinance. I didn’t even bother to read it. The law, whatever it is, is poorly enforced and given no respect by dog owners. So discussing it is more or less academic. I took the question as asking what we all though of off leash dogs, not whether the conduct of taking an off leash dog on a populated trail was sanctioned by the City.

    Even if it is perfectly legal to have your dog off leash on a busy trail, at peak hours, like the tour trail, Rovers, Moose meadow, etc. its not okay. Its a bad idea, that puts both other people and the dog in danger. This kind of bad judgment can’t be justified simply by saying “... but the government lets me do it...”. I feel pretty strongly about this right now because I just encountered some guys “little sweetheart” biting my foot a few weeks ago.

    But at the same time I have ridden, hiked and skied with people who have their dogs off leash and felt fine about it. Generally this has been up in the State Park. And I more or less don’t mind when people bring dogs along. But then again, I’ve never ridden with anyone who tried to bring their dog on a popular trail.

    So here's my thoughts in a nutshell. Neither the enforcers nor the rule breakers seem to care about the leash law, so I don't either. There’s a time and place for everything.

    On a lighter note:
    RTR,
    I've been up toward's Red Mountain from Kings river and Ruby Lake. Nice country. How long would that ride be ? That area is just begging for an ultra. I'm looking on my map, but I'm not 100% sure which trail is Permanente. For some reason I though it was on the other side of the Kings River.

    Adam
    Adam, King Rv. would be, in the first pic., down in the valley with Permanente Trail at the base of the mtns. in the background on the other side of the river. Just to the right,out of the pic frame, would be Castle Mtn. The Permanente trailhead is just about exactly 10 min past King Rv. just before you roll into Chickaloon. This pic is on the Perm. trail about a mi from where you could cross King Rv, or turn N.E. at that point and go up the East Fork of the rv. The peaks in the background would be right on the same ridgeline as where the first pic was taken at the top of the Red Mtn. trail. Better yet, we should just go ride both trails after breakup...........One more thing, there's always lots-o-bear sign from this point of the trail on up to the river, fun stuff....The new pic is right at the King Rv, the channel had moved about 40 yds beyond, at this point you could turn to the right and go up the East Fork of the King..........
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Last edited by R.T.R.; 03-29-2007 at 11:38 PM.

  34. #34
    old format's better
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    580

    Happiness???? No.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jilleo
    A lot of emotion on both sides.

    I'm among the large contingent that's been attacked by a dog on a trail. Pit bull. Its teeth went clean through my thigh, almost all the way to the bone. I still have the shorts with the teeth marks in them. The dog's "owner" actually had the audacity to blame the incident on me. She said I was "too quiet," hiking alone along the trail as I was, and I "scared" her dog. I was much too upset and frightened to argue with her. We were in a national park. Dogs weren't even allowed on the trails, leashed or not.

    I won't chime in on my opinion here, since it's obviously more emotionally driven than rational. But I will say, when I see a trail with a sign that says "no dogs allowed" or "all dogs must be on a leash," this makes me very happy. Don't I have a right to happiness, too?
    But you do have the right to the PURSUIT of happiness.

    Ken
    No matter where you go, there you are.

  35. #35
    I'm from Utah
    Reputation: Jilleo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    171

    Oh yeah.

    Quote Originally Posted by AK Ken
    But you do have the right to the PURSUIT of happiness.

    Ken
    Good point. Who wrote that stupid ordinance?

  36. #36
    FatBike Fiend
    Reputation: Wildfire's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    959

    Blatant violators

    So here's my thoughts in a nutshell. Neither the enforcers nor the rule breakers seem to care about the leash law, so I don't either. There’s a time and place for everything.

    On a lighter note:
    RTR,
    I've been up toward's Red Mountain from Kings river and Ruby Lake. Nice country. How long would that ride be ? That area is just begging for an ultra. I'm looking on my map, but I'm not 100% sure which trail is Permanente. For some reason I though it was on the other side of the Kings River.

    Adam[/QUOTE]

    Excellent point, Adam. For instance, The ENTIRE Matanuska Susitna Borough has a leash law, so technically dogs have to be on a leash no matter how far out in the tulies you are. Is this a reasonable law? I don't think so, so I often choose to violate it. Just because some chumps in suits dream up some ordinance is not a good enough reason for me to follow along like a sheep. I do try and use discretion though so my dog is not someone else's problem and I agree that they should be on a leash on crowded trails.. And I see wolves all the time with no leash! Imagine that, no wonder they're gunning them down. I think every single one of us is guilty of violating some petty law or another on a regular basis. Not that I condone it, of course.

    RTR: That King River crossing can be pretty nasty, you'd have to call the race the Soggy Body most times of the year. I have crossed it before in knee deep water in the late summer and fall but if we have a fall like last one, there's no way any one's getting across and live to tell about it. Still though, it would be a great area for a race, theres a lot of trails.
    Owner, Trailwerx Trails Contracting
    Palmer, Alaska
    www.trailwerx.com

  37. #37
    Mr.Secret
    Reputation: R.T.R.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    613
    Quote Originally Posted by Wildfire
    So here's my thoughts in a nutshell. Neither the enforcers nor the rule breakers seem to care about the leash law, so I don't either. There’s a time and place for everything.

    On a lighter note:
    RTR,
    I've been up toward's Red Mountain from Kings river and Ruby Lake. Nice country. How long would that ride be ? That area is just begging for an ultra. I'm looking on my map, but I'm not 100% sure which trail is Permanente. For some reason I though it was on the other side of the Kings River.

    Adam
    Excellent point, Adam. For instance, The ENTIRE Matanuska Susitna Borough has a leash law, so technically dogs have to be on a leash no matter how far out in the tulies you are. Is this a reasonable law? I don't think so, so I often choose to violate it. Just because some chumps in suits dream up some ordinance is not a good enough reason for me to follow along like a sheep. I do try and use discretion though so my dog is not someone else's problem and I agree that they should be on a leash on crowded trails.. And I see wolves all the time with no leash! Imagine that, no wonder they're gunning them down. I think every single one of us is guilty of violating some petty law or another on a regular basis. Not that I condone it, of course.

    RTR: That King River crossing can be pretty nasty, you'd have to call the race the Soggy Body most times of the year. I have crossed it before in knee deep water in the late summer and fall but if we have a fall like last one, there's no way any one's getting across and live to tell about it. Still though, it would be a great area for a race, theres a lot of trails.[/QUOTE] Marc, It's a given that any glacial stream has certain times of the year where they're either safe to cross or not, but heck, you can bust yourself up in plenty of other ways before you even get to the river crossings out there, like crashing over Fido when he darts in front of you I've been MTB'n in the Matanuska drainage for a looong time. To have an ultra event out there you would obviously plan around the best time of year. Fall isn't necessarily the best time of year anyhow on account of the hunters out there. Besides look at the Alaska Wilderness Classic, those boys 'n girls are doing way bigger water crossings albeit with ultralite packrafts.............oh yeah, keep yer doggies on a leash in the on leash areas please.
    Last edited by R.T.R.; 03-30-2007 at 04:32 PM.

  38. #38
    Baked Alaskan
    Reputation: AK Chris's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    1,812
    Wow, lots of opinions on this one. Personally I'm in favor of leashes, but there's a certain amount of user awareness that's involved leashes.

    To me, out of respect to other trail users that want to ski/bike/run/skate without someone's dog chasing them, jumping in front of their bike on a downhill, biting them, jumping on them when they ski by, running to the middle of the trail causing a collision while skating (rollerblading) or sidel up next to you them while they're climbing a steep hill and force the rider to swerve just to avoid clanging a pedal of the dogs head.

    I love dogs, but I hate dodging them when owners can't keep them out of your lane, or keep them from chasing affter you and such. I know they're usually just being friendly, but while I'm skiing I really don't need to get jumped by a dog looking to play. I feel bad colliding with someone's dog, or someone for that matter, but sometimes these things are unavoidable. I think these incidents could be minimized by *alert* owners with leashes.

    I have to stress alert because too many times I've been skating the costal trail and had to hurdle a knee-height clothesline or skate into the woods or just knock a dog out of the way simply because the owner just let their dog take the line and run.

    This kind of stuff happens every year. I think it can work either way, leash or no leash, but its up to the owner to keep their dog in line and not let it be an obstruction on the trail.

    To me all the dog leash stuff can be annoying when things happen, but its no worse than people that clog the entire trail and don't move to single file when you're approaching or trying to pass, random wildlife encounters and jerk drivers when you're on the roads - the absolute worst IMHO. Its all just part of life on two wheels...
    The red couch has moved from Alaska to Florida...

  39. #39
    Caveman
    Reputation: Bearbait's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,002
    In the summer 2004 Hammer adventure race we crossed the Kings river with bikes in hand and the aid of a tag line. It was pretty sketchy trying to carry a bike, I was glad I'm over 6' I wouldent recommend it.

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    2

    bad dog

    my opinion?...

    On single track/narrow trails I personally prefer to encounter other bikers with their dogs off leash.

    I prefer that the dog is trained to stay to the side with its owner and not obstruct the trail causing other riders to slow unnecessarily or stop. Bikers with leashed untrained dogs on narrow trails are more likely to cause obstructions.

    I haven't had any problems with overly aggressive dogs but I don't think a leash is going to make much difference unless the owner stops his bike and restrains the dog prior to being passed. Owners of untrained/aggressive dogs are not very likely to slow down and stop to allow another rider to pass (I don't think that many riders want to stop everytime one encounters another rider).

    The real issue is trained versus untrained pets and a leash isn't going to resolve many of the trail conflicts addressed in the previous postings.

    I ride with my dog on and off leash and will sometimes release my dog when passing riders to make it easier to pass on tight trails (I consider this a courtesy).
    Last edited by Ridewithriley; 03-30-2007 at 07:02 PM.

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    2

    bad dog

    my opinion?...

    On single track/narrow trails I personally prefer to encounter other bikers with their dogs off leash.

    I prefer that the dog is trained to stay to the side with its owner and not obstruct the trail causing other riders to slow unnecessarily or stop. Bikers with leashed untrained dogs on narrow trails are more likely to cause obstructions.

    I haven't had any problems with overly aggressive dogs but I don't think a leash is going to make much difference unless the owner stops his bike and restrains the dog prior to being passed. Owners of untrained/aggressive dogs are not very likely to slow down and stop to allow another rider to pass.

    The real issue is trained versus untrained pets and a leash isn't going to resolve many of the trail conflicts addressed in the previous postings.

    I ride with my dog on and off leash and will sometimes release my dog when passing riders to make it easier to pass on tight trails.
    Last edited by Ridewithriley; 03-30-2007 at 07:00 PM.

  42. #42
    Mr.Secret
    Reputation: R.T.R.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    613

  43. #43
    Mr.Secret
    Reputation: R.T.R.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    613
    Quote Originally Posted by R.T.R.
    ...think we'll ever get outta' this world alive ?...

  44. #44
    I'm from Utah
    Reputation: Jilleo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    171

    The perils of not leashing your dog


  45. #45
    Mr.Secret
    Reputation: R.T.R.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    613
    Quote Originally Posted by Jilleo
    Is this similiar to a 2.1 WTB ExiWolf hitting the unleashed pup and breaking it's back or would a WTB Timberwolf be more appropriate ?
    ...think we'll ever get outta' this world alive ?...

  46. #46
    rio
    rio is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    969

    Sumo Tyres 4.0 slightly OT

    I did run over a medium sized and unleashed dog dog this winter.
    My snaux bike was shod with Endomorph on a Large Marge on the rear, and a Endomorph on a snaux cat wheel up front.
    I am happy to report the neither the bike or the rider was hurt, the traction was great despite the 3 inches of fresh snow that was on the ground !

    SUMO the Snaux BIke 3 , Unleashed Dogs 0


    Quote Originally Posted by R.T.R.
    Is this similiar to a 2.1 WTB ExiWolf hitting the unleashed pup and breaking it's back or would a WTB Timberwolf be more appropriate ?

  47. #47
    Caveman
    Reputation: Bearbait's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,002
    oh my god Jill, That is a crazy photo! Hope it wasnt any dog you knew...

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    128
    I T-boned a golden retriever a couple of weeks ago. Hit him at about 15 mph with Nokkian Extremes. Dog and rider were fine, but I wish he had been leased. Now that I have my 29er up and going, dogs better watch out!

  49. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    229
    The thing I dislike more than unleashed dogs is the dog crap that people leave behind,especially on the local bike trails.If you want to take your dog for a stroll fine,just have the decency to pick up after it! I get sick of dodging dog crap !!

  50. #50
    I'm from Utah
    Reputation: Jilleo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    171

    Not a dog I know

    Although I'm happy to report that the wolf spit the pug out and all came out of that incident unharmed. That was February, though. This month, a pomeranian wasn't so lucky.

    Playing with unleashed dogs near the Mendenhall Lake area has become common for this wolf. (It's the one everyone in Juneau calls "Romeo.") It started because idiotic dog owners encouraged it. Carrying dogs off is a new development, but that also is becoming more common. Now people are calling for Romeo's head. It wouldn't be necessary if eveyone would just leash their dog when walking in the area. Would it really kill people to leash their dogs? Interestingly enough, the people who are most vocal about it think it would be better to kill the wolf.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •