Yesterday a fellow hiker whom I have known for several years
emailed me to ask about a route description for the Three Peaks Loop on Mount Spokane. As luck would have it, another friend had
just asked about the same route the week before, so all I had to do was copy
and paste from my earlier email.
Today I opened up my email to an invite from a local hiking
club regarding a trip to the Three Peaks Loop led by the aforementioned
friend. There’s nothing wrong with
that—I love the idea of exposing more people to “my” mountain (just read some
of my older posts to get a sense of how much time I spend up there). However, I do take issue with one section of
the hiking club’s invite: “Dogs are
allowed on this hike. Park rules state that they must be leashed, my
rules do not. Note: If your dogs are off leash you will be taking your
chance as there is a fine for off leash dogs.”
I have sooo many issues with those three sentences. I have at times been accused of being
anti-dog because of my stance on this issue, but rest assured, I am not. I consider myself personal trainer and coach
to several dogs; I currently “coach” Blaze, my running buddy regardless of
weather and my skijor partner all winter.
We even tried long boarding together a few weeks ago, but I decided
perhaps that was a little too dangerous for us.
But I digress. I am not anti-dog,
but I am anti-dog off leash in areas where it’s against the law.
There are so many reasons why I feel this way. First and foremost, there’s the obvious. It’s against the law, so don’t do it. As Maya Angelou wrote, “When you know better you do better.” Clearly, the hike leader knows better. So why isn’t he also doing better?
Of course, we
all, myself included, break the law from time to time. I have let my dog off leash inside Mount Spokane
State Park on more than
one occasion. Generally, I feel that I
have a good reason to do so when I choose this, and it is always
temporary. As an example, there is a
large water crossing on trail 100/110 near the Lower Mount Kit Carson Loop Road. In the early spring, when the water is
running high, I let my dog off leash to navigate the crossing because I feel it
keeps us both safer as we cross. It is
not so deep that my dog could be swept downstream, but it’s deep enough and
tricky enough that he could knock me into the water if he pulls on the leash as
I try to navigate the crossing. I let
him off to choose his own route, I figure out my way across, and then he’s back
on the leash again. I think that would
make sense to most people.
Putting aside
the lawbreaking part then, I think that it is important to examine another
aspect of when a person should choose to “do better.” This isn’t just one person choosing to go out
with his dogs off leash. This is a
person who is leading a hike for a local hiking club, advertising a trip with
room for twenty participants, and in a sense inviting every one of them to
knowingly ignore park rules (really, Spokane County rules). Not only is the potential harm greater given
the potential number of participants, but I feel that whenever a person
represents any organization one has an even greater responsibility to follow
all posted laws and regulations. As a
trip leader, one is the public face of one’s organization. I believe that most organized groups do
everything they can to maintain a positive public image. Suppose something bad were to happen on this
group’s upcoming hike? There is both
individual and group liability to consider, and a hiking group’s reputation at
stake. I believe that for all of those
reasons, another local club (disclosure: a club of which I happen to be a
member, committee chair, and board member) has adopted a strict dog policy that
applies to all trips. I know that the
club’s policy is not followed 100% of the time, but at least it gives club
leadership a place to open the dialogue should there be any issues, and it
protects the club by showing a good faith effort on the part of the larger
organization to prevent rogue behavior from individual members.
There is also a
larger issue that is apparent to me: Why
should one’s right to do what he or she wishes to do outweigh the rights of
others?
First, there are
the human “others.”
I happen to
serve on the Mount Spokane State Park Advisory Committee. I have been told by the park manager, on more
than one occasion, that the number one concern of park visitors is off-leash
dogs. There are a lot of people who have
had a bad experience with a dog at some point in their lives, myself
included. That’s one of the main reasons
why I always carry pepper spray when I run; the one time I had to use the
pepper spray, it was on an off-leash and vicious dog. I have been around dogs my entire life, and I
feel that I’m pretty good at judging dog body language. I have taken several dogs through obedience
classes, so I know how to speak to dogs in such a way as to make them
obey. I came close to using my pepper
spray on several other occasions, but was able to “talk down” an aggressive
dog. However, many people haven’t been
around dogs so much, don’t know what to do when confronted with a potentially
dangerous or aggressive dog, and really have no wish to learn. That is their choice, and I believe that they
should have a reasonable expectation to encounter only leashed dogs in the
park. After all, that’s the law,
right?
What’s more,
many park visitors are families with children.
It doesn’t take a vicious dog to knock down and injure a child, it only
takes an unleashed dog that “just wants to play” (a “playful” unleashed dog
nearly knocked me down a few months ago, and I’m a 150 pound adult). I guarantee that the child is just as scared,
and potentially just as injured, whether the dog attacks or merely plays too
rough. Now imagine taking a nice walk
with your kids and encountering a group of twenty people with several off leash
dogs—no guarantee that the dog’s owner is the nearest human, no guarantee that
the dog is under voice control. That’s
terrifying to both child and parent.
Next, there are
the nonhuman “others.”
It is June, the
time of year when the ungulates on the mountain are giving birth. The mothers are in a weakened condition and
cannot afford to be harassed by domestic dogs.
The babies are newborn and are therefore vulnerable. Even the nicest dog could inflict a lot of
harm on newborn critters; put that nice dog in a pack of other nice and now
off-leash dogs, and there’s no telling what could happen. My personal scariest experience in the park
took place a few years ago when I was trail running with my dog in the Nordic
area. It was early June, and I came
around a switchback in the trail and found myself face-to-face with a mother
moose and newborn calf. To this day, I
am so thankful that my dog was on leash when it happened. If she had not been, and she had gotten close
to the mother moose, she probably would have been dead. Moose are not to be trifled with.
This is not the
only situation that’s potentially dangerous for both the wildlife and for
fido. Mount Spokane
is prime habitat for several species that are a little higher up the food
chain. I have encountered more coyotes
than I can recall on the trails that make up the Three Peaks
route. Additionally, I have encountered
black bears on the route on several occasions, and I have twice treed bear cubs
while out running. If a dog trees a cub,
and the cub’s mom attacks the dog, what happens to the bear? What if mamma bear attacks the dog, which
then runs to its owner for protection, and now the owner is attacked by the
bear, too?
I think it’s
worth mentioning that I first met the leader of this hike through a
conservation organization; I know that he understands the importance of
wildlife habitat, healthy ecosystems, and conservation efforts both locally and
regionally. I’m not sure that he has
fully considered the potential negative consequences to wildlife—and
humans—should he allow his dogs to go unleashed.
A couple years
ago, there was a similar situation involving snowmobilers going off-trail on
private land accessed from the state park.
It’s a longer story than I have time for here, but one of the main
takeaways from the experience was that issuing warnings for flagrant violations
of the rules did absolutely nothing to curb the bad behavior. Issuing citations did. I believe that the leash law violations need
to be enforced consistently, not just in Mount Spokane
State Park, but on all of
our local public lands. I wish that Maya
Angelou’s quote held true in more situations; in my experience, people only “do
better” when forced to do so.
