BART Cop Smashes Drunk Dude's Head Through Glass
Asm. Tom Ammiano On Glass Breaking BART Cop
Parents Petition Caltrain to Reduce Train Speed In Palo Alto
Gavin Newsom's Mariah Carey-like Interview Demand
Don't Dump Unwanted Stuff On City Sidewalks
These two black dogs were seen repeatedly biting the hindquarters of the white one in a local San Francisco park. The white dog might not consider this behavior "play".
San Francisco's numerous off-leash dog areas (shown as the white, green, and black parts of this map) allow for lots of canine-canine interaction. Is the behaviour shown in the photo merely "dramatic-looking, non-injurious squabbling"? Do leash laws actually contribute to this kind of aggression, as suggested by our local chapter of the S.P.C.A.? You make the call.
SFist Photo: Off Leash Dogs "Playing" in an S.F. Park
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebookComments (24) [rss]
Post a comment (Comment Policy)
Tips
Contribute
Latest Tip:
John Burris wants to be a vexatious litigator: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009
[more]
From my experience, I'd say that the picture is "dramatic-looking non-injurious squabbling". I've seen the line get crossed aweful quick, however.
As the owner of several dogs, past and present, I still have to say that, in general, the guardian knows (but doesn't always act) best.
I have a semi-retard zeta (non-alpha) dog, who gets picked on a lot, but is rarely hurt. Occasionally, she'll get "attacked" or dominated by a leashed dog. My dog that passed last year was more of the quiet alpha type. She could be gentle to little dogs, children and pups, but also very protective when she was tied up, especially when next to the 'tard dog. She was also very good at reprimanding dogs and children when they would go overboard, yet I don't recall her ever hurting another. She'd put a more than a few dogs on their backs while she was on leash, but basically wanted very little (outside of play) to do with them when she was off leash. I'd definitely consider her better behaved off leash than on.
That being stated, there are some dogs out there that don't belong off-leash, either for their own protection or the protection of others.
General rule: If your dog doesn't play well with others, don't let them play. If they don't do well on a leash, don't leave them tied in a public space or bring them to places where they would be around other dogs. Seems like common sense to me.
PS - not all incidents involving animals or humans behaving poorly can be avoided.
Off leash doesn't contribute to dog violence. It's stoooopid people that shouldn't have dogs in the first place. Last time a dog tried to attack my dog I put the smack down on it. I was waiting for the "pet guardian" to say something 'cause I was gonna smack them upside the head too! If you're dog isn't trained, keep it on a leash! Don't just laugh and say, "dogs will be dogs" 'cause you'll get a cap popped in yo ass!!!!!!! Also, there are too many big dogs in SF, WTF? Unless you live in a mansion with vast grounds, it's kinda like animal cruelty to keep them cramped in your skanky little apartment/home. Get real foolioos and get a size appropriate dog.
The problem that I see, is that there are no such things in this city as dog-on-leash areas, as the laws are rarely enforced. I have a dog, and I would love to be able to walk down the street and not have some exuberant larger animal bowl over my little guy.
So, Jim, you're a certified dog behaviorist? An ethologist that has spent your lifetime studying canine behavior? Have an advanced degree in animal behavioral science? Ya, I didn't think so.
The SFSPCA is not only right, they are regarded as one of the most knowledgeable and cutting edge dog behavior and training institutions in the world - not just the US, the world. Jean Donaldson’s credentials are more than impressive. She is an incredible resource, she know what she's doing/talking about and we are so lucky to have someone with her experience and knowledge here in SF.
But you obviously don't know sh*t. Posting this kind of thing and making these sort of insinuations mislead the public and are inflammatory in nature. Reminds me of the recent Bill O'Rielly show on the baseball events for gays and families that took place on the same day – typically, he made a big fuss over it. But, like this photo and off-leash dogs, it's a non-issue for most well-adjusted people. Are you really so anti-dog?
The ONLY problem I see in this photo is the black lab wearing a metal training collar while off-leash. These collars are extremely dangerous for this dog and his/her playmates. They should NEVER be left on the dog. They are to be attached to your LEASH and used with a leash only, not left on the dog. I'm not a fan of these collars anyway - but if you are going to use them, use them safely and correctly. This is a life or death issue, and it's so important.
The dogs are playing - they're having a great time. You do not know enough about dogs or dog behavior to make the call here. Perhaps you should read some books, or take some classes/seminars on dog behavior before you post such nonsense?
Well I'd just like to be able to sit and read in Duboce Park without having to pick my way through "land mines", and without being jumped over or licked by one of the many off-leash proxy-children running around. It's astounding that "Dog Poop Park" isn't even listed as an off-leash area on the map linked in the post above. How can people who go buy those elongated-ice-cream-scoop yuppie badges (to throw a ball without deigning to touch your dog's slobber) act like asking someone to keep their over-inquisitive dog on-leash is an act of political oppression?
Want to sit and read?! You must be anti-canine!! At least SFDOG says so.
"Is the behaviour shown in the photo merely 'dramatic-looking, non-injurious squabbling?'"
Yes.
When has SFDOG said anything of the sort? Sorry - completely untrue.
SFDOG advocates for *responsible* shared use of our parks. SFDOG has a real problem with those that do not pick up after their dogs, and people that do not have control over their dogs - probably moreso than the non-dogs folks becasue it's this sort of activity that undermines their efforts and the work that they do. Being responsible includes respecting other park users, acting in a considerate manner towards everyone, ALWAYS cleaning up after your dog (and other dogs, too - dog groups are the ones that organize regular park clean-ups, you know), and never allowing your dog to approach people/dogs uninvited. Maybe you should actually read their website/what they preach?
It goes both ways though - people without dogs need to respect those with dogs, and be willing to share the parks with us, too.
As the owner of two of the three dogs, I would say at most this is dramatic-looking non-injurious squabbling -- and I am not even sure it is squabbling. The black dog in the background is so submissive, she pees upon first meetings with most dogs and humans -- she is seen here playing with her "brother"
The blonde-ish dog snarling is her brother. He is 20 lbs lighter than his sister, so he puts on a big show when they get heated up. (Does anyone else find it a little racist that Jim called him a "white" dog in the photo caption??? Mortimer is far from "white" -- even when he is clean, which is rare.)
This photo has been taken out of context.
In any case, interesting to see what my dogs are up to each Noon with their walker.
Indeed! Playing and having a grand 'ol time - as they should be. Thanks for posting.
The two black dogs in the picture aren't even standing in an aggressive pose. WTF is up with this post? You just discovered dogs have teeth that show when they bark?
Baiting for memorable comments, perhaps - trolling even?
It's impossible to say what was actually going on from a still photo. You'd really have to see a video clip to know. The cream dog's facial expression doesn't mean much without a context. I've seen dogs look like this who were play-fighting (meaning, it was 100% play). Sometimes a dog will look like this when she's saying "Enough, you're playing too rough." It's really not possible to say.
I love this picture. It shows a few dogs together playing/pestering each other/having a fabulous time in the lovely city we call home. Teeth showing is not always due to aggression.
I agree with "J" above. Owners know their dogs best. If you know your dog displays dog-dog and stranger aggression, keep your dog on a leash and away from other dogs and strangers. It is true though, not all situations can be avoided. I know this first hand since my dog is a rescued chihuahua who has some aggression issues that I have never been able to work out.
She does not play or even interact with other dogs nicely, despises children, and is very weary of strangers. She has bitten before, and I don't intend on ever letting that happen again. If anything, she has trained me well. I keep her on a leash during all excursions outdoors, do not let her around children at all, and cross the street when I see an approaching dog on her walk. That is how I've learned to cope with her agression issues.
That being said, It does make me very very sad that she can not experience the fun and joy of playing with other dogs nicely in an open area like the picture above.
As far as regarding the SF/SPCA as "one of the most knowledgeable and cutting edge dog behavior and training institutions in the world", thats fine. believe that if you will. But they have not been able to get any help from them. I've emailed and called just about every single trainer listed on the SPCA website to try and set up behavior lessons for my little tyke. I either got no response, or an email back saying they were not interested and to try someone else. One trainer even wrote that I would have to make a decision. Either live with my dog's aggression for the rest of her life, or give her back to the rescue group from where my dog came from.
I have decided to live with her, aggression issues or not.
The SPCA doesn't say that 'leash laws contribute to aggression.' Their site describes how some dogs on leash may react to meeting another dog on leash and offer tips on how to manage the situation. They are also pro-off leash recreation, which apparently you are not.
Racist for calling a dog "white"? Jesus Christ people, get your heads out of your PC a-holes. Man, talk about living up to "San Francisco as left wing nutjob central" stereotype.
As far as "sharing" a park with dogs, I used to live right near Duboce Park. There was little to no point of using that park for people. It's completely and utterly taken over (and destroyed) by the dog owners. There is poop and poop-remnants everywhere - on some warm days, the park actually smells of dog feces. And the dogs run wild everywhere. And yes, the dog groups do organize cleanups, but what the dog lobby fails to recognize is a simple fact of physics - poops sticks to grass like shit on hot pavement, and no matter how hard you try, some of it ain't coming off. Now, compound that by 100s of dog shits a week in a small park plus dog owners walking their dogs at night and completely losing the shit in the dark...well, you get the picture.
I understand that the dog owner lobbyists want everywhere to be "shared" by dog owners and non-dog owners and then blame the negative results on the "bad" dog owners - sounds a lot like the NRA blaming gun violence as the product of just a few bad apples.
Yes, the negative consequences are the product of the bad actors or irresponsible persons - but that's pretty much beside the point. Running around promoting public policies that depend on perfect participation, or perfect enforcement, or perfect obedience to rules or standards is just assinine. If 200 plus years of economic theory has taught us anything, its that people are self-interested slobs who generally will do whatever is in their narrow self-interests and will respond to whatever rational but self-interested incentives are put before them. And, if the immediate result of not curbing one's dog is NOT immediate and certain electrocution, some people are just not gonna bother with it - especially when parks are free. Its called the tragedy of the commons, people.
Put another way, if 100% perfect dog pooper scoopering and 100% perfect control of dogs by dog owners is not going to happen (and we KNOW it won't based on, oh, 10,000 years of human experience), and if anything marginally less than 100% perfect obedience to these rules stands a good chance of turning a "shared" park into a "dog" park, then it means we CANNOT effectively have any hope of having shared parks that are useable to both sides equally.
So now that we've all woken up to blinding reality, the only rational choice left is deciding which parks dogs can go to, and which they cannot.
We don't live in a perfect world and pretending we do - or that we can create one - is just a waste of everyone's time. Rather, we need to just accept the world we live as it is and deal with it thusly.
Come on, C-Nob. Equating dog poop with bullets is a little over the top, don't you think?
It's kinda funny in Cnob's ranting that (1) he totally ignores that the picture pretty much has nothing to do with dog poop, which is a separate issue, and (2) is so proud of his anti-liberalism that he fails to see it was a joke to refer to the dogs' white and black races in my post
I had a perfectly behaved dog once but if anyone ever asked me to leash him in a park I did in a second and apologized profusely and I'm pretty big. Offleash dogs that pose ANY kind of threat should be maced, tasered, or antifreezed. No question. Deal with it hippies. I understand some dogs really are good but if ANYONE is threatened and especialy anyone with children the dogs need to be leashed or they die. SFDOG and DOGPAC are friends of Michael Vick. Hey they were offleash freedom duuude.
Obviously gun violence is a different order of magnitude. I wasn't drawing a moral equivalence argument, I was drawing an equivalent flaw in reasoning argument.
As far as responding to the inflammatory picture, I wasn't. I was responding to some of the other pro-dog comments arguing that we all should be able to share our parks and that its just the bad dog owners that are the problem and if everyone just followed the rules, we all get to live in Candyland.
And can SFist get rid of the guest function. It makes it pretty diffcult to reference a previous poster when half the posters are logged in as "guest."
I agree that the best solution is dividing the parks to "pet parks" and "pet-free parks". It would be lovely to be able to enjoy a park unmolested by dogs in this city. I'm happy to meet them half way.
I dont get why there are dog owners who drive their dogs to the NON DOG park at the corner of my block and then COMPLAIN when they are told to go to the dog park further up the hill because
"its so far".
i was the kid who had to keep off the grass at my park because it was littered with dog poop. the kids in my neighborhood are still restricted to the sand box area and the basket ball court because of all the hidden poop in the grass.
i don't care if you are a good dog owner or a bad dog owner, if you walk your dog off leash in a park where it is illegal to do so you are breaking the law and that makes you a BAD dog owner. You dont like the law, lobby to change it, but dont go breaking it and expecting to still be considered innocent.
That subject is done. New thread!!!! I'm training my dog to only pee and poop on non-plant surfaces. Come on people - have your pets do their pee-pees and poo-poos before they get to the park. This is a small city and we all need to share the space. Also, anyone that sits on the ground at a park is a fool anyway. Forget about the dog waste, what about the human dookie and needles? FYI: This whole city is one big toliet.
guest #22, do you really own a dog? if i flush will you go away?
Anyone, including the SPCA, that suggests leashes cause aggression in dogs is a fool. Or lazy. Either way, they shouldn't own a dog.
If your dog acts agressively on a leash, it is because you haven't properly trained your dog, not because leashes make dogs aggressive.
It is laughable that the SPCA thinks dogs can be socialized to become non-aggressive around children, horses, people, etc. but that dogs can't be trained to be well-behaved on-leash.
Of course, it takes less effort to blame the leash than fix the behavior problems through humane, consistent training. That's why so many irresponsible dog owners blame the leash, rather than themselves for failing to train their dog: they are lazy.