You are here

Reader Participation Day: Should Pets Be Given More Leeway in National Parks?

Share

It always surprises me to see folks bring their pets -- usually dogs -- to national parks. It's surprising because most parks ban pets from trails, and always require them to be on leashes. As a result, the pets usually spend time in a nearby kennel, in the rig, or being walked in parking lots. Should the rules change?

While we always leave our springers behind at home, more than a few pet owners wouldn't think for a minute of leaving their animals -- family members, actually -- behind. While park officials don't want dogs and other pets to get in frays with wildlife, leave their "messes" behind, or bother other visitors, some pet owners will point out that their pets are better behaved than many of today's teens and a surprising number of adults.

What do you think? Are park officials being overly stringent in banning pets on trails? Do you avoid national parks because of these regulations?

Comments

I kinda like the "No Children" rule until they learn to behave.


Dogs on horse trails equals potential mishaps. Many dogs have never seen a horse and would get aggressive, defensive, barking, jumping around, etc. A long leash gets tangled around a horse's leg and somebody's not gonna feel so good!
Perhaps there could be a select few trails where leashed dogs would be OK, just to see how it goes. For example, one on either side of the Rocky Mountain park, and monitor for a year to see how it goes. Mandatory pickup, of course. And how about a health certificate for Fido, just like we need for our horses?
Finally, let's reserve one trail in each park where there are no children, no musical/auditory devices that can be heard more than 1 foot from the user, and where hikers must take an intelligence test. Sample question: If you see a large moose by the side of the trail you should: a) Yell "Hey guys, it's a moose," as loud as you can; b) sneak up close and pat it; c) stop, watch, take a picture, enjoy.


As a dog owner who formerly lived in a national park, and as a traveler who has visited many, many national parks, it amazes me the broad spectrum of dog acceptance within the NPS system. Petrified Forest NP allows dogs on trails, and I've had some of the most delightful walks there with my dogs. Grand Canyon, where I lived, has a rim trail on the South Rim that allows dogs, but nowhere else. A quiet morning walk along the rim with my dogs was a wonderful experience. Then you have Bryce Canyon, where dogs aren't even allowed at the overlooks. Why?

Perhaps dog-friendly trails, as posted several times above, would be a step in the right direction. Of course, there would have to be rules - leashed, pick up your dog's poop, etc. But it would enable travelers to experience the park with their four-legged companions, reduce the possibility of dogs dying in hot cars, and inprove the public's view of how NPS accommodates the visitor.


I love my dog, but don't travel with her. I think most dogs, even those who are well-behaved, are likely to bark at and frighten wildlife, so I would probably say "no" to dogs on most trails in the national parks. I did see two dogs on my recent trip to Sequoia, one was in a tote bag and the other in a pillow case! Both were at the General Sherman Tree and on the shuttle. Stranger yet, on our return trip we stopped at Goblin Valley State Park in Utah where we saw some people walking with their pet lamb!


It is always interesting to see/hear dog owners claim that their dog(s) are well behaved, friendly, leashed, and always cleaned up after. As a walker, and frequent visitor to public parks and our wonderful National Parks, I must state that encountering any dog while on a path or trail is an uncomfortable experience. One, I'm sure, many dog owners cannot understand. We humans do not all love dogs. I do not dislike them, I am just uncomfortable around them. They do not announce themselves as non biters, nippers, lickers, jumpers, poopers, etc. They just should not be in places with a lot of humans. Allowing dogs on the trails of our National Parks would, I fear, just drive the rest of us from frequenting them.


Karl:
From a safety perspective I wouldn't want to see dogs allowed in bear country. This is a case where dogs and horses probably shouldn't be equated. I'm told a horse actually decreases your chance of a dangerous bear encounter while a dog will increase it.

All depends. Dogs are typically allowed on Forest Service and BLM lands where there are bears. In fact, dogs are sometimes used in legal bear hunts to track and sometimes tree bears. I've certainly hiked in Forest Service trails and met dogs. I really didn't see it as an issue.


National Parks need special places for visitors to walk their
pets since they often have been traveling long distances in warm vehicles.
At Crater Lake, Sequoia and Redwood NP,
while serving as either a volunteer interpreter or uniformed naturalist,
I have found that pets provide an
opportunity to meet very interesting people since all pet owners love talking
about their "furry family child"; once "the ice is broken" people feel
more relaxed to inquire about park issues with very
interesting questions providing them a more rewarding park experience.
So, the Lesson is focus on the Positive, and Assist visitors with their
daily park reality issues including furry person exercise. Parks are for
People, including furry ones on a leash; wildlife issues need to be addressed
too, but most local, short trails provide little opportunity for pet/wildlife conflicts.
(all within the context of Reasonable). At Redwood, a park born in Controversy,
an error was made to prohibit dogs on what became the Lady Bird Johnson Grove
Trail on October 2nd, 1968. Prior to the NP, this "Trail" was an old county road/track
used by local residents/visitors; so, immediately the negative "Don'ts"
in NP Regulations became more hated. I understand dogs are now permitted on
this same short Loop Trail which is only Common Sense, I believe. All national parks
need/require a local constituency of citizens to defend their unique resource values.


It is inappropriate for dogs to enter our national parks. The only non-human animals I want to see in the parks are those that live wild there. I don't know of any wild animal who welcomes a dog into his territory. The parks should be reserved for the animals who live there and the humans who appreciate there presence. Humans who harrass wild animals and dogs, who almost all will alarm a wild animal, should be totally prohibited from national parks.


Add comment

CAPTCHA

This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.

The Essential RVing Guide

The Essential RVing Guide to the National Parks

The National Parks RVing Guide, aka the Essential RVing Guide To The National Parks, is the definitive guide for RVers seeking information on campgrounds in the National Park System where they can park their rigs. It's available for free for both iPhones and Android models.

This app is packed with RVing specific details on more than 250 campgrounds in more than 70 parks.

You'll also find stories about RVing in the parks, some tips if you've just recently turned into an RVer, and some planning suggestions. A bonus that wasn't in the previous eBook or PDF versions of this guide are feeds of Traveler content: you'll find our latest stories as well as our most recent podcasts just a click away.

So whether you have an iPhone or an Android, download this app and start exploring the campgrounds in the National Park System where you can park your rig.