Off Leash Updates

A couple of important items related to off-leash space came across my inbox today.

Is their vision your vision?
If you care about the off-leash use of Ocean Beach, one of SF's favorite dog socialization spots, you may want to show up at the Ocean Beach Vision Council meeting this Thursday, July 8, 6-8 PM at the Osher Great Hall at the San Francisco Zoo.

The Ocean Beach Vision Council was formed by the Golden Gate National Recreation Area officials and SF Mayor Gavin Newsom to discuss how best to improve the use of SF's Ocean Beach, a 5-mile long beach that has been in the center of some controversy around off-leash use by dogs. While some environmentalists claim that parts of Ocean Beach house vulnerable species that are threatened by the presence of dogs, many of SF's dog loving folk enjoy using Ocean Beach and tout it as a valuable exercise and socialization resource in the urban environment--something key for our city's dogs.
SF Dog Chair Sally Stephens notes that many dog advocates are concerned that the Vision Council is biased against off-leash use of Ocean Beach, citing that plans to commercially develop Ocean Beach may leave dogs and their people to find other spots for exercise.

This is an excellent opportunity to advocate for our community's dogs. Urban dogs need sufficient space and fresh air, and the unfettered socialization that off-leash recreation affords. Ocean Beach's 5 miles of shoreline can provide a very special environment for our canine friends.

What's in a name?
I also got word today from Suzanne Valenti, a representative of Ocean Beach Dog, that Nancy Pelosi has submitted Bill HR 6305 that would, among a number of other things, rename the Golden Gate National Recreation Area to "Golden Gate National Parks." If you think this is meaningless, you might want to think again.

Years ago when the people of San Francisco turned some of their key open space over to the Federal government, it was with the intention that the land continue to be used recreationally. According to the Ocean Beach Dog web site:

Off-leash advocates have been told by GGNRA staff for years that changing the name from Golden Gate National Recreation Area to Golden Gate National Parks will make it easier for them to further restrict recreation within GGNRA boundaries. There is no other reason for this name change. They want to remove recreation from the park just as they remove it from their name.

It's been no secret for the last few years that a vocal group has called for dogs to either be banned completely from certain land in the GGNRA or to be forced to return to leash-only recreation. The Ocean Beach Dog group contends that this "name change" would effectively allow the affected land to be treated more like a national park rather than the recreational treasure it has been for the many Bay Area residents who have enjoyed it with and without their dogs.

If you would like to comment on this issue:

• Contact Nancy Pelosi and demand that she remove Sec 2 from HR 6305:
  email: sf.nancy@mail.house.gov
  District Office - 450 Golden Gate Ave. - 14th Floor - San Francisco, CA 94102, (415) 556-4862
  Washington, D.C. Office - 235 Cannon HOB - Washington, DC 20515 - (202) 225-4965
• Also contact the Committee on Natural Resources to which the bill has been referred:
  1324 Longworth House Office Building
  (202) 225-6065 Fax: (202) 225-1931
  MR. NICK J. RAHALL, II, West Virginia, Chairman
  MR. DON YOUNG, Alaska, Ranking Republican Member
  and the Subcommittee on National Parks Forests and Public Lands to which it was referred on June 25:
  1333 Longworth House Office Building
  (202) 226-7736 Fax: (202) 226-2301
  Mr. Raul M. Grijalva, Arizona, Chairman
  Mr. Rob Bishop, Utah, Ranking Republican Member 

Comments

[david]

"While some environmentalists claim that parts of Ocean Beach house vulnerable species that are threatened by the presence of dogs, many of SF's dog loving folk enjoy using Ocean Beach and tout it as a valuable exercise and socialization resource in the urban environment--something key for our city's dogs."

In other words, SF dog owners dont give a shit about the vulnerable species.

[Sandy]

David, I don't think you should assume that the dog people don't care about vulnerable species. There are many questions about whether any resident species on Ocean Beach are threatened in that environment. I refer you to the Ocean Beach Dog web site where the community group has posted a lot of indepth information about this issue: http://oceanbeachdog.home.mindspring.com

[Steve Sayad]

Brent Plater regularly uses the "David" name as an alias, so he is likely the source of the comment. More importantly, there is no legal definition (certainly in the ESA) of a "vulnerable" species. Such language is just jibberish. The only "threatened" species in any of the off-leash areas within the GGNRA is the Western Snowy Plover. However, despite the desires of so-called "environmentalists", U.S. Fish & Wildlife has refused to recognize any area in the San Francisco Bay Area as "critical" habitat for the WSP. Accordingly, nothing that goes on in the few areas where the WSP roosts (on portions of Ocean Beach and Crissy Field) can have any impact on the ability of the WSP to survive. Also completely lost by "David" is the fact that the 1979 Pet Policy and the 1996 Compendium Amendment (both the product of the GGNRA) make clear that any off-leash dog disturbing wildlife (or people or anything else) must be leashed and the owner may be fined. The Pet Policy involves a small amount of land (less than 1% of the GGNRA) and provides adequate protection for the WSP. Finally, within the last two years, studies (unbiased studies, not GGNRA studies) have shown that the feeding habits of the WSP at Crissy Field are not affected by off-leash dogs, and that off-leash dogs do not pose any significant threat to the WSP. The actual threats to the WSP, particularly at Ocean Beach, come from its true predators, crows and sparrows, who have been brough to the area by human garbage left on the Great Highway. Don't blame the dogs.
On the subject of the bill just introduced by Nancy Pelosi, she has, in her zeal to develop the areas under the administrative jurisdiction of the Presidio Trust (such as building a museum of modern art) lost sight of the fact that the deeds conveying former City land to the GGNRA (such as Ocean Beach and Funston) clearly state that should the GGNRA deviate from its recreation-first mandate, the lands shall revert back to the City. That might actually be a welcome result of the rather devious bill put forth by Pelosi for the purposes of development of the Presidio.

[david]

David here (not Brent Plater).

I have learned that dog owners will do and say almost anything to justify their desires to let their dogs run off-leash and that includes disputing environmental/health/safety research. Steve, I like how you put the names of those you disagree with in quotes. You prove my earlier point about your ilk doing and saying anything to justify letting your dogs off leash.

And steve, I dont blame dogs for this. Dogs run, dig, piss, shit, bark, bite and all that cuz thats what dogs do. Thats what a lot of animals do.

I blame selfish, greedy entitled dog owners who think that because they pay taxes, or dont have children, or whatever, that they DESERVE public space to let their dogs do what dogs do.

-David (not Brent)

[Steve Sayad]

David, aka Brent:

Every one of the things you attribute to dogs (in a negative way of course) is also a human attribute and something you have the capacity to engage in and humans regularly engage in. But, because you are human, you claim the right of superiority over dogs, and even over dog owners. You also apparently could not care less that Pelosi's bill (which is the subject here) will eliminate all forms of recreation from the GGNRA. Perhaps you do not use the Park, but those of us who did, and those of us who were promised a miniscule amount of land for off-leash recreation, and who fought for and won that right back in federal court, do care. It's not too much to keep less than one percent of the GGNRA for off-leash rights, rights that require people to pick up after their pets, which seems to take up most of your obsession. If you do not pick up after your dog, as you do not pick up after yourself, you are subject to citation. Come to think of it, what did you do when the two recent discharges of your waste took place in the Bay. Did you get out and clean it up? Or did you turn yourself in to the authorities? Of course you did neither because you can't deal with your own waste except to forget about it once you're done.

[Maayan Gordon]

I have loved dogs my entire life. I now own a black labrador/aussie mix and i am training a guide dog puppy who is a lab. I have worked in two vet clinics and i loved beeing able to help animals in need. I have also previously raised and trained a guide dog named Garth who I now miss very much. When I was younger my family owned a wonderful and energetic peach colored standar poodle named Sparky and two cats. One white siamese named angel and one brown grey tabby named lucifer (after the cat in cinderella). Because of my love of cats and dogs I decided to start a store for pets so I can continue to help and provide for them.