Dogs in National Parks

[Tortoise]

Hopefully, a lesson learned....

I doubt that very much.

[Xplora]

Good job PWS.

+1

Well done Mr. Parker. You get a mention in the news. Anyone else? Our internet speed and data limit does not allow us to view a great deal of U tube so I did not get to the end. 16 minutes of video would take me about an hour to watch on a good day. The pleasures of living remote and I refuse to put up a big ugly sat dish. No doubt he will do it again but next time he may not be so stupid to post it on the internet. He may actually be dumb enough to contest the infringement and then the court can increase the costs.

[slparker]

TY, Xplora.

Wow, I have 15 seconds of fame.

I will only charge Bushwalking.com members $5 for my autograph. That is quite a discount .

[davidf]

the video ha been pulled. Ha I have had a hard life etc is bull. Me at time to. I dont mind the odd rule breaking but wilderness area are jut no go

[Lost]

I’m a dog owner, I agree strongly in this case and in most cases, that dogs should not be allowed in NP’s but not all cases. Anywhere that is wilderness or of significant heritage value should never allow dogs into the park. But this blanket “No dogs allowed” leads to dog owners ignoring the rule and just accepting the fine if caught, it’s not a criminal offence. I would like to see some common sense in this regard.

There are many areas which are not wilderness and have no significant heritage value, full of rubbish, high-power lines, roads, horse manure, feral animals and fire trails that have been eroded by bike riders, horses and 4WD’s.

If it was up to me, I would allow dogs in certain areas, particularly urban areas. Every dog would need to be microchipped, owners must carry doggie bags and have a NP “dog” pass to enter. I would up the fines dramatically for infringements, I wouldn’t allow camping with dogs (there are State Forests for that) and use the money raised through fines and passes to increase funding for eradicating feral animals.

There is a lot of money to be made by NP’s if they used common sense in this regard. And if dog owners don’t show common sense, fine the living daylights out of them.

Go take your dog or dogs into state forests. Let me guess your one of the many people who take your dogs for walkies in the Royal National park 90% who do it off leash. It galls me when walking up the Higgs track and I come across people taking there dogs up the top mostly off leash. I used to wonder why I didn't see much wildlife up the top off Higgs track. Me thinks the dogs might have something to do with it. You do know in a few national parks dogs have gone feral and do quite abit of damage.

[potato]

I’m a dog owner, I agree strongly in this case and in most cases, that dogs should not be allowed in NP’s but not all cases. Anywhere that is wilderness or of significant heritage value should never allow dogs into the park. But this blanket “No dogs allowed” leads to dog owners ignoring the rule and just accepting the fine if caught, it’s not a criminal offence. I would like to see some common sense in this regard.

There are many areas which are not wilderness and have no significant heritage value, full of rubbish, high-power lines, roads, horse manure, feral animals and fire trails that have been eroded by bike riders, horses and 4WD’s.

If it was up to me, I would allow dogs in certain areas, particularly urban areas. Every dog would need to be microchipped, owners must carry doggie bags and have a NP “dog” pass to enter. I would up the fines dramatically for infringements, I wouldn’t allow camping with dogs (there are State Forests for that) and use the money raised through fines and passes to increase funding for eradicating feral animals.

There is a lot of money to be made by NP’s if they used common sense in this regard. And if dog owners don’t show common sense, fine the living daylights out of them.

Go take your dog or dogs into state forests. Let me guess your one of the many people who take your dogs for walkies in the Royal National park 90% who do it off leash. It galls me when walking up the Higgs track and I come across people taking there dogs up the top mostly off leash. I used to wonder why I didn't see much wildlife up the top off Higgs track. Me thinks the dogs might have something to do with it. You do know in a few national parks dogs have gone feral and do quite abit of damage.

+1 there are so many places to take your dog as it is - there is no need to take pets into national parks.

Your argument about existing human impacts like power lines etc is a can-of-worms and has no rational end - you may as well throw climate change into that mix.

[Graham17]

Well, it was a bit of a dog track, till they fixed it up

[Graham17]

Very important to keep dogs out, it took ages to get rid of the thylacine

[wildwanderer]

Very important to keep dogs out, it took ages to get rid of the thylacine

There are many areas which are not wilderness and have no significant heritage value, full of rubbish, high-power lines, roads, horse manure, feral animals and fire trails that have been eroded by bike riders, horses and 4WD’s.

If it was up to me, I would allow dogs in certain areas, particularly urban areas. Every dog would need to be microchipped, owners must carry doggie bags and have a NP “dog” pass to enter. I would up the fines dramatically for infringements, I wouldn’t allow camping with dogs (there are State Forests for that) and use the money raised through fines and passes to increase funding for eradicating feral animals.

There is a lot of money to be made by NP’s if they used common sense in this regard. And if dog owners don’t show common sense, fine the living daylights out of them.

Im not a dog person but I agree with Croll here, in certain areas they should be allowed. Having just returned from Canada where they allow dogs in National Parks. Certainly hasnt harmed the natural beauty of the place.

I do think if your taking a dog it should be leashed.

[Lost]

Having lived in Canada for a number of years the bears enjoy the dogs too.

[taswegian]

I love (some) dogs,never owned one.
Whilst a dog may be "a man's best friend" I have trouble with a concept of dogs in our Tasmanian national parks.
There's enough (too many) issues with dogs in suburbia that people and authorities have to deal with.
I'm happy for a prohibition.

I expect one could ask does one visit those remote and beautiful places for their attributes, or is time out with their dog what's important?

I guess the extreme is past behaviour in Walls of Jerusalem/Dixons Kingdom many years ago.
Dogs, guns, horses.
Still resonates after all those years.

[Nuts]

The system, as it stands, is probably the best the service can manage, dare I say i'd like to see the receipt for payment of that fine.
Maybe our parks deserve the discussions where the gritty reality of outcomes meets with public expectation, on the teetering edge of a bluff.

I see no reason for allowing dogs into parks, even on a leash, no matter how great the desire.
But then I see no reason for hacking private hut sites and tracks for those human animals who desire home comfort and or exclusivity afforded by or as a demonstration of wealth. As will happen on this track. Integrity goes to *&%$#! as a whole.

[swills]

I feel that if you can take your horse into the Alpine N.P. then why can't you take your dog (on a lead) into the park. There are already large numbers of feral animals in the park. Someone walking their dog and cleaning up after them wouldn't be an issue. If people can bring their pet horses then why not dogs?

[stepbystep]

I feel that if you can take your horse into the Alpine N.P. then why can't you take your dog (on a lead) into the park. There are already large numbers of feral animals in the park. Someone walking their dog and cleaning up after them wouldn't be an issue. If people can bring their pet horses then why not dogs?

No horses in NP's in Tas, and very few ferals swills. It's a no-brainer...

[Lost]

I feel that if you can take your horse into the Alpine N.P. then why can't you take your dog (on a lead) into the park. There are already large numbers of feral animals in the park. Someone walking their dog and cleaning up after them wouldn't be an issue. If people can bring their pet horses then why not dogs?

No horses in NP's in Tas, and very few ferals swills. It's a no-brainer...

Unfortunately there is one NP in Tassie that lets horse's on some dedicated trails and the powers that be have just opened it up to private enterprise to do commercial horse riding in the park. This park is also surrounded by a state forest and I have seen kangaroos guts ripped open by dogs and left for a painful death in this NP probably the dogs have come in from the state forest.Seen the same thing in NP's up in NSW hence no dogs in NP for me.

[Chris]

As a dog lover I still believe that they are totally inappropriate in National Parks. No matter how well intentioned, there would a great temptation for some owners to have their dogs off lead, with the inevitable consequence of some going missing. This is fair to neither the wildlife nor the dogs. So many owners believe their dogs to be unfailingly obedient, but it's very hard to over-ride the chasing instinct.

[slparker]

I feel that if you can take your horse into the Alpine N.P. then why can't you take your dog (on a lead) into the park. There are already large numbers of feral animals in the park. Someone walking their dog and cleaning up after them wouldn't be an issue. If people can bring their pet horses then why not dogs?

It is the opposite. Why bring horses into a National Park if you can’t bring dogs? Both are introduced species and don’t belong in national parks.

Just because you can doesnt mean you should.

[Lost]

I feel that if you can take your horse into the Alpine N.P. then why can't you take your dog (on a lead) into the park. There are already large numbers of feral animals in the park. Someone walking their dog and cleaning up after them wouldn't be an issue. If people can bring their pet horses then why not dogs?

It is the opposite. Why bring horses into a National Park if you can’t bring dogs? Both are introduced species and don’t belong in national parks.

Just because you can doesnt mean you should.

I don't think you should bring horse's or dogs or any other animal that is not native to that habitat.Horse's don't generally kill the local wildlife dogs do.

Here is some reasons I don't take my dog into National parks. Dogs are inquisitive easy to get bitten by a snake even on a leash. Ticks really do some damage to dogs and it cost me about $8K to get one fixed after a tick had a go at it(no it wasn't in NP)Ticks are in plaque porpotions in alot of NP.

Dogs run a long way fast and cover large amount of areas that you could not believe. A friend lost a dog (he lived on the edge of NP) within 3 hours he got together a bunch of friends on horseback. trail bikes and hiking we worked our way out from where it was last seen bad move work your way in. Dog was found 24 hours latter 30klms away gone through park and state forest.

I have been bailed up numerous times by people walking their dogs (from little lap dogs up to labs) and all the owners said the same thing "he/she has never done that before" mostly off leash all in National parks.

[Outbeck]

I have 2 dogs. One is mine and the other is a Seeing Eye Dog puppy in training. The SEDA puppy comes with me into NPs (and is allowed to).
I'm in the 'no dogs in NPs' camp (apart from service dogs). It's not the place for them and the really well behaved, obedient dogs are in the minority these days.
You only need to go to a dog park to see how many out of control dogs there are.

[tom_brennan]

I often go walking in my local urban bushland reserve, which allows dogs but only on leash. I see plenty of dogs. Over 50% of them, and probably closer to 75%, are not on their leash. There are pretty clear signs about the requirement to leash dogs on the tracks at all of the entrances to the reserve.

It seems as if many dog owners are of the view that their dog is special, and well-behaved, and that the rules don't apply to them.

Best not to open this up to the National Parks.

[north-north-west]

I've taken plenty of dogs, both my own and others, into reserves where dogs are permitted. If I am sure I can trust the dog to behave and that I can control it effectively by voice or whistle commands, I'll let it off the leash. But if there's any sign of other people or dogs, they're back on the lead immediately. Even the best behaved dogs have off days or particular triggers.
And my first rule with them is that they don't annoy the wildlife (except silver gulls). I had one dog who was taught to distinguish between ferals and natives - rabbits, feral cats, things like that, he was allowed (even encouraged) to go after. But I could sit quietly at camp with wallabies and goannas and currawongs etc wandering around and he'd ignore them,

The big problem with dogs these days is, as has been said, they're mostly not properly trained or controlled. But no matter the circumstances, except for assistance dogs they just don't belong in NPs.

[crollsurf]

Just got back from a family holiday in Victoria. Maybe my comments regarding dogs being allowed in National Parks "in some cases" may only apply to NSW where we have farmed land, old quarries, toxic rivers and creeks listed as National Parks. Parks covered in Rabbit and Horse manure. With a few exceptions, any park land acquired by NSW is classified "National Park". No dogs allowed. Which means very few places to walk your dog in the bush. particularly near Sydney.

In Victoria they are a lot more pragmatic. Parks Victoria allow dogs in many of their parks and where dogs are not allowed, it makes total sense. As lost pointed out, dogs are even allowed in conservation areas in Tasmania which sounds a bit far in the other direction.

So I agree dogs should not be allowed in National Parks but people from other states may not be aware of the situation in NSW.

Lost wrote:
Let me guess your one of the many people who take your dogs for walkies in the Royal National park 90% who do it off leash

You guessed wrong but a great example of what happens when you let humans into the parks.

I agree with NNW's last post. I wouldn't say it annoys me but people who let their dog approach other people off-lead are being inconsiderate. Some people are scared or nervous around dogs.

[tyggriffic]

So dogs are allowed in a lot of wilderness areas - they're called state forests. Don't be selfish. The reason dogs are not allowed is due to their scent which can deter and interfere with wildlife. Thats the sole reason. That means nat. parks are the only areas where native wildlife cannot be interfered with by domestic pets. Is that really too much to ask? Our country is filled with state forests to enjoy with your animals.
Now as to the og topic. I HATE admitting this but I have known this guy in the past, in my cyberpunk hippy doofing days. He is an obnoxious twat of a human being who i never personally liked. There is so much i could say abouth this douchebag but none of it nice or useful. His list of criminal offences is huge by now, it was impressive 10 years ago. He's all about free living, by which he means scabbing off everyone he comes in contact with and society in general. Hates government etc, yet is happy to claim a pension.

[Graham17]

ok back to the point... Thylacine was the top dog... if there are any left should they a) be banned from NPs b) Be on leash only C)Shot on sight

[ILUVSWTAS]

ok back to the point... Thylacine was the top dog... if there are any left should they a) be banned from NPs b) Be on leash only C)Shot on sight

That's a bit like comparing native cats to feral cats

[johnw]

ok back to the point... Thylacine was the top dog... if there are any left should they a) be banned from NPs b) Be on leash only C)Shot on sight

That's a bit like comparing native cats to feral cats

Good point Mark. In any case the Thylacine was (is? ) a native carnivorous marsupial, not an introduced dog/mammal...

[puredingo]

Ok, so lets not even begin to open up the can of worms that is the Dingo!

I'm in agreeance with crollsurf from awhile back. Not all NP's where created evenly...well they were created evenly but mankind has abused some more than others.

One particular park I visit regularly is riddled with feral animals, domestic stock roam unfenced, working dogs free ranging the hills, roads criss cross like lashings on a convicts back, power lines buzz and pop overhead and a polluted river runs down the guts of it. Would strolling down one of those roads with a dog on a LEAD (Australian) be any more detremental to the enviroment than whats already happening?

But in saying that I grew up in the royal and never took a dog out in that scrub (although plenty of the old timers did..even the rangers!) .

[slparker]

Ok, so lets not even begin to open up the can of worms that is the Dingo!

I'm in agreeance with crollsurf from awhile back. Not all NP's where created evenly...well they were created evenly but mankind has abused some more than others.

One particular park I visit regularly is riddled with feral animals, domestic stock roam unfenced, working dogs free ranging the hills, roads criss cross like lashings on a convicts back, power lines buzz and pop overhead and a polluted river runs down the guts of it. Would strolling down one of those roads with a dog on a LEAD (Australian) be any more detremental to the enviroment than whats already happening?

But in saying that I grew up in the royal and never took a dog out in that scrub (although plenty of the old timers did..even the rangers!) .

Domestic dogs in NPs have bred with the dingo which is a problem in and of itself, but to be honest this thread concerns NP in Tasmania where there were never canines before colonial times.

The presence of domestic dogs and other feral species in mainland Australian NPs is a different issue, to be sure. I mean I saw a hare up on Feathertop last weekend - feral mammal species are more integrated into the mainland ecosystem than in Tasmania, so far as I am aware.

[tom_brennan]

Would strolling down one of those roads with a dog on a LEAD (Australian) be any more detremental to the enviroment than whats already happening?

Probably not.

However, the majority of dog owners don't seem to be capable of keeping their dog on a lead when they are required to, so it's a lot easier just to ban dogs altogether.