wiener.jpgA San Francisco supervisor wants the city to have a say in the proposal by the Golden Gate National Recreation Area to drastically reduce the areas in which dogs can go without a leash, and asked at today’s board meeting for a hearing to be held on the issue in the coming weeks.

Supervisor Scott Wiener requested the hearing on the issue after the National Park Service released a proposal last month to reduce the size of off-leash areas for dogs throughout the Golden Gate recreation area, including in San Francisco locations such as Ocean Beach, Crissy Field and Fort Mason.

The proposal, issued by the park service on Jan. 14, said the “increased expectations for use of the park for dog recreation have resulted in controversy, litigation, and compromised visitor and employee safety, affecting visitor experience and resulting in resource degradation.”

Wiener, who represents San Francisco’s District 8, said he was concerned that the drastic reduction in off-leash space in the national parks would lead to “a corresponding increase in use at neighborhood parks” around the city.

He asked the board today to convene a committee meeting to get public input on the proposal and how it would affect local residents, businesses and city agencies.

Wiener, who said outside the board room that he likes dogs but doesn’t have one, said the city should be “part of the conversation” about the proposal. He said the hearing, which has yet to be scheduled, would be for everyone who has an opinion on the issue.
“There’s a lot of concern and opinion about it,” he said.

The park service’s proposal is in the middle of a 90-day public
comment period that ends April 14, and Wiener said his hearing would likely be held in the next month or two while the proposal is still receiving public comment.

The park service is holding three hearings of its own on the issue in March. The first hearing is scheduled for March 2 at Tamalpais High School in Mill Valley, followed by ones on March 5 at San Francisco State University’s Seven Hills Center and March 7 at Fort Mason Center in San Francisco.

More information on the National Park Service’s proposal is available at http://www.nps.gov/goga/parkmgmt/dog-management.htm.

Dan McMenamin, Bay City News

Want more news, sent to your inbox every day? Then how about subscribing to our email newsletter? Here’s why we think you should. Come on, give it a try.

Please make sure your comment adheres to our comment policy. If it doesn't, it may be deleted. Repeat violations may cause us to revoke your commenting privileges. No one wants that!
  • Laura

    San Francisco needs to take a stand for people who don’t want to encounter dogs. Currently there is 0% of SF land for those people because dog owners treat every inch of SF as off leash. Scott Weiner likes dogs so what does he care about those who don’t. Apparently he doesn’t care at all. Think about what other groups he might not care about. There are more whites in his district, so maybe he doesn’t care about blacks either. There aren’t too many muslims in his district, maybe he doesn’t care about muslims. Maybe he doesn’t care about you. Let him get away with this and he’ll take away your rights too.

  • Laura

    San Francisco needs to take a stand for people who don’t want to encounter dogs. Currently there is 0% of SF land for those people because dog owners treat every inch of SF as off leash. Scott Weiner likes dogs so what does he care about those who don’t. Apparently he doesn’t care at all. Think about what other groups he might not care about. There are more whites in his district, so maybe he doesn’t care about blacks either. There aren’t too many muslims in his district, maybe he doesn’t care about muslims. Maybe he doesn’t care about you. Let him get away with this and he’ll take away your rights too.

  • sfbird

    Oh, boo hoo for the people who don’t like dogs. What about the people who don’t like kids? Or old people? Should they have land set aside for them too? Or, to use your insanely stupid logic and bring race into it, what about racists and homophobes? Should they have “straight whites only” areas set aside? Don’t they have as much of a right to not encounter things they don’t like?

    Christ, this is the same logic people use against gay marriage; that other people doing something you don’t agree with is somehow “infringing” on your rights. Are you going to rally for music you don’t like to be banned next?

  • sfbird

    Oh, boo hoo for the people who don’t like dogs. What about the people who don’t like kids? Or old people? Should they have land set aside for them too? Or, to use your insanely stupid logic and bring race into it, what about racists and homophobes? Should they have “straight whites only” areas set aside? Don’t they have as much of a right to not encounter things they don’t like?

    Christ, this is the same logic people use against gay marriage; that other people doing something you don’t agree with is somehow “infringing” on your rights. Are you going to rally for music you don’t like to be banned next?

  • Laura

    How can you compare non-white people and gay people to dogs?!!! That makes me so mad. Just makes me more sure that dog owners hate people.
    So if you want to keep your dogs in the parks, you have to let other people take their animals into the park. How about our pet snakes, spiders, ferrets, rats etc? Dogs aren’t above other animals and should not be treated as superior to other animals including people. If you unleash dogs, you unleash all animals. If you happen to be scared of snakes then you’ll have to go somewhere else.

  • Laura

    How can you compare non-white people and gay people to dogs?!!! That makes me so mad. Just makes me more sure that dog owners hate people.
    So if you want to keep your dogs in the parks, you have to let other people take their animals into the park. How about our pet snakes, spiders, ferrets, rats etc? Dogs aren’t above other animals and should not be treated as superior to other animals including people. If you unleash dogs, you unleash all animals. If you happen to be scared of snakes then you’ll have to go somewhere else.

  • getsnarky

    This is a great idea.

    I do, incidentally, understand the concerns of folks who aren’t huge dog fans. Perhaps a compromise can be made to simultaneously increase the fines for failure to pick up after a dog or other dog-related incidents to assuage the concerns of the non-dog-fans. Maybe increased vigilance in checking dog tags would also help.

    p.s. Laura, you might want to check your facts. Dogs are treated differently than most other animals in California, i.e. it’s illegal to own a ferret as a pet here, among many, many other types of animals. See, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 671 (c)(2)(K). http://www.dfg.ca.gov/licensing/pdffiles/fg1518.pdf

  • getsnarky

    This is a great idea.

    I do, incidentally, understand the concerns of folks who aren’t huge dog fans. Perhaps a compromise can be made to simultaneously increase the fines for failure to pick up after a dog or other dog-related incidents to assuage the concerns of the non-dog-fans. Maybe increased vigilance in checking dog tags would also help.

    p.s. Laura, you might want to check your facts. Dogs are treated differently than most other animals in California, i.e. it’s illegal to own a ferret as a pet here, among many, many other types of animals. See, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 671 (c)(2)(K). http://www.dfg.ca.gov/licensing/pdffiles/fg1518.pdf

  • sfbird

    @Laura: Hey, you’re the one who brought race into it for absolutely no reason whatsoever. I was just throwing your crazy logic back at you.

    As for other animals in the park, sure, you can bring them there. In fact, some people do already. Haven’t you ever seen one of those crazy snake-around-the-shoulders guys walking around? Or the guy with the Indiana Jones hat and two parrots? I’ve even seen a cat on a leash once or twice, which is pretty weird, but hey, whatever. Live and let live, I say.

    I suppose you could take your snake “off leash,” but, since they don’t have ears, it probably won’t come back when you call it.

    @getsnarky: Agreed. Bad pet owners are just like any person that litters. They should be ticketed and fined for not picking up waste. But I’ve found that in off leash dog areas, people are very conscious of being responsible about it (and are quickly called out by other dog owners if they aren’t).

  • sfbird

    @Laura: Hey, you’re the one who brought race into it for absolutely no reason whatsoever. I was just throwing your crazy logic back at you.

    As for other animals in the park, sure, you can bring them there. In fact, some people do already. Haven’t you ever seen one of those crazy snake-around-the-shoulders guys walking around? Or the guy with the Indiana Jones hat and two parrots? I’ve even seen a cat on a leash once or twice, which is pretty weird, but hey, whatever. Live and let live, I say.

    I suppose you could take your snake “off leash,” but, since they don’t have ears, it probably won’t come back when you call it.

    @getsnarky: Agreed. Bad pet owners are just like any person that litters. They should be ticketed and fined for not picking up waste. But I’ve found that in off leash dog areas, people are very conscious of being responsible about it (and are quickly called out by other dog owners if they aren’t).

  • sunnysunset

    I think getsnarky brings up a very valid point – its the crappy dog owners who need to be enforced, not an overall ban on having good behaving dogs and their owners being able to enjoy the outdoor unrestricted.

    @Laura – What exactly is behind your strong hatred towards dogs? Did you have a bad incident with one in the past? Is it the dog poo that pisses you off? The barking?

    I’m a dog owner and I am actually really conscious of people’s cues when I walk my dog down the street. If a person appears to be displeased about the dog (and you dog haters don’t hide it), I typically ensure my dog does not approach the person. If she’s off-leash I typically call her back to keep her by my side if she’s roaming and I approach such an individual.

    I’m all for upping fines for bad ownership: failing to pick-up, not abiding by posted leash rules (especially when related to wildlife habitat protection), and may be even bringing an non-neutered dogs to dog parks since that’s typically the prime cause for incidents.I just don’t think it’s fair to take away my ability to roam free with my dog around Ft. Funston which is what these rules are proposing.

  • sunnysunset

    I think getsnarky brings up a very valid point – its the crappy dog owners who need to be enforced, not an overall ban on having good behaving dogs and their owners being able to enjoy the outdoor unrestricted.

    @Laura – What exactly is behind your strong hatred towards dogs? Did you have a bad incident with one in the past? Is it the dog poo that pisses you off? The barking?

    I’m a dog owner and I am actually really conscious of people’s cues when I walk my dog down the street. If a person appears to be displeased about the dog (and you dog haters don’t hide it), I typically ensure my dog does not approach the person. If she’s off-leash I typically call her back to keep her by my side if she’s roaming and I approach such an individual.

    I’m all for upping fines for bad ownership: failing to pick-up, not abiding by posted leash rules (especially when related to wildlife habitat protection), and may be even bringing an non-neutered dogs to dog parks since that’s typically the prime cause for incidents.I just don’t think it’s fair to take away my ability to roam free with my dog around Ft. Funston which is what these rules are proposing.