Tim Woody’s Feb. 6 op-ed painted a picture of unleashed dogs being a blight on our fair city in what feels like a piece of sophistry. He gave nationwide statistics regarding dog bites, not statistics for Anchorage, and claimed streams are polluted and outdoor activities are thwarted by dog feces, yet no source was given for these anecdotal situations. How does a leash have anything to do with dog poop and polluted water, and are dog bites a serious issue here in Anchorage? In my line of work, emergency medical services, I have seen so few dog bites I can’t recall the last one I encountered, so I must ask: Is this a problem in search of a solution or the other way around?
Woody’s solution is to rewrite Title 17 so that leashes are required on trails or public spaces,no exceptions. This rewrite would lump in untrained dogs with e-collar and voice-trained dogs. It would make it difficult or impossible, if one has multiple dogs, to bike or ski with one’s companion, due to the fact the dogs must be tethered to you or the bike; it is less safe for dogs and humans alike.
Title 17, in its current format, was written with input from all the stakeholders: trail users, dog owners and more. It strikes a good balance.Imagine that an unspecified number of bikers caused injury to pedestrians in our community and the solution was to ban bikers from trails: That is the workable equivalent of what we are talking about here. Once again, we see two user groups pitted against each other when there truly is no need.
These changes will, in all likelihood, not affect me. My dogs are e-collar trained and I walk them on designated off-leash trails or deep in the woods, as well as bike weekly with them. I’m all for finding workable solutions, but according to ADN reporting, enforcement is lax and usually ends in a verbal warning.
A workable solution, in my opinion: enforcement of the existing law and citations for scofflaws, just like any other law on the books – not limits for those of us who follow the law. I’m not advocating for some free-for-all where all dogs roam free, I’m simply saying if an owner is responsible and trains their dog, they are hardly the nuisance owner you need to alter the law for. You must hold the offender responsible, not an entire community.
Shawn O’Donnell
Anchorage
Have something on your mind? Send to letters@adn.com or click here to submit via any web browser. Letters under 200 words have the best chance of being published. Writers should disclose any personal or professional connections with the subjects of their letters. Letters are edited for accuracy, clarity and length.