This past week we took a little vacation to the Black Hills of South Dakota. It was disturbing to see the number of places dogs weren't allowed to be. The pets-allowed hotel turned out to be pets allowed in crates the entire time. At the Badlands dogs weren't supposed to be out of the vehicle unless you were in a parking lot. No dogs at Mount Rushmore except in the parking ramp- this is a fairly recent change. The dogs probably weren't supposed to be in Custer Park either. Fortunately there was nobody at the Ranger station to ask and no signs. I'm just curious about where others go with their dogs that is a little more dog friendly.

On a brighter note while at a wayside stop my 20 month old GSD was finally inspired to lift his leg instead of squatting and peeing on his front leg <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" /> . Hopefully the habit continues.

It is Federal Law 'no dogs' It is federal land. I forget the exact train of thought , but something along the lines of they aren't natural to the enviroment , people let them run amuck when on hiking trails ,they bother the other 'visitors' Don't pick up after them ,leave their piles in the middle of the trail ,chase up varmits, deer, bear what ever may live in the park or forrest you are in. etc..

Of course service dogs are allowed ie, L/E K9, Guide dogs.. etc.. I have read a while ago some folks 'seniors' where trying to get their properly O/B trained dogs approved as assistant dogs since they use them as a pack animals to lessen the load on them so they can enjoy the trails and back country. The main reason the parks exist

I always travel off season and wind up in the least visited or remote areas anyways never had a problem not to say I won't sometime but my dogs are always under control and well behaved? (Atleast they listen to me) at all times and it shows, IMO the "no dogs' is a result of the millions of 1/2 or barely trained dogs visiting the parks over the years causing mayhem.

But I am sure someone here, will have a more definitive answer for you

Oh ya I believe most state parks Federal forrest and federal recreation areas allow dogs

A few years ago I stayed on Assateague Island for most of april -- camping on the beach, watching the birds and ponies. It was great, other than the mosquitos at night.

Access to Assateague and Chincoteague with the dogs was a big problem.

The national park allowed dogs, and we were able to walk with them and play on the beach. They had to stay leashed, but that was no problem.

The rangers visited my camp often to chat and check us out, but were very pleasant and really appreciated the dog's training. Because of the moquitos, and a pony stallion that didn't like the look of our tent, we ended up sleeping in the van. Also not a big deal, considering we had miles of white sand beach and surf fishing all to ourselves <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Neither the state park on Assateague, or the island of Chincoteage (which is the "settled" island) allowed dogs. I ended up not ever setting foot on Chincoteage because of it. Bummer.

I hadn't thought to check about the parks allowing dogs, since there is no restrictions at any of the ones in our area. I sure will in the future. If not for the national park, that could've been one lousy vacation.

We have BLM land near us. We drive in a ways off the road. The dogs explore all over off leash. It's kinda neat to watch the three of them wander. I worry about possible snake encounters, but it's not happened in the three years we've been doing it. They sleep in the vehicle at night.

We camped at Sequioa National Forest last year before school let out in early June. Seemed once the campground hosts and rangers saw the dogs were well behaved they really didn't care about them being off leash.

I always make it a point to do OB with the dogs shortly after arrival at a campground in the hopes that fellow campers, campground hosts, and rangers see that they're under control. The silly tricks they can do help to endear them to strangers <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" /> .

Even a so-called "well behaved" dog can take off after a deer or rabbit and be gone in a matter of seconds. I have yet to meet someone else whose dog will reliably recall when it takes off after something, or even if it's 50 feet away sniffing a bush. It's because of people's "well behaved dogs" that these rules have been put in place at many of our national parks and outdoor recreation facilities. Like Rob said, off-leash dogs chase and kill native wildlife, defacate on and around trails (the same rules apply for dog poop as it does your own when hiking in the forest - bury it or pack it out with you), pee on and trample native plants (which can kill them), and approach other people who may or may not want a strange dog coming up to them. I carry a walking stick and/or my pepper spray every time we go hiking or backpacking for just that reason; I don't want someone else's dog bothering me and my dog, and I will not hesitate to spray an approaching dog if it does not heed my verbal warnings (I will tell an approaching dog NO! or SIT! and that will usually get them confused enough to stop) and then my attempts to shoo it away.
This is a problem especially around here; go to any trailhead and see how many "lost dog" flyers are up. I don't pity the 'owners' of these dogs, but I do pity the dogs. I'm sure most of them die from getting their collars snagged (since most people think that choke chains should be worn by their dogs at all times), being shot by someone when they start acting aggressively towards hikers or when they start picking off livestock, from natural predators like bears or cougars, or even from starvation.

Kirsten writes: "I have yet to meet someone else whose dog will reliably recall when it takes off after something, or even if it's 50 feet away sniffing a bush."

Too true. I imagine that a lot of people on this board, like myself, have gone to the trouble to "critter-proof" their dogs (Van Camp has given the details elsewhere), as well as to develop solid OB, but we can't enjoy the freedom that would otherwise give us because most people have no control over their dogs off-leash, and the law can't practically make allowances for us.

With my GSD, despite his sky-high prey drive, one command suffices to stop the chase, be it deer, rabbit, squirrel, or what have you.

OTOH, if I'm in mountain lion territory, I don't let him wander.

I guess I forgot to mention that it was the middle of the week and there were zero other campers. Otherwise, I would not have allowed my dogs off leash while at a campground. And they aren't allowed to run amuk and bother people, and they don't go on the trails, and I do pick up their poop.

I was just going on the assumption that the people on this board were generally responsible and not the average pet owner so I didn't go into these details. Each situation is different. I use judgment as to whether or not my dogs can sniff around off leash. I don't set them loose and let them be pests.

People with uncontrolled "he's just being friendly" dogs bug me too.

I work at Sam Rayburn Lake, Texas with the Corps of Engineers. We have thousands of acres of federal land (National Forest and Corps of Engineer) that are open to people camping with their pets (leash laws apply). The only exceptions that I can think of are a couple privately owned marinas that prohibit any dogs on the property, leashed or otherwise. The reason for their ban is too many owners failing to clean up after and/or control their dogs.

As the very proud owner of a Malinois, I consider myself to be a responsible pet owner - and I DO clean up after my dog. I just figure it comes with the territory. We travel a lot to matches and dog shows; doggy pick up bags are always in my back pocket - you never know on which walk one will be needed! I'm sad to say that the number of hotels that keep their doors open to dog owners seems to be shrinking. It seems that every premium list for upcoming dog shows has one or more hotels that were available at a previous show that are noted as no longer accepting dogs. Who's to blame?? The dog owners of course! Not everyone, but those that don't clean up after their dogs, that don't keep them leashed and under control, that don't crate their pets or otherwise maintain control of them while in the hotel rooms, that try to sneak their dogs in the room without paying the pet fee, well, they are ruining it for everyone. Let's face it, when a manager gets complaints from nondog owning customers about the poop all over the grass or walkway outside their room, or they have to pay for repairs to dog related damage in a room that presumable didn't have a dog in it, guess what? Dogs aren't welcome there anymore.

Not sure what the answer is. How do you "train" pet owners to be responsible? All pet owners need to do their best to not contribute to the problem or we are all going to find ourselves without places to go/stay with our dogs.

I can certainly understand why dogs should be on leashes- particularly during peak season when there are many people around. But they weren't even allowed to be on a path made of wooden planks. It's hard to see how they could have really impacted the environment. I understand that irresponsible dog owners have a negative affect on policies but what are the chances that the irresponsible owners even obey the policies. It seems more worthwhile to specifically target the offenders rather than all dogs and their owners.