Okay I was looking at the rules for the BWCAW on the USDA website about bear resistant barrels vs. hanging rules but I found this about dogs needed to be leashed.

“ Q: What responsibilities do you have if you bring your dog?

A: Dogs must be under human control at all times on a 6-foot or shorter leash. Dogs endanger wildlife and barking intrudes on the experience. Dispose of dog waste 200 feet from water, campsites, portages, or put it in a latrine.”

This seems to be new. Previously it was more vaguely worded, dog must be under control at all times. Anyone aware why they changed the rules? Or is it a rule change? I know the USDA is guilty of posting different worded rules on different areas…

T

I always thought it was leashed on portages but that was it. Campsites I thought they were able to free roam as long as they were well behaved.

Yeah they definitely pulled a fast one and changed it up. It never stated anything about a leash previously

The wording seems a little odd to me, usually there is an "or" before the "on a 6 foot leash"

What about duck/grouse hunters with dogs in the BWCA? Those dogs are certainly not going to be on a leash. When I worked for the US Fish and Wildlife Service, there was wording specifically for the activity of bird hunting.

Okay I am terrible at the details ?? Adam pointed out in another post they talk about containers for bears but albeit more vaguely than the dogs on leash…
T

There's a 0% chance people are going to keep their dogs on a 6' leash the entire time they are at camp. Nor should they, that's pretty ridiculous assuming the dog isn't a nuisance.

I too thought there used to an "or" in there. My guess is it is worded that way to take out any subjectiveness. A lot easier and pretty cut and dry for a ranger to tell you your dog is off leash instead of your dog isn't under your control. I trip with my dog all the time in the U.S. and Canada and she is never on leash. I've never had any issues but of course she is extremely well behaved and on an e-collar. My guess is as long as your dog obeys the rules, i.e. is quiet, doesn't jump, or run off I don't think you'll have any issues.

dschult2: "I too thought there used to an "or" in there. My guess is it is worded that way to take out any subjectiveness. A lot easier and pretty cut and dry for a ranger to tell you your dog is off leash instead of your dog isn't under your control. I trip with my dog all the time in the U.S. and Canada and she is never on leash. I've never had any issues but of course she is extremely well behaved and on an e-collar. My guess is as long as your dog obeys the rules, i.e. is quiet, doesn't jump, or run off I don't think you'll have any issues."

Agreed, I dont see any enforcement on this over what was already being enforced. If I had to guess, since this was slipped into the rules and nobody seemed to know about it, most of the rangers probably aren't privy to it either. I leash on portages anyway because my dog doesn't do well with other dogs, we step off trail to let other dogs pass. Otherwise, literally perfect at camp, never goes more than 50 feet from me.

I think it might be the person at the Forest Service that wrote up the Q&A on the webpage.
If you click on the link to "Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness Trip Planning Guide" there is a section that lists the rules and regulations.
In that document, the wording of "under human control" is used and mentions cleaning up after your pet.
No leash mentioned.

Jakthund: "I think it might be the person at the Forest Service that wrote up the Q&A on the webpage.
If you click on the link to "Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness Trip Planning Guide" there is a section that lists the rules and regulations.
In that document, the wording of "under human control" is used and mentions cleaning up after your pet.
No leash mentioned.
"

Good to know, I was trying to determine if that was the case myself then I got distracted with work. I hate work. Now I am daydreaming about the next trip with my dog!

As someone who used to be a canine behavior consultant and trainer, the sheer number of people who stubbornly and arrogantly proclaim that they can control their dogs while absolutely NOT having any control over their dogs is infuriating. I'm glad the USFS is cracking down and spelling it out more because there are so many people who take dogs out there off-leash without any control while claiming to be able to control their dog, and I hate it. Then they whine about how inconvenient the leash is for them because of their dog's excitement and pulling or whatever. Guess what. If your dog is too much for you on a leash, it is absolutely NOT a dog that should be off leash. My dog is on-leash at all times on wilderness trips, and I can rarely even tell he's there. Leash is attached to me on portages, and in camp, he gets put on a line in camp.

P.S. If your dog gets into my or my dog's space while we are portaging, you're going to hear about it from me. Especially if you are nowhere to be seen when you dog comes down the portage at us. And if you tell me, "It's OK. He/she's friendly," I will be suppressing the urge to punch you in the neck. I don't care how friendly you dog is. I don't want him getting in my way or getting in my dog's space when we are on a portage especially since I have no idea what to expect from a strange dog off-leash out there and must then be prepared for the worst.

mschi772: "As someone who used to be a canine behavior consultant and trainer, the sheer number of people who stubbornly and arrogantly proclaim that they can control their dogs while absolutely NOT having any control over their dogs is infuriating. I'm glad the USFS is cracking down and spelling it out more because there are so many people who take dogs out there off-leash without any control while claiming to be able to control their dog, and I hate it. Then they whine about how inconvenient the leash is for them because of their dog's excitement and pulling or whatever. Guess what. If your dog is too much for you on a leash, it is absolutely NOT a dog that should be off leash. My dog is on-leash at all times on wilderness trips, and I can rarely even tell he's there. Leash is attached to me on portages, and in camp, he gets put on a line in camp.


P.S. If your dog gets into my or my dog's space while we are portaging, you're going to hear about it from me. Especially if you are nowhere to be seen when you dog comes down the portage at us. And if you tell me, "It's OK. He/she's friendly," I will be suppressing the urge to punch you in the neck. I don't care how friendly you dog is. I don't want him getting in my way or getting in my dog's space when we are on a portage especially since I have no idea what to expect from a strange dog off-leash out there and must then be prepared for the worst."

+1. I am a dog owner and dog lover. Most of my dogs would not and could not come along with me to the BW despite me wishing they could. I can't portage while also holding a leash and would not ever want an unsuspecting person to encounter my dog as a surprise. I have had several bad experiences on portage trails with dogs far from their owners while I am fully loaded, boat and pack, and just trying to get from A to B. More than once, it wasn't clear the dog was at all friendly. A few years ago, I had to put the boat down while the assertive dog blocked the trail. The owner ambled up after a while and just did the typical "Oh, he's fine, don't worry." This is a worse offense and more dangerous than someone outright leaving their crap blocking the middle of a portage with them nowhere in sight.

I volunteer at a private non-profit nature which had to ban dogs from the property due to a number of off leash dogs charging other hikers on trails in the woods. I don’t recall anyone ever having their dog on a leash. Everyone has a much better experience without dogs on the property.

mschi772: "As someone who used to be a canine behavior consultant and trainer, the sheer number of people who stubbornly and arrogantly proclaim that they can control their dogs while absolutely NOT having any control over their dogs is infuriating. I'm glad the USFS is cracking down and spelling it out more because there are so many people who take dogs out there off-leash without any control while claiming to be able to control their dog, and I hate it. Then they whine about how inconvenient the leash is for them because of their dog's excitement and pulling or whatever. Guess what. If your dog is too much for you on a leash, it is absolutely NOT a dog that should be off leash. My dog is on-leash at all times on wilderness trips, and I can rarely even tell he's there. Leash is attached to me on portages, and in camp, he gets put on a line in camp.


P.S. If your dog gets into my or my dog's space while we are portaging, you're going to hear about it from me. Especially if you are nowhere to be seen when you dog comes down the portage at us. And if you tell me, "It's OK. He/she's friendly," I will be suppressing the urge to punch you in the neck. I don't care how friendly you dog is. I don't want him getting in my way or getting in my dog's space when we are on a portage especially since I have no idea what to expect from a strange dog off-leash out there and must then be prepared for the worst."

I am a veterinarian in my 28th year of work. I like dogs. I’ve spent more than half my lifetime caring about them and helping them. I traveled, paddled and camped with three different dogs over the course of thirty years. I think many board members here have impeccably-trained dogs, and a deep understanding of canine behavior and the bond that forms with these special companions. And I am in 100% agreement with the above. I am tired of getting charged by “friendly dogs” when I have a canoe on my head. Nobody likes that.

That said, here’s an experience that flipped my switch. A few years back, I was walking on a single track road with a friend and her two off-leash dogs. Nobody around for miles. Middle of SNF. Beautiful day. Out of nowhere, her terrier snatches and shakes to death a Northern flicker (commonly on the ground pecking at wood and duff). Just like that, this beautiful bird was dead. This bird, living its best life, gone. And not a word from my friend in recognition of what had happened or leashing the dogs. It sickened me. It just changed me right then and there. This is a very well-trained dog. Kind with all people, all dogs, very obedient, doing what border terriers do best - target their prey, then shake and kill it. As humans, we bred them for this purpose. It was helpful for hunting as well as killing rats before we developed rodenticides.

I think the tide of wildlife management is tilting toward a recognition that dogs have high potential to leave trace - a lot of it. It goes beyond recall and acceptable behavior on the portage. It includes a recognition that turtles and ovenbirds are nesting (on the ground). Flickers are on the ground feeding. Mink frogs are a species in decline. Your dog is in their home.

This specific rule touches on an issue that is really frustrating because it should be so EASY to remedy, but government agencies just insist on being lumbering, dim-witted bureaucracies. When people just want to look-up the rules and regulations for the BWCAW, there are multiple sources they may find, and none of them look like a primary source. Someone at the SNF office needs to just sit down one day and publish THE RULES. A thoroughly, *thoughtfully* spelled-out document that leaves no ambiguity as to whether or not it is the last word on what the rules are and aren't for the area. This document should be what everyone--visitors, enforcement, outfitters, etc--link to when referring someone to the rules. Not that old Dept of Ag trip planning brochure from forever ago. Not the list from ely.org which is just copied from recreation.gov. Not lists published by outfitters or sites like this one and others that Adam won't even allow to be mentioned here. And no, not even recreation.gov should be considered THE source. Of course all the places should have the rules and regs available, but they should ALL cite or link back to a singular, authoritative source from the SNF/USFS/Dept of Ag so that we don't have people arguing every year about what the rules actually are and fussing about "Where did you see that? Where can I find the rules? Who says that?" All the old lists found everywhere should be updated, with link/citation to the primary source, or just removed so that people aren't arguing about what is and isn't true so flipping much.


https://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/superior/specialplaces/?cid=fseprd852569#main_content seems like it is the closest thing to THE SOURCE as I can ever find, but so many people are led to other, older lists that are published by people other than the USFS, and that creates a stupid amount of confusion.

Thought provoking discussion. Many of the things that seem to irritate others here do not bother me. I would be curious to see a poll of the majority of visitors and their feelings. Admittedly, I’m not in the camp of making big changes based on the feelings of a few and I am a dog owner who doesn’t have any children…Jade goes everywhere with me. She’s my right hand. Wouldn’t want to go anywhere without her so my opinions have some bias.

How many dog biting incidents are occurring each year? Is being startled by a dog on a portage enough to warrant a leash law or ban?

How many animals are killed by dogs? Is a frog or bird’s life more important that the 800,000 fish that lose theirs?

What true impact above the 200,000 visitors do dogs add? More than all of us plastic bagging our dog’s poop so it can go in the landfill and not on my shoe?

What’s a larger noice nuisance…a dog bark or boat motors, float planes, kids yelling/crying, a Bluetooth speaker blaring?

I ask these questions not discounting the feelings expressed above whatsoever. I get it and understand.

Aside from an obviously aggressive dog - i don't have any issues with the pups in the BW. An occasional bark, unleashed on portages, an excited dog greeting me on the portage...I'm totally fine with it.

Not to mention dogs get lost in the BW every year and we read about the anguish of the owners as they are rightfully worried about their best friends here on the Board. Hopefully they don't become hot lunch to wolves or have a slow death starving.

I have three dogs that I love very much.

mschi772: "This specific rule touches on an issue that is really frustrating because it should be so EASY to remedy, but government agencies just insist on being lumbering, dim-witted bureaucracies. When people just want to look-up the rules and regulations for the BWCAW, there are multiple sources they may find, and none of them look like a primary source. Someone at the SNF office needs to just sit down one day and publish THE RULES. A thoroughly, *thoughtfully* spelled-out document that leaves no ambiguity as to whether or not it is the last word on what the rules are and aren't for the area. This document should be what everyone--visitors, enforcement, outfitters, etc--link to when referring someone to the rules. Not that old Dept of Ag trip planning brochure from forever ago. Not the list from ely.org which is just copied from recreation.gov. Not lists published by outfitters or sites like this one and others that Adam won't even allow to be mentioned here. And no, not even recreation.gov should be considered THE source. Of course all the places should have the rules and regs available, but they should ALL cite or link back to a singular, authoritative source from the SNF/USFS/Dept of Ag so that we don't have people arguing every year about what the rules actually are and fussing about "Where did you see that? Where can I find the rules? Who says that?" All the old lists found everywhere should be updated, with link/citation to the primary source, or just removed so that people aren't arguing about what is and isn't true so flipping much.



https://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/superior/specialplaces/?cid=fseprd852569#main_content seems like it is the closest thing to THE SOURCE as I can ever find, but so many people are led to other, older lists that are published by people other than the USFS, and that creates a stupid amount of confusion."

I have worked with government agencies in the past and when I make the suggestion for an obvious improvement most of the time I receive the answer, "we will never get that past the legal department". Government is afraid that a change to anything no matter how good it would be would open them to potential lawsuits.

mschi772: "This specific rule touches on an issue that is really frustrating because it should be so EASY to remedy, but government agencies just insist on being lumbering, dim-witted bureaucracies. When people just want to look-up the rules and regulations for the BWCAW, there are multiple sources they may find, and none of them look like a primary source. Someone at the SNF office needs to just sit down one day and publish THE RULES. A thoroughly, *thoughtfully* spelled-out document that leaves no ambiguity as to whether or not it is the last word on what the rules are and aren't for the area. This document should be what everyone--visitors, enforcement, outfitters, etc--link to when referring someone to the rules. Not that old Dept of Ag trip planning brochure from forever ago. Not the list from ely.org which is just copied from recreation.gov. Not lists published by outfitters or sites like this one and others that Adam won't even allow to be mentioned here. And no, not even recreation.gov should be considered THE source. Of course all the places should have the rules and regs available, but they should ALL cite or link back to a singular, authoritative source from the SNF/USFS/Dept of Ag so that we don't have people arguing every year about what the rules actually are and fussing about "Where did you see that? Where can I find the rules? Who says that?" All the old lists found everywhere should be updated, with link/citation to the primary source, or just removed so that people aren't arguing about what is and isn't true so flipping much.



https://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/superior/specialplaces/?cid=fseprd852569#main_content seems like it is the closest thing to THE SOURCE as I can ever find, but so many people are led to other, older lists that are published by people other than the USFS, and that creates a stupid amount of confusion."

I think a lot of us have the same frustration. Makes no sense...clearly define the rules and you get better compliance. Even in your link the rule for bear resistant containers is not clearly defined. In the previous temporary orders bear resistant was defined by IGBC-Certified...this distinction was not made.

Somewhere on the USDA...I found it once...are the BWCAW rules fully written out. For example, the 9 person/4 canoe rule was clearly written out that it only applied to the groups you travel with, random groups at portages or using a portage at the same time would not be fined. 2 separate groups such as a BSA or Church group obviously together but with 2 different permits would be fined. While the posted rule is more vague.

T

iCallitMaize: "
How many animals are killed by dogs? Is a frog or bird’s life more important that the 800,000 fish that lose theirs?

"

It is when the entire species is threatened. Just like you can't target and keep coaster brook trout, pet dogs shouldn't be off-leash on portage trails and campsites, hunting and killing non-game wildlife.

Maybe your dog doesn't doesn't instinctively hunt when off-leash. Mine didn't either. They were Labs, and spent about 99% of their lifetime looking at me for the next step. But other people have dogs that do this. The owners are either not educated about the impact, or they don't care about it. Or, some - not enough - responsibly leash the dog or leave the dog at home.

Here is some information about Northern flicker decline, which is just one of many bird species at-risk.

Northern flicker.

How many non-game / non-"vermin" animals are killed in the BWCAW by dogs? The answer should be none if it is LNT.

I enjoy meeting dogs on the trail. My observation is that nearly always the dogs that would seem to have behavioral concerns will be found at the end of some type of restraint. We always travel with a well behaved Black Lab. Most all of the campers that interact with him enjoy petting him. Gunner has chased more than a few Bears out of camp. In the fifteen trips he has done we have not had any negative experiences. I just wish he could get a little better with the paddle.

I am in the camp of those that don't want to run into a dog off the leash on a trail, or one that wanders into our camp. And I certainly don't want to hear one that barks.

I have owned dogs for 30 plus years. However we never took them on trips off the leash.

I. . . and a lot of others. . . go to the BWCA for solitude and the nature. Not to see/hear other people's dogs.

Appreciate the link to the Flicker. Good read.

Maybe something like the Smokies or some other national parks where only certain trails/areas are dog friendly? Just like we have certain sections of lakes within the BWCA allow motors, why could we not do the same with dogs? I would think the boat motors have a greater overall impact on the ecosystem and serenity than my old German Shepherd. I jokingly say my carbon footprint is already pretty small since I didn’t have any children.

The world has a history of a few bad apples (bad dogs) ruining things for the lot of us. I would hate to see a dog ban.


Currently….

I'll only say this and avoid the rules discussion.

I took my Brittany with me on one trip and he was miserable. Mosquitoes, flies, and rain. He shivered a lot there as well because of the cold nights.

Before you take your dog there, ask yourself if they will enjoy themselves.

My old dog has been on every trip I’ve been on and has always been a good BWCA dog, so I’ve always been an “I have my dog under control with no leash” type.

She’s gone blind now and I have a new dog. I don’t think new dog will ever be as well behaved up there as old dog and suddenly a leash requirement seems more reasonable than it used to!

As a dog-lover and someone who's tripped in the BWCA with my own and other people dogs, I'm inclined to agree all dogs should be leashed–especially on portages. It's a simple courtesy to your fellow wilderness users and your own animal. If your dog is out of eye line it's not remotely under your control. And the human who's animal was off-leash will ultimately be responsible for unfriendly encounters the dog may find themselves in.

We got a warning from a Ranger last summer because by dog stopped and looked at him while he was off leash. He was never in his way nor was he out of control my dogs are trained to ignore ppl.

He explained the rule as "under control at all times OR on a 6' leash."

Another paddler came into the portage with an aggressive loose dog a few minutes later that tried to start a fight with mine.

A friend of mine is a Cook County Deputy, she said dogs are not required to be leashed in the BWCA.

I can't imagine leashing a dog in the wilderness. I grew up in an era and a city where dogs weren't leashed until I was an adult. It was just part of the background. There were downsides of course - lots of poo.

My own personal observation is that dogs are often more aggressive on leash than off.

I don't know how you safely leash a dog and carry 50 lbs on your back through some of these treacherous portages.

Of course everyone should know his dog and how to manage him. Perhaps a dog that needs to be normally leashed at home may not be a suitable hound for a canoe trip.

I prefer seeing unrestrained dogs on canoe trips. They almost always appear so happy. So many scents! I don't care if they take the odd squirrel or critter.

fenrirrr: "As a dog-lover and someone who's tripped in the BWCA with my own and other people dogs, I'm inclined to agree all dogs should be leashed–especially on portages. It's a simple courtesy to your fellow wilderness users and your own animal. If your dog is out of eye line it's not remotely under your control. And the human who's animal was off-leash will ultimately be responsible for unfriendly encounters the dog may find themselves in.
"

Someone needs to start a BWCA Dog Photo thread.

I've lived on a city park for 29 years now.
Leashes are required of course, but folks will unleash their hounds for either training or some "fetch" exercise.
95% of the dogs that are unleashed, are just fine unleashed.
It's that remaining 5% that gives the other pups and their owners a bad rep.

Probably similar up in the BW, you tend to remember the bad encounters and forget the good ones.
I've camped with great dogs, some of them not even mine, and I actually prefer their company over most humans.

I would think leashing up my 90 lb Golden might be treacherous for me on a portage. Thankfully she's a winter camping dog, both the heat and bugs would not be kind to her. I don't think I've ever even brought a leash for a winter trip. Yes, different circumstances than open water camping. She can be a little mouthy when strangers appear, but that gets shut down right away, camping or not.

I supposed those sled teams are technically always leashed.
And if you hear them start to sound off, just pretend it's a pack of wolves in the distance. (I had a winter campmate's eyes get all bug eyed once hearing that one night)
"Those are dogs" I said. (My folks had 10 Siberian Huskies IN the house growing up)
That's why I'm on my 3rd Golden. :)

It comes down to like most issues in the BW, just have respect for others.
Not all people are dog people.
Not all dogs are people dogs or dog dogs.
My free roaming dog fortunately ignores both, has too when dozens of folks walk by the yard daily with dogs. Lucky in that, because I see unruly dogs everyday as well. I totally get why it can be an issue in the BW.
But it would be a big shame should dogs be outlawed up there.

Argo: "I can't imagine leashing a dog in the wilderness. I grew up in an era and a city where dogs weren't leashed until I was an adult. It was just part of the background. There were downsides of course - lots of poo.


My own personal observation is that dogs are often more aggressive on leash than off.


I don't know how you safely leash a dog and carry 50 lbs on your back through some of these treacherous portages.


Of course everyone should know his dog and how to manage him. Perhaps a dog that needs to be normally leashed at home may not be a suitable hound for a canoe trip.


I prefer seeing unrestrained dogs on canoe trips. They almost always appear so happy. So many scents! I don't care if they take the odd squirrel or critter. "

I agree that unrestrained dogs look really happy. I know they are having a grand time.

As for your dilemma: "I don't know how you safely leash a dog and carry 50 lbs on your back through some of these treacherous portages," I have a solution: Leash your dog at one end of the portage, carry your pack across, then come back for your dog. Having a dog doesn't make you immune from making another trip across the portage, it makes you obligated and responsible to do so. It makes you a considerate tripper.

I agree that "everyone should know his dog and how to manage him." The issue is that I don't know your dog. A lot of people are bitten by dogs that are "friendly" or "don't bite." If I encounter an unrestrained dog on a portage, and the owner has no control over the animal, I am left to discern the nature of the dog in about a half a second. That's not my job (because I shouldn't be in that position in the first place) and it doesn't afford me enough time to develop a plan of action. If I am bitten by an unrestrained dog on a portage (or anywhere in the BWCA), bad things will happen to the dog. Is that a chance you are willing to take?

Mike

"If I encounter an unrestrained dog on a portage, and the owner has no control over the animal, I am left to discern the nature of the dog in about a half a second. That's not my job (because I shouldn't be in that position in the first place) and it doesn't afford me enough time to develop a plan of action. If I am bitten by an unrestrained dog on a portage (or anywhere in the BWCA), bad things will happen to the dog. Is that a chance you are willing to take?"

In my work I have been bitten 3 times. EAch time I was told the dog was friendly and did not bite. It won't happen again. As with the poster above, if I encounter an unrestrained dog that becomes agressive, and the owner is neither present or willing nto restrain the dog, the results will not be on me. I am not waiting until after he bites me.

MikeinMpls: "

Argo: "I can't imagine leashing a dog in the wilderness. I grew up in an era and a city where dogs weren't leashed until I was an adult. It was just part of the background. There were downsides of course - lots of poo.



My own personal observation is that dogs are often more aggressive on leash than off.



I don't know how you safely leash a dog and carry 50 lbs on your back through some of these treacherous portages.



Of course everyone should know his dog and how to manage him. Perhaps a dog that needs to be normally leashed at home may not be a suitable hound for a canoe trip.



I prefer seeing unrestrained dogs on canoe trips. They almost always appear so happy. So many scents! I don't care if they take the odd squirrel or critter. "

I agree that unrestrained dogs look really happy. I know they are having a grand time.


As for your dilemma: "I don't know how you safely leash a dog and carry 50 lbs on your back through some of these treacherous portages," I have a solution: Leash your dog at one end of the portage, carry your pack across, then come back for your dog. Having a dog doesn't make you immune from making another trip across the portage, it makes you obligated and responsible to do so. It makes you a considerate tripper.


I agree that "everyone should know his dog and how to manage him." The issue is that I don't know your dog. A lot of people are bitten by dogs that are "friendly" or "don't bite." If I encounter an unrestrained dog on a portage, and the owner has no control over the animal, I am left to discern the nature of the dog in about a half a second. That's not my job (because I shouldn't be in that position in the first place) and it doesn't afford me enough time to develop a plan of action. If I am bitten by an unrestrained dog on a portage (or anywhere in the BWCA), bad things will happen to the dog. Is that a chance you are willing to take?


Mike"

Mike, I'm sorry but I think your solution may result in unanticipated problems where none may have originally existed...

Leaving a leashed dog unattended for curious strangers to discover - say a young naïve family - might be seen by the courts as rather indictable action should the dog-that-never-bites bites a child (by the way I agree with you on that head-fake point).

Another problem is that there's a large cohort of dogs that don't leave their masters' side . Abandoning that type of dog to the opposite side of a portage would be substituting a perfectly natural order for a stress-inducing one. One that would likely result in a lot of high-pitched yelping. Not an appealing "solution" for those camped on that lake.

The way you describe 'discerning the nature of the dog in about half a second sounds somewhat peculiar to me. Maybe I'm naïve. No, I don't present my face for a lick to a strange dog. But I'm friendly and welcoming. It's just reflexive behaviour. But at the same time I'm suitably wary. Maybe that's all you meant to say. But as written, it seems unnecessarily alarmist.

Anyway, I understand there's many who don't share my general viewpoint about keeping these wilderness areas as leash-optional. I'm aware that there will likely be the occasional bad outcome if my preferred choice prevails. But I believe to argue in favour of leashing is simply invoking the precautionary principle where any indication of a bad outcome arising from a (leash optional) plan is sufficient to defeat the plan. Like saying let's halve the highway speed limit because it will save lives.

MikeinMpls:I have a solution: Leash your dog at one end of the portage, carry your pack across, then come back for your dog. Having a dog doesn't make you immune from making another trip across the portage, it makes you obligated and responsible to do so. It makes you a considerate tripper.
Mike"

So your solution is to leash a dog to something at one end of the portage then leave it completely unattended and alone while you carry gear across?

That's about the most irresponsible thing I think I've heard, as a devoted dog lover and someone that brings their dog with them on solo trips. I would never in a million years just leave my dog alone tied to something anywhere, let alone in the wilderness.

With that said, I portage with a 50lb pack and the dog leash tethered around my waist with no problem, but I am a 35 year old fit adult. Maybe not everyone can do that. To be clear I fully support the idea of full control of dog on portage with leash, there are many other solutions to make portaging with your dog easier but no responsible person should ever consider just tying the dog up and disappearing down a trail.

MikeinMpls: ""If I am bitten by an unrestrained dog on a portage (or anywhere in the BWCA), bad things will happen to the dog. Is that a chance you are willing to take?
Mike"

ockycamper: ""As with the poster above, if I encounter an unrestrained dog that becomes agressive, and the owner is neither present or willing nto restrain the dog, the results will not be on me. I am not waiting until after he bites me.
"

Great - the thread's devolved into Chest puffing and dick measuring.

As someone who's brought their dog to the BW and has kept him leashed on portages, but not 100% of the time, but the dog is seriously like the most affectionate and loving dog i've ever owned...at the same time he may give a bark when startled, but quickly turn to tail wagging and I'm supposed to expect that you may interpret that as aggressive and do what to my dog?

One of you asked the question is that a chance you're willing to take? My dog has been unleashed around various people at various times his entire life and never had any level of issue. So yes, I'm willing to take the chance that he doesn't bite you, much the same as I take the chance that my 17 year old son won't punch you in the nose or my wife won't slap you. You think every dog owner is just going to cower to and accept that "bad things" happening to thier dog, that the results of such won't be on you. Any thought that there might be some level of reaction from the dog owner that you may not be prepared to handle? Is that a chance you are willing to take?

As the OP on this subject Speckled I am stepping in on this one.

I understand the 2 posts maybe bringing up some emotions. But let's refrain from personal attacks (I am not always perfect myself)

I guess I read them differently. It seemed the 2 posters were concerned about dogs approaching them in an aggressive manner when the owner wasn't around or a far distance away, or unwilling to step in and control their dog. These are legitimate concerns. It sounds like this would never be the case with your dog, so I am not sure why the visceral response. It doesn't apply to you then? It applies to very poor dog owners who unfortunately exist.

As someone who has been confronted by these situations when walking my dog with my small children...I will agree the dog approaching me aggressively doesn't get a second chance. I've never had to kill one but I wouldn't hesitate to protect a child, I wouldn't wait until one bit my child or my dog. I've punted a few dogs a fair distance. The last one was a German Shephard. He deserved it and the owner didn't complain he was relieved he didn't get to my child and thanked me. So yes I've taken the risk of the owner punching me and i will do it again. So these are real situations that can and do occur. It's not a dick measuring contest or chest thumping---they were terrible situations that had to be dealt with. And guess what, some people have baggage/PSTD after a situation like that and may react differently to your dog approaching them--as a responsible dog owner you need to be aware of that as well.

General statement:
Leashed or unleashed the rules have always stated the dog needs to be under owner control. If the dog is out of site of the owner by definition this is a violation as an owner cannot control a dog it can no longer see.

T

Once you get too far right or left on any subject it becomes difficult to see the other side. And that ability to see where the other side is coming from and/or how they arrived is paramount to finding a solution.

I did shoot out an email to USDAFS to see if they would share any reported data of domestic dog attacks/incidents that have occurred in the BWCA. We'll see if I get a reply.

icallitmaze: It could simply be the FS reducing their liability. If someone's dog bites another person or dog, the FS can fall back and say Hey they weren't following our rules we have no liability on this?

General dog attack statistics in the USA would extrapolate to 3-5 attacks/bites per year in the BWCAW. I kinda hold most BWCAW travelers in a higher regard than the average US citizen :) so I would expect that number to be lower than the average...I am guessing the FS's tolerance for dog attacks/bites to be zero though... and of course one wonders if something happened in the last 2 years to change their stance on this?



T

I think it's trace - feces, barking, chasing / disrupting / killing "a few critters", and so forth.
I am going to guess the incidence of bites is probably low-to-none. It would be in the media.
But if gov't. fear of litigation motivates policy, then maybe the risk of dog-bite has some teeth.

As far as stating my experience and viewpoint as a means of chest-puffing and comparing male genitalia, not even close. Crass.

Taking a break for awhile.
Should have listened to my friend who wisely avoided stepping in this discussion.

Lena, when she was retired from wilderness trips.

I am a little biased on this but then I have been changing dressings on my wife for 7 weeks after she was mauled outside our driveway by a dog on a short leash that had never showed this behavior before. Not just a nip and she had two surgeries and six days in the hospital.

Lets face it, when your dog is out in front of you and it sees some creature coming at you wearing a canoe or draped with packs it may get very defensive. You may end up with a real liability issue.

The federal and state governments are immune from virtually all liability for incidents and for policies like this. The only real exception is for a public employee if he/she causes harm doing something illegal or outside the scope of their authority. Otherwise, every car accident lawsuit would be filed against the state, not just the other driver. There are some cases in which a claim can be made for loss, but not for anything another visitor or their dog does on public lands.

The reason I think dogs should always be on a leash when on a portage (at a campsite they can be off leash).

This happened probably 15 - 20 years ago. We pulled up to a portage and as we were pulling our canoes up, a family of 3 were just heading down the trail. The father had the canoe and pack on his shoulders, the mother had a pack and paddle, the son (8 or 9 years old) had a small pack and paddle. A short way down the trail a dog came over the hill, sniffed the dad, the mom, and then went towards the boy. The boy got scared and started to cry. The mom came back and tried to shoe the dog way and the dad set the canoe down and started back. At this time the dog's owner came over the hill and said "don't worry, he won't bite". It didn't appear that the dog would be aggressive but that was no longer the point. The boy was obviously scared and crying, and the parents were worried. This convinced me right there that dogs should always be on a leach if in an area where other people may be encountered. I don't know if it was that boys first trip or not, but I would hate to think that that was one of the memories he has of his BWCA trip.

Those who have dogs love them and are used to having them around. Some others are not used to having dogs around and may not know how to react to an unleashed dog coming down the trail.

Marten: "I am a little biased on this but then I have been changing dressings on my wife for 7 weeks after she was mauled outside our driveway by a dog on a short leash that had never showed this behavior before. Not just a nip and she had two surgeries and six days in the hospital.


Lets face it, when your dog is out in front of you and it sees some creature coming at you wearing a canoe or draped with packs it may get very defensive. You may end up with a real liability issue."

Marten, How awful for you both. Sending her every wish for fast and complete healing. So sorry.

I understand that people have been bit by dogs. I too have been bit by dogs that aren't mine on two separate occassions.

A repeating thought I've had while reading this thread, is you're way more likely to encounter rude or disrespectful behaviour from humans than dogs (see the myriad of threads about it through the years). I haven't really read any of the same chest puffing, threatening "bad things will happen" type of mentality in those threads.

I'm of the opinion that a sweeping all dogs leashed rule 100% of the time in a sparesely populated wilderness is insane to me and my thoughts align with Argo's when he stated let's halve the speed limits.

I don’t think you can compare rude people to a dog potentially biting/attacking you or your child or even your own dog.

Yes, of course more rude people exist than a potentially bad dog…I’d argue it is higher than a 100 to 1 ratio in my personal BWCAW experiences but the consequences are excessively different.

Several people have shared that they or someone they knew was attacked or bitten by a dog before and the common theme is the dog was unleashed and the owner said the dog was fine/nice as it approached?

I don’t think anyone has tried to make the case that a dog should be leashed at a camp site…if they did I missed it. It certainly isn’t a majority. I think they’re are mixed feelings/opinions about leashing a dog on the portage. At least for me I see both sides. I’ve seen lots of dogs that were fine. I’ve seen some that were terribly behaved and posed a potential threat either came off as aggressive or was nice but jumping on people as they tried to negotiate a portage—very rare, but happens.

I think you are reading way too much into this with your “chest thumping” comments. Neither one of the statements you quoted were “chest thumping”. They were potentially dangerous scenarios. Ironically the only threats or chest thumping has come from you…talking about slapping or punching? I am not sure why this hits you so personal? It sounds like I would be happy to see your dog? It sounds like you are a good dog owner…so your dog would never put anyone in the scenarios you quoted.

T

Speckled: "I understand that people have been bit by dogs. I too have been bit by dogs that aren't mine on two separate occasions.

A repeating thought I've had while reading this thread, is you're way more likely to encounter rude or disrespectful behaviour from humans than dogs (see the myriad of threads about it through the years). I haven't really read any of the same chest puffing, threatening "bad things will happen" type of mentality in those threads.

I'm of the opinion that a sweeping all dogs leashed rule 100% of the time in a sparsely populated wilderness is insane to me and my thoughts align with Argo's when he stated let's halve the speed limits. "

Or you could just leash your dog, per the USFS rules/guidance.

The fact that I may run into rude people far more frequently than a dog may be true. However, it has nothing to do with this thread.

I'm sorry my opinion struck such a nerve in you. Apparently you're as passionate as I am.

Mike

timatkn: "
I think you are reading way too much into this with your “chest thumping” comments. Neither one of the statements you quoted were “chest thumping”. They were potentially dangerous scenarios. Ironically the only threats or chest thumping has come from you…talking about slapping or punching? "

I read it differently and my thoughts on the matter aren't really changing, but realize, i'm one opinion. If the case is that I read it wrong and am the one out of line, then I apologize to all involved.

I carry bear spray and if your dog comes at me aggressively it will get sprayed! If it is friendly, it will get petted!

Captn Tony: "I carry bear spray and if your dog comes at me aggressively it will get sprayed!
If it is friendly it will get petted!"

Lol - I'm out. I need to leave this thread.

Speckled: Lol - I'm out. I need to leave this thread."

Don't worry Spec, some of us get where you are coming from.
My last skirmish as an adult was when someone booted my leashed hound at a church softball game no less.
For no other reason than "I hate dogs." Which was his response after his teammate asked "Why the heck did you do that?!"
I planted my cleat so far up his arse that he did the tippitoe dance for the next 5 minutes. *thumps chest*
I get that some dogs actions are bootable, but please make dang sure that those actions are truly boot worthy.

Dog owners see our own animals in a very singular light. Strangers we share trails/portages/wilderness with won't have that same or and perspective. We should be mindful of that.

It’s bad dog owners not the dogs, leash laws are good, ran into unleashed before. Muzzles would work also, otherwise leave them home.

After this entire thread I thought I would actually read the rule:

Q: What responsibilities do you have if you bring your dog?
A: Dogs must be under human control at all times on a 6-foot or shorter leash. Dogs endanger wildlife and barking intrudes on the experience. Dispose of dog waste 200 feet from water, campsites, portages, or put it in a latrine.

This does not sound vague to me. On the leash at all times, 6 foot or shorter. How is that hard to understand?

ockycamper: "After this entire thread I thought I would actually read the rule:


Q: What responsibilities do you have if you bring your dog?
A: Dogs must be under human control at all times on a 6-foot or shorter leash. Dogs endanger wildlife and barking intrudes on the experience. Dispose of dog waste 200 feet from water, campsites, portages, or put it in a latrine.


This does not sound vague to me. On the leash at all times, 6 foot or shorter. How is that hard to understand?"

True this does appear to be the rule from what I could find. That said I am with Lightfoot. Anywhere you will meet others like a portage I think they should be leashed because its the decent thing to do and some people have bad experiences.

But at camp, that seems excessive and back to the original question. I think it is a new rule. I don't recall ever seeing leashed at camp.

There are plenty of discussions on these forums about rules. Posters go nuts if food is not secured according to the rules. Or number of people/canoes on a site. Or glass containers.

But when it comes to dogs. . .the same ones state freely they will not abide by keeping their dogs on a leash the whole time.

My biggest surprise in this thread was not necessarily how widely opinions differ but how adamant some of us are in favor of mandatory leashing of dogs in the BWCA. Maybe it's because I grew up in a very rural area and had dogs running around all the time, everywhere. And yes...I have been bitten a few times over the years...once in the face.

https://www.instagram.com/bwcadogs/

I hear ya OkayCamper. Thinking on your comment I have a few thoughts. I do think dogs should be on a leash to protect people like you who have had bad experiences. I don't think you should have to wonder if you are going to get attacked or not. However at camp... there is no reason for another person to come into my camp and that risk would then be on you.... and yes I get that it is against the rules.

Concerning glass. Yes I am against that however if you pack it out with no incident then I guess I don't care. Its more about the people who leave it or smash it. Same with groups over 9... I don't like that but if they are respectful, quiet, and clean. I guess I don't really care. I would rather have a group of 15 that I didn't know was there over a group of 4 drunks partying into the night.

The rules are put into place because so many people are careless. If everyone would just be good considerate people while being respectful of the wilderness and others then all of this would be a moot point.

The rules are put into place because so many people are careless. If everyone would just be good considerate people while being respectful of the wilderness and others then all of this would be a moot point. "

The rules are put into place because people have different ideas of what is "good", "considerate" and "respectful of the wilderness". Some people believe dogs can be "respectful to the wilderness" without a leash, others do not.

x2jmorris: "... However at camp... there is no reason for another person to come into my camp and that risk would then be on you.... and yes I get that it is against the rules. "

The point about leashing dogs at camp would be to keep them from running away.

bobbernumber3: "

x2jmorris: "... However at camp... there is no reason for another person to come into my camp and that risk would then be on you.... and yes I get that it is against the rules. "

The point about leashing dogs at camp would be to keep them from running away."

And from randomly shitting and peeing wherever. The rules require dog owners to dispose of dog waste 200 feet from water, campsites, portages, or put it in a latrine.

And to help prevent dogs from endangering wildlife. The rules state dogs should not endanger wildlife.

Love'em or hate'em, follow them or don't follow them, those are the rules.

x2jmorris: "However at camp... there is no reason for another person to come into my camp and that risk would then be on you.... "

Technically you can't prohibit someone from entering the campsite, its public property, obviously you need to be properly permitted to enter the BWCA, but there is no rule or prohibition on entering a site that is occupied by someone. I never would enter an occupied site, but technically you can't prohibit another person from coming into the campsite your tent is pitched at. Probably another reason the leash rule applies at campsites too.

Am I the only one who has NEVER had an issue with any dog in the BWCA lol. Some of you need to just relax lmao

OMGitsKa: "Am I the only one who has NEVER had an issue with any dog in the BWCA lol. Some of you need to just relax lmao "

Dogs have more opposition here than the firearm thread. Seems crazy to me but I even forgave ole Pete who almost ripped my lower lip and chin off. People will be concerned about the things that concern them...and that's our American right.

OMGitsKa: "Am I the only one who has NEVER had an issue with any dog in the BWCA lol. Some of you need to just relax lmao "

Since you have never had an issue with a dog in the BWCA, others who have had issues with dogs need to relax while you laugh your ass off? That's a pretty mean spirited post.

YaMarVa: "

x2jmorris: "However at camp... there is no reason for another person to come into my camp and that risk would then be on you.... "

Technically you can't prohibit someone from entering the campsite, its public property (you need to be properly permitted) and there is no rule or prohibition on entering a site that is occupied by someone. I never would, but technically you can't prohibit another person from coming into the campsite your tent is pitched at. Probably another reason the leash rule applies at campsites too. "

I mean I understand the rules. But entering someone's camp is not the same as being on a portage. On a portage you are in an area where you have a good chance of running into someone on a shared area. If you are entering a campsite... you are entering an area that is in a way being lived in. Even if there is no dog you still run the risk of being injured if the person is crazy enough. Is it your right to walk onto the area? Sure, but it's also increasing your risk of having an issue whether with a dog or a person.

And speaking for myself... my dog doesn't chase wildlife and I do dispose of the waste. Perhaps she does pee within 200 feet of the water though but she would on leash or off so idk :)

I guess you and I will disagree though.

x2jmorris: "I guess you and I will disagree though."

I'm not sure what we're disagreeing about? -I never said people should leash their dog at their site, I was just pointing out that the rules require it and was purely speculating on why the rules required a leash at a campsite. I never stated that I agreed with this rule or not.

I also understand some campsites are near, or next to, portages. The Cherry/Hanson portage is a good example where the site and portage almost one and the same.

I appreciate the honest back and forth. I am a dog owner and have brought dogs to the BWCA.

This thread reminds me of a home owners association meeting I went to last month. Several residents commented they wanted to put signs up in their yards about their kids graduating. The management company said: they knew the rules before they moved in. They were always free to move to another subdivsion. Since they chose to move into this one, they chose to abide by the rules.

We all go to BWCA knowing the rules. We know them before we go. The only decision is if we are going to obey the rules or not. However, if you pick and choose which rules you will obey, don't try to get others to obey the rules you like to keep.

x2jmorris: "Perhaps she does pee within 200 feet of the water though but she would on leash or off so idk :)"

I think most guys do too.

ockycamper: We all go to BWCA knowing the rules. We know them before we go. The only decision is if we are going to obey the rules or not. However, if you pick and choose which rules you will obey, don't try to get others to obey the rules you like to keep."

Agreed...everyone follow your own values/rules and not get worked up about someone else not adhering. I must account for no one following the damn speed limit daily which might kill me or someone else...your dog will not. I'm good.

I cannot believe this thread is still going on, and I have not seen one person's opinion changed. It would seem that dogs are as polarizing as religion and politics. But since we're on the subject of rules and following them to the letter, I wonder what people think about the food storage rule "never leave food unattended on a portage trail". Seems like that would be a real PITA if your solo and double carrying. Or (in my best sarcasm font) is that one ok to interpret as we see fit?
https://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/superior/specialplaces/?cid=fseprd852569#main_content

dschult2: "I cannot believe this thread is still going on, and I have not seen one person's opinion changed. It would seem that dogs are as polarizing as religion and politics. But since we're on the subject of rules and following them to the letter, I wonder what people think about the food storage rule "never leave food unattended on a portage trail". Seems like that would be a real PITA if your solo and double carrying. Or (in my best sarcasm font) is that one ok to interpret as we see fit?
https://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/superior/specialplaces/?cid=fseprd852569#main_content "

I think there is a whole thread on this already…it came up because the leash and food rule seem to have been added at the same time.

T

timatkn: "

dschult2: "I cannot believe this thread is still going on, and I have not seen one person's opinion changed. It would seem that dogs are as polarizing as religion and politics. But since we're on the subject of rules and following them to the letter, I wonder what people think about the food storage rule "never leave food unattended on a portage trail". Seems like that would be a real PITA if your solo and double carrying. Or (in my best sarcasm font) is that one ok to interpret as we see fit?
https://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/superior/specialplaces/?cid=fseprd852569#main_content "

I think there is a whole thread on this already…it came up because the leash and food rule seem to have been added at the same time.


T"

Yes, I am aware of that thread, which is partly the reason for my post. There is percieved ambiguity in that rule just as there is in this one.

dschult2: "

timatkn: "

dschult2: "I cannot believe this thread is still going on, and I have not seen one person's opinion changed. It would seem that dogs are as polarizing as religion and politics. But since we're on the subject of rules and following them to the letter, I wonder what people think about the food storage rule "never leave food unattended on a portage trail". Seems like that would be a real PITA if your solo and double carrying. Or (in my best sarcasm font) is that one ok to interpret as we see fit?
https://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/superior/specialplaces/?cid=fseprd852569#main_content "

I think there is a whole thread on this already…it came up because the leash and food rule seem to have been added at the same time.



T"

Yes, I am aware of that thread, which is partly the reason for my post. There is ambiguity in that rule just as there is in this one."

I don't really think there is ambiguity. The "regulations and rules" are given in an FAQ format but the link explicitly states that they are the regulations and rules. None of the regulations or rules are overly complicated or obscure. The wording is clear. We may not agree with them, practice them or teach them to new trippers when we have the opportunity but that ambiguity in practice doesn't seem to be the result of ambiguity in the law.

SNF BWCAW Main Page

BWCAW Regulations and Rules

pleflar: "

dschult2: "

timatkn: "

dschult2: "I cannot believe this thread is still going on, and I have not seen one person's opinion changed. It would seem that dogs are as polarizing as religion and politics. But since we're on the subject of rules and following them to the letter, I wonder what people think about the food storage rule "never leave food unattended on a portage trail". Seems like that would be a real PITA if your solo and double carrying. Or (in my best sarcasm font) is that one ok to interpret as we see fit?
https://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/superior/specialplaces/?cid=fseprd852569#main_content "

I think there is a whole thread on this already…it came up because the leash and food rule seem to have been added at the same time.



T"

Yes, I am aware of that thread, which is partly the reason for my post. There is ambiguity in that rule just as there is in this one."

I don't really think there is ambiguity. The "regulations and rules" are given in an FAQ format but the link explicitly states that they are the regulations and rules. None of the regulations or rules are overly complicated or obscure. The wording is clear. We may not agree with them, practice them or teach them to new trippers when we have the opportunity but that ambiguity in practice doesn't seem to be the result of ambiguity in the law.

SNF BWCAW Main Page


BWCAW Regulations and Rules "

O.k. Back to the letter of the law. Given that, then no food left on portage landings unattended (bring it back with you if you double carry) and all dogs on leash 24/7. Got it.

Sorry, not going to keep up the ridiculous quote chain.

I do think the regulations are clear but they also leave empty spaces and imply greater effort than is necessary in some situations.

I paddle with a friend but we're both effectively soloing. Separate boats and all. We both have a BV in our portage packs with our food, toiletries and trash. The BV is an approved method of storage at camp. Should we carry the BV the entire time? Should we carry everything else and come back for the BVs, or vice-versa? Should we do watch half the night each to keep an eye on them?

The regulations are clear but they're incomplete,they aren't comprehensive.
I'm not trying to argue against anyone who cares enough about spending time in backcountry to be paying attention to this thread. I find the regulations, as stated, disappointing because they appear, to me, simple but unclear given the wide variety situations the rules will need to be applied. This thread and the bear proofing thread are evidence of that lack of clarity in reality.

Sorry for writing my previous post as though the rules were perfect and clear for all situations.

The crux of the debate here is that some folks‘ preferred wilderness experience is different from—and sometimes directly at odds with—others’.

Incomplete as the regs may be, they are clear about what the baseline action should be.

After all this discussion I just hope than dog owners realize that their canine companion will sometimes look at a person approaching on a portage as a threat to their master. A muzzle although not a leash may be the way to take the danger out of an encounter. Please do not use the argument that " My dog has never bitten anyone." My wife and I have both had surgeries to repair damage from friendly dogs that just flipped one day and went nuts.

Just ban them. We are so good at rationalizing. There is no way to make everyone happy here. There are far too many good reasons why pets, all of them, need to be restrained. If you don’t think you can appreciate the wilderness without your pet, maybe you need to look in the mirror. Sorry for ranting.

We are facebook now. Lets all just cry about it until we can bitch about the next topic up? What is next?! I am ready!

mapsguy1955: "Just ban them. We are so good at rationalizing. There is no way to make everyone happy here. There are far too many good reasons why pets, all of them, need to be restrained. If you don’t think you can appreciate the wilderness without your pet, maybe you need to look in the mirror. Sorry for ranting. "

This is the first comment that made me say "c'mon man." I guess I better f'ing look myself in the mirror for loving my dog. Something must be wrong. Getting myself a therapist on Monday. Appreciate the reality check man, I really do.

Harvard Health

CNN Article

Per the CDC: There are many health benefits of owning a pet. They can increase opportunities to exercise, get outside, and socialize. Regular walking or playing with pets can decrease blood pressure, cholesterol levels, and triglyceride levels. Pets can help manage loneliness and depression by giving us companionship. Most households in the United States have at least one pet.

Studies have shown that the bond between people and their pets is linked to several health benefits, including:

Decreased blood pressure, cholesterol levels, triglyceride levels, feelings of loneliness, anxiety, and symptoms of PTSD.
Increased opportunities for exercise and outdoor activities; better cognitive function in older adults; and more opportunities to socialize

OMGitsKa: "We are facebook now. Lets all just cry about it until we can bitch about the next topic up? What is next?! I am ready! "

Travel Guitar to play at night time around the fire and everyone at camp singing along as we toast our mixed drinks :D

Lot of people that should be leashed up is all I can say. I love the... we go in with our group of nine looking for solitude. And oh my, I met a dog on the portage. I’m offended cause I think he smiled at me. Oh, and the flickers are dying off cause someone brought a dog to the boundary waters... and 99% of dogs don’t even look twice at one and the 1% that might chase could never catch one. That would be cats... I’ve never heard such a bunch of crap... you have any idea how idiotic you all sound?
Haha haha! Thanks for the laugh... Hahaha!
And oh... if your dog looks cross eyed at me I’m hitting him with bear spray... I’d bite you myself... bite your ear right off! Hahaha!

The only sensible plan is to put dogs into bear barrels and drag those across portages with leashes attached to our belts.

sns: "The only sensible plan is to put dogs into bear barrels and drag those across portages with leashes attached to our belts."

/thread
I think this is a fair approach!

It seems most see what they should do to be responsible. If you insist on your dog running free on a portage be sure to have your insurance policy up to date and enough coverage to cover the worst, a few pics of my wifes wounds after a leashed dog with no known history went nuts on her at our driveway.

My dog is really gentle, but I almost always leash her because I just don't want to deal with other people who are scared of dogs or who just want to feel superior by yelling at someone.

As a former undefeated boxer I am not too concerned about getting punched in the neck. Anyone making threats should always keep in mind that others can react too.

On portages, I use skijor equipment. For those that do not know, it is a flexible leash connected to a pulling harness on the dog. The human end gets tied to the chest strap on a pack, or maybe some might prefer the belt. There are many written materials on how to teach your dog verbal commands for skijoring, but for portaging they really just need to learn that they should not pull downhill. You really don't need a command (at least my dog doesn't).

Actually having her on the leash does have advantages on uphills.




The photo here is from before I used the flexible leash (it was a retractable leash which also has advantages)

Marten…terrible stuff, it is. I get it. I don’t think anyone here is discounting the possibility of something happening. And as you pointed out, it can happen on or off the leash. I’m probably lucky I’m not mentally scared from my bad encounter. I just haven’t read one post about anyone bitten by a domestic dog in the BWCA even though I’m sure it has happened at some point. Googled looking for reports. I even emailed the USDA trying to acquire dog incident statistics.

About 2/3 of dog attacks are pit bulls or pit mixes…I don’t see many photos of folks with their pitty in the canoe. Beautiful dogs but data shows they can be temperamental especially if not well trained.

Does the data really warrant a ban of dogs? Does one person’s fear outweigh another’s joy?

Does the data support campsite leashing? How many in camp incidents have there ever been?

I can take it or leave portage leashing but it’s fair in my opinion. It is difficult for a solo person, however.

By the letter of the new leash law(omitting the language “or under human control), your dog must be leashed in the canoe as well. There’s no exceptions listed. Are hunting dogs exempt?

Again, thanks to everyone for this thought provoking discussion.

Icallitmaize, I am a dog lover and I am not sure I agree or not with the new rule. I definitely don’t agree if it applies to the canoe and camp…your hunting dog question is one I didn’t think of and would question as well. Leashing in a canoe puts the dog at a large risk if the canoe capsized. That’s ridiculous to require that.

Anyway your dog bite/attack numbers are way…way…way…off. It’s true Pit bulls account for 2/3 of all deaths due to dogs in the USA (roughly 300/year by Pitbulls) but not even close to 2/3 of all dog bites/attacks. A very important distinction.

There are 4.5 million reported dog attacks/bites yearly in the USA of which pit bulls are only responsible for ~3400 of those attacks. Pit bulls are actually responsible for only .0008 of all dog attacks yearly in the USA. Part of that is there are just so many more dogs of other breeds, but you can’t extrapolate deaths to attacks and say that just because you don’t see many pitbulls in the BWCAW people aren’t likely to be bitten as you hinted…although I’d guess bites rarely if ever happen in the BWCAW—-so we agree more than disagree, I just needed to point out the stats are incorrect.

T

nctry: "Lot of people that should be leashed up is all I can say. I love the... we go in with our group of nine looking for solitude. And oh my, I met a dog on the portage. I’m offended cause I think he smiled at me. Oh, and the flickers are dying off cause someone brought a dog to the boundary waters... and 99% of dogs don’t even look twice at one and the 1% that might chase could never catch one. That would be cats... I’ve never heard such a bunch of crap... you have any idea how idiotic you all sound?
Haha haha! Thanks for the laugh... Hahaha!
And oh... if your dog looks cross eyed at me I’m hitting him with bear spray... I’d bite you myself... bite your ear right off! Hahaha!


"

I have a dog, I love dogs…but what you wrote…no one said. I am not sure what all the sensitivity is for dogs on this thread…consistently people have said if the dog is threatening they will take action. No one said if they just look “cross eyed” except you? No one said it a dog approaches them and they don’t like it they will pepper spray… It was all about how the dog approached them.

Do all of you sensitive dog owners have dogs that randomly go up to people and growl and bite? If not, what are you worried about. Do you think it is okay for a dog to approach people aggressively and they should just do nothing? If your dog is nice, behaves…which is almost every dog I encounter no big deal. But a few a-holes ruin for the good dog owners. I gave an example of how I punted a German Shepard going after my 8 year old son…the dog weighed twice as much as him… There was no mistaking its intentions. I am pretty sure my instincts were correct because he bit someone else a week later and the owner had him put down. Maybe I should just keep my kids home so dog owners can do whatever they want??? Geesh… maybe look at all the perspectives before ya judge people’s responses???

It’s more laughable how people are so sensitive on this issue they make up stories in their head that people are just looking for reasons to pepper spray or kick a dog…pure gibberish…

T

timatkn: "Icallitmaize, I am a dog lover and I am not sure I agree or not with the new rule. I definitely don’t agree if it applies to the canoe and camp…your hunting dog question is one I didn’t think of and would question as well.


Anyway your dog bite/attack numbers are way…way…way…off. It’s true Pit bulls account for 2/3 of all deaths due to dogs in the USA (roughly 300/year by Pitbulls) but not even close to 2/3 of all dog bites/attacks. A very important distinction.


There are 4.5 million reported dog attacks/bites yearly in the USA of which pit bulls are only responsible for ~3400 of those attacks. Pit bulls are actually responsible for only .0008 of all dog attacks yearly in the USA. Part of that is there are just so many more dogs of other breeds, but you can’t extrapolate deaths to attacks and say that just because you don’t see many pitbulls in the BWCAW people aren’t likely to be bitten as you hinted.


T

"

That you for the correction! I had heard the 2/3 number from somewhere. Guess it was fatalities.

I don’t know if I was hinting anything but I do think the breeds of the dogs would make the risk of an incident greater if everyone was taking K9 trained shepherds, mastiff, pits, etc. I like them all but statistically speaking, certain breeds are considered more likely to bite.

Here’s some info I pulled straight off the World Animal Foundation:

Top 9 Most Crucial Statistics

Dog Statistics at a glance:

Almost 4.5 Million People Become Victim of Dog Bites Annually in the US

Among 4.5 Million Bite Victims, Half Are Children

The Incidence of Dying From a Dog Bite is 1 in 112,400

70% of Dog Bites Are from Unneutered (Male) Dogs

In 2019, From a Total of 46 Dog Attack Fatalities 33 were Cause by Pit bulls

Pitbulls and Rottweiler Are Responsible for 77% of All Dog Bites

The Kangal Dog Breed Has the Strongest Bite Force of 743 PSI

Pit Bulls Pass the Temperament Rating with 86.7%

Globally, Tens of Millions of Dog Bites Occur Annually

Top 10 Dogs Most Likely to Bite

It’s hard to envision our beloved pet dogs as potentially vicious animals that can inflict serious physical harm and even death. But as responsible pet owners, we must face the fact that it can happen.

Bite statistics confirm that some dogs bite more frequently, though big dogs bear the burden because their bite causes much more damage.

People who get bitten by little dogs are less likely to report the incident. However, larger breed dogs and mixed breeds can inflict severe physical damage by sheer force of PSI (pounds by square inch or newtons).

Pit bulls (a class of dogs like the American Bully, American Pit Bull Terrier, American Staffordshire Terrier, American Bulldog, and Staffordshire Bull Terrier and any mixed breeds from the lineage of these dogs) are known as the most aggressive, with 64% of bites. It does not distinguish the breeds listed under the pity umbrella in dog bite attacks. PSI of 241.

Rottweilers have an immensely potent bite at 1,180 and 1,460 newtons of force or 328 PSI.

German Shepherds have a bite force of over 1060 newtons and a tendency to bite smaller dogs. PSI of 238.

Doberman Pinschers were in demand a few decades ago, and the last death caused by Dobby happened in 2011. PSI of 228 (though some suggest 600PSI)

Bull Mastiff, this 130-pound powerhouse dog, injured a young girl and killed a boy trying to save her. PSI of 556.

Husky dogs are working dogs, and Siberian Huskies killed 15 people in the USA from 1979 to 1998s. PSI of 320.

Malamutes don’t like other smaller animals and have five fatalities on their record. PSI of 328.

Wolf Hybrids caused 14 deaths and constitute any mixed breed with one wolf parent. These dog mixes are illegal in many states. PSI of 406.

Boxers are hunting dog descendants and have powerful jaws. The last recorded fatality happened in 2013. PSI of 230. (Just spent a month hand-feeding a boxer and didn’t think they could bite through pre-moistened kibble.)

Great Danes weigh 200 pounds, and in 2003, one of these gentle giants killed a 2-year-old. PSI of 238.

Sorry for the long post. I should have just linked it instead of copy/paste.

And I’m glad that you started this thread. I had absolutely no idea so many people were this fearful of dogs. I guess it’s just not a conversation I’ve had with this many people from so many different places.

And I’m totally guessing but I think the sensitivity came from some saying they should be banned and hinted that they are a nuisance along with messing up the pristine wilderness.

iCallitMaize:
About 2/3 of dog attacks are pit bulls or pit mixes…I don’t see many photos of folks with their pitty in the canoe. Beautiful dogs but data shows they can be temperamental especially if not well trained.

Let me help with that! Here is my 3 y/o pit mutt - Cora. She is leashed on portages, roams off leash in camp. She has recall and other command training. Just wanted to fill the void of pitties in canoes/canoe country!

schwartyman: "

iCallitMaize:
About 2/3 of dog attacks are pit bulls or pit mixes…I don’t see many photos of folks with their pitty in the canoe. Beautiful dogs but data shows they can be temperamental especially if not well trained.

Let me help with that! Here is my 3 y/o pit mutt - Cora. She is leashed on portages, roams off leash in camp. She has recall and other command training. Just wanted to fill the void of pitties in canoes/canoe country!

Awesome! She’s beautiful.

Love the photos schwartyman

What laws apply to dogs in the BWCA? NOT what rules are on the website nor what an over zealous ranger says - what laws are being broken?

Just curious if the dog rule has been codified somewhere or if this is just forest service suggesting proper etiquette. Has anyone ever been ticketed for a dog that is off leash?

sgthulka: "What laws apply to dogs in the BWCA? NOT what rules are on the website nor what an over zealous ranger says - what laws are being broken?


Just curious if the dog rule has been codified somewhere or if this is just forest service suggesting proper etiquette. Has anyone ever been ticketed for a dog that is off leash?"

Since there is a fine attached to it for finding a dog off the leash. . . .it is not like the "Pirate's Code. . .just a suggestion". It is not a rule or a law. It is a regulation. There is penalty for violating it.

I’ve had a dog jump in our boat as we were attempting to leave a portage. No owner in sight. If it’s too much trouble for you to put it on a leash while portaging. Leave it at home.

FWIW you also agree to follow the regulations when you're issued a permit (or at least the group leader does on behalf of the party when they sign it)...

Nothing to add here, I’m just here for the comments. Now where is my trail mix?

Savage Voyageur: "Nothing to add here, I’m just here for the comments. Now where is my trail mix? "

Bringing it on Saturday. Jade will have it in her saddle bags. ;-D

I'll be the first one to admit that I'm biased since I'm terrified of large dogs, and the last thing I want to encounter anywhere is a big, unfamiliar dog. So with that in mind, I think dogs should be leashed in any public place where encountering other dogs or people is likely. That helps keep everyone safe and a happy as reasonably possible.

ockycamper: "
Since there is a fine attached to it for finding a dog off the leash. . . .it is not like the "Pirate's Code. . .just a suggestion". It is not a rule or a law. It is a regulation. There is penalty for violating it."

Yes, I understand. ...but by what authority. Where is the law?

For example: When you get a ticket for doing 40 down mainstreet the cop will cite a specific city ordinance where the citizens of the community (via elected representatives) passed a local ordinance along with specific fines - "The speed limit on city streets shall be 30". Not sure how it works with the forest service. The USFS cannot just impose new rules unless they are well within the latitude provided by a specific law. Just was trying to figure out which law provided the authority related to dogs to see what the original intent was that provided the authority.

As a landowner with remote property on an entry lake and that borders BWCA/Superior National Forest it is a little different for me. I am up there all the time with a dog. The USFS comes up with rules all the time that go against the original law depending on how they feel on a certain day. If they are sympathetic there are no issues no matter how badly a law was broken - if they don't think a law goes far enough they pretend it means something else and make everyone's lives miserable until a judge steps in to correct them. The bureaucracy but it gets old.

Bringing my Dottie to the BWCA is one of the pure joys of my life. Can't tell which of us enjoys the experience more. That said, first time across the portage, I have her on leash while I'm carrying just my pack. If I see no one else on the portage and I'm 100% sure there is no one else around, she can be off leash for the 2nd trip. If there is ANY doubt at all, she is off leash while I carry the canoe, BUT she gets the muzzle put on. She generally avoids people and stays close to me, but I want there to be no doubt that she is not a threat to anyone.

Dotbear: "Bringing my Dottie to the BWCA is one of the pure joys of my life. Can't tell which of us enjoys the experience more. That said, first time across the portage, I have her on leash while I'm carrying just my pack. If I see no one else on the portage and I'm 100% sure there is no one else around, she can be off leash for the 2nd trip. If there is ANY doubt at all, she is off leash while I carry the canoe, BUT she gets the muzzle put on. She generally avoids people and stays close to me, but I want there to be no doubt that she is not a threat to anyone.








"

Thank you, excellent way for Dottie and everyone else to have a most enjoyable time.