Dog friendly attribute

[+Fox_Trot]

So a main reason why i started geocaching was to go places with my dog, despite how that sounds its true. I really enjoy being outdoors and letting my dog run or at least smell and be outside. I am finding there are many types of geocaches out there, literally all types. Some are big, easy, tall, camoed, multi... i mean the list in endless.... so what i dont understand is this. People put attributes next to their cache to help describe the area or what to expect. I have experienced some caches that say "dog friendly" and they really are not. They are in business areas, with nothing but traffic. So why would people put this? is it rude to tell people to change it? any advice/ info would be great

thanks again

[+SSO JOAT]

Lots of people don't use the attributes very well. The only means of "check-n-balance" for the usage is to tell people when they use 'em wrong. I've sent a "polite" note to CO's explaining my take on the attribute or terrain/difficulty rating that I belive to be in error. Don't be rude or demanding, but explain your case or your point of view on how it should be used and ask them if they would consider revising the usage on their cache listing.

 

Often they will thank you for taking the time to explain the meaning of these things (because they didn't really understand it in the first place) and will change it. Occasionally you'll get a cold shoulder. No biggie. You did all you need to do.

[+Isonzo Karst]

People are using dog friendly for an area where a dog on a leash is permitted.

There are outdoor places where dogs are not permitted ( except for service dogs.) Most nature preserves prohibit dogs.

I own a number of caches in woods where the management rules allow only tracking dogs used by hunters.

 

Your expectation that dog friendly means a great place for the dog is not the only way that attribute can be read. A more basic reading is simply that you can put your dog on a leash to accompany you; not having to leave the animal behind in the vehicle.

[+briansnat]

I have experienced some caches that say "dog friendly" and they really are not. They are in business areas, with nothing but traffic. So why would people put this?

 

If a dog is allowed many consider that to be "dog friendly". It doesn't necessarily have to be the kind of place you'd like to go with your dog.

[+Markwell]

Rather than specifically looking for caches where Dog Friendly is true, I'd avoid caches where Dog Friendly is false.

[+tozainamboku]

Rather than specifically looking for caches where Dog Friendly is true, I'd avoid caches where Dog Friendly is false.

That's not exactly what the OP was looking for. There problem was that the dog friendly cache was in a business area with lots of traffic. They are looking for parks and wilderness areas where dogs are allowed. If there were some way to tell that cache was in a park or wilderness area and not in a parking log, then perhaps looking for these and avoiding ones that have no dogs allowed would work. The problem I see that that there may be areas that restrict dogs and not all geoachers will put the no dogs attribute. It's up to the cacher to find out if dogs are allowed or not as the attribute might not always be correct.

 

I have found some parking lot caches at Petsmart stores. They had the dog friendly attribute. I've also seen a few caches hidden on fire hydrants that had the dog friendly attribute used humorously.

[+briansnat]

Rather than specifically looking for caches where Dog Friendly is true, I'd avoid caches where Dog Friendly is false.

 

...and try to concentrate on caches hidden in the kinds of places where you'd like to take your dog for a run.

[+DragonsWest]

At least let your dog smell...

 

I think some people take a theoretical view on attributes as in "Yes, it is theoretically possible to place a stroller on this mountain top OR Yes, with enough blood, sweat, toil and tears you could get a horse in and out of this ravine" whereas the spirit of the attribute would mean "Is it legal and is it sensible to have a stroller on a mountain top Or a horse in this ravine."

 

If zeppelins make a big comeback, all bets are off.

[+Markwell]

Rather than specifically looking for caches where Dog Friendly is true, I'd avoid caches where Dog Friendly is false.

That's not exactly what the OP was looking for.

 

I realize that. However what many people fail to realize is that inclusion of caches with is not the same as exclusion of , and neither are the same as

 

I've always took it to mean that...

- The cache owner thinks that one of the 10 most important things to say about the cache is that dogs are allowed in this area ("dog friendly")

- The cache owner thinks that one of the 10 most important things to say about the cache is that dogs are NOT allowed in this area ("you can't bring your dog here at all")

- The cache owner doesn't think that whether dogs are allowed or not is one of the 10 most important things about this cache, or that the owner doesn't use attributes.

 

So if I take my dog places and people tell me I can take my dog, I interpret it as a broad "yes" like "You can take your dog to the park" or "You can take your dog to the sidewalks of the downtown street" or "You can take your dog to the outside of a business". Those may or may not be places that I want to take my dog. The cache owners think that I can, but I have to make my own determination.

 

Likewise, if people don't tell me yes or no (), I have to make my own determination.

 

However if someone specifically tells me that dogs aren't allowed, those would be the ones I would check off my list of possibilities, and that narrows the choice in a better way. Beyond that, *I would have to make my own determination, either way*.

 

=======================

I believe that my post (and Briansnat's follow-up) gives the original poster a different way of looking at the possibilities that might give him more of what they are truly looking for. Since the "Dog Friendly" attribute isn't universally used for the same meaning, and since people can't choose more than 10 attributes, and since even the attributes themselves aren't as widely used as I believe they should be*, I think the better solution is to rule out the definite "no" than to try and set my hopes on someone else's "yes".

 

 

*I just updated my GSAK database of over 7,200 caches and found that only 67.1% had attributes at all. There's also a subset of about 3.1% that the only attribute they have is "Needs Maintenance", which is not chosen by the owner. Therefore on my sampling of over 7,200 caches, only 64.1% of the caches have ANY attribute assigned by the owner. Hopefully this will improve over time. The good news is that of those 7,200 of the caches 37.2% of them thought that the it was important to put "Dog Yes" or "Dog No" as one of the attributes. The "Dog No" exists on 114, and the "Dog Yes" exist on about 2,600.

Edited January 26, 2010 by Markwell

[+flask]

if i know dogs are not welcome in a cache area, i will use the attribute to tell you to leave him at home when looking for my cache.

 

i am not a dog person and am unlikely, EVER, to think "this would really be a nice place to bring a dog", even if it would be a nice place to bring him. it just wouldn't cross my mind.

 

so you won't be seeing the dog-friendly attribute on my caches. you should check the cache listing and maybe the logs to see what people with dogs thought.

[+DragonsWest]

The largish issues with dogs seem to be whether they are on a leash and owners pick up after them.

 

Most places around where I live welcome dogs, but there are clearly posted signs stating dog must be on leash and it's ignored about 70%

 

Picking up after the dog shouldn't be a problem as bags are usually available. In some parks where the city has posted they can no longer afford the cost of stocking the bags, local people have put their own money into seeing there are bags available. Most people are more willing to pick up after their dogs than to keep them on leash, though I have seen a few bags then tossed in the foliage.

 

Not much escapes the eyes of a cacher.

 

Where dogs are forbidden they can often be found, same applies for mountain bikes. There are people who will ignore the posted signs because they have done so for many instances without hassle. They don't do the other people who obey any favors.

[+trailsailor]

The only time I really appreciate the dog attribute being used is when dogs are specifically not allowed in areas that look and sound like they would be a great place to take my dog. Nothing worse than to pack up the dog and drive an hour or more only to find "No Dogs Allowed" signs posted. It really helps to know in advance to leave the dog at home, skip the cache in question or to bring along the cloaking device.

[Andronicus]

Of my 6 caches, 4 have a dog attribute. One of the ones without the attribute is due to me not knowing if there are rules, the other because it depends on where you hike in from if you are allowed a dog. From the East, I suspect the rancher would not allow you to bring a dog. From the other (much less convinient) directions, it is all wildland preserve, and dogs, horses etc. would be allowed.

 

Of the ones with the dog atribute, some are good places, and some are places that dogs are not banned (but not anything special or even good).

[+Fox_Trot]

wow, didnt think i would get that big of a response... but here are more of my thoughts. Thanks for all your opinions on the matter, i think you all summed it up by saying people have different thoughts on what the "dog friendly" means. Obviously i think parks that allow dogs on leashes fit the "dog friendly" attribute and if they dont the attribute that says they dont. I still think most people just put anything they can think of up there sometimes. Maybe possibly a "off leash" dog attribute? just an idea. Also, the area was a very busy area with cars and in a parking lot area, thus why i was upset.. i have decided to write the person and ask for them to edit it. thanks guys

Fox_Trot