[HN Gopher] 3,000 eggs abandoned after drone scares birds in Cal...
___________________________________________________________________
3,000 eggs abandoned after drone scares birds in California
Author : erentz
Score : 282 points
Date : 2021-06-05 10:34 UTC (12 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (abcnews.go.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (abcnews.go.com)
| [deleted]
| pvaldes wrote:
| I wouldn't discard a deliberated action it somebody wants to
| develop the area.
|
| They are not extinct because they live from Chile to US, so they
| have more than one nest area. Tern are serious migratory birds.
| KineticLensman wrote:
| Elegant Terns are considered 'Near Threatened' - so they are
| not at imminent risk of extinction. However, the wetland -
| Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve - where they live is home to
| other species that may not be so secure.
|
| > I wouldn't discard a deliberated action it somebody wants to
| develop the area.
|
| If we gradually lose all of the migration endpoints the species
| will eventually suffer.
| anonAndOn wrote:
| >If we gradually lose all of the migration endpoints the
| species will eventually suffer.
|
| Indeed. We may see the extinction of the monarch butterfly
| within the decade for this very reason.
| KineticLensman wrote:
| Yes.
|
| I work at the Hawk Conservation Trust in the UK. We have a
| few White-headed vultures and this year two of them have
| successfully raised a chick (currently two months old and
| about to start flapping its little wings). A visitor asked
| me if it would be returned to the wild. I said 'no - it is
| part of the insurance policy for this species' and the
| conversation moved on.
|
| What I didn't say was that returning it to the wild would
| be like throwing it into a shredder. These African birds
| are superbly good at spotting carrion. When poachers kill
| elephants and rhinos, the vultures start circling and
| unwittingly act as a signal to the wildlife rangers that
| poachers might be in the vicinity. So, after they have
| chain-sawed the horns / tusks off, the poachers poison the
| carcasses to kill the vultures so they won't give the game
| away at the next kill. The record is 500 vultures of
| various species killed as a result of one poaching event.
| The wild populations will not survive this relentless
| slaughter.
|
| So, I'm afraid I have very little sympathy for people who
| are worried about their drone-flying rights. Sorry.
| mensetmanusman wrote:
| " That's contributed not only to increased drone activity, but
| also to more dogs and bicycles on the trails - all of which are
| prohibited.
|
| "We've seen a significant increase in dogs, particularly off-
| leash," Loebl said. "That's devastating for wildlife and this is
| prime nesting season. The dogs chase the birds and the birds
| abandon their nests."
|
| Another problem is the development of multimillion-dollar homes
| on the hillside at the north end of the reserve overlooking the
| wetlands, said Fish and Wildlife warden Nick Molsberry. While
| most residents respect the sensitive nature of the estuary, there
| are a few scofflaws, he said.
|
| "It's residents that sometimes feel entitled, that feel they
| should be able to use the land as they like," Molsberry said.
| Authorities are ramping up enforcement and citing people who
| break the rules. "
|
| It's sad to see people taking ignorant actions that harm future
| generations from experiencing nature.
| MajorBee wrote:
| > scofflaws
|
| Learned a new word today! One who scoffs at laws can be called,
| quite appropriately, a "scofflaw".
| ecf wrote:
| As someone in their 20s I've already come to terms with just
| how much wildlife I'll never be able to see because previous
| generations decided to absolutely destroy the planet.
| throwaway803453 wrote:
| As someone in their 20's you are also likely lamenting the
| lack of affordable housing. One way to address it is to build
| more housing which which disrupts wildlife.
|
| Without affordable housing you might delay having children
| and getting married like I did. Wait too long and you might
| never be able to see your children or grandchildren because
| you won't have them.
|
| Reframing it that way might reduce resentment and ameliorate
| this perpetual blame of the previous generations. You'll have
| to pick your poison just like previous generations did only
| to later be criticized regardless of which poison you chose.
| bobthepanda wrote:
| Sprawl affects wildlife. Density, particularly infill
| density, generally only impacts land already being used for
| human habitation anyways.
| rangersanger wrote:
| Are you saying that the act of building affordable housing
| impacts wildlife/that affordable housing is built in
| locations disruptive to wildlife?
| ashtonkem wrote:
| Funny how this is always the argument against affordable
| housing, and never the large detached single family
| dwellings in the far exurbs. Makes you wonder if the
| concerns are sincere...
| ashtonkem wrote:
| It's not the affordable housing advocates that are putting
| up houses at the edge of the wilderness that is
| disproportionately affecting wildlife. That's the upper
| middle and the upper class that's doing that.
|
| Generally speaking, affordable housing advocates
| incidentally advocate for more efficient land use, because
| that's one part of the strategy to build cheap places for
| people to live.
| GekkePrutser wrote:
| Not having children at allor at least less of them is a
| better way to protect the environment and housing though.
| If we continue to grow our population as we are we're going
| to run out of natural resources and space to live sooner or
| later.
|
| It'll cause some immediate societal issues like an
| unbalanced population pyramid just like the boomers did.
| But it'll be better in the long run.
| proc0 wrote:
| You're human, and part of the problem. Let's not pretend
| you don't benefit from that destruction (unless you are
| living in the wilderness).
| ArkanExplorer wrote:
| The best way to address it is to restrict immigration, so
| that the demand isn't there in the first place.
|
| For example the USA could end its refugee intake program
| (which Biden has increased by 50,000/year to 62,500) -
| which alone will bring in a Wyoming's worth of people over
| the next 9 years.
|
| Secondly to limit immigration only to other highly
| developed countries: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_
| countries_by_Human_Dev... And to persecute and physically
| prevent all unauthorised arrivals.
| andrewzah wrote:
| Thanks to inflation and skyrocketing tuition, etc, things
| are different for this generation. This isn't perpetually
| blaming each past generation; it's specifically blaming the
| boomer generation. Our "poisons" are home ownership being
| out of reach for a significant chunk of the population
| (therefore tossing money away instead of building wealth
| like previous generations), and our environment being
| destroyed with the help of our geriatric politicians. Let
| me just "reframe" that!
|
| [0]: https://news.yahoo.com/average-cost-college-jumped-
| incredibl...
|
| [1]: https://archive.curbed.com/2018/4/10/17219786/buying-
| a-house...
| throwaway803453 wrote:
| Agreed. No one's arguing you didn't get a shit deal. At
| least I hope no one is arguing that.
|
| But that doesn't mean the previous generation got a
| better deal. When my Dad bought our first home the
| interest rate was over 10%. And how did he pay for
| college ? He had to fight in a war and then work at the
| military morgue. He never recovered from this.
|
| I am not trying to win an argument here. It's human
| nature to focus one's own problems and assume others have
| it better. For the record, my dad would definitely
| preferred to have been born into your generation, as I
| would. Again that's not a counterargument but should at
| least help lessen some of the bitterness from these
| discussions.
| gambiting wrote:
| Also not everyone had the luck to be growing up in rich
| western countries. My "boomer" parents grew up under
| communism, you know what they had at my age? Absolutely
| nothing. Definitely no wealth building to speak of, no
| amazing opportunities, good job existed if the government
| granted you any.....compared with them, my generation has
| it _extremely_ good.
|
| And then you go on the internet and read how the post WW2
| generation fucked everyone over - like....in US, sure. In
| the former Soviet block? Not so much.
| bradleyjg wrote:
| No one decided that. It feels good to divide the world into
| good guys and bad guys, but if that's your mental model of
| history and older people (like me) you are going to make
| mistaken judgments over and over again.
| EB66 wrote:
| What? Of course humans have decided to harm the
| environment. It happens every day and has happened for as
| long as humans have existed. I don't think his comment
| "divides the world into good guys and bad guys" -- it
| merely points out an abundantly obvious truth.
|
| Clear-cutting, overfishing, fossil fuel extraction,
| emissions, etc didn't just happen on their own -- they all
| required a human decision.
|
| Whether or not humans making these decisions realize that
| their actions will contribute to the irreparable harm of
| the environment is a moot point. The decisions are made and
| the harm is done. Even so, willful ignorance and
| indifference to the impact of ones actions are decisions
| too.
|
| If we ever want to turn the tide on global environmental
| destruction, then it is imperative that we as a society not
| diminish individual responsibility for the impact of one's
| decisions and actions.
| animal_spirits wrote:
| We've exploited nature to bootstrap us into the
| information age we currently exist in. I don't condemn
| the efforts past humans have made so I can live in a
| world with instant fresh water to wash myself and to
| drink, markets with food, sewer systems to manage waste,
| roads, electricity, medicine, etc.
|
| We now have the tools humans have been dreaming of for
| millennia to make the world a better place. I personally
| think instead of looking backwards and blaming people for
| making mistakes, we should use the tools to look forward
| to accomplish the goals of the future; Human health,
| environmental health, agricultural sustainability, peace.
| bradleyjg wrote:
| Let's play this out a little bit:
|
| I point out that your generation is also destroying the
| planet.
|
| You acknowledge that---taking the position that we all
| are sinners to a greater or lesser extent.
|
| However, since the contemporary Western religion is
| Protestantism without a Christ, you don't even have any
| salvation to offer. Just endless flagellation of self and
| others over our sinful natures. We should all do good
| works, of course, but we are bound to fail. _O fortuna!_
|
| Why not instead of hating humanity and spending your life
| impotently shaking your fist at our collective
| imperfections, look for systemic solutions that are
| compatible with human nature?
| EB66 wrote:
| > I point out that your generation is also destroying the
| planet.
|
| No, not quite. You stated "no one decided [to harm the
| environment]". My reply sought to explain how that is
| incorrect.
|
| > You acknowledge that---taking the position that we all
| are sinners to a greater or lesser extent.
|
| Again, not quite. "We are all sinners" is very different
| from 'humans have made decisions to harm the environment
| for a long time'. Those two are different.
|
| > However, since the contemporary Western religion is
| Protestantism without a Christ, you don't even have any
| salvation to offer. Just endless flagellation of self and
| others over our sinful natures. We should all do good
| works, of course, but we are bound to fail. O fortuna!
|
| Wow, where to begin...
|
| > you don't even have any salvation to offer.
|
| I'm advocating a very simple proposition: preserving the
| environment. Whether you want to liken it to "salvation"
| is entirely up to you.
|
| > We should all do good works, of course, but we are
| bound to fail.
|
| What an awful assertion. I'd hardly agree that
| environmental protection and preservation is a lost
| cause.
|
| > Why not instead of hating humanity
|
| Again, false. I do not "hate" humanity.
|
| > spending your life impotently shaking your fist at our
| collective imperfections,
|
| I could be wrong, but you seem to be suggesting that
| because something is difficult and that the result might
| not be unachievable, that it's therefore not worth
| trying. Again, I completely disagree.
|
| > look for systemic solutions that are compatible with
| human nature?
|
| Absolutely! There are an innumerable number of ways that
| we can protect and preserve the environment. In this
| thread, I'm contributing in a tiny way by dispelling the
| notion that "no one decided [to harm the environment]".
| As I stated above: If we ever want to turn the tide on
| global environmental destruction, then it is imperative
| that we as a society not diminish individual
| responsibility for the impact of one's decisions and
| actions.
| bradleyjg wrote:
| > In this thread, I'm contributing in a tiny way by
| dispelling the notion that "no one decided [to harm the
| environment]". As I stated above: If we ever want to turn
| the tide on global environmental destruction, then it is
| imperative that we as a society not diminish individual
| responsibility for the impact of one's decisions and
| actions.
|
| On the contrary preaching at people to change their
| sinful ways will never work. In fact, it's likely to be
| counterproductive. But self righteous sure does feel
| good.
|
| If you really want to save the environment, and not just
| feel like a good person, invent ways to break the zero
| sum trade off curve between the environment and human
| flourishing in the short and medium term.
| splithalf wrote:
| I think dog owners are generally good people who have done
| really great things but I also sometimes feel like there might
| be a few entitled jerks in their ranks, especially pit bull
| owners.
| adrr wrote:
| There is a dog beach a mile down from Bolsa Chica reserve. It's
| like littering when there is garbage can within sight.
| boplicity wrote:
| If I were to poop in someone's front yard, I might go to jail.
| Yet, people constantly encourage human-sized pooping in my
| front yard -- every single day -- without any consequence at
| all.
|
| Why do dogs get away with behaviour that would be blatantly
| offensive if done by a person?
| alisonkisk wrote:
| Did you know that insects, birds, and squirrels poop on your
| lawn too?
| julianlam wrote:
| At least where I live, it is a bylaw offense to not scoop
| after pooping.
|
| Not that it ever can be enforced, unless you happen to have
| your doggy do its business on the bylaw officer's front lawn,
| but it's a bylaw nonetheless.
| saurik wrote:
| Just to verify--I am not taking a stance on this and I
| could see going either way--the idea is then that I can
| poop on your front yard as long as I "scoop"?
| alisonkisk wrote:
| You can use a toilet. Dogs can't. Yes, it's an
| inconsistency. Socialization matters.
| fnord77 wrote:
| people with dogs off-leash are extremely inconsiderate. they're
| also the type to get hostile and even violent if you say
| anything
| throwaway803453 wrote:
| My last girlfriend picked me up in San Diego and we drove 6
| hours to Tucson after we had been apart for about a month.
| During the drive with her two dogs she told me while I was
| away there was an incident where her dog mauled a smaller dog
| and then bit the owner's face when she bent over to rescue
| her small dog. Her take away was pride as she was _smart
| enough_ to just run off with her dog implying an idiot like
| me would have stayed and taken responsibility.
|
| My response was there are two options, your dog either needs
| to be destroyed or never off leash again and we didn't
| discuss further. Then we stopped somewhere to take a break
| and she let her dogs run out of the car off leash. When my
| jaw dropped, she replied, "it's no problem, I don't see
| anyone around".
|
| So it's worse than getting "hostile" or "violent" as you
| mentioned. Many of these people never learn. You could sue
| them into oblivion and the take away would be they are the
| victim of an unjust world.
| marvin wrote:
| Don't know about the US, but in my jurisdiction, the dog
| would be killed by the police if it could be proved that it
| had bitten a human. There's very few exceptions to these
| rulings.
| trhway wrote:
| >the dog would be killed by the police if it could be
| proved that it had bitten a human
|
| and here lies the main issue - the dog gets punished for
| what is mainly the owner's fault (it is somewhat similar
| to destroying the gun in case of killing while letting
| the killer go free). I'm generally against corporal
| punishment, and this is one of the few exceptions where i
| think corporal punishment would be very useful - any
| damage inflicted by your dog as a result of your gross
| negligence should be inflicted as a punishment on you.
| anonAndOn wrote:
| It is the same in the US, thus why she picked up the dog
| and ran.
| dathinab wrote:
| Same in Germany.
|
| Through sadly this can even apply in situations where it
| was reasonable for the Dog to bite (e.g. in self defense
| or to defense their holder).
| nielsbot wrote:
| OT, but you dodged a figurative bullet
| throwaway803453 wrote:
| The real PSA here is that sex can be insanely powerful.
| Had we not separated for a month, I would have married
| her since there would have been no preceding window of
| clarity. After that 6hr drive I ended the relationship
| and did not accept her _friends with benefits_ counter-
| offer.
| dathinab wrote:
| As a side note: Do not _ever_ go into between two dogs
| fighting, even if both dogs know you and are normally super
| team.
|
| It's not just a risk for you but can also make the dogs
| involved more aggressive.
|
| Furthermore most dogs (which do not have mental issues or
| are badly wrongly trained) normally won't kill or majorly
| injure the other dog but mainly make it submit. But if you
| step in thinks can still escalate.
|
| Lastly the problem are not dogs of the leach, but people
| not training their dogs properly (and often not
| understanding/ignoring that they don't train their dog
| properly). Or people buying dogs which are bread (and
| potentially even trained) to be super aggressive. Which
| IMHO is a no-go and requires the dog to muzzled nearly
| always outside of private properties (through ONLY for this
| dogs bread to be aggressive, e.g. for dog fighting).
|
| I have been in areas where dogs are allowed to be of the
| leach frequently and is generally not a problem, most dog
| holders living around where I live do not use a leach when
| walking their dogs in the evening and it's not a problem.
|
| EDIT: Wrt. the main thread, if you dog is properly trained
| you can have it walk alongside you without a leach even
| with birds close by and it won't run to the birds. A lot of
| dogs I meat are good but not hat good trained so while
| there really is no reason to put them on the leach in the
| city or common German forest areas you would put them on
| the leach if you enter a area with e.g. ground breading
| birds.
| trhway wrote:
| when it comes to dogs there are a lot of misinformation
| and contradictory unverified advises floating around
|
| >normally won't kill or majorly injure the other dog but
| mainly make it submit
|
| some are doing it by biting and sinking their teeth deep
| into the back of the neck of the victim. So it does make
| sense to step in before that happens, as well as to step
| in to stop that when that is already going on (i've met
| owners who had that happen to their dogs, and couple
| times i stepped in right before that was going to happen
| to my dog)
| sebmellen wrote:
| Did that factor into the "last" prefix?
| adriancr wrote:
| The other party can follow her to figure out where she
| lives or some car license plate, call the police and report
| incident.
|
| Once police get involved she will get fined and there is a
| risk that dogs get euthanised in some countries after
| biting someone...
|
| There is also a risk of someone hurting her dogs due to
| adrenaline...
| brandonmenc wrote:
| > they're also the type to get hostile and even violent if
| you say anything
|
| Or, they're the type who thinks everyone loves dogs and that
| you know their dog is just the sweetest thing ever.
|
| I live in Austin (which is ground zero for irresponsible dog
| owners) and I can't count the number of times some huge
| unleashed dog runs up on me out of nowhere, followed by their
| owner shouting "oh, he's really friendly!"
| fugfjj wrote:
| Ground zero is Buenos Aires.
|
| Ive been to Austin. Its nice. In sure you have some very
| annoying dog owners.
|
| I grew up in BsAs. The city is a sidewalk of dog shit you
| have to avoid stepping on.
| sonofhans wrote:
| I've lived in both places. You're totally right. Most
| Americans would be shocked at the level of public
| disruption dogs are allowed in many other places.
| 2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote:
| My father told me a story of a man walking in a park one day
| when an unleashed dog walked up to him. The man took out his
| handgun and shot it.
| fugfjj wrote:
| A little dog once nipped my 90 year old grandpa in his
| porch. My grandpa responded with a swift kidney blow from
| his cane.
|
| The owner looked furious but caught me staring him in the
| eye in time to recompose himself and get off of our front
| yard.
|
| The bloody nerve. You have your dog take its daily piss on
| our wall - a wall that my grandma cleans, btw. The dog
| takes its daily piss and my grandpa decides to ignore it,
| but then you don't stop the thing from nipping him?
|
| Oh well the dog pissed blood for a week after that
| offbynull wrote:
| Had you or your grandparents thought about maybe first
| asking the owner to keep the dog off the property? Maybe
| conveying to the owner that your grandmother has been
| cleaning the wall and (I'm assuming) you and your family
| aren't a fan of dogs.
| kodah wrote:
| Thankfully this is a felony in at least some states now.
|
| > My father told me a story of a man walking in a park one
| day when an unleashed dog walked up to him. The man took
| out his handgun and shot it.
|
| Not a threatening dog, just a fucking dog walking up to
| somebody. This is a disgusting line of thought that anyone
| would take a life purely based on an animal approaching
| you.
|
| It makes me question my involvement in a community where
| people are so unhinged they think taking out a gun and
| shooting someone's random dog is appropriate. How far we've
| come from To Kill a Mockingbird is astounding.
|
| I think I am done with this place. What a disappointing
| thread.
| fugfjj wrote:
| Why thankfully?
|
| An unleashed dog comes up to you where its not supposed
| to.
|
| - What are its intentions?
|
| - Is it aggressive?
|
| - Is it rabid?
|
| Its no different than if a coyote came up and accosted
| you. Worse, because dogs are socialized not to fear man.
|
| My neighbor had an aggressive dog (german shepherd) and
| every time my kid was outside in the backyard I made sure
| to carry a weapon to kill it if need be. It didn't really
| matter, my kid was too scared of it to play in the
| backyard.
|
| I was planning on calling the city to have it destroyed
| but she moved out.
|
| And for all you down voters... yes I talked to her. It
| was obvious talking with her where the dog got its
| attitude from.
| kodah wrote:
| You have effectively picked the worst sample of dogs, and
| established a standard that a human being may take a life
| based on that standard.
|
| Dogs have tells too, and there's common ones that most
| dog owners will know:
|
| - ears backed with tail tucked or quick wagging
|
| - cowering / laying down (in a non-relaxed posture)
|
| - deep growls and a leg spread defensive stance
|
| And there's tells that occur far before the above. Dogs
| are _domesticated_ animals (with millions of years of
| domestication, as opposed to cats), so comparing them in
| your head to a coyote is a false dichotomy from the get-
| go.
|
| Your situation and GPs are very different. GP has
| specifically framed a dog that walked up to them off-
| leash. You are talking about having to potentially defend
| a child's life. There's a massive chasm between the two
| both legally and ethically.
| wyager wrote:
| The number of dog attacks that occur in the US every year
| suggest your "you can always avoid a dog attack" model is
| completely wrong.
| fugfjj wrote:
| I actually like dogs. Id be honored to have my BF entrust
| his dog to me for a few days.
|
| But the onus is _not_ on me to meet your pet half way,
| learn the species' "tells" or pretend that there are no
| irresponsible owners.
|
| The onus is on you.
| kodah wrote:
| Yeah, sure, I mentioned tells because having _more
| information_ is better. The onus is on me to protect my
| dog from sociopaths who bring guns to shoot random dogs
| that walk up to them (as a reminder, _that_ is the
| situation we 're discussing apart from your "defense of a
| child" scenario)
| paulcole wrote:
| I'm not a dog owner and it's not my responsibility to
| determine the friendly unleashed dogs from the unfriendly
| ones. In an area where a leash is required, my assumption
| is they're all unfriendly and their owners are all
| selfish idiots.
|
| "Leash your fucking dog" is my go-to. "Are you selfish or
| stupid?" works, too.
| MauranKilom wrote:
| I still have a (fading) scar on my calf from that one
| time I ran past some tables in a cafe as a toddler. I
| hold no ill will towards the dog that leapt out from
| under a table and sunk his jaws into my leg before the
| owners could even react. But let's be clear that big dog
| + unfamiliar small child is not about "can you read the
| tells".
| kodah wrote:
| Sure, it doesn't always work that way. Dogs are still
| animals and can be unpredictable. That does not rise to
| the level of shooting some stray or off-leash dog. I
| still have puncture marks in my hand from when I
| dislodged a sucker from my childhood dogs throat and he
| bit down.
|
| Defending yourself and being a violent person are two
| different things. The man who shoots any off-leash or
| stray dog is just violent.
| efraim wrote:
| >Dogs are still animals and can be unpredictable.
|
| Which is precisely why they must be on a leash, always.
| Except in a fenced off area maybe.
| kodah wrote:
| There are a lot of places that put on their website or
| Google maps that they're dog friendly and allow off-leash
| or on-leash visits. So "always" is not even near correct
| here, it is on a dog owner (and other visitors) to
| determine whether the place they're visiting is dog-
| friendly and to what degree.
| corndoge wrote:
| > would take a life purely based on an animal approaching
| you
|
| Which is it, an animal or a life? The phrase "take a
| life" implies some sort of value akin to that of a human
| life. If you want to elevate animals to that level, then
| acknowledge that you take a life when you slap a mosquito
| or step on an ant, yet I doubt you apply the same
| moralizing to anyone else who does so.
|
| > It makes me question my involvement in a community
| where people are so unhinged they think taking out a gun
| and shooting someone's random dog is appropriate.
|
| I think the key thing is that an off leash dog ceases to
| become "someone's random dog". It being "someone's dog"
| gives it value by being recognized as another person's
| property. Once off leash, relative to other people it's
| just a dog now; the owner has effectively abdicated
| responsibility of ownership for the dog by letting it off
| the leash. At that point it's not "someone's dog" any
| more than a bird with a FWS band is "someone's bird".
| Consequently treating it like any other animals is
| acceptable.
|
| I say all of this as someone who loves dogs, and I even
| enjoy friendly dogs approaching me. But they 100% should
| be on leash and unable to approach me. I wouldn't blame
| someone for shooting a dog in the exact same
| circumstances.
| kodah wrote:
| > Once off leash, relative to other people it's just a
| dog now; the owner has effectively abdicated
| responsibility of ownership for the dog by letting it off
| the leash
|
| Do you think it's okay to walk around and shoot strays?
| At least dog pounds in the US will make an _attempt_ at a
| nonviolent death for a stray animal.
|
| Let me be clear, it's not moralizing when it's ethically
| unsound to shoot a dog that does _nothing else than walk
| up to you_. When I chose "life" it's probably because I
| live with my dog. She has a personality, she has quirks,
| she learns from me and even teaches me things. If I saw
| her brains get blown out by some random dude because she
| walked up (and that was the framing) what am I in bounds
| to do? I can tell you, what I'm allowed to do would be of
| little consequence to me, because although that is just a
| dog _to you_ , _to me_ you took an animal that I know on
| a level deeper than I know most humans.
|
| > At that point it's not "someone's dog" any more than a
| bird with a FWS band is "someone's bird". Consequently
| treating it like any other animals is acceptable.
|
| Birds are not domesticated and we certainly treat
| domesticated animals differently in the context of the
| law _and_ societal expectations. Dogs being the _most_
| and _longest_ domesticated animal, whose behavior has
| been shaped and maintained over millions of years.
| csense wrote:
| Can you legally shoot someone who pulls a gun on your dog?
| [deleted]
| vanattab wrote:
| No
| fugfjj wrote:
| No. A dog is not a human being, unless there is another
| factor (like your dog was defending you) youre looking at
| a murder charge. No matter how angry you might get the
| best you should keep your cool. Otherwise you're betting
| on being the benevolence of nine.
|
| Only K-9 have that right, and thats ridiculous
| devwastaken wrote:
| No. Doesn't meet any of the standards of self defense.
| anonAndOn wrote:
| Many are often also surprised that their off-leash little
| companion suddenly wants chase me and go for my ankle as I
| bicycle past. I've had a couple narrow misses by sprinting
| away but as I age I'm becoming more willing to properly repel
| an attack.
|
| PSA: Please keep your dog away from cyclists.
| wott wrote:
| There is perhaps worse than off-leash: on a bloody 16 feet
| retractable leash, with the dog on one side of the road,
| and the owner on the other side... So called "retractable",
| because you cannot pull anything.
|
| A friend suffered a bicycle crash and killed a dog like
| that. I can see from my place all the time the same
| situation waiting to happen, with women busy chatting on
| one side, and not caring at all about where the dog goes.
| When I had to walk the dog of a former girlfriend on a
| road/street side, I always took the short, fixed leash, and
| in places where room was scarce, I even kept my second hand
| further on the leash to be able to shorten it quickly if
| needed.
|
| Just a couple of days ago, a bit different situations. I
| was cycling uphill on a small road, and there was a woman
| (it's almost always a woman, in fact) with a dog at her
| feet on the right of the road. I prepared to move a bit to
| the left to give them space while taking over. But the dog
| started coming to me (not aggressively), and the woman let
| the leash unroll, and unroll, and unroll. She never stopped
| it, but started yelling: not at the dog to call it back
| (which has a dubious success rate in general but shows a
| little bit of conscience at least), but at me! She was
| telling me to slow down, that I was crazy and dangerous. I
| said it was uphill, and I suck at climbing, so I was
| cycling at the ridiculous speed of 5 mph (yes, five)... And
| I was now on the opposite side of the road. It's a very bad
| idea to yell at me, it makes me completely snap, so the
| result was not what she expected.
|
| Coming back to off-leash, I was bitten in the calf while
| riding last year by two dogs (so far dogs had only gone for
| my trousers, but this time they went through the trouser,
| through the sock, and through the skin). The owner was
| standing 10 yards away, he didn't do or say anything. He
| didn't give a damn. In the little "discussion" had with the
| cretin, he kept claiming his dogs do not bite... while they
| were biting and pulling my trouser again... At no point he
| tried to regain control of his dogs. As it should be done,
| I reported it to the Mayor, who MUST take measures: here,
| there is no immediate death penalty for such behaviour, but
| the Mayor MUST make sure the dog should first be sent to a
| vet for behavioural examination. She didn't do anything.
|
| At my place, there are plenty of dogs loose all day long.
| The (French) law is lax, but even the few restrictions are
| never enforced. They shit and dig holes in people's open
| gardens, they occasionally attack and sometimes kill other
| people's pets (dogs and cats). Then you have shepherds
| dogs, who attack cyclists and occasionally pedestrians,
| even on public roads (and it's not a matter of protection,
| these bastards generally attack people in the back, _after_
| they have passed by); often farmers ' dogs haven't been
| trained at all, or in the case of livestock farmers only
| trained to one purpose and the relation with humans was not
| part of it. When I was living in another country, dogs were
| never loose: either in a fenced yard, or on a leash ;
| whether they were pet dogs, shepherds dogs, sledge dogs or
| whatever type of dog and dog owner you may imagine. But
| over here people will tell you this is impossible. Gee...
|
| There are plenty of dogs these days. Cats are even worse,
| it is a proliferation (their number was multiplied by 2 or
| 3 in a few decades, IIRC), and due to their nature, they
| are even less kept under control. Luckily, they are also
| less a danger to humans, but they are worse about gardens,
| because contrarily to dogs, they ignore fences :-)
|
| It's like everyone wants to own a pet for the fun side, but
| the negative externalities are for others to undergo. Of
| course I don't do justice to the owners who care and pay
| attention, they do exist :-) but of course the others are
| more noticeable.
| diggan wrote:
| I frequently walk my dogs without leash. They follow my
| command, don't disturb other people or dogs unless both
| parties engage and generally I don't do anything that someone
| who has a leash wouldn't be doing. They also walk side-by-
| side with me when off-leash. This is very common in the city
| I live and surrounding area (Barcelona, Spain and Catalunya).
| Both me and others without leashes are indistinctive from
| people who are using leashes.
|
| How is inconsiderate if the dogs themselves are behaving?
| Maybe there is something I'm missing, and I'd like to
| understand your point of view. I could understand you think
| it's inconsiderate if people don't have control on their dogs
| and they annoy others while the owners do nothing, then I
| agree with you. But just because of being off-leash? Not sure
| I understand that line of reasoning.
|
| Edit: Just to clarify further, if I did meet someone who asks
| me to leash my dog I would obviously do so without hostility
| or violence. In my ~6 years of having dogs in Barcelona, that
| has yet to happen even once.
| spicyramen wrote:
| I have a toddler and I absolutely hate people doing this. I
| don't know you nor your dog. Sometimes I go to the park and
| people assume we can read minds and let stranger dogs come
| close to us. Please leash your dog
| smcl wrote:
| Strange you're getting so downvoted. While I am a dog owner
| (and therefore may have a bias) I don't think you've said
| anything wrong or even controversial. I've seen a lot of
| US-based people who cannot fathom the idea of a well-
| behaved dog being completely fine off-leash, so maybe this
| is why?
|
| I must say that in this sort of situation - an area near a
| nesting site - I _absolutely_ agree a dog shouldn 't be
| free to run around. But I imagine there are signs
| specifically warning people against doing that. There are
| areas here where I have to do the same, for example near
| areas where people hunt deer (a lot nearby) or where there
| are bears (only seen warnings in Slovakia). But outside of
| those areas, with an conscientious owner and an attentive,
| trained dog who listens to their owner - there's no reason
| not to unless it's someone who hasn't bothered training
| their dog.
| brandur wrote:
| I'm going to hazard a guess as to why the downvotes are
| happening: There's a silent majority out there who are
| not happy with the way dog owners behave, which is very
| often badly. Most of the time they have no real power to
| do anything about it, but it's occasionally visible in
| places like this with karma systems.
|
| In my experience, most dog owners are like the user who
| started this thread. They do what they want, having their
| dog constantly off leash in areas where it's clearly not
| allowed, and then rationalize it to themselves with
| something like "well my dog's well behaved and would
| never hurt a fly!" It's incredibly inconsiderate to both
| the environment (dogs are constantly chasing and damaging
| wildlife, a lot of poop gets left behind as the owner is
| walking off in front and doesn't notice) and other people
| (many people don't like dogs, dogs are dangerous for
| bicyclists and small kids, and some people have smaller
| dogs who they don't want strange dogs interacting with),
| and indeed the badly behaved dog owner will see signs of
| this on a daily basis, but chooses to consciously ignore
| all of them by pretending none of it's happening.
|
| Dog culture around the Bay Area where I am has reached
| peak absurd. With more dogs in SF now than kids, people
| treat their dogs like they would human children. Off
| leash dogs in on leash or even no dog areas is the norm.
| At least a few times a week I'll see an off leash dog to
| something bad to a person or another dog, and the owner
| pretend-chastise them with a, "ooohhhhh Fido, silly dog,
| don't do that" (but in a sweet tone so the dog is not
| actually being chastised) followed by a "he doesn't
| normally do that". You know of course that Fido does
| normally do that on a consistent basis, and the owner is
| pretending Fido doesn't because they really don't care.
|
| It's frustrating to me, and probably frustrating to other
| people on here too. There's no real enforcement anywhere,
| so the only thing we can do is ask dog owners to put
| their animals back on leash, which will be ignored. It's
| like fighting entropy at this point, and if you're
| anything like me, you sort of wish nebulously that people
| would just be better.
| asimpletune wrote:
| It is totally counter to HN ethos to downvote a opinion
| you don't agree with, and I'm disappointed others don't
| give pause and ask themselves why they're doing it first.
|
| All the responses in this thread have been cordial and
| relevant, so it is disappointing to see some of them met
| with this kind of silent disapproval, which is reserved
| for non-sequitors, those acting in bad faith, or impolite
| speech.
| smcl wrote:
| I'm particularly confused because this comment of mine is
| downvoted despite me _agreeing_ with the idea that dogs
| should be leashed in these situations. But I understand -
| people get annoyed and irritated, and really it 's just
| meaningless internet numbers at stake so it doesn't
| matter :)
| bradleyjg wrote:
| There are a lot of different dog cultures around the
| world and even within the US.
|
| In cities that have a lot of people from all over the
| country and world you end up with a lot of culture
| clashes. People do things that in the context they grew
| up in are totally reasonable and normal, but from someone
| else's perspective seems uncomfortable or even dangerous.
|
| In theory municipal rules should harmonize, albeit with
| some people left unhappy, but it's another American
| cultural quirk that some rules are widely ignored. But
| which ones is again a matter of geographic diversity.
| stephenhuey wrote:
| You're in the minority - too many dog owners think their
| dogs are fine and when their dog runs dozens of yards away
| from their master to bound up to us th egg cheerfully call
| out, "It's a friendly dog!" Then they go on their merry way
| and I have to attend to my 2 crying toddlers. Maybe they
| only kicked my kids' faces but sometimes they knock them
| down. I grew up with dogs in the 20th century - mine could
| obey and do tricks but I still didn't make assumptions and
| grabbed them if we were in a situation like that. I don't
| live out in the middle of nowhere - we're in one of the
| largest cities in the USA and it's illegal but dog owners
| think it's a suggestion the way speeders on the road often
| do!
| diggan wrote:
| > You're in the minority
|
| Yes, if I was in the USA maybe I would be in the
| minority. But where I actually live (Barcelona, Spain)
| I'm not, as mentioned before. Countless people walk their
| dogs without leashes here, and no one bats an eye.
|
| > too many dog owners think their dogs are fine and when
| their dog runs dozens of yards away from their master to
| bound up to us th egg cheerfully call out, "It's a
| friendly dog!"
|
| Sure that might be a friendly dog but in no way is that a
| well-behaved dog, it wouldn't run away yards away unless
| the owner explicitly calls out for them to behave that
| way. Living in ~16th or something biggest city in Europe,
| you wouldn't have your dog stray that far away from you,
| easily within a yard of yourself at all time, otherwise I
| wouldn't call them well-behaved.
|
| So back to the original point: off-leash dogs that don't
| behave properly have inconsiderate owners, yes I agree
| with this. Are all owners who let their dogs be off-leash
| inconsiderate? No.
| varjag wrote:
| If they leave their dogs off leash in leash-only areas,
| YES, they are being inconsiderate.
| tomjen3 wrote:
| The wast majority of dogs that aren't leashed should be. If
| I encounter your dogs I can't know if they are one of the
| handful out of a hundred who are totally safe to keep off
| leash, or not. I can also not know if they are mostly fine
| off leash but react badly to bicyclists, other dogs or
| whatever.
|
| So when I encounter them I have to assume you are not a
| reponsible dog owner.
| nanis wrote:
| > They follow my command
|
| That's great, as it should be. However, the majority of dog
| owners I encounter are at the mercy of their dogs, they
| treat the dogs not as dogs but as humans and try to bargain
| with them. This is merely annoying when the dogs is a
| golden lab, but can be mortal when it is a "sweet" "rescue"
| pit.
|
| You are right though, it doesn't matter if the dog is on a
| leash because people also get these 30ft (10m) leashes and
| all of a sudden, out of nowhere, someone's dog is trying to
| "just show affection" to a toddler.
|
| So, the golden rule is not to get a dog if you can't be
| pack leader. A very bad proxy for a person being able to
| control a dog is the dog being on a "short leash"[1]. So,
| people go for that rule.
|
| Then you get the 100 lb jogger (45 kg) who attaches a
| Doberman with a breakaway clip to their shorts.
|
| [1]: https://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/on+a+short+leash
| ptr2voidStar wrote:
| >the majority of dog owners I encounter are at the mercy
| of their dogs, they treat the dogs not as dogs but as
| humans and try to bargain with them.
|
| The crux of the problem.
| cratermoon wrote:
| Every stereotype of the off-leash dog owner on display
| here.
|
| Leash your dog. To do otherwise is selfish and rude.
| diggan wrote:
| > Every stereotype of the off-leash dog owner on display
| here.
|
| The comment I responded to called me "extremely
| inconsiderate", "hostile" and "violent" while I'm neither
| of those things (well, "inconsiderate" when it comes to
| how I handle my dogs seems to be up for debate at least).
| Are those the stereotypes you mean are visible in my
| comment?
|
| > Leash your dog. To do otherwise is selfish and rude.
|
| Thank you for sharing your opinion but it does not help
| me understand WHY, which I why I made my initial comment
| in the first place. You have something to contribute,
| contribute. But re-iterating exactly the same piece of
| information as what I replied to without any sort of
| addition or effort does not help anyone in this
| discussion. If you want to explain why you feel that way,
| please do.
| cratermoon wrote:
| Are you familiar with the term "sea-lioning"?
| diggan wrote:
| I wasn't but now I am. It doesn't seem like something we
| should subject HN to, so if that's what you're doing you
| should probably stop sooner rather than later.
| capedape wrote:
| This and even if they are behaving that can change anytime,
| especially in nature. This is coming from someone who just
| broke an elbow because of off leash dogs on a trail. Trail
| allowed bikes and dogs on leash. Dogs were on the side of
| the trail sniffing, caught wind of something else and
| immediately jumped in front of bike. I was going slow and
| watching them like a hawk. Dodged one and couldn't the
| other. Owners were on a jog and literally ran off after
| asking if I was ok once. If the trail says keep dogs on
| leash , there might be a good reason.
| badgley wrote:
| https://slco.org/parks/millcreek-canyon/
|
| there's a great hike just outside Salt Lake City that
| solves this problem by allowing bikes on even numbered
| days and off-leash dogs on odd numbered days
| blamazon wrote:
| > How is it inconsiderate if the dogs themselves are
| behaving?
|
| This is the problem right here. We have no idea whether
| your dogs are properly trained or not. There is no
| certification or regulation for having a dog off leash. We
| have no idea if they're going to suddenly snap and, in the
| worst case scenario, viciously attack a baby, something
| they are biologically quite capable of.
|
| It is probably different in collectivist societies where
| folks consider proper training a prerequisite to going off-
| leash, but where I'm from we have a scourge of ignorant
| owners who are not in control of their dogs. They ruin it
| for everybody.
| musingsole wrote:
| > We have no idea whether your dogs are properly trained
| or not.
|
| This is interesting to me because we have no such
| assurances about other humans either. But acting on the
| fear that a given human isn't adequately trained and
| restrained is labeled with every variant of ignorance.
| v-yadli wrote:
| I'll probably be more confident about a dog if:
|
| - It's well dressed instead of naked
|
| - It walks on two feet
|
| - It speaks English
|
| ... And vice versa.
| SamoyedFurFluff wrote:
| We do ban humans from certain spaces and limit humans
| behaviors and ability to travel without restriction or
| direct watch though.
| blamazon wrote:
| Such are the ethical pitfalls that we fall into when one
| species decides to domesticate and selectively breed
| another species for thousands of years. The subjugation
| is baked in already, literally in their DNA.
| smcl wrote:
| Can I ask where you're from? This might be a cultural
| difference. I mentioned originally in another comment
| (then removed it as it looked a bit hostile) that this
| might be something more US-centric as it hasn't been a
| problem anywhere I've seen in Europe. I don't mean to
| bash the USA here, but I think there might be more "this
| is a free country and I can do what I want..." types over
| there who (if they have a dog) are more likely to not be
| considerate of others or respond aggressively when
| confronted about such behaviour. We'd be talking in
| cliches and stereotypes of course, but I imagine that
| sort of person is antisocial _generally_. I dunno, I 'm
| just trying to rationalize the stark differences in our
| experiences because here dog owners are by and large
| extremely considerate.
| blamazon wrote:
| I think we're already past cliches and stereotypes when
| talking of all dog owners who walk without a leash!
|
| I'm from USA. On the same page with you here about the
| collectivist vs individual freedom. As you noted it's a
| tragedy of the commons---because unquestioned individual
| freedom is prized so heavily in USA, some dog owners take
| advantage of it without appropriate precaution, and those
| people tend to do things like call the police on black
| people, or scare and injure children by accident with
| their dogs, and these incidents correspondingly build our
| stereotype of off-leashers. Ironically this also leads to
| laws and rules and a general social attitude that
| restrict our individual freedom to walk dogs off leash.
|
| In that way, Europeans are more 'individually free' on
| this topic because, as you note, off leash dog walking is
| totally normal over there because people wouldn't think
| of doing it without appropriate control of their dog.
| Interesting to think about the tension and paradoxes
| between individual and collectivist freedoms.
|
| But, you probably have some annoying dog tax ;)
| alentist wrote:
| > As you noted it's a tragedy of the commons---because
| unquestioned individual freedom is prized so heavily in
| USA, some dog owners take advantage of it without
| appropriate precaution, and those people tend to do
| things like call the police on black people
|
| This passage doesn't make sense. It's a word salad.
| blamazon wrote:
| Blame the Saturday cannabis.
| smcl wrote:
| Happens to me even when I'm not under the influence
| smcl wrote:
| We actually do have such a tax! And I'm glad you reminded
| me because my residency status changed meaning that I now
| need to start paying this :D
|
| The tax is from the local municipality, and I think it's
| for upkeep of some dog infrastructure - dedicated dog
| parks, bins with little bags. It's not much
| [deleted]
| elvischidera wrote:
| Not sure. I will just share my own personal experience.
|
| I live in Germany and I go to parks to freestyle with a
| soccer ball. My issue has always been dogs off lease
| interfering with my personal business. I have some balls
| with bite marks. I have been snubbed and sometimes gotten
| a rude response from owners.
|
| I have lived in the USA also. My observation generally is
| that people find it weird when you say you don't like
| dogs/cats/etc -- almost like they are hearing it for the
| first time. This was a big difference from my home place.
|
| I don't hate them, I just feel totally uncomfortable.
| Sometimes I feel my heart racing or I just totally freeze
| when I see a dog off lease nearby. (I would love to fix
| this: would appreciate any pointers).
| smcl wrote:
| Ah so that's the sort of inconsiderate stuff I was saying
| I _havent_ personally seen, but I guess it does exist
| here after all. So if there are people playing with
| something a dog might consider a "toy" (a frisbee,
| football etc) or having a picnic everyone I know would
| leash their dog unless they're the type who are totally
| not into these things (some dogs are enamoured with their
| owners and just are not interested in the outside world).
| Mine wouldn't bother anyone, he's too interested in his
| own frisbee, but I do it as its just a good idea anyway
|
| I've had a couple of friends who were afraid like you,
| where I would not bring my dog (a Vizsla - Quite
| energetic and very into people, so not a good idea to
| take him if I want those friends to feel comfortable).
| They started to come round to dogs generally after
| hanging out with friends that have smaller more docile
| breeds. Eventually they felt more comfortable and after
| shorter interactions with mine they got familiar with how
| the dog behaves, what motivates them, what they
| understand etc and slowly figure out that most are
| similar. So I'm not sure this is helpful, but that's been
| my experience.
| FooBarBizBazz wrote:
| > I don't hate them, I just feel totally uncomfortable.
|
| That's an interesting sentence.
| Scarblac wrote:
| In the Netherlands people who let their dogs free without
| a leash is a huge problem in many areas. Despite huge
| warning signs, people let them off the leash and they
| kill roe deer cubs and other wildlife.
|
| And they _all_ say their dog is well behaved and doesn 't
| do such things.
| diggan wrote:
| > We have no idea whether your dogs are properly trained
| or not
|
| I think the assumption is, at least from mine and others
| like me, is that if your dog is off-leash, you can handle
| your dog off-leash. The same if you bring friends to some
| social event, you wouldn't bring them if you can't handle
| them and they can behave in public. I'm not afraid they
| are gonna attack me, although sometimes humans do attack
| other humans, most of them are fine so no need to worry
| in general.
|
| > but where I'm from we have a scourge of ignorant owners
| who are not in control of their dogs. They ruin it for
| everybody.
|
| Yes, I agree, it's terrible when owners have no control
| over their dogs. But that's not relevant to the leash
| itself, that's relevant to the expertise of the owner.
| Dogs on leashes misbehave as well, and can easily (if
| wanted and the owner is a terrible one) unleash
| themselves by either raw power or the owner not paying
| attention.
| TomVDB wrote:
| > The same if you bring friends to some social event, you
| wouldn't bring them if you can't handle them and they can
| behave in public.
|
| No, this is not the same. You are legally responsible for
| the behavior of your dog.
| musingsole wrote:
| The legal responsibility angle of this all always leave
| my head spinning.
|
| If you let your dog off leash in a place where it is
| illegal to do so, congratulations: you've just lost the
| lawsuit.
|
| If anything remotely funny happens -- regardless of what
| -- the liability can and will fall on the dog-owner for
| their reckless behavior. The real sad part of this is
| when the dog gets put down for the stupid owner...but my
| point is the people who let their dogs off leash have
| also posted a big, red sign saying "I'm responsible for
| anything happening here" -- even though few of them seem
| aware of that fact. Liability only becomes a question
| again if there is _another_ dog-owner with their dog off
| leash.
| wang_li wrote:
| Dogs should be treated like guns and other weapons. If a
| person gets a fine or jail time for shooting someone, a
| dog owner should get the same if their dog bites someone.
| If my gun would be taken away if I rubbed it in someone's
| crotch, then a dog should be taken away if it sticks its
| snout in someone's crotch. Perhaps one would say "it's
| not the owner's fault, the dog makes it's own decisions",
| well that makes it worse. my gun doesn't aim and fire
| itself. So maybe dogs should be regulated even more than
| guns.
| ncallaway wrote:
| > I think the assumption is, at least from mine and
| others like me, is that if your dog is off-leash, you can
| handle your dog off-leash.
|
| Which may apply to 90% of off leash dogs. Unfortunately,
| the other 10% that have dogs that *cannot* be off leash,
| but do so anyway ruin it for you.
|
| There are people that are afraid of dogs. They have no
| way of knowing, at a distance, whether your dogs will
| behave or run up to them. So when they see any dog off
| leash in a leash required area, they have to take a large
| detour to give the off leash dogs a wide enough berth.
|
| If you're in an area where leashes are required, and you
| have your dogs off leash (no matter how well trained they
| are) you are being extremely inconsiderate of the other
| people around you.
|
| As a dog owner as well, I wish there were more acceptable
| off leash places in society for dogs, and I cherish the
| areas where off leash behavior is acceptable. But taking
| them off leash, when others have a fair expectation that
| they will be leashed is rude and inconsiderate.
|
| Finally, in my personal experience the number of well
| trained off leash dogs (that can behave appropriately in
| a "leash required" setting), is nowhere near 90%. In
| fact, I would say the majority of off leash dogs I run
| across do not behave appropriately. It's probably closer
| to 25% of the off leash dogs I run across that are
| trained well enough that they behave acceptably in on-
| leash settings
| KineticLensman wrote:
| > There are people that are afraid of dogs. They have no
| way of knowing, at a distance, whether your dogs will
| behave or run up to them. So when they see any dog off
| leash in a leash required area, they have to take a large
| detour to give the off leash dogs a wide enough berth.
|
| This is my sister, exactly. At age four she was chased by
| an off-leash Alsatian and to this day is nervous of any
| off-leash large dog
| fbelzile wrote:
| As a cyclist, I've had a fair share of "well trained"
| dogs chase me and nip at my ankles. It's scary and
| usually only ends after I stop, get off my bike and walk
| back towards the owner so they can regain control.
|
| > Taking them off leash, when others have a fair
| expectation that they will be leashed is rude and
| inconsiderate.
|
| This sums it up perfectly. Thank you!
| diggan wrote:
| > I've had a fair share of "well trained" dogs chase me
| and nip at my ankles
|
| Not sure why you say "well trained", the owners have
| obviously not trained the dog and has no business being
| off the leash, they are not well trained by any
| definition and you won't see dogs like that without a
| leash here in Barcelona.
|
| > > Taking them off leash, when others have a fair
| expectation that they will be leashed is rude and
| inconsiderate.
|
| > This sums it up perfectly. Thank you!
|
| So... If there is no expectation of having your dog on
| the leash, then it's not rude and inconsiderate? Makes me
| feel a bit better at least, as the expectation here where
| I live seems to be very different than where you folks
| live.
| novok wrote:
| > Not sure why you say "well trained", the owners have
| obviously not trained the dog and has no business being
| off the leash, they are not well trained by any
| definition and you won't see dogs like that without a
| leash here in Barcelona.
|
| He was using scare quotes:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scare_quotes
| ncallaway wrote:
| > If there is no expectation of having your dog on the
| leash, then it's not rude and inconsiderate?
|
| Yea, I would agree with that. If there's a legal
| expectation, or shared social expectation that an area
| requires a leash, then it's rude and inconsiderate to
| have a dog off leash in that area.
|
| If no such expectation exists, then off leash dogs are
| much more acceptable.
|
| > the expectation here where I live seems to be very
| different than where you folks live.
|
| There's not a single expectation where I live, it varies
| by the place that you are. In certain areas of the city,
| dogs are required to be on a leash, while in the rest of
| they city they are not required.
|
| In most parks in the city, dogs are required to be on a
| leash, but there are certain parks where dogs are allowed
| off leash.
|
| My expectations of people's behavior are largely driven
| by those laws, as that seems like the best way that we
| have to create shared expectations about different
| spaces.
| FooBarBizBazz wrote:
| > if you bring friends to some social event, you wouldn't
| bring them if you can't handle them and they can behave
| in public. I'm not afraid they are gonna attack me
|
| Maybe, but I'd still feel safer if they were properly
| leashed and muzzled.
| wila wrote:
| Just a few seconds of not paying attention are enough
| when a dog gets excited.
|
| I walk a cat -on a leash- and dogs without a leash are a
| real problem to be on the lookout for at all times.
| mbrameld wrote:
| > Both me and others without leashes are indistinctive from
| people who are using leashes.
|
| If this is true then you should have no problem putting a
| leash on them where it's required. By your own admission it
| wouldn't affect your activity.
| diggan wrote:
| Indeed, if I do end up in a situation where it's
| required, I'll do it, no questions asked. But for day-to-
| day walks, it's not so I don't, together with the rest of
| almost everyone we meet with dogs on our daily walks.
| Bud wrote:
| This comment basically drips with a fundamental inability
| to see this situation from the other person's perspective.
| Even to see the _most basic thing_ , which is that other
| people have no oracular powers with which to discern
| whether you or your dog are well-behaved.
| diggan wrote:
| > This comment basically drips with a fundamental
| inability to see this situation from the other person's
| perspective
|
| Well... I mean yeah, that's why I asked for more
| information in order to understand the other persons
| perspective, what do you think this discussion is about?
| In case you missed it, here is the part I explicitly call
| out that I don't understand their perspective but I would
| like to, so please educate me:
|
| > How is inconsiderate if the dogs themselves are
| behaving? Maybe there is something I'm missing, and I'd
| like to understand your point of view. I could understand
| you think it's inconsiderate if people don't have control
| on their dogs and they annoy others while the owners do
| nothing, then I agree with you. But just because of being
| off-leash? Not sure I understand that line of reasoning.
|
| If you have something to contribute that can further my
| understanding, I'd be most appreciative.
|
| > other people have no oracular powers with which to
| discern whether you or your dog are well-behaved.
|
| Yeah, this is true but applies in so many things in life.
| New friend introduced by my other friend? Not sure they
| are well-behaved or not, but I'll default to that they
| won't murder me, but if they give signs that they might
| want to kill me, I'd stay away or contact authorities. I
| think in general society is adjusting well to the
| possibility of judging things as they come along, instead
| of painting broad strokes like "people with dogs off-
| leash are extremely inconsiderate", at least where I
| live, not sure how things look where you live.
| vimax wrote:
| To me the issue isn't generally having a dog off the leash,
| but specifically having a dog off the leash at a wildlife
| reserve where they may be running around disturbing the
| wildlife. It isn't a dog park.
| nitrogen wrote:
| Indeed, there are areas (such as some federal land, dog
| parks, etc.) that specifically _do not_ require dogs to
| be leashed, by design and intent. People who want to
| avoid dogs should avoid those places, and people who want
| to walk dogs off-leash should favor them.
| asimpletune wrote:
| Do we just downvote people now who contradict the
| majority's opinion?
|
| As far as I can say this adds to the discussion.
|
| Someone literally said people who don't have their dogs on
| leashes are prone to violent confrontations.
|
| Then someone else retorted this is not the case for them
| and asked for elaboration to better understand their
| interlocutor's point of view.
|
| We should not be abusing downvote privilegies by
| discouraging viewpoints that we disagree with, when these
| viewpoints are relevant to the discussion. In the long run
| that will be harmful to ths community here and the next
| generation of hackers will go to different forums, or,
| worse, learn from our example.
| randompwd wrote:
| Meta comments do not belong.
| glennpratt wrote:
| Anecdata:
|
| ~ I've been bitten in the hand drawing blood by two
| different dogs (not mine). ~ My daughter had a large dog
| nipping her face while the owner laughed. ~ I have too
| different acquaintances that were mauled on their face
| pretty badly.
|
| All these dogs had owners nearby.
|
| I love dogs and have had one or more the majority of my
| life, but people are irresponsible and arrogant.
| diggan wrote:
| That's really bad and obviously badly behaved dogs you
| have interacted with. I hope in all cases they got fined
| properly for the disturbance and ill caused, and
| hopefully improved over time, although unlikely...
|
| > people are irresponsible and arrogant
|
| Agree! And it does harm that people are behaving that
| way, but that doesn't give me reason to limit people who
| are not irresponsible and arrogant. Yes, some things are
| dangerous to consume for example, and irresponsible
| people can make it worse for everyone by consuming those
| things, but I don't think we should outlaw those things
| just because of that.
| Bud wrote:
| Not a good analogy at all. You're comparing inanimate
| objects that people consume, entirely by choice, to an
| animal that can maim or kill others? Find a different
| rhetorical device, I'd say.
| seattle_spring wrote:
| I philosophically agree with you, but the reality on the
| ground on US trails is that many people (dog owners or
| not) do not observe rules or etiquette. Go on a hike near
| Seattle and you'll probably leave with a Drake song
| memorized from how many kids are blasting it on their
| Bluetooth speakers. The actual trail is sometimes
| indistinguishable from the switchback cuts people make.
| Even take some time looking at US centric comments on
| this site lately: even with respect to a global pandemic,
| people will vehemently put their own wants over the
| greater good of society or the environment. The only
| solution is heavy handed enforcement. It sucks but I
| don't see a better way.
| GekkePrutser wrote:
| I have to agree, here in Barcelona there's no issues with
| dogs in general. People and dogs are well behaved. There is
| an issue with the police though, killing dogs
| unnecessarily. https://english.elpais.com/elpais/2018/12/20
| /inenglish/15453...
| totalZero wrote:
| I'm not the GP but I'd like to comment on this because it's
| an interesting question.
|
| Some people are afraid of dogs. Others come from cultures
| where dogs are considered ritually unclean. And no stranger
| can verify just by a glance that your dogs will behave
| themselves.
|
| To take the third point to its logical extreme, imagine a
| town where police wear street clothes and openly carry
| firearms. You, a visitor, cannot determine by observation
| alone that they are all highly trained officers of the law.
| You simply see people with firearms. That could be
| unsettling, despite the fact that the presence of those
| people actually makes you safer.
|
| I suppose that if everyone is walking their dogs without a
| leash, it's not really an issue because the culture has
| adapted to that practice.
| foobiekr wrote:
| I have a friend whose pet dog killed one of his other
| pets, is known to growl at children, and to me seems
| genuinely dangerous. Friend insists that the dog is a
| good boy and wouldn't ever hurt anything. Friend insists
| dog loves children.
|
| Friend is an intelligent, gregarious, kind hearted tech
| worker. He's also completely delusional and in denial
| about his dangerous, demonstrably violent pit bull.
|
| Friend routinely takes dog off leash in places where that
| is not permitted.
|
| This is the problem.
| CJefferson wrote:
| The problem is I don't know your dogs are well controlled.
| I've been bitten twice over the last year by leashless
| dogs.
|
| This could of course be solved by introducing stiff
| penalties for owners of unleashed dogs who bite -- how
| about a fixed 10,000 dollar fine?
| ptr2voidStar wrote:
| >introducing stiff penalties for owners of unleashed dogs
| who bite -- how about a fixed 10,000 dollar fine?
|
| If such a law were ever to be passed, something tells me
| a lot of people with "well behaved" dogs would suddenly
| start to leash their dogs "just in case".
|
| Humans are very predictable in that fashion.
| [deleted]
| foobiter wrote:
| it's inconsiderate because you're forcing strangers to
| trust you in a situation where you could alternatively
| follow a simple rule... it also sets a bad example for
| people with poorly trained dogs. We live in a society, not
| everything is about you.
| [deleted]
| patcon wrote:
| Laws are about enforceability, not individual outcomes.
|
| Your doing what you're doing stabilizes a culture where
| there can be no consequences for anyone in this domain,
| because there's no clear line of enforcement. What's a low-
| wage enforcement officer expected to do in this context you
| advocate, where people "mind their own dog's abilities" and
| only get fined when some clear violation occurs? Are they
| supposed to fine people only when they see dogs chasing
| birds, or scarring a fearful child, or jumping up on an
| elderly person, or any number of other things with unclear
| lines? No, you just outlaw dogs off-leash, and allow the
| $20/h enforcement officer to clearly execute their pro-
| social task. The anti-social behavior get fined.
| diggan wrote:
| To be fair, walking your dogs without a leash in the city
| of Barcelona is already illegal. You can walk past the
| police and they won't do anything though, unless your dog
| is not behaving, then they'll use the law to give you a
| fine for not having a leash.
|
| So while it's setup like you say it is, in theory, what
| you think cannot happen is what happens in practice. Same
| with public drinking and other laws. The police usually
| look the other way unless you are abusing it somehow,
| being too drunk, loud or otherwise annoying. Sitting in
| the park with a bottle of wine is fine and won't end up
| with you getting a ticket, even though it's illegal. At
| worst they'll tell you to stop whatever you're doing, and
| if you follow their command, that's the end of the
| situation.
|
| Maybe the big difference here between law officers in
| Spain (Barcelona at least) and wherever you're based, is
| how strict they actually enforce the laws. Here is maybe
| a bit laxer, which also fits in with the whole culture
| here, and it's represented in how law officers behave as
| well.
| admax88q wrote:
| So basically the parties that are actually the problem
| are too hard to find, so we target everyone who fits into
| a similar category.
| bradleyjg wrote:
| Yes, because we don't have infinite enforcement resources
| we need to decide if we are going to prioritize type I
| errors or type II. Given the balance of harms minimizing
| type II errors (i.e. requiring leashes where they aren't
| necessary) seems the better choice.
| dnh44 wrote:
| Walking dogs off lead is totally normal in the UK as well.
| giobox wrote:
| Dog attacks are common enough in the U.K. to be a topic
| you can subscribe to on the BBC news site. While it's
| definitely pretty culturally acceptable to have a dog off
| leash there, I'm not so sure it should be, especially in
| places such as children's parks or near livestock etc.
|
| https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/topics/c9q9301541xt/dog-
| attacks
| diggan wrote:
| Strangely enough, most of those stories are about dogs
| attacking their own owners/families and seems to indicate
| the dogs were leashed in most stories.
| abandonliberty wrote:
| Why do you have to follow [law] if you don't cause a
| problem for others? Would you make the same reasonable
| question for driving double the speed limit, not wearing a
| seatbelt, or carrying a gun in public?
|
| "How is it inconsiderate if I carry a gun in public? I've
| never shot or threatened anyone! If I met someone who asked
| me to put my gun away, I would obviously do so." :)
|
| Societies work because we agree to give up a measure of our
| personal freedoms, even when it's sometimes a bit
| inconvenient for us.
| diggan wrote:
| Generally law officers here apply laws against civilians
| based on preventing harm to others. If you have a wine
| bottle in the park and a officer walks by, they most
| likely wouldn't do anything. If you're loud and
| obnoxious, they would do something as you're disturbing
| others.
|
| Seemingly the police here are of the view that most dogs
| don't pose a threat to others and are not annoying when
| off leash, as I haven't been confronted when walking next
| to them with my leashed dog.
|
| Carrying a gun would obviously not be OK here as it's
| strictly outlawed. If I went to the US, I would probably
| feel the same way that some feel against dogs here but
| regarding guns, so that's actually a good point, thank
| you.
| wheels wrote:
| Three things:
|
| - Laws are virtually never there to regulate the median
| case. They're there to reduce the risk of harm. The reason
| we don't let people have automatic weapons isn't because
| most people would go on a killing spree if they had one,
| it's that a tiny minority would, and that would be
| disastrous.
|
| - It's literally only been just yesterday that I watched
| someone's "well behaved" dog attack my friend's dog on a
| leash. He had to pull the (probably 3x larger) dog off of
| his. My brother had stitches on his face from being bitten
| as a kid by someone's "well behaved" dog. I have zero faith
| in dog owners' ability to self-regulate.
|
| - I'm sure you have the one dog in the world that doesn't
| chase birds. Most dogs do. This is specifically about that
| case.
| Enginerrrd wrote:
| >- I'm sure you have the one dog in the world that
| doesn't chase birds. Most dogs do. This is specifically
| about that case.
|
| This really demonstrates your ignorance. Such dogs are
| not uncommon, particularly when well trained. My dog
| doesn't chase birds. She's a border collie that lives for
| frisbee and frisbee only. I taught her the herding
| maneuvers, but she does it lackadaisically and it's hard
| to get her to give eye to chickens. She's just not into
| it, but she'll humor me if I tell her to do it. Frisbee
| though... she is. And she can be at a dead sprint after a
| frisbee in flight and if I say "Stop" she'll stop on a
| dime. If the frisbee drifts off the field and into the
| street, she'll simply stop on the edge of the grass or
| sidewalk and wait for my ok to go get it without me
| saying anything.
|
| And my dog really isn't special. Honestly, she has been a
| difficult to train dog from day one, but she has still
| been trained. Her mother though... man she's a true
| pleasure to work with.
|
| I usually walk her off leash as well. When people ask me
| to put her on leash, I do, and I hold it with a loose
| pinky finger since it's kind of a joke because of how
| unneeded it is.
| blamazon wrote:
| Typified in the viral 'Central Park Birdwatching Incident.'
|
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Park_birdwatching_in.
| ..
| oh_sigh wrote:
| The guy approached her, told her to put her dog on the
| leash, and then said something along the lines of "Put your
| dog on leash or I'm going to do something you're not going
| to like".
|
| And then he pulled dog treats out of his pocket(he doesn't
| have a dog, he carries them for confrontations with dog
| owners he gets into) and attempted to lure the dog away
| from her.
|
| I think, if the races were reversed, the off-leash person
| would have been seen as the victim, and the dude would have
| been told "You aren't the park police - mind your own
| business".
|
| However, because she called the police and said a black man
| was accosting her, twitter/cnn took that to mean she was
| trying to get the police to show up to kill this dude,
| which is a crazy idea to me, considering the NYPD has
| hundreds of thousands of interactions with black people
| every year and almost all of them end in the person not
| being killed.
|
| She also described him as a man, and as "with a bike
| helmet" multiple times, which leads me to believe she was
| just "describing the perp" like they do in crime shows when
| people call the emergency services, and not saying "Hey
| 911, come kill this black man!"
| verall wrote:
| Dude, did you watch the video? You can hear her say "I'm
| going to tell them that there is an african american man
| threatening my life."
|
| And then she called the police...
| oh_sigh wrote:
| Yes, because that is what she thought was happening. "I'm
| going to do something you don't like" sure does sound
| like a threat to me.
|
| She also said "a man with a bike helmet"...do you think
| she is especially afraid of bikers? Isn't the most
| reasonable reading that she is describing the man, and
| not scheming that she can get the cops to come out and
| kill this stranger who is annoying her?
| tolbish wrote:
| I'm guessing she blamed cancel culture and the woke left
| for losing her job/dog instead of blaming her racism and
| foolishly filing a false police report.
| afiori wrote:
| From wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Par
| k_birdwatching_inci...
|
| > Christian asked Amy to leash her dog, and she allegedly
| refused. By his own account, Christian then said, "Look,
| if you're going to do what you want, I'm going to do what
| I want, but you're not going to like it," and beckoned
| the dog toward him with a dog treat.[3] Amy then yelled,
| "Don't you touch my dog!"[3] Christian then began
| recording on his cellphone.[1][3]
|
| And the man post where he tells his own side of the story
| (the [3] in the wikipedia article):
| https://nypost.com/2020/05/26/christian-cooper-recounts-
| amy-...
|
| > "ME: All you have to do is take him to the other side
| of the drive, outside the Ramble, and you can let him run
| off leash all you want.
|
| > "HER: It's too dangerous.
|
| > "ME: Look, if you're going to do what you want, I'm
| going to do what I want, but you're not going to like it.
|
| > "HER: What's that?
|
| > "ME (to the dog): Come here, puppy!
|
| > "HER: He won't come to you.
|
| > "ME: We'll see about that..." before adding, "I pull
| out the dog treats I carry for just for such
| intransigence. I didn't even get a chance to toss any
| treats to the pooch before Karen scrambled to grab the
| dog.
|
| > "HER: DON'T YOU TOUCH MY DOG!!!!!
|
| > "That's when I started video recording with my iPhone,
| and when her inner Karen fully emerged and took a dark
| turn..
|
| I have no interest in defending or accusing anyone nor in
| discussing whether her action in the video where
| motivated and/or reasonable. But to say that she had no
| basis to perceive this as threathing behaviour (`filing a
| false police report`) feels a bit of a stretch.
|
| PS: Obviously this topic can be seen from many angles, my
| response to you comment is almost entirely due to the
| "false" in "filing a false police report", had you
| substituted "racially motivated" this comment would be
| moot.
| tolbish wrote:
| The wiki article I responded to stated she was charged
| with filing a false police report.
| afiori wrote:
| Yes, I agree that she was, I also do not hold against
| anyone for believing the story had no further nuances.
| birdyrooster wrote:
| White women been filing false police reports for decades,
| it's one of their super powers in America.
| kodah wrote:
| I've not witnessed this hostility or violence, but as with
| all things there's probably some tiny fraction of the
| population that motivates comments like this one.
|
| I have had non-dog owners speak pretty nastily to me, whether
| it's about my dog doing something natural (like defecating,
| which I carry bags for) or not realizing that areas _are_
| off-leash. I typically find the latter when I go camping
| (though there are certainly trails and campgrounds that are
| non-off leash this usually isn 't about the dog itself, but
| the presence of predatory or endangered wildlife).
|
| As a responsible dog owner, I check the beaches I'm going to,
| I check the parks (including trails and campgrounds) I go to,
| my dog is harnessed rather than collared, and my dog is
| properly socialized for both humans and animals (cats too!)
| FooBarBizBazz wrote:
| The dog, in this instance, is not sufficiently subject to the
| master-pet power relation for your comfort?
| acomjean wrote:
| I live near a wildlife refuge. They allowed dogs on leash for
| many years. But fewer and fewer complied.
|
| About 5 years ago after trying all sorts of signage they
| banned dogs altogether.
|
| I feel bad for the small minority of dog owners who complied
| and kept their dogs on-leash
| globular-toast wrote:
| What's the point of walking a dog on a leash, though? Dogs
| need to stretch their legs. They're supposed to run around.
| The underlying problem is people taking in animals as pets
| without taking the responsibility that should be required
| as a dog owner.
| finiteseries wrote:
| It's a wildlife refuge, Brad.
| wyager wrote:
| His point is obviously that that is not an appropriate
| place to walk a dog at all.
| finiteseries wrote:
| Given the response, it's obviously not.
| globular-toast wrote:
| Given what response? It was my point.
| finiteseries wrote:
| The dozen or so mistakenly angry replies and downvotes.
| If that is your point, it isn't at all obvious from your
| comment.
| wyager wrote:
| The fact that the average HN voter can't read isn't
| evidence that the GP meant something.
| lobotryas wrote:
| Go buy a few private acres for that. If your dog shares
| public space with others you don't get to just let it off
| leash.
| wyager wrote:
| That's his point.
| smichel17 wrote:
| I'm American, but I've lived in Germany (Hamburg) for ~1
| year, cumulatively. I recall most dogs being leashed, but
| at least a few not. It didn't seem to matter to me,
| because every dog there was damn well trained. In that
| year, I think can recall _one_ instance of a dog barking
| inappropriately (to the mortification of its owner).
|
| I remember one dog in particular, which was unleashed and
| running with its owner, who was on a bike. It would run
| ahead, staying on the correct part of the sidewalk, until
| it reached a crosswalk or corner, then stop and calmly
| wait for its owner to catch up and give permission to
| cross. I think one time (of the 3 crosswalks it was in
| view for) it got impatient and went back to its owner
| instead of waiting in place.
|
| As a result, dogs are commonly (though not always)
| allowed in restaurants -- they stay quietly under the
| table -- and some other venues, which would be
| unthinkable in the US.
|
| There's not too much of a point to this comment, just
| sharing perspective. I guess if anything it's that I
| wouldn't be so categorical about "if X, then Y, period".
| kbshacker wrote:
| It's exactly the same in Switzerland. Dogs are so well
| behaved I wonder if they are a special breed altogether
| smhg wrote:
| Your wording might be a bit harsh, but I agree:
|
| Dogs need (outdoor) space. As a dog owner you carry that
| responsibility.
|
| Having a garden to (mostly) take care of this seems
| obvious. If not, when using public space instead, it
| seems strange to expect others (wildlife, kids,...) to
| take this for granted?
| Xylakant wrote:
| A dog needs to run, but not all the time and in all
| places. Walking on a leash is a required skill unless you
| live in a very remote area that you never leave.
| globular-toast wrote:
| Just leave the dog at home. My point is why take the dog
| somewhere if you can't let it off the leash? Jeeze...
| Touched a nerve here it seems.
| [deleted]
| adriancr wrote:
| There are special places to let dog off leash to run
| around... Or buy a house with a yard
| swader999 wrote:
| In some places they are aptly named "off leash parks".
| treeman79 wrote:
| Those are full of drama.
|
| Someone's dog gets bitten every week or so and it's a
| huge outrage.
|
| Periodically a little dog goes into the big dog area and
| gets torn to shreds.
|
| Now I have used same locations many times without issues.
| But it happens.
| [deleted]
| dghughes wrote:
| There's a new fenced dog park near me. Lately people have
| been going there but letting their dogs off leash in the
| filed next to the park. There are many new homes and lots of
| kids in the area. It's maddening.
| rcpt wrote:
| It's out of control in Santa Cruz. Can't even take small kids
| to the local beaches without risking a mailing.
|
| I don't know why California is so lax about this. Other
| states I've lived in actually enforced dog laws.
| Gene5ive wrote:
| I decided to read the comments on the linked article and got
| depressed. It's a similar feeling to what Ethan Hawke portrayed
| in First Reformed. Caring about nature is a lonely and foreboding
| state of being.
| yuvalr1 wrote:
| Did the birds completely abandon the eggs, or there's still a
| chance they're going to come back? I didn't find it in the
| article.
| rossdavidh wrote:
| Because "3,000 eggs abandoned after dogs scare birds in
| California", would be a headline that gets much less attention.
| psychlops wrote:
| Some evidence of the drone would be a nice addition. Or the
| construction of the nearby multimillion dollar homes they
| mention. I'm curious how they narrowed it down to two drone
| flights.
| cjensen wrote:
| I'm a birder, so some extra info...
|
| On dogs, training and leashes only matter a little. The problem
| is birds immediately identify a dog as a dangerous predator. They
| are far less bothered by humans.
|
| Birds pay more attention that we might realize. They identify
| potential threats from much farther away that we do. This leads
| to them being disturbed even when the casual rule-breaking dog
| walker thinks "I'm not doing anything wrong."
|
| I'm extremely surprised so many birds abandoned their nests
| permanently. I would have expected only the closest nests to be
| abandoned.
|
| Some people rely on their drones to tell them when they are in a
| no-fly zone. Terrible idea. Once at Hayward Regional Shoreline, I
| had to tell a guy that he was potentially creating a problem. I
| told him the two locations where endangered species can be found
| and that he should avoid -- and also that he was definitely
| within the limits of Hayward Regional Airport. He was both
| contrite and horrified that his drone didn't tell him.
|
| They other issue is boundary-pushing. Literally. Give people a
| space, and many people will act like selfish toddlers and push
| the boundaries. Sunnyvale Baylands allows drones and it's a great
| space for them. There is a clearly marked fence they must not go
| beyond. So of _course_ people constantly violate the fence. The
| fence is to a marshland with endangered species. Drones can fail,
| and a drone that falls into the marsh is not retrievable and then
| what happens to the toxins in the battery?
| lifeisstillgood wrote:
| I am guessing that drones are to birds what a Martian invasion
| would be to us - suddenly a new species has arrived and is
| _persistent_ - it can go everywhere birds can go, it has spare
| energy enough to make aggressive noises _constantly_ and it
| completely ignores any aggressive actions and attacks made to
| drive the drone off.
|
| It has arrived and taken over the territory completely - so
| abandon the area.
|
| My problem is if my conjecture is true, we basically have to ban
| drones ... everywhere.
| Causality1 wrote:
| Interesting. I wonder why the drone caused such a
| disproportionate response. The article doesn't address it but I
| doubt that if, say, an eagle had landed or started killing birds
| they would have abandoned so many eggs.
| prawn wrote:
| I fly drones including with commercial filming permits at
| conservation parks/islands with large bird populations.
| Different types of birds react in various ways to a drone
| though I've never noticed similar birds to these act in an
| overly panicked way. Some types of birds will take flight and
| then resettle, some will circle closely and try to intimidate
| the drone (galahs), some charge or consider attacking it
| (osprey, whistling kite), some ignore it (wedge tailed eagles -
| at least in my experience so far^), etc.
|
| The permit in a case like this would require that I land safely
| if the presence of the drone alters the behaviour of the birds
| (even if they're staying on the ground, but bobbing their
| head). Here's a video below from a tiny, low island with a bird
| population in the tens of thousands, where a group of hikers
| have possibly spooked birds that are then flying _towards_ the
| drone from the other side of the island. Most passed under the
| drone, suggesting they weren 't concerned; I was keeping the
| drone still or moving slowly and predictably towards where I
| could land on the beach. This flock was going through for some
| time. I don't think these are terns, but there were crested
| terns on that island.
|
| Troubridge Island birds: https://bit.ly/3z49lwm
|
| I don't mean to discount the impact of drones, but I suspect
| that a repeated close drone presence is more likely to cause
| birds to abandon a nest than a crash. That is generally the
| concern with raptor nests where I live.
|
| My thought when reading the article was that off-leash dogs
| might've had the main impact in abandonment of eggs, but that
| drones are more likely to make a headline for the story.
| Couldn't find an original press release, but every news
| headline is about drones.
|
| ^ Here's one encounter with a wedge-tailed eagle. It beat its
| wings perhaps to make sure it was clear but didn't seem to move
| its head at all. In other cases, they've not beaten their wings
| or moved their heads so weren't visibly bothered.
| https://bit.ly/3uVIvn5
|
| And here's a whistling kite coming in to attack but then
| changing its mind at the last moment: https://bit.ly/3vTJ0za
| ericmcer wrote:
| Wouldn't the drones flying put it into a whole different
| threat category from humans/dogs/bikes? Birds are probably
| smart enough to realize hikers cannot threaten them or their
| eggs if they are up in a tree, but a large, fast flying
| object is pretty much game over for them and their eggs
| unless they abandon the area entirely.
|
| Your theory that dogs are the main cause just doesn't make
| sense to me, birds can't be so dumb that they leave their
| eggs to rot because a dog is walking around below them, why
| even bother evolving flight and nesting in trees?
| everybodyknows wrote:
| As a mitigation, consider a slower, quieter, winged drone.
| With gyro stabilization, one could be built to mimic the
| profile of a large non-predator, recognizable as such to the
| vulnerable birds. Vulture, goose, albatross ...
|
| Drone hackers: Consider the business opportunity here.
| SkittyDog wrote:
| Fixed wing drones require considerably more skill and
| training to fly. They also cannot take off/land vertically,
| they need a runway or catapult/arrest system to operate. As
| a result, fixed wing drones are not generally a realistic
| substitute for quad-copter drones.
|
| The poster you're replying to has already mentioned getting
| permits to fly near wildlife, and taking appropriate
| consideration for the welfare of the birds being filmed. It
| sounds like they're doing a fine job of flying responsibly,
| already.
| CameronNemo wrote:
| Off leash dogs and bikes could not have reached the nesting
| site. It is an island with a fence between the trail and the
| waterways surrounding the island. I dunno maybe the barking
| could have caused a disturbance.
| prawn wrote:
| Must've been a reason they mentioned it.
|
| I was picturing an island well off shore. It's right next
| to a highway! Not sure exactly which island in the complex
| held the eggs, but one is about 100m from a campground/RV
| park.
| 7952 wrote:
| Some bird species tend to take-off and fly about when
| disturbed. This may causes an energy defecit that could have
| an effect. Birds may have evolved to roost for a particular
| portion of the day and be put under stress if they can't.
| There is not necessarily good science on this but wading or
| coastal birds are probably best avoided.
| mschuster91 wrote:
| The article mentions other disturbances from dogs, bikers and
| walkers. Perhaps the drones were the last drop in the bucket to
| convince the birds "this area is unsafe for nesting".
| slver wrote:
| It's a pretty devastating evolutionary loss to have to
| abandon your offspring due to a disturbance. This is why
| mammals carry their "eggs". Birds couldn't evolve this way as
| they're very sensitive to weight due to flight.
| [deleted]
| nabilhat wrote:
| Eagle populations have recovered enough to become a problem for
| colony-nesting species. Murres on the North American west coast
| are one example [0].
|
| Walking, dog, and bicycle restrictions are normal in wildlife
| refuges that prioritize being a wildlife refuge ahead of
| recreational use. Humans walking can be interpreted as a
| potential predation threat. Bicycling has a tall, loping aspect
| that checks off more of the "predator" boxes than walking. Dogs
| are always identified as an irrefutable predation threat by
| wildlife, on or off leash.
|
| Drones peering into a bird nursury are likely to get a pretty
| similar reaction from birds as if it was a human nursury, minus
| the adults calling police or coming after you themselves. If
| parents decide there's a problem, they will abandon the
| nursury.
|
| [0] https://www.birdnote.org/listen/shows/eagles-and-murres
| GekkePrutser wrote:
| Poor birds :'( Sad that this happened.
| chmod775 wrote:
| On one hand that sucks.
|
| On the other hand, given their alleged response to disturbances,
| how aren't these birds extinct yet?
|
| This makes me somewhat skeptical of this story.
| opencl wrote:
| Many bird species have low survival rates for their young but
| the species survives because each adult lays a large number of
| eggs in its lifetime.
| tolbish wrote:
| > Michael H. Horn, a professor emeritus of biology at
| California State University, Fullerton, said that although the
| loss of 1,500 eggs might not threaten the long-term health of
| the elegant tern, which has a worldwide population of about
| 100,000 to 150,000, the drone crash was still troubling.
|
| [0] https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/04/us/elegant-tern-eggs-
| dron...
| ramphastidae wrote:
| Really? You are "skeptical"? Did you even read the article?
| It's a nesting island on a dedicated ecological reserve. This
| has likely been happening there for decades or centuries.
| chmod775 wrote:
| Thank you.
|
| Your well-written and thoughtful response helped me greatly
| in broadening my understanding and from now on I will take
| every news article at face value.
|
| I really appreciated how you specifically addressed the
| question I posed.
|
| Edit:
|
| How is a snarky comment that serves no purpose besides being
| self-serving and demeaning higher rated than the constructive
| comments in this tree? That's an insult to the people in this
| community who are still trying.
|
| Bonus points for downvoting the other person who asked an
| honest question in the thread.
|
| My disappointment with this place increases by the day.
| dang wrote:
| Could you please not be a jerk in HN comments or otherwise
| break the site guidelines? It's not the first time you've
| done this, unfortunately, and we're really trying for
| something different here.
|
| If you wouldn't mind reviewing
| https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking
| the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be
| grateful.
| scandox wrote:
| With that attitude eventually there will just be cockroaches,
| rats and humans.
| hugoromano wrote:
| not even humans. what humans don't understand is that when
| you protect ecosystems, i.e. the planet you protect your own
| species. We are part of a biological "balance" a change
| creates risks for us.
| [deleted]
| javajosh wrote:
| Does anyone know how these birds react to thunderstorms?
| greenburger wrote:
| Thunderstorms are likely rare in this location. Most of
| coastal California only experiences such storms less than
| once a year, depending on when they begin nesting any rain at
| all may not be common, as typically they is little rain from
| April to October.
| chewyfruitloop wrote:
| Probably better than a huge lump of vibrating plastic
| plummeting out of the sky at them
| prawn wrote:
| It's most likely that the drone that crashed was similar in
| size to the type of bird that was spooked (Mavic Mini to
| Mavic Pro range; maybe a Phantom at most). Anyone flying a
| larger drone (Inspire and up) would have a serious license
| and familiarity with permits, therefore unlikely to be
| called "illegal".
|
| I'm guessing it either fell after colliding with a bird or
| was flying low enough with sensors off and clipped the
| ground.
| Ralfp wrote:
| Wild animals either shelter from thunderstorm, or they learn
| from each other differet behaviours (like making herd close-
| knit) to pull through.
| cratermoon wrote:
| Thunderstorms have been happening with some predictability
| since before birds even evolved. A buzzing, hovering, and
| erratically moving clanking mechanical thing is _extremely_
| novel.
|
| Which of those two would the birds have a genetically and
| socially built-in way to cope and survive through?
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-06-05 23:01 UTC)