Canine Chaos: Why Dogs Don't Belong in Downtown Santa Cruz
Written by Tara Leonard
SANTA CRUZ (March, 2010) - I’m a dog person. My house is littered with slobbery tennis balls, my car stocked with extra leashes and dog treats. Sometimes the very best part of my day is spent tossing a stick for my ridiculously enthusiastic pets who are ceaselessly entertained by the joy of retrieval. It’s impossible not to share their delight in the everyday routine of walks, play and meals (Food? For me? I LOVE you!). In short, I think everyone should have a dog.
Just not downtown.
This past week Santa Cruz merchants introduced a proposal to allow leashed dogs downtown after a 35-year ban. They believe that pooches on Pacific will be good for business, bringing animal lovers and their dollars to the downtown corridor. While their hearts may be in the right place, I wonder about their eyes and ears.
Downtown Santa Cruz is loud and crowded. The streets are filled with traffic. The sidewalks are bustling with people of all ages, many of them eating or drinking as they move about. Even the most well-behaved dogs can react to such stimuli in unexpected ways. Seeing a young child running down the sidewalk, some dogs, particularly those from a herding breed, will playfully take chase, causing fear or anger in startled parents. Greeting other dogs, our canine friends engage in a ritual of dominance that, while perfectly understood by the participants, can at times appear threatening to observers. And all that food! What dog wouldn’t be tempted to take a bite out of that eye-level hot dog, swaying so enticingly in a young child’s hand? Imagine distracted tourists tripping over tangled leashes, unattended dogs (friendly? not friendly?) tethered outside coffee shops, and rambunctious canine pals wrestling on the sidewalk.
Dogs pee. They poop. They throw up all that delicious sweetgrass they just ate. And while most responsible dog owners religiously clean up after their pets, others do not. On more than a few occasions, I have watched, dumbfounded, while a dog owner pretends not to notice his dog’s recent contribution. “Do you need a bag?” I’ll ask politely. Sometimes the owner responds with gratitude and springs into action. Other times, I’ve been glared at, cursed, or ignored.
Look at Carmel, people argue. People go there just because they can bring their dogs! Think of the business it will attract! Ironically, these are exactly the arguments that reasonable dog owners used, unsuccessfully, to fight for continued off-leash dog hours at Lighthouse Field and Its Beach. But while Lighthouse Field is vast and open, downtown Santa Cruz is not. While there are dozens of dog-free Santa Cruz beaches from which to choose, there is only one Pacific Avenue. And, while a core group of daily users self-policed canine behavior at Its Beach, the ever-changing population downtown is less likely to do so successfully.
And let’s face it, Santa Cruz is not Carmel. Our community’s tolerance level for “weird” behavior is continually challenged and defended, appreciated and attacked. I’ve seen grown men pee on the sidewalk with no apparent consequences, so who will act as the canine potty patrol? How will we know which dogs are licensed and vaccinated? Will every aggressive pan-handler now be accompanied by an equally aggressive mutt? Who will decide which dogs are behaving appropriately and which aren’t? Don’t downtown police have enough on their plates already dealing with poorly behaved two-legged residents?
Which gets to the heart of the matter. Irresponsible dog owners tend to screw things up for the rest of us. There are plenty of well-behaved dogs that would be a positive addition to downtown. (If your pooch fits in your purse, who will even notice?) But just as poorly behaved bicyclists reflect badly on all two-wheeled commuters, the presence of out-of-control dogs downtown might generate a backlash that further restricts dogs' access to open space throughout Santa Cruz County. That would be a dog-gone shame for everyone.
So here’s what I propose. Give us back off-leash hours at Lighthouse Field and Its Beach. Let dogs be dogs at appropriate times in appropriate places. Then leave Pacific Avenue to the people. Because frankly, we’re already dealing with enough doo-doo down there as it is.
Set as favorite
Bookmark
Email this
Trackback(0)
TrackBack URI for this entryComments
(11)
Subscribe to this comment's feed
I understand dogs do their business wherever they are, and some owners don't do the right thing. But is that a reason to penalize everyone? If the folks who don't pick up after their pet are ticketed, they will either start doing it, or stay away. Sounds like a win-win to me.
Votes: +1
report abuse
vote down
vote up
written by tleonard , April 14, 2011
I'm so glad BigDogMom has taken the time to train her St. Bernard. Sadly, not all dog owners display that same level of responsibility. I have two very large dogs as well and I walk them, both on- and off-leash here in Santa Cruz every day. My experiences with (some) other dogs and their owners simply reinforce my initial statement: irresponsible dog owners tend to screw things up for the rest of us. Next time you visit, I recommend you head to a specified dog beach for a better experience.
Votes: -1
report abuse
vote down
vote up
written by BigDogMom , April 14, 2011
After reading this post, it sounds to me the author doesn't know much about dog obedience. I/we have a 150lb St. Bernard whom I've devoted much time to being a well behaved dog and able to cope in all kinds of hectic environments. We live in San Francisco and he loves his walks throughout the city. Here we see many dogs well behaved on or off leash either on busy city streets or parks with no issues. We see as much dog poop as homeless poop on the sidewalks, but it's not as though it's everywhere. We took our dog to Santa Cruz and I was shocked at how dog un-friendly it was. Dogs and people (separately) can bring in their own set of problems, but making laws that limit your freedom to just walk along public streets with your leashed dog is simply ridiculous. If those laws are allowed, why not a ban on something like screaming babies on red-eye flights? That to me is more bothersome than ignoring someone's disobedient dog.
Votes: +1
report abuse
vote down
vote up
written by Bobbi LaPlante , March 27, 2010
From the retailer's point of view, this is an opportunity to bring more potential customers through the door. Los Gatos is dog-friendly and I haven't noticed their streets awash in doggy debris. I say, give it a try.
Votes: +1
report abuse
vote down
vote up
written by Cara , March 15, 2010
I tend to agree that there are better places for dogs to be walked. Do I think this mandates a ban? Not sure. My concern in this debate is whether the ban is just another way keeping homeless people with dogs from access to downtown. My perception is that many of these dogs are well care for, but an equal number are not, and that many are pitbulls or other breeds that have been characterized unfavorably by the media. Is the ban a way of preluding these people from access to downtown? Is it another way of sparing us from seeing that which makes us uncomfortable? Great article, Tara. Bring back some off-leash options Santa Cruz!
Votes: +1
report abuse
vote down
vote up
written by DoubleDoggerSantaCruz , March 14, 2010
As someone who just returned from Paris, lets just say the Parisians don't understand the concept of picking up after their dogs on the city streets - and the result is pretty gross.
If Santa Cruz really wants to be dog friendly, the City Council needs to think like a dog. Remember the adage "a good dog is a tired dog"? That's because dogs want to be off-leash, where they can run and get some exercise. They don't want to be in a crowded downtown, on leash. City leaders ought to find viable ways to provide dogs - and their owners -access to more off-leash open space, like Its Beach and Lighthouse Field did before a few overzealous city residents ruined it.
Votes: +1
If Santa Cruz really wants to be dog friendly, the City Council needs to think like a dog. Remember the adage "a good dog is a tired dog"? That's because dogs want to be off-leash, where they can run and get some exercise. They don't want to be in a crowded downtown, on leash. City leaders ought to find viable ways to provide dogs - and their owners -access to more off-leash open space, like Its Beach and Lighthouse Field did before a few overzealous city residents ruined it.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
written by Andy , March 14, 2010
Somehow Paris, London and New York are able to handle leashed dogs downtown. Is the noise and traffic so much worse here in our mighty metropolis?
BTW I've lived a few blocks from Pacific for 18 years and only recently learned that dogs are prohibited there, which illustrates another problem with the ban. We have too many laws that are enforced only sporadically. This leads, in my view, to the possibility of selective enforcement, to indifference to laws and rules in general, and to distrust of the police by those who are prosecuted. It would be better to have fewer laws, specifically targeted at offensive behavior and to enforce those laws rigorously.
Votes: +3
BTW I've lived a few blocks from Pacific for 18 years and only recently learned that dogs are prohibited there, which illustrates another problem with the ban. We have too many laws that are enforced only sporadically. This leads, in my view, to the possibility of selective enforcement, to indifference to laws and rules in general, and to distrust of the police by those who are prosecuted. It would be better to have fewer laws, specifically targeted at offensive behavior and to enforce those laws rigorously.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
written by doggrrl , March 14, 2010
Hey Downtown merchants, how about a swap? Keep dogs off Pacific but work to give them back Its Beach. Win-win.
Votes: -1
report abuse
vote down
vote up
written by mlm , March 14, 2010
Too bad that Lighthouse Field and Its Beach are under state park jurisdiction and downtown is city-run. Therefore, it's like negotiating apples for turtles.
Votes: +1
report abuse
vote down
vote up
