[MR] Yup, we're still talkin' 'bout pooches...

[Kerri Martinsen]

I agree with Glynn-Haydn.  Owners should be warned and then asked to leave if their pet becomes a problem.  I also own a dog and choose not to bring her to Sapphire due to the ticks that run rampent.  They are hard enough to get off my daughter....

I have a thought.  At camping events that allow pets, maybe the autocrate can contact a couple of local kennels that would be open to boarding the pets for the night if the pet becomes an issue.  Much like a hotel list or "ammenties" list we already see.  The owner would of course take care of arrangements and payment,  but it would get them an option besides driving home.

Too bad you can't do this with children....

Vitha
Mom of a 4 yr old daughter and a 6 yr old very quiet lab.

-----Original Message-----
>From: Tank Mark D <matank at WCNOC.com>
>
>Turn back to the behavior of dogs: Why should the "sponsors" responsibility for the dog be any different? Why should people look the other way for an animal's behavior when they wouldn't put up with it from a human? In the case of an unruly animal that is causing general disturbance, the owner should be given a short but reasonable time to get his/her animal in line, or be asked to leave the premises immediately upon the expiration of that time period.
>
>Draconian? Not at all. Basic good manners and consideration for the group's well-being should be the guideline. Yes, that could possibly mean the owner may not return to future events, but would that necessarily be a bad thing? Especially if they would have brought the same unruly animal. Additionally, how many others would, as a previous post indicated, not attend future events due to other people's "dog control issues". 
>

>There's my two-pence...
>
>Yours In Service,
>Glynn-Haydn Murcheson-O'Shannon
>