I just don't get some people!

[Denim Deb]

OK, maybe someone can explain this to me cuz it sure doesn't make sense to me!

At the park where I'm working this summer, there's a playground. It has some type of foam safety padding in the whole thing. Every so once in awhile, they need to close the playground so they can fix it since it will get holes in it. Then, it becomes a safety issue. That involves cutting out the damaged pieces, replacing it w/new, then letting it cure for several hours. Today was the day that they fixed it. The part that needed to be fixed had red safety tape around it to keep people off. And the tape had DANGER printed on it.

This afternoon, I went to check it out to see if it was fixed, and to let anyone that might want to know when it would be reopened know. There was a guy w/his kids. One was in the area of the playground that was OK for using. The other 2 were in the taped off area and the father was letting them play there! Needless to say, I made them get out.

I just don't get it. What part of DANGER didn't they get? What did they think the tape was there for?

 

[baymule]

Denim Deb, I want to break this to you as gently as possible........but.......PEOPLE ARE STUPID!!

And...........they are inconsiderate too......

 

[mrscoyote]

Yep, sad to say the stupidity and don't give a bleep level is really high nowadays.

 

[Denim Deb]

Good thing it was a relatively cloudy day yesterday and kind of cool. Otherwise, we would have probably had to kick a bunch of kids off. I talked to one of the rangers B4 I left and he did say that he would be keeping a really close watch on it around 6:00. He says that that's when the park really gets busy w/people getting off of work and trying to tire out their kids so they'll go to sleep early.

 

[Joel_BC]

How coincidental, Deb. Because yesterday I had contemplated posting here on a similar theme (of course, all the details are different).

My wife and I, with our daughter, were within a 25-minute drive of a small wilderness park a couple days ago. We decided to go into the park to see the "run" of spawning Kokanee (inland salmon) coming from the river into one of the main spawning channels (a section of a creek). It's always a fascinating thing to watch and there's a nicely kept trail beside the portion of the creek that the fish use as a spawning channel.

We had been there about half an hour, walking along and looking - with genuine delight - when four people (a man around 30-35, his apparent girlfriend, and two women friends) arrived with a large dog on a leash. The dog proceeded to dart through the rail fence between the trail and the creek's bank, presumably to get a big drink, though conceivably to get at the big fish hovering nearly motionless in the clear water. The guy pulled the thrashing, splashing dog back with some difficulty.

Another person who had seen this went and reported the incident to one of the park attendants, a woman. (These attendants are either low-paid or volunteer, I'm not sure - but they are not trained professional park rangers.) The attendant came right over and asked the dog owner why he was walking his dog at the edge of a spawning channel during the fish run. He replied that his dog was on a leash. The attendant more or less told him it was a stupid, ignorant move to walk a large and possibly uncontrollable dog at the edge of the channel. As the exchange went on, the guy responded in an increasingly defiant manner. Finally, the woman attendant flew into a red-faced rage at him! I don't blame her and I sympathized with her, but the scene looked a bit pathetic, since the unarmed and only semi-official attendant was nearly a foot shorter than the guy and probably outweighed by sixty or seventy pounds. The guy's girlfriend was the first to verbally weigh into the argument in the guy's support, and, to a lesser extent so did the two female friends.

The situation eventually dispersed, and these four visitors were returning to their two cars (license plates from a province to the east of ours), but not before the girlfriend of the defiant guy headed into the park's interpretive-center building, looking like she was going to try to complain to someone behind a desk!

Possibly the parking lot at this park should be posted with signs saying No Dogs on Trails. But then, where would people leave their dogs? - because there are laws in our province forbidding people to leave pets alone in vehicles, due to past suffering and deaths of dogs. But you'd think anybody with a brain, travelling in a party of four, would have had someone stay with the leashed dog in the parking lot while the others walked the trail. But you cannot count on people using common sense, I guess.

After mulling it over, my wife and I feel that the park needs chain-link fencing, even if just 40" high, between the trail and the creek's edge. The park's rail fence isn't adequate to fend off anybody's big dog, let alone the dog of a renegade (or even of a mere self-righteous idiot).

Anyhow, main immediate issue... why argue with the park attendant (who started off with a reasonable request to get the dog off the trail)?

 

[Denim Deb]

I'll never understand some people. Like today, I'm heading to pick up hay. I came to a stop at a stop sign behind another driver. He went thru the intersection-and stopped to talk to someone stopped coming the other direction. OK, I had started thru the intersection as well and now I had to stop-w/my trailer in the middle of the intersection. I pop the horn. He doesn't move. I pop it again and I have someone behind me blowing their horn as well. He finally takes off, goes up just a bit and makes a left. The whole time he's doing this, he's flipping me the bird.

 

[ORChick]

How coincidental, Deb. Because yesterday I had contemplated posting here on a similar theme (of course, all the details are different).

My wife and I, with our daughter, were within a 25-minute drive of a small wilderness park a couple days ago. We decided to go into the park to see the "run" of spawning Kokanee (inland salmon) coming from the river into one of the main spawning channels (a section of a creek). It's always a fascinating thing to watch and there's a nicely kept trail beside the portion of the creek that the fish use as a spawning channel.

We had been there about half an hour, walking along and looking - with genuine delight - when four people (a man around 30-35, his apparent girlfriend, and two women friends) arrived with a large dog on a leash. The dog proceeded to dart through the rail fence between the trail and the creek's bank, presumably to get a big drink, though conceivably to get at the big fish hovering nearly motionless in the clear water. The guy pulled the thrashing, splashing dog back with some difficulty.

Another person who had seen this went and reported the incident to one of the park attendants, a woman. (These attendants are either low-paid or volunteer, I'm not sure - but they are not trained professional park rangers.) The attendant came right over and asked the dog owner why he was walking his dog at the edge of a spawning channel during the fish run. He replied that his dog was on a leash. The attendant more or less told him it was a stupid, ignorant move to walk a large and possibly uncontrollable dog at the edge of the channel. As the exchange went on, the guy respond in an increasingly defiant manner. Finally, the woman attendant flew into a red-faced rage at him! I don't blame her and I sympathized with her, but the scene looked a bit pathetic, since the unarmed and only semi-official attendant was nearly a foot shorter than the guy and probably outweighed by sixty or seventy pounds. The guy's girlfriend was the first to verbally weigh into the argument in the guy's support, and, to a lesser extent so did the two female friends.

The situation eventually dispersed, and these four visitors were returning to their two cars (license plates from a province to the east of ours), but not before the girlfriend of the defiant guy headed into the park's interpretive-center building, looking like she was going to try to complain to someone behind a desk!

Possibly the parking lot at this park should be posted with signs saying No Dogs on Trails. But then, where would people leave their dogs? - because there are laws in our province forbidding people to leave pets alone in vehicles, due to past suffering and deaths of dogs. But you'd think anybody with a brain, travelling in a party of four, would have had someone stay with the leashed dog in the parking lot while the others walked the trail. But you cannot count on people using common sense, I guess.

After mulling it over, my wife and I feel that the park needs chain-link fencing, even if just 40" high, between the trail and the creek's edge. The park's rail fence isn't adequate to fend off anybody's big dog, let alone the dog of a renegade (or even of a mere self-righteous idiot).

Anyhow, main immediate issue... why argue with the park attendant (who started off with a reasonable request to get the dog off the trail)?

I'm not so sure about this one, Joel. I take it there were no signs prohibiting dogs on the trail? So he was within his rights to have the dog there, it was on a leash, and he did try (albeit clumsily, it sounds like) to keep the dog under control, and on the correct side of the fence. Arguing with the attendant was foolish, but it sounds as though it started out reasonably enough. Without signs to the contrary, I think it would be unreasonable to expect one of the party (which has come from out of province to see the sights) to stay behind in the parking lot with the dog.

Also - aren't ALL the Canadian provinces to the east of yours?

 

[Joel_BC]

I'm not so sure about this one, Joel. I take it there were no signs prohibiting dogs on the trail? So he was within his rights to have the dog there, it was on a leash, and he did try (albeit clumsily, it sounds like) to keep the dog under control, and on the correct side of the fence. Arguing with the attendant was foolish, but it sounds as though it started out reasonably enough. Without signs to the contrary, I think it would be unreasonable to expect one of the party (which has come from out of province to see the sights) to stay behind in the parking lot with the dog.

You make good points, and I definitely considered them - even while still in the park. Yes the dog was on a leash. But both my wife and I felt the guy was being a big brat when he resisted taking his dog back to the parking lot or his car (my wife more strongly then me, I recall).

I knew a married couple who managed a wilderness park on a lake up north. The man in the couple told me that, although he wore a uniform, sometimes the only way he achieved authority in situations where groups of park visitors partied in the park (complete with alcoholic beverages) was by not only speaking firmly but by carrying a side arm - which is definitely not the general Canadian leaning. LOL

Of course, the incident I described didn't appear to involve intoxication, but I mention the above because there's always the question about the practicalities of establishing authority in parks and public places.

Anyhow, yes the story as I've told it just reflects my reaction, not an interpretation from on-high.

Also - aren't ALL the Canadian provinces to the east of yours?

You're right. There are "territories" to the north of us. I didn't want to tar any specific province in telling my little story. There's clearly untold variety in human types and personalities in any province. Ironically, my wife is originally from the same province as the visitors, whose license plates we saw.

 

[Britesea]

The whole idea of having a dog on a leash is to have CONTROL of the dog. If the dog was able to break away and get to the water it was NOT under control. There are devices such as choke chains and pinch collars that can give more control, although proper leash training is the best form of control.

Not only was the wildlife (ie salmon) at risk, but the dog is too. The next time this dog chooses to take off and his owner can't hold him in check, it may be out into a road and under the wheels of an oncoming vehicle.

 

[rhoda_bruce]

One part of my family feels very funny about following rules. You see rules are to keep other people in check, but they don't apply if you are one of the special people. If you offend one of those special people there will be consequences, but they can do whatever they want, including break the rules and its Okay because they are, who they are.