[pct-l] skeptical raptor: Thru hiking with dog

[Dana Fuhrmann]

First of all, thank you to everyone who replied to my post, especially
everyone who responded off list--all of my questions were answered and I
learned a lot.  I had never heard of snake aversion training and it is a
great idea--but I can't find anywhere in Colorado that offers it! The
closest I found is the Colorado Gun Dog Association offers a clinic but it
is in June which obviously won't work for me.  Any suggestions?



I got a lot of great information from people who emailed me directly--it is
a shame that they didn't post those responses, because I think that many
other dog-owning hikers could've benefitted from that information.  The
reason they all claimed for off-list correspondence was to avoid the
vicious attacks of some of the "old timers" who apparently go out of their
way to be nasty to anyone who hikes differently than they do.  Thank you,
Brick, for trying to remind them about the meaning of HYOH-- that hypocrisy
really surprised and disappointed me.



Anyway, I had decided to refrain from responding on-list to the attacks
launched against me.  I got the information I needed, I have no desire to
argue with strangers nor do I feel any need to justify my personal
decisions to them, and I simply have better things to do with my time.
However, then as I was reading Michael "skeptical raptor's" post and
thinking how pathetic it was that there are people out there who get so
angry about things that don't even affect them personally, I noticed the
link to his blog and clicked on it out of curiosity.  And what a surprise!!
And now, I admit it, I am too weak--I simply don't have the self-control to
resist responding when confronted with such blatant hypocrisy! From the way
he writes, I thought for sure he would be some god-loving irrational and
indoctrinated conservative!



So this, Michael, is to you:  First of all, if you read my original post, I
never once asked for your support so I really can't imagine what would
compel you to go out of your way to state that "No one here is going to
support you", nor why you think I would care.  Thank you, Eric and
Jim(PITA) for pointing out that he does not speak for the list as a whole.
I got many supportive emails.



Then there are your comments on the vaccine:

 "As for the rattlesnake vaccine, you do understand that the vaccine
instructions for use clearly state that dog needs to be taken immediately
to a vet since it is considered an emergency.  Why?  Because immune
reactions vary from dog to dog (as they do in humans).  The animal may be
incompletely immune (especially since you don't have enough time to get the
annual booster that develops a more complete immune response), the immune
response can cause unexpected consequences, and the danger of a snake bite
is twofold:  venom AND bacterial infection. But you don't seem to be
someone who listens to advice, so I'm probably wasting my time reviewing
the medical literature on the vaccine."



Ahh where to start with this...Yes, I DO understand that the dog must be
taken immediately to a vet.  The purpose of the vaccine is to buy the dog
more time--so that if a rattlesnake does bite your dog, you have a better
chance of getting to a vet while the dog is still alive.  As far as I know,
there isn't a vaccine that can make your dog completely immune--the issue
is not that "I don't have enough time to get the annual booster".  Had you
actually read my post before launching on your tirade, you would've read
that I got her the vaccine last summer--she actually got two separate
shots, a month apart.



While I agree that you are wasting your time, you have no valid evidence
for drawing the conclusion that I am "not someone who listens to advice".
Taking Lucy hiking with me is not an obstinate decision.  I spent a lot of
time reading the PCT list archives and other online resources and
considering the many reasons for and against hiking with a dog.  I then
added into the mix my past experiences backpacking with Lucy, and my
general knowledge about myself and my dog, which is information that you
obviously do not have.  When I carefully weighed the pros and cons, I came
to the rational decision that Lucy and I should attempt a thru-hike
together.  Notice that I say ATTEMPT.  Although you are again forcing me to
repeat what I said in my original post, I am prepared to change my plans
depending on my dog's needs and wants.  I love Lucy more than anything and
it is disgusting to me that you would accuse a stranger of "wanting to risk
the life of my dog".



Actually let's just take another look at that whole, brilliant statement of
yours: "Of course, since you want to break the law and risk the life of
your dog, I guess that's your choice."  Hahaha, seriously??? I never
mentioned anything in my first post about my plan for the park sections of
the trail, and you conclude that "I want to break the law", presumably by
bringing a pet into areas where they are not allowed.



And you call yourself a skeptic? Apparently, your hypocrisy does not end
with your false promotion of HYOH. People who believe in aliens, or god, or
sasquatch, or homeopathic medicine, etc., can at least provide some reasons
for their beliefs, even if those reasons are faulty.  Your conclusions and
accusations, on the other hand, are completely baseless.  I think it is
hilarious and appropriate that your "logical fallacies" link is under
construction.  I'm assuming that you intend to give examples of common
logical fallacies on that page, so let me help get you started: Your jump
from "she doesn't mention her plan for parks" to "she wants to break the
law" would be a good example of a "non-sequitur".  I need to give a
shout-out here to my second favorite post, by mikey chapman, for a classic
example of the "slippery slope" fallacy, as demonstrated by his statement: "I
love my dog enough to only section hike with her, but I also cant afford to
pay giant fines and get kicked out of national parks. If this law is
breakable for you, what else is?(sorry but hey)".  First of all, how dare
you suggest that you love your dog more than I love mine!?  But more
relevantly for Michael's lesson in logic, after again taking the irrational
jump from not knowing my plan for parks to assuming I will be breaking the
law, mikey heads down the slippery slope to conclude that I break all kinds
of laws! hahaha



I could keep going-- your arguments were so poor (in addition to being
completely uncalled for), but I don't want to waste any more time on this.
I don't know why you are so angry and ready to attack but I would suggest,
ever so politely, that you remove your ultralight trekking pole from up
your ass and remember that hiking is supposed to be fun! Chill out, buddy!
Lucy and I will be hiking our own hike and I promise that we will not
interfere with you doing the same. I'm done with this list, at least for
awhile.  For the other "newbs" and the more good-natured
"old-timers"--we'll see ya on the trail! (I'll be the one with the DOG and
a backpack full of drugs and...I can't even think of the other criminal
activities I'll be engaging in right now, it's my bedtime).

Dana