More

San Francisco Dog Walker Regulation: Supervisor Proposes Licensing Fees and A Limit On Number Of Dogs

Dog Walker

First Posted: 10/18/11 04:33 PM ET Updated: 12/18/11 05:12 AM ET

SAN FRANCISCO - At a meeting of the Board of Supervisors this week, Supervisor Scott Weiner plans to introduce a resolution to regulating San Francisco's army of commercial dogwalkers who regularly bring their customers' four-legged friends to the city's dozens of parks.

Weiner's bill mandates all commercial dogwalkers pay to obtain a permit, receive proper animal control training, ensure their vehicle is safe for the transportation of animals and ensure the dogs they walk are licensed.

The law will also limit the number of dogs controlled by a single dog walker to seven at any given time.

"Commercial dogwalkers provide a critical service to the many San Franciscans with dogs," said Wiener. "This service must be carried out in a professional manner that respects city property and the other users of that property. There are many responsible and professional dogwalkers in San Francisco, and we need to ensure that the few irresponsible dogwalkers don't give the many good ones a bad name."

The legislation was created with the input of the local Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals and San Francisco-area dogwalkers.

"For the many professional dogwalkers who are well-trained, who know how to care for dogs, and who respect the city property they use, this legislation will legitimate them and will require dogwalkers who lack training or skills to get training," said Angela Gardener of San Francisco Professional Dogwalkers Association. "It will also provide firm standards to ensure that all of us in the industry operate under the same rules."

Two years ago, the San Francisco Animal Control and Welfare Commission suggested setting an annual licensing fee to between $100 and $200 a year.

The San Francisco Examiner reports:

Emy Sakai, who owns the Urban Paw and has walked dogs professionally for almost four years, said Wiener’s legislation could weed out the people who aren’t serious about dog walking, which would make her happy. However, it also would cut into the money she earns.

"If you put in a full eight hours and you walk at least two groups in a day, that will add up," Sakai said.

Still, there are some who believe the seven dogs at a time limit is too high. A study conducted by the U.C. Davis Center for Animals in Society recommended limiting the number of off-leash dogs per park visitor to three is ideal for creating a safe and hygienic dog park environment.

If Weiner's legislation does pass, actually making sure the new rules are followed may be difficult. ABC-7 reports:

San Francisco Animal Care and Control would be the agency enforcing these new regulations if they pass.

Carl Friedman, Animal Care & Control director: "How are we going to enforce it? That is going to be an issue. I am not really in favor of passing legislation that can't be enforced."

At present, there are no official regulations for dogwalkers in San Francisco; however, there is a set of voluntary guidelines they can agree to follow in order to be placed on the city's list of recommended dogwalkers—almost 70 San Francisco dog walking services have signed the pledge limiting the number of dogs they can walk at one time to six, requiring they pick up all the dog poop their charges leave behind and mandating all of their dogs be licensed with the city and have current vaccinations.

Even though, as SF Weekly notes, Weiner doesn't own a dog himself, the Castro supervisor is styling himself as the Board's de facto leader on pup issues. He lead the charge against a proposed National Park Service rule change to severely restrict the ability of dogs to be off-leash in the parks operated by the Golden Gate National Recreation Area (GGNRA).

The proposed law doesn't explicitly include said areas, however, Weiner has been in conversation with GNNRA officials in an effort to get them to voluntarily follow his guidelines even tough they GGNA is outside San Francisco's jurisdiction. In exchange for complying with the law, the city would allow the GGNRA to issue dog-related tickets within its courts instead having to going though federal system, which it does now. The federal courts unsurprisingly don't place a high priority on dog issues, so these cases tend to get drawn out or ignored—whereas they would likely receive more attention in a city-operated courtroom. While the GGNRA has, for now, declined to join in until they complete their own comprehensive report reevaluating the role of dogs in their parks, the possibility remains open.

"They not included right now," said Weiner, "but in the future it's my hope that they will join."

Including the GGNRA-operated areas in the regulation is important because they are ground zero for the city's off-leash dog debate.

"My only complaint is all the dog walkers that bring WAY TOO many dogs at a time!" writes one Yelp reviewer about the pooch paradise of Fort Funston. "This has become increasingly worse in recent years. It's not only irresponsible, but unfair to the rest of the people that share the park. They're way less likely to be able to pick up after a dozen dogs, less likely to be able to manage their dogs if something should happen, and are much more likely to lose one of the dogs (as I've seen all of these incidents more than enough times)."

If off-leash dogs are banned from the GGNRA, it will put more stress on city's other dog parks; hence Weiner's desire to pro-actively take action to calm the dog situation at the already crowded dog areas in places like Duboce and Alamo Square parks.

There are currently 27 parks in San Francisco that allow off-leash dog walking.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST SAN FRANCISCO

 
 
  • Comments
  • 20
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
07:48 PM on 10/24/2011
The issue in city parks isn't the professional dog walkers but the private citizens with one or two dogs. As a rule, dog walkers are very responsible for controling their animals and cleaning up after them, since they have been under the microscope for years. Private owners, on the other hand, are by-and-large disgraceful! Many have no control over their animals, and refuse to even acknowledge that their dog has aggressive traits. I recently witnessed a large doberman mix attack another dog at the 27th and Douglas dog-park, while the dobie's owner literally turned her back to the commotion because she was on her cell-phone.

San Francisco already has laws in place which address dogs and their droppings. It's up to the city to enforce these laws and not place the burden on professional dogwalkers who are simply trying to make a living. Limiting the number of dogs that can be walked at a given time won't prevent problems in dog-parks. It'll only serve to cap their ability to earn a living in the city and drive more self-employed individuals into the unemployment line.

And higher unemployment is the last thing San Francisco needs!
09:11 PM on 10/23/2011
get the dogs out of the stores and restaurants. it's gross.
01:56 PM on 10/20/2011
All of these dog laws serve to no purpose since the city doesn't have enough or any Police walking the streets or in areas where there are more dogs without leashes or owners who don't pick up the feces or dog walkers who have tons of dogs, especially at the beach. There should be laws against letting owners walk into public places with their dogs, especially in supermarkets. I understand that Safeway, in particular, has rules against dogs in their premises, but they aren't enforced. The Safeway on Church and Market is the worst offender of these rules. One of the managers told a friend of mine that they don't do anything about it because they don't want to get into a hassle with the dog owners. How cowardly of Safeway!
08:26 PM on 10/19/2011
how the politicans cry for less goverment,now this issue that requires emergency govt. action.
MrStat1
I believe in the rule of law
02:06 PM on 10/19/2011
Another "lets control your life as much as we can" Leftist San Francisco idiot law. Sometimes I wish that place would just break off and float out into the ocean, never to be seen again!
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
gsocratesasks
Dammit Gumby!
02:16 PM on 10/19/2011
yes..not very "liberal"... are they?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
sf girl
I like my micro-bio empty.
02:20 PM on 10/19/2011
Which part do you disagree with? Or are you against laws in general?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
gsocratesasks
Dammit Gumby!
01:48 PM on 10/19/2011
The town that h8s kids and dogs.
01:49 PM on 10/20/2011
We don't "hate" them, we just don't want too many of them, especially when the dog owners don't pick up their dog feces in streets and parks, or when dangerous dogs bit and kill people through fault of their owners. We also dislike child breeders, especially when they don't socialize their kids in public.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
01:36 PM on 10/19/2011
People don't know the requierments of "off leash". The law states the dog has to respond to your verbal commands and from I see, about 5% do. I am sick and tired of being harrassed by off leash big dogs and their stupider owners. Another example of "Self Francisco".
11:16 PM on 10/19/2011
i will protect you if nobody else is! ;)
12:05 PM on 10/19/2011
i'm a vet tech and see many dog emergencies of dogs while under the care of dogwalkers. not that dogwalkers are not a benefit to our city, they are just as important as human daycare. but some dogwalkers can also be bullies and intimidate people who want to just walk their dog in the panhandle. i have also noticed dogwalkers giving very poor medical advice to dog-owners (this is one of my own personal "pet" peeves with dogwalkers--that and they like to put blockades on trails in GGpark to prevent bikes from riding on the trails--sorry completely different issue) i think it will weed out the irresponsible. also, with so many dogs to handle in such a small city-- and that's just it, it's a city--these are city dogs--one must be accepting of the responsibilities of action (off-leash). regulations would not have to be made if there is common sense. we have to work together to help our parks be clean and safe for all that love to enjoy a park. i'm rambling...
02:35 AM on 11/14/2011
no kidding, what is your point? There are good dog walkers and bad dog walkers, just like there are good vet techs and bad vet techs.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Grimway
04:53 AM on 10/19/2011
I walk 6 dogs at a time. no problems. I own all of them. I feel yas but lets save anger for the politicians atleast until they are done robbing us. Peace.
01:51 PM on 10/20/2011
You should be fined.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Grimway
11:17 AM on 10/23/2011
You need a brain.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
09:30 PM on 10/18/2011
I have two dogs in San Francisco and I have been saying this at least two years. I have seen dog walkers with 20 dogs. Yes, 20. I stopped going to Randall Museum park because the dog walkers let their dogs loose all over the park and they do their business while the DW is on their cell phone, as if that gives them a free pass LOL
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
09:22 PM on 10/18/2011
I see too many dogs with one person in this city. I also see dog walkers flying around in their pickup trucks with the hood on the back with dogs being flung from one side to the other. There is a dog walker in upper market that takes his dogs to his home when he eats lunch, and leaves the dogs outside in the back of the truck while he goes into his house to have lunch, never coming out to check on them even if they bark obsessively at a passing dog on the street.

It always makes me wonder, have you ever followed your dog walker for a day. Do you really know what they are doing with your dogs?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Emmaboverry
04:05 PM on 10/20/2011
Call animal control if you see this kind of negligence again(and in heat,leaving dogs unattended in cars can be abuse).
photo
LeeMon
Dog is good.
06:50 PM on 10/18/2011
7:1 ratio is pretty high...