What's New?

What's Going On Now? 

Elections

Election 2004 

Make a Difference

Contribute to DogPAC 

Other Sites

San Francisco DOG 
Fort Funston Dog Walkers 
Ocean Beach DOG 

Email us at:

dogpac@hotmail.com

Tys Sniffen

DogPAC Questionnaire
District 5

1. What have you done on behalf of the dog owning community and what will you do in the future?
   

   Having moved to San Francisco with my Border Collie, Scout, 6 years ago, I've obviouslybeen a part of the dog community in San Francisco for my whole experience here. Overthe years of being a neighborhood leader and a regular park user, I've come to realize theimportance of responsible dog and people relations with their neighbors.

   This sense of responsibility has led me to found and lead my local park group, the Friendsof the Panhandle with Lisa Vittori, a strong dog politics advocate. That work has includedclean-up days, park advocacy, putting up and maintaining the bag dispensers, organizing and participating in Parkscan via the Neighborhood Parks Council, writing an article for the D5Dog group's website, http://d5dog.org/tys_grabber.htm the SF Dog website, http://www.sfdog.org/features/tys_grabber.htm and ultimately, has led to myinvolvement and chairing of the Natural Areas Program Citizen's Advisory Committee.

   Of course, all that work isn't necessarily directly 'on behalf' of the dog community, but as adog person working on bettering the parks, I hope I've represented the dog community ina way that helps overall. And of course, better parks and better parks management is vitalto everyone, including dog people who visit parks at least twice a day. I will continue this sort of advocacy, and work to bring strong, balanced, reasonablemanagement to our parks and our public spaces.

2. The only real oversight mechanism the Board of Supervisors has with regard to the operating departments is the power of the purse: that is, the Board must approve the budget. Would you be prepared to withhold portions of a Department's budget if the Department was managing the money poorly, reporting to the Board inadequately, or failing to develop reasonable public consensus? Please describe.
   

   I would use whatever means available to a Supervisor to make sure every department isusing it's funding to properly do the work of the public. While holding up the budgetprocess is probably near the end of the possibilities, I would do whatever is necessary.

3. Currently, the Recreation and Park Department has 10-15% of the city's playing fields locked up and chained shut. RPD is in the process of claiming hundreds of acres of parkland as natural habitat areas where public access will be very restricted if allowed at all. Critics have said that the goal of the Rec & Park Department is Parks without People. Will you work to promote public access to public parkland? How?

   Yes. As my work with NAPCAC, I will work to insure the public, including the local community, has a say in the planning and management of the city's parkland. I feel that the management plan created by NAPCAC is a good model for how our public spaces should be managed. Another good model is the 'Better Neighborhoods' plan.

4. Will you work to promote tolerant, multi-purpose, shared-use of parks? How?

   Yes. By working with the mayor to appoint competent, publicly-minded commissioners, either in partnership, or with an entirely new appointment and review process, part ofwhich is described on my website at: http://www.tyssniffen.com/promises.htm#commissions . Further, I will work with the Bicycle Coalition, the Skateboard Task Force, Dog groups, children's groups, sports groups, and of course, NPC to continue to bring all voices to thetable and maintain our diverse uses in our parks. My local park, the Panhandle, continues to be a model of multi-use.

5. Most of us believe that it is reasonable to regulate certain incompatible uses of public spaces. For example, most of us would agree that horses should not be allowed on the golf course and dogs should not be allowed in children's playgrounds. Would you feel differently if you discovered that the dogs in a children's playground belonged to the parents and their kids?

   Probably not. While I fully realize and know the benefits of children interacting in a safe environment with dogs and other pets, we're just going to have to allow for some people's concerns. The variables in those situations are just too high. 'The perfect dog' could meet 'the terrible child' and a few eye pokes and tail pulls later, a lawsuit could break out.

6. Do you think the Recreation and Park Department provides adequate public process for park policies? Would you be willing to intervene in Rec/Park business if there were inadequate public process?
   

   In general, in my years of experience, no. Or they use it to their advantage to slow aproject to a standstill. Yes, I'm very willing to intervene. One could say it's a fundamental reason for my campaign.

7. Have you ever visited on or more of the original 19 dog exercise areas approved by the RPD over 20 years ago? Which ones? How would you characterize the conditions you saw?

   Yes, I've been to the Corona Heights DPA, amongst others. I don't like how there's no grass, limited seating, and when I was there with my dog, the water spout didn't work.

8. Statistics show that children are more likely to grow up with a family dog than with both parents; that dog owner/guardians have lower blood pressure and cholesterol levels; and that elderly pet owner/guardians are more active and less depressed. Do you believe that dogs play an important role in society? What is your personal experience with dogs in your life - now or in the past?

   I believe dogs can play an important role in the family structure, and in urban society in general. Often times, I've seen how dogs are the 'ambassadors' of neighborhoods, how they become the social lubricant that get humans that live near each other to interact in positive ways. However, like another popular social lubricant, alcohol, they also can be a negative force when the wrong human attitudes get connected to them. Dog people whodon't clean up after their dog, aren't trained properly, and aren't aware of others aroundthem can create negative situations.

9. San Francisco's dog population is estimated by the Dept. of Animal Care and Control to be between 100,000 and 120,000. Roughly 25% of the city's households includes a dog. Many dog owner/guardians are single and/or elderly, and recreation with their dog is their primary or sole form of socialization, recreation and exercise. Do you believe that off-leash recreation can be viewed as a benefit for people - not just for their dogs?

   Yes, walking with your dog is a positive thing.

10. Do you believe that walking a dog off-leash is a valid form of recreation on a par with picnicking, Frisbee, hiking, bird watching, soccer, etc.?
    

    Yes, off-leash walking is valid recreation, as long as it doesn't negatively impact otherusers in the park. just like picnicking, Frisbee, hiking, etc.

11. What positive things do you see about off-leash recreation in our parks?

    Dogs need to get the proper amount of exercise, and often, off leash is the only way they can. Off leash walking also removes the danger of 'clothes-lining' bikers and other walkers, to say nothing of the psychology of a dog that feels more aggressive in a trapped/leashed situation rather than an off-leash one.

12. Do you believe that public authorities should make regulations to accommodate people who are afraid of dogs?

    Public authorities need to keep in mind the most good for the most people.

13. Some people have fears, phobias, and dislikes of other people in our society. Gays, African-Americans, Asian Americans, dog owners, and teenagers are some targets of such fears. Is it appropriate to restrict the access to public places of such groups simply because some people are afraid of them or dislike their behavior in public?

    I don't see the logic in this question. 'Access restriction' might be appropriate for certain behaviors, not for identity.

14. If you answered questions 12 and 13 differently, please explain.

    Did I answer them differently?

15. Most people agree that there is too much rudeness in public these days, which sometimes escalates into violence, such as "road rage". There is certainly more rudeness than we would like in our public parks these days between joggers, bicyclists, dog owners, parents, etc. Conflict and rudeness may occur when people share limited park resources. What is the appropriate response by public agencies to individual conflict or reported "rudeness" in parks?

    I think the best thing public authorities can do is take situations into consideration on a case by case basis. The only way we're going to deal with rudeness in our society is through communication and understanding. Those can be fostered by public leaders through listening, respect, and working towards solutions, not pointing fingers.

16. San Francisco's dog bite rate is about 40% of the national average - and most bites occur in or around the home - not in public spaces. Many, many more children are injured in sports and playground accidents than by the family or neighborhood dog. Sergeant Herndon of the SFPD "Doggy Court" attributes SF's low bite rate to increasingly responsible dog owners who socialize and exercise their dogs off-leash. Is this a surprise to you? Does it change your concept of the value of adequate off-leash areas for everyone, not just dog owners and their dogs?

    I'm not surprised by Sgt. Herndon's thoughts, no. no.

17. Through its Natural Areas Program, the Rec/park Department is spending thousands of dollars cutting down healthy Eucalyptus trees because they are not native. At the same time, through its Construction Program, Rec/Park is spending hundreds of thousands of dollars (almost $200,000 in Holly Park alone) to purchase and plant Canary Island palm trees. Does this make any sense to you?

    I believe my work with the NAPCAC shows my understanding, and dissatisfaction with the current ungrounded value structure of NAP.

18. A book-length study conducted and published by the Urban Land Institute shows that the San Francisco Rec/Park Department is among the 3 best-funded big-city Rec/Park Departments in the country. Nonetheless, even in strained economic times such as these, when city heath and other services are being cut, the Board of Supervisors added $1 million to Rec/Park's budget. Do you think this is good government?

    Well, I don't think RPD's problem is too much, or too little money. I believe it's problem lies in lack of management and oversight that needs to be tied to public valuesand input.

19. Supervisors are particularly susceptible to what looks like bribery by city agencies. If a city agency offers to build or acquire a new park or renovate an old one, or to change a street-cleaning schedule in a Supervisor's district, in return for loyal support of the agency, many Supervisors go for the deal. How do you think we can curtail this kind of bribery?

    With vigilance of citizens and advocacy groups, and better appointment and review process for commissioners.