Posted on 02/26/2002 1:09:22 PM PST by X-USAF
Alta isn’t a big place.
It’s a quaint resort community up Little Cottonwood Canyon in the mountains east of Salt Lake City.
The population varies, depending on the season and how many people are in the lodges. But it probably has 400 permanent residents.
And 36 dogs.
Last year there were 37, but something happened. I haven’t asked the details, but it probably wasn’t pretty.
So this year they’re down to 36 dogs and that means a permit has come open. Because you can’t have a dog in Alta unless you have a permit and there are only 37 permits.
It’s just the way it is.
And there’s some pretty fierce competition for this open permit. Folks are putting their names in and there will be a lottery.
And somebody will be able to get a dog.
And a bunch of somebodies won’t.
Which is odd. Because the people in Alta don’t have anything against dogs. It’s dog anuses they seem to have a problem with.
Specifically, it’s what comes out of those anuses. And where it goes. And who’s drinking the water.
Let me explain.
The folks in Alta, and down below in Salt Lake, are quick to explain that the town is in a “watershed.” Which means that the rain that falls in Alta ends up running somewhere else.
Which is also true of virtually every piece of land in the world, but that’s beside the point.
In Alta they’re worried that what washes through their town ends up in the reservoirs that feed the kitchen sinks of Salt Lake City. And so they look at doggy leavings and hydrology and the big city in the valley and all of a sudden the water has a funny taste to it.
And so, “to protect the watershed,” they limit the number of dogs. Apparently 37 is ok, but 38 is too much.
I guess it depends on how much dog crap you can tolerate in your drinking water.
Or, how nonsensical people can be.
Because the number of dogs in Alta has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the quality of municipal water in Salt Lake City.
No matter what they tell you when you go to get a dog permit.
Think it through.
How many tens of millions of gallons of water collect through the Salt Lake watershed? And how much poop comes out of the back end of Alta’s dogs? When you compare one to the other the differential is so radically lopsided that the impact of crap on water is statistically nonexistent.
And, if you’re fixated on fecal matter in the water supply, why do we limit ourselves to doggie derrieres?
Do you know how many coyotes, deer, elk, moose and Canada geese are regularly crapping in Little Cottonwood Canyon? This place is nature’s Port-A-Potty, for crying out loud. The Wild Kingdom deposits tons of excreta in this canyon every year – none of it very palatable or healthful – and yet to protect the water, Alta limits dogs.
Which is nuts.
And which seems to indicate the folks there have never heard of Pooper Scoopers. Or those little bags people carry around when they walk their dogs.
If Fido makes a stinky, take it home.
End of story.
That way it goes in the trash instead of into the water supply and everybody’s happy.
If Alta’s concern was truly protecting the water supply, it would ban car tires. And fertilizers and pesticides and pressure-treated lumber and rubber-soled shoes and oil-based paint and fireplaces. Because all those things leave residue that washes away with the melting snow or falling rain and goes into the watershed.
But those things aren’t banned.
Not in Alta, and not anywhere else.
And why?
Because we don’t go down to the stream and get our water in pots anymore.
Very smart people have designed municipal water systems that make sure no matter what comes into the system, what comes out of the system is healthy and safe.
Does the word “chlorine” ring a bell?
It’s not the dog permits in Alta that make the water potable, it’s the technicians in Salt Lake City.
Period.
So this thing with permits in Alta is all a con. It’s some idiot story they came up with to limit the number of dogs in town. Probably because some city councilman sometime was kept awake by a barking dog.
And they’re not honest enough to admit they just want to limit the number of dogs. So they blame it on the water.
Which is ridiculous.
But that’s what you have to do when you want to limit someone else’s freedom.
All along I sat here in my humble abode thinking the politics of Berkeley were screwed up. How wrong I was.
Enjoy, everyone!
Enviro-whackos are so arrogant.
You get the government you deserve.
The foolishness of both the government and the governed seems to rise in direct proportion to the quality of the local ski runs. The State of Vermont and the Town of Aspen spring directly to mind, but I am sure Freeper skiers can suggest others.
Though 'Daschles' is an increasingly popular slang term.
It doesn't stop the dogs pooping on my lawn, but sure makes me feel better (And yes, I have tried politely asking the dog owners to have their dogs do their business elsewhere; doesn't work).
7dogs=1 cow =1/4 grizzly bear = 4 deer = 45 starlings = 8 racoons = 57 1/2 fish = 25 drunks relieving themselves in a parking lot.
Inside joke.
I think that's pretty much true, although I can't say for sure.
For extra credit, name the comedian
You don't understand. Alta is where Berkeley goes to ski...
...crapping.
Sending my best Pooper scoopers from the East Coast!!!!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.