LONDON, U.K. -- The conversation began this way:
“Mike told Val, and Val told me, that dogs no longer have to be kept on the lead.”
To the red-eyed and half-crazed masses, bound together in isolation—clinging to the slightest sign of normalization—this was amazing and joyful news.
If it was true.
“How would Mike know?” I asked dismissively. “Wouldn’t we have heard something official?”
But sure enough, there seemed to be a new sign—“Coronavirus Update”—on our gate of The Regent’s Park, replacing the word “must” with the word “should.”
“Dogs should be kept on leads.”
There was an immediate and giddy temptation to reach down, unclick his collar, and let the Sammy dog run free—for the first time in weeks.
It seemed like a clear victory in the Great Lockdown park war: 1 for the happy puppies, frolicking and kicking up their paws on the spring grass, 0 for the huffing, puffing, spitting joggers.
Then, with the lighting reaction of two highly trained, inquisitive journalists, we both muttered through our ninja masks at the same time: What does “should” actually mean?
It wasn’t exactly permission to let loose the canines of north London, but it wasn’t a full prohibition either. It could go either way, I guess.
Looking around, most dogs were still being obediently walked on leads, as if “should” hadn’t replaced “must” at all. There was something admirable about it.
- Complete coverage at CTVNews.ca/Coronavirus
- Coronavirus newsletter sign-up: Get The COVID-19 Brief sent to your inbox
The farther we ventured from the gate however, the more we encountered those old signs—the ones that said “must” keep dogs on lead. As you can imagine, this created quite a bit of doubt and confusion for the two journalists in question.
He: “I haven’t seen that new sign anywhere else.”
She: “It doesn’t seem like anything has changed.”
The Royal Parks website didn’t offer much clarity. There was a subtle change, I suppose. It now “strongly advises” keeping dogs on a lead, but it’s no longer a command.
So, what was it, should or must? And what does one do in the face of such a moral dilemma, with a yearning dog begging you for freedom? Oh, those pleading eyes Sam.
Admittedly, the word “should” puts the onus on the individual. It is a recommendation, not an order. It requires a choice. Maybe that was the idea from those tricky people who look after Her Majesty’s beautiful parks.
To see how many us would yield to this obvious muddling of the rules and let playful doggies roam. It certainly opened the door to compromise.
Could one go early in the morning, say, and let doggie run before it gets busy. Would that qualify?
Or, let doggie run free on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays? Now, that seems like a relatively guilt-free solution, one that lives up to the spirit of the guidelines, if not the letter.
I can see this is going to be a difficult issue to resolve, one that demands careful review, and delicate consideration. It may also involve some palliative consumption. The women who convene for Zoom cocktails twice a week—Sarah, Ruth, Mellissa and Louise—are already divided.
In summary, may I just say this kind ethical challenge is not what the world needs in the middle of a pandemic. Lead? Or no lead? I might have to call for a show of well-washed hands on this one.
Yes, you absolutely should. Make that must.
