|
|
Post by RealPitBull on Feb 10, 2015 9:39:21 GMT -5
We all have heard about the debacle that involved Mickey the Pit Bull being "saved" after being declared vicious and sentenced to life in prison. ( therealpitbull.proboards.com/thread/13467/mickey-bull-hour-jail-star ) Well, what about an organization like The Lexus Project, which strives to get dogs off death row and rehome after they have been determined to be "vicious". Hey, I am the first to admit that dogs get condemned unfairly but what about when they have been declared vicious, failed a behavior assessment according to one person, and deemed "retrainable" (whatever that means?) by two other people? I can't judge the following situation because as far as I am reading this dog never bit anyone, but the assessment results seem suspect to me. Not enough info. Still, wondering what others thought about putting so much time and resources into saving "vicious" dogs who may or may not actually be vicious? For me it's gotta be a case by case basis - if the dog is legit dangerous and has a bite history, I think it is unethical to be pulling aggressive dogs, "rehabilitating" them, then rehoming. But I DO think dogs unfairly accused need advocates. www.starnewsonline.com/article/20150209/ARTICLES/150209709/1177?p=1&tc=pg |
|
|
|
Post by heartless on Feb 10, 2015 11:09:29 GMT -5
here is what I come away with from that story...
1. the original owners didnt give a rats behind about the dog - and possibly even abused it - simple neglect is technically abuse... this was proven when they simply refused to comply with any of the corrective measures (ignored more likely) mandated by the citations issued...
2. the dog had obviously learned that "the best defense is a good offense" - by acting the way it did, it got what it wanted... just guessing & extrapolating a little here, but if she had been abused, she would be fearful around people (people cause her pain/discomfort), growling and baring her teeth made people go away/leave her alone - she got what she wanted...sort of...
3. the "reports" of her sneaking up behind people? not really sure what to make of that one - but if true - she may really want to be around people, but is afraid at the same time, and will only get closer on her terms - ie: they arent looking at me so it is ok, for now...
My interpretation (and it is solely mine, based on the limited information given) of this situation: I would say that, yes, this particular dog has potential - she should be given the chance anyway. She has no history of biting, just what most would call "aggression" and that is most probably based on fear...
And I agree that things like this need to be considered on a case by case basis - look at all the facts of the case, weigh the pros/cons and make a (hopefully) intelligent decision based on those facts.
|
|
|
|
Post by RealPitBull on Feb 10, 2015 11:20:48 GMT -5
I totally agree with your post. Stripping off my devil's advocate outfit, I think this dog likely has potential too (although I am wondering what the eval'er saw that made them claim this dog is a ticking time bomb? And why did the other two say she could be "retrained"? Reading between the lines to me that sounds like they are saying she needs to "have her aggression trained away". But I'm just guessing here.)
To reiterate, I know for sure some dogs fall into bad situations with irresponsible - or sometimes through no fault of their own - people and need legit help. I also know a lot of rescues stick their necks out for dogs that should justly be euth'd, so I admit to always being skeptical when I see stories like this.
As an aside, I did just refer someone to Lexus because they were in a situation where their dog was deemed "dangerous" after it killed another dog who was it the Pit Bull's yard. A case like that (if as presented was legit) is a prime example of a dog needing help).
|
|
|
|
Post by heartless on Feb 10, 2015 12:00:14 GMT -5
It really is a double edged sword - there are no clear cut, precise answers. as for the "evaluators" - umm, I dont know who they were, or what kind of experience/training they may have, but speaking in general terms, people tend to be swayed by the opinions of others quite easily - even when they dont think they are... the dog being labeled as "dangerous" by law enforcement could very easily have swayed the opinions one way or the other before they even met the dog... keeping a completely open mind is hard to do... an extrapolation on that idea (college psychology class, anyone?)... if you go in expecting to meet a "dangerous" dog, you will... if you go in expecting to meet a dog miss-labeled as "dangerous", you will... going in to simply "meet a dog" - no labels, no preconceived impressions, ideas, or notions - is extremely hard to do. and then we get into the "validity" of the assessments (referring to one of your other posts elsewhere  ) just how valid are these assessments? Can they accurately determine a dogs true personality when the dog is under extreme stress? (think of how you would feel if thrown in jail - you would not be acting "normally" if that is an unfamiliar environment to you) and I like playing devils advocate! It sometimes (hopefully) makes people think about things in a new/different way... |
|
|
|
Post by RealPitBull on Feb 10, 2015 13:53:02 GMT -5
The pre-labeled thing is a really important point, I think! You're right, we don't know the evaluators' credentials/experience, and like you said, people are easily swayed even when you think you aren't! They could have been seeing something that wasn't there. Wonder what would happen if the same dog was evaluated and the evaluator had been told, NO HISTORY OF AGGRESSION. Wonder if that "ticking time bomb" label would have still been given?
|
|
|
|
Post by heartless on Feb 11, 2015 18:11:20 GMT -5
exactly the point i was hinting at!
If the evaluators had been asked to evaluate "a dog with no known history" - would they have given the same opinions?
|
|
|
|
Post by RealPitBull on Feb 12, 2015 8:09:42 GMT -5
I'm really interested in behavior and temperament, and temperament evaluations. I worked really hard on a booklet for APBT temp and eval, after a long period of time of really knowing what I want and what to look for, but I think follow-up is the only way to really know if what you are doing is accurately predicting what you are seeing during eval's.
|
|
|
|
Post by heartless on Feb 12, 2015 22:39:09 GMT -5
most definitely on the follow-up aspect. you can never know for certain if what you think you are seeing is true without it. and the longer you can keep tabs on something - 6 months, a year, 2 years, 5 years, etc, the better the understanding will be
|
|
) just how valid are these assessments? Can they accurately determine a dogs true personality when the dog is under extreme stress? (think of how you would feel if thrown in jail - you would not be acting "normally" if that is an unfamiliar environment to you)
I look forward to learning much here