|
|
Post by bamapitbullmom on Jan 5, 2009 17:35:45 GMT -5
Hi Jean!
On this subject I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. I certainly would never assume or accuse you of not caring for your dogs, properly exercising them or loving them and being concerned and proactive for their well-being. That said, I do still disagree with chaining dogs.
I understand that people sometimes don't have options but considering that, owning a dog is optional. You must agree that many people (note I did not say "most" though I am inclined to) are not properly chaining their dogs in respect to the entire gamut of proper and responsible dog ownership. The dogs are chained for one sole purpose: to keep them where the owners want them.
I have concluded that you are an intelligent person and have your dogs' best interest in mind but just as you defend your decision and reasons to chain your dogs, you dismiss our stance on why we don't agree with a defensive angle.
Chaining dogs is a very debatable topic and one I feel is similar to debating abortion or religion, in the context of dog people, anyway. Because it can be such a hot topic, trickling into personal space and possibly (and likely) becoming offensive in regards to people's personal choices, I don't see the purpose of arguing the point with someone who already is aware of the cons. And the cons of chaining are undeniable. That aspect, I don't feel you can defend.
Which leads me to defending chaining by comparing it to crating. Obviously, I will agree that long term crating is no better than other methods of housing a dog. But there are some differences.
Crating will protect your dog from certain dangers such as theft, taunting, destructive behaviors, etc. I am a fan of crating dogs which have been properly conditioned to them and whom are comfortable in them. I crate my dogs. Usually, when I leave the house for a few hours, one is crated, one is allowed loose in the house. If I worked for 10 or more hours a day or if I regularly had to be away for such long periods, I would take my dogs to be in-home boarded and doggie daycare with my close friend/trainer whom I trust. If I did not have an alternative, I likely would not have acquired my dogs in the first place until my situation changed.
My dogs love their crates, their crates are large enough for them, they are often found napping in them on their own and sometimes when the kids get too rowdy, the dogs retreat to them to snooze. I've found that many folks who dismiss crating are not familiar with using them, make it seem that the dogs are stuffed in them for full days and that the dogs are miserable. As a trainer who prefers positive methods and humane treatment, if I ever felt my dogs were stressed, uncomfortable or showed a decline in health, personality or temperament b/c of the use of crates, I would long have stopped using them.
I have heard many people say that their dog or the stray they found is just not happy inside. As a trainer and canine behavior lush, I disagree that this is the case in most instances. I feel that many times this is just a way to avoid the proper effort and time it takes to properly condition and introduce a dog, formerly unfamiliar with home life, to what is expected as a house pet and the great things which come with it.
I have fostered many dogs which were terrified to be indoors and "seemed" to hate to be indoors. They simply knew nothing about it. With proper care, training, conditioning, etc I feel most dogs who have an aversion or distrust of indoor living bloom into dogs which would much prefer to live indoors. All things strange and new can be uncomfortable. That reasoning even makes sense if I were to suddenly take my dogs who have known nothing but indoor living and chain them from now on. They'd seem to hate that, too. I just don't think that we should allow our dogs to make the decisions regarding what's best for them. If I did that my guys would drink from the toilet even when there are chemicals, jump on visitors, counter surf, pull on leash and probably would have spoken up before they were on the table to be spayed and neutered.
On the same note, my house dogs are thoroughly exercised, socialized, well-trained, happy, healthy and have a productive working life and a high quality of life. They've never spent the night outdoors, had to stand in the rain longer than it took for me to open the door, they are not in danger of all the things that can happen if they were left to their own devices. I like to know where my dogs are just as I like to know where my kids are. But I also don't anthromorphosize my dogs, dress them in tu-tus, spoon feed them caviar or wipe their butts.
They are essentially dogs and as such are my responsibility which I choose to keep as house pets. I prefer a furry four-legged pitty to curl up with on the sofa and the daily interaction and company they provide.
I guess in comparison, it makes me sad to wonder how they would be if they were left to their own devices if tethered.
I'm very interested in your statement regarding how you used to be very anti-chaining. What did you have issues with when you felt that way and what made you decide that it isn't that bad?
And I do agree with you that it is abusive and neglectful owners who are the problem. I also feel that not everyone who chains their dogs are either but I personally do feel that the vast majority of those who chain either are uneducated about alternatives, do not view their dogs as companions and are not aware of the dangers and repercussions.
We can battle all day long and defend the way that we choose to house our dogs and get no where. Just the mere fact that you are here on this forum and willing to discuss your points of view tells me that you are concerned for your dogs' well being. I'm sure that we all care for, house, train and handle our dogs differently but we all share a common aspect; a passion for the dogs, the breed and have goals to educate and promote our dogs in a positive light.
|
|
|
|
Post by coolhandjean on Jan 5, 2009 20:17:17 GMT -5
I guess we will have to agree to disagree.
Like I said, you have your right to be against it, and you have the right not to take part in it, but once you (again a general you, not directed at a specific person) try to outlaw it, then you are taking it from a belief or personal decision, and forcing it on someone else, and like I have said already, when it gets outlawed, it doesn't hurt those who are being irresponsible, they could careless. It is hurting those who do it responsibly.
I changed my mind on the whole thing, because I realized you can do it properly. I realized you can still raise a well socialized dog, and it doesn't truly cause aggression. Heck, Cuddles behavior alone showed me that the chain was better than the pen.
Most people I know who use a chain as a set-up are doing it properly. However, yes, I have seen some pretty pissed poor ways people have chained their dogs, but I have seen just as many bad situations for dogs in crates and dogs in pens or house dogs. Heck, most of the video or pictures I have seen from puppy mill bust/reports have been dogs in crates one on top of another, wallowing in their own waste.
My neighbor up the road has a big American Bulldog in a what looks like a 5x5 pen, it used to be on a 15ft. chain. I felt bad for the dog when it was on the chain, since, it appeared no one paid attention to it, but now I feel even worse for it. Now its in a extremely small space, and still has no attention. They, also, have a fenced in yard, where two other dogs sit day in and day out, and I've never seen them leave that yard. So, if chaining is outlawed, what does it do for those dogs? Nothing. They are still ignored, hence the reason I think we need to go after the owners, not the form of containment.
|
|
|
|
Post by lpyrbby on Jan 5, 2009 20:29:13 GMT -5
But what reason would anyone have to go after the owners?
And even keeping dogs in pens isn't satisfactory to me either. Granted, it has to be done in shelter situations, but it just isn't enough for a permanent set up for a dog. Like Mary keeps saying, why get a dog if you aren't going to interact with it?
This isn't a knock at what you do. That is your choice and I'm sorry that those of us who are opposed to tethering throw a risk at how you successfully contain your dogs.
There are examples I want to compare this situation to about a law enacted that "hurts" some but overall does more protecting, but i have to collect my thoughts more to make it make sense.
What we can all agree on here is that it's no life for a dog to be removed from social interaction. What current laws out there can affect the owners of the dirtbags who own lawn ornaments (dogs)? Food, water and shelter is all they need. Beyond that? What more can one do?
|
|
|
|
Post by RealPitBull on Jan 5, 2009 21:28:30 GMT -5
The point for me, is that current laws in my state in particular are practically worthless. I would hate to see the sort of situation a dog WOULD have to be in in order for AC to actually do something. Tethering is just all too easily abused - and so many dogs suffer because it is totally legal to just chuck your dog on a chain and forget about it.
Improper containment and neglect are important issues TOO, BUT, pointing to the fact that, no matter what, some dogs will be abused doesn't lessen the concerns those of us have with tethering. It's just too d*mn easy for folks to neglect their dogs. Tethering is just another easy, legal way for them to do it.
|
|
|
|
Post by coolhandjean on Jan 5, 2009 21:39:15 GMT -5
Now we are going in circles.
I guess we should just agree to disagree and leave it at that, because I will just repeat myself, and you all will just repeat yourselves, and we'll be at the same point.
|
|
|
|
Post by RealPitBull on Jan 5, 2009 21:50:54 GMT -5
I guess you can think I am lazy if you like. I know I am not. I don't think you are lazy, and I didn't call you such. I do think that many people who chain their dogs ARE too lazy to care for them properly. But see, this is the thing I have a difficult time understanding.....why is it chaining, OR 'only other option is to let them run free together in a yard that couldn't contain them'? If the only way I could have 2 or 3 or 4 or more dogs was to keep them chained in my yard...I'd opt for 1 dog. I TOTALLY get that you personally believe chaining is ok - and I do believe you care for your dogs......but in my mind, this isn't an 'either/or' issue.....it's not chaining OR 'dogs run loose/stay in a crate all day/are kept in a cramped kennel run'. Those are all legit husbandry concerns, as well....but this thread is about chaining. And just because a dog isn't chained doesn't mean the other options have to be bad options. I do too. I wouldn't own a dog if I had to keep the dog in a crate for more than a few hours at a time. I didn't say that. Chaining seems to be your only husbandry option. I do wish that if the only way people could contain the dogs they have is by chaining, they wouldn't have so many dogs in the first place. I just could never agree that 20 hours a day on a chain is any way for a dog to live. Sorry  Lack of exercise is a concern, but so is lack of human contact and company. I couldn't imagine my dog outside in the dark on a chain while I was cozy indoors. (He's actually sleeping on my bed right now....) Dogs are just such social creatures and it breaks my heart when I see one on a chain, segregated from their human family.....Quite a number of years ago, I cared for a family member's dog that was kept on a chain. Sure, he was fed, watered, had a nice yard and a nice dog house.....but he was one of the most pathetic, depressed dogs I have ever come across. Sure he got daily attention. From his owner, and also from me - I tried to visit him daily. But the cries of that dog as he watched me leave after each visit would haunt me until I could see him again. He was just so so so lonely. I don't think my family member would have ever even gotten a dog if chaining wasn't an option - he wouldn't have supported a wannabe puppymill, he wouldn't have neglected this dog, the dog wouldn't have run away to BARELY be found in a really bad part of the state where bad things happen to dogs. I think a LOT of people who chain dogs wouldn't have so many or ANY if chaining wasn't an option - and that's for the better. (I did eventually bring this dog home to live with me, btw.) I think you misunderstood what I was saying....chaining Pit Bulls is a cultural thing, developed from the sort of history these dogs came from. I didn't think you encouraged any sort of aggressive behavior. Many experts agree that chaining is detrimental. This isn't 'opinion' or about someone's 'feelings'. Please just take my words for what they are....my opinion, not a judgment on you. |
|
|
|
Post by bamapitbullmom on Jan 5, 2009 21:59:06 GMT -5
Like I said, you have your right to be against it, and you have the right not to take part in it, but once you (again a general you, not directed at a specific person) try to outlaw it, then you are taking it from a belief or personal decision, and forcing it on someone else, and like I have said already, when it gets outlawed, it doesn't hurt those who are being irresponsible, they could careless. It is hurting those who do it responsibly. ****Okie dokie...since it's on the table, I certainly would be all for chaining, tethering or tying up dogs as housing to be illegal. And I'll leave it at that. Not that I ever said that or that I am lobbying for it, but I am all for dogs *not* living on chains. Is chaining practical to enforce? No. Would it likely be enforced? prolly not. Would it impact responsible owners...I think not. Again, this is my opinion, scoff at it if you like. I don't consider my aversion to chaining dogs as a 'belief' as you say. I believe in it b/c it happens. I don't agree with it and don't have to and for good reason. I have a big, fat problem with being forced to vaccinate my dogs against rabies every year, too and am staying on top of that. But that certainly doesn't mean that I'm going to do everything possible to convince you to question overvaccinations. Through research I know that the liklihood of my dogs acquiring rabies is very little and the vaccine has been proven to last upwards of 7 years. However, a VERY high percentage of dog attacks and bites were inflicted by tethered...er...chained dogs. It is a problem. I changed my mind on the whole thing, because I realized you can do it properly. I realized you can still raise a well socialized dog, and it doesn't truly cause aggression. Heck, Cuddles behavior alone showed me that the chain was better than the pen. This statement seems to be splitting hairs. So chaining is better than penning/kenneling. I don't agree with either. Both share the same cons and both have been proven to be dangerous and detrimental to the dog. If you have evidence otherwise, feel free to share. It's not just aggression which is a concern here, it is a vast number of other things. Let me ask you this; if given the choice to live outside, chained or penned/kenneled for the most part of your life, regardless of exercise, attention and affection, would you choose that over structured protection from the elements, boredom and the numerous other positives which come with living in a safe, protected home environment with the people you love? Also, do you really think that most people who chain their dogs, specifically pit bulls actually do a darn thing with them? Honestly? Don't you think setting an example is more important than whatever the reason is that you chain? Still haven't figured out exactly *why* you do other than you just want to. ? Most people I know who use a chain as a set-up are doing it properly. However, yes, I have seen some pretty pissed poor ways people have chained their dogs, but I have seen just as many bad situations for dogs in crates and dogs in pens or house dogs. Heck, most of the video or pictures I have seen from puppy mill bust/reports have been dogs in crates one on top of another, wallowing in their own waste. First of all, please explain how to chain a dog "properly". I'm confused about that. Does properly chaining completely eliminate all dangers? Are properly chained dogs somehow exempt from being stolen? Poisoned? Dehydrated because they wrap their chains around a tree and can't reach their water? Safe from other aggressive dogs entering their area? I'm also interested in knowing why you feel that properly and humanely crating dogs within the home can EVER be compared to puppy mill kept dogs, stacked on top of each other, wallowing in their own waste. Forgive me for defending crating on that level but dare I say my choosing to crate and the method I crate my dogs should EVER be compared to the autrosities of dogs kept and bred for selfish gain. Those dogs are kept purely as property, a commodity. Honestly, I think your comparison here is a stretch at best. [/quote] My neighbor up the road has a big American Bulldog in a what looks like a 5x5 pen, it used to be on a 15ft. chain. I felt bad for the dog when it was on the chain, since, it appeared no one paid attention to it, but now I feel even worse for it. Now its in a extremely small space, and still has no attention. They, also, have a fenced in yard, where two other dogs sit day in and day out, and I've never seen them leave that yard. So, if chaining is outlawed, what does it do for those dogs? Nothing. They are still ignored, hence the reason I think we need to go after the owners, not the form of containment. I don't really understand your point via the Ambull story. Both stories of him being chained and kenneled sounds horrible. As a dog owner and even more-so as a pit bull owner I make every attempt to ensure that my dogs are safe from harm, safe from ever feeling the need to physically defend themselves and furthermore from making negative headlines which affects every other pit bull out there. Chaining pit bulls not only solidifies the stereotypes, allows room for error, allows access and removes the constant ability to manage and teach. I couldn't imagine being able to teach Cajun all the things he needs to know to do Therapy Dog visits if he were living on a chain. And doG forbid I ask him to perform tasks for me as a Service Dog then chunk him in the yard on a chain til I *need* him again...  ! I'm sure that there are dogs who live on chains with no issues, no apparent stress or distress. I guess it all depends on one's ability to understand and to really make that connection with a dog where they aren't just seen as self-reliant property but instead a soulful being worthy of so much more.  |
|
|
|
Post by lpyrbby on Jan 5, 2009 22:13:09 GMT -5
Did she leave? Why?
|
|
|
|
Post by RealPitBull on Jan 6, 2009 7:34:02 GMT -5
Yes, she left. I can just guess that perhaps she felt the general mindset of this board wasn't in line with her general mindset. It happens.  |
|
|
|
Post by mcgregor on Jan 6, 2009 9:06:32 GMT -5
size=2]I agree on all perceptives of Bamapitbullmom and Realpitbullmom , chaining is dangerous to the mindset of any dog........We fought for a tethering law here in California and won ........Dogs can be chained at least three hours of a day and not more .................... the horrors of chaining a pitbull or any breed derides from frustration and that frustration usually agitates to aggression.................dogs are social animals and chaining them takes away the power to enjoy companionship which they so naturally crave as dogs are pack animals....................................................................................
Jean I presume is the one who left, if one adheres to ignorance and gives up on sound advice from knowledgable members; then it is a lost case as pitbulls are not for one who is not doing right by them ...............it is their opinion but if people want to learn , they need to listen and not run out the door in frustration............. the key to owning a pitbull requires two things responsibility and education......... [/size][/size][/b]
|
|
|
|
Post by lpyrbby on Jan 6, 2009 9:19:02 GMT -5
And THICK skin!
|
|
|
|
Post by bamapitbullmom on Jan 6, 2009 13:34:09 GMT -5
Well, I hate that she left.
|
|
Chloe
I Love RPBF!
Posts: 433
|
Post by Chloe on Feb 25, 2009 19:07:57 GMT -5
I'm not o.k with tethering a dog unless you are outside with him/her. Leaving a dog tied up unsupervised is a bad idea in my opinion. I have seen it many times, dogs hanging themselves, or getting tangled so they cant reach their water and then dying of heat stroke, no thanks, not my baby!
Now, I will put her on a tie out cable if I am out with her. Like in the front yard watching the kids play or doing yard work, but I dont leave her out there alone, when I go in, so does she.
|
|
lola1
I Love RPBF!
Lola and Reed
Posts: 372
|
Post by lola1 on Feb 25, 2009 23:46:03 GMT -5
I had a garage sale last year that required me to leave my gate open and so while I was outside tending to the sale, I put Lola on a 25ft tie out. She HATED it. I couldn't imagine leaving her on that all day.
I recently found out that in my county it is illegal to leave a dog on a chain etc. for longer than 4 hours.
Yet every time I called AC on my neighbor they said they couldn't do anything. This poor dog (APBT) was kept on a tow chain in the garage. They cleaned out the feces once a week! He barked EVERY night. AC said they couldn't do anything. Then the dog (very dog aggro) got loose one day (no fence) and got ahold of a passing JRT. Almost killed him. The owner still would not properly contain him and AC said that since he didn't bite a person and since the JRT didn't die there was nothing they could do to the owner.
Ridiculous. My dogs are house dogs for sure. Reed has his issues and we are working on that. He and Lola seem to have a great relationship though. They play very well together and no fights (so far). I guess I have to say that my opinion is that if your dogs are required to be outside on a chain all day/half day then maybe you should rethink your choice as a dog owner.
I do have to crate my dogs while I am at work. Total, we are gone 7 hours a day, but we have someone who lets them out halfway through and plays with them/lets them play together for a while before they go back to their crates. I also freeze treats in their kongs for them to keep them occupied. I even hate doing that to them. I cant wait for them to be old enough and/or done chewing on my stuff to be able to keep them separated yet out of their crates while I am gone.
|
|
|
|
Post by tank on Feb 26, 2009 12:08:51 GMT -5
I tie out Lucy quite often when it is warm out. She likes hanging outside by herself. But, I never leave her unattended. I am always within hearing range, and in my house that is in the kitchen (where I can also see her and have only the screen door closed) or in the living room. I get really nervous about her being outside by herself. But, she really enjoys herself outside, just sitting on the porch watching people/cars go by eating a bully stick or hoof. I also go out to see why she is barking everytime I hear even a short bark, just in case. Also, my dog is with me almost 24/7. She comes to work with me everyday and is barely left alone because I live with 3 other people.
People in this area are very against dogs on chains. I see people posting on craigslist that they are adopting out their neighbors dogs because they see them on a chain everyday. I am nervous mostly because I think someone will see Lucy outside, (oh poor helpless neglected dog) and take her and try to sell her/adopt her out. This is actually a real problem around here. I think anti chain laws cause this type of behavior. People taking situations in their own hands that they know nothing about.
|
|
|
|
Post by andreacassel on Feb 26, 2009 15:56:50 GMT -5
Ok - I am going to kick in some brain cells on this one.
Lots of you know that I have older dogs - like older than 10 years. Now, when my great pyr developed cancer my great dane decided that was not acceptable and became somewhat aggro towards the pyr. So, while working through all of this - my pyr, instead of going into the back yard to play, went in the front on a tether. Was she ever left alone? Nope - I would do yard work, play in the flower bed, toss balls with her, tug of war, or just sit on the ground with her head in my lap.
So, for about 30 minutes at a time, 5 times a day, she was tethered. Once we worked through the aggro issues my dane developed all went back to supervised back yard time for the both of them.
In all of that mish mash I guess I am trying to say - sometimes you have to do something you hate for a period of time in order to make life work.. Sometimes - that thing might be tethering (especially if your dog is to sick to walk the blocks), sometimes it means that one is alone in one side of the yard while you are in the other. Now - you guys - don't think poorly of me because of this, it is just that there were no other viable options available to me at the time - so I did what i had to do to keep my dogs safe.
Do I think a tether is a lifelong or longterm solution - hell no - I just know that "sometimes you gotta do what you gotta do".
|
|
|
|
Post by bamapitbullmom on Feb 26, 2009 18:30:56 GMT -5
This discussion wasn't about supervised or temporary or occasional tethering. This discussion was about people housing dogs on tethers or chains or runners fulltime.
|
|
|
|
Post by tank on Feb 26, 2009 20:20:09 GMT -5
I think anti chain laws cause this type of behavior. People taking situations in their own hands that they know nothing about. this was my point |
|
|
|
Post by valliesong on Feb 26, 2009 20:31:14 GMT -5
I think anti chain laws cause this type of behavior. People taking situations in their own hands that they know nothing about. this was my point Actually if animal control is able to intervene in the case of a dog chained/penned 24/7, I would think the well-meaning public would be LESS likely to get involved by stealing pets. Most cases I have heard "through the grapevine" involved animals kept in morally reprehensible but legal conditions, where AC was called but couldn't/wouldn't do anything. |
|
|
|
Post by RealPitBull on Feb 27, 2009 10:55:56 GMT -5
Actually if animal control is able to intervene in the case of a dog chained/penned 24/7, I would think the well-meaning public would be LESS likely to get involved by stealing pets. Most cases I have heard "through the grapevine" involved animals kept in morally reprehensible but legal conditions, where AC was called but couldn't/wouldn't do anything. Ditto. I think people get frustrated because they call for help and nothing happens. When someone is forced to see a dog suffering day in and day out, yet it is some how legal, they do desparate things. Like steal a dog. It's not about tethering a dog for a short period of time - like while you are hanging out on the porch, doing yard work, or as a short-term fix to an issue you are having. It's about dogs who are KEPT on chains as their way of living. Like, my dog's way of living is house dog. That doesn't mean in a certain circumstance, I wouldn't tether him. In fact, I have - in the yard at my family's shore house, when I am out there with him but cannot hold him on leash (the yard is fenced, but no where near sufficiently). But he comes with me when I head indoors. In regards to short-term tethering, I would never leave a dog unattended unless I was fully away that he could not escape, strangle himself or get tangled, or was accesible to the public (i.e. not surrounded by a secure fence). |
|
