This is a placeholder text
Group text
by Doberdoodle on 18 July 2010 - 23:07
What is the point of behavioral trainers if we just recommend anyone with a problem dog to euthanize it, there's some good trainers out there that could possibly work with the dog and the family.
by FHTracker on 18 July 2010 - 23:07
I'm sorry Dober but I have to disagree on this point.
A problem dog is a puppy who is uncertain about strangers, perhaps shows a fear response, growling or other uncertainty.
The OP posts a description of an aggressive dog, who even after being removed from immediate exposure to this child, continued to express extreme aggression towards the child.
Going off what the OP describes, put the dog down. It is irresponsible of people to come onto a message board, describe a situation of open, continued, unrelenting hostility from a dog towards a child and expect someone to come along with the Dog Whisper answer to make everything better.
Either the OP over exagerated the event or the dog needs to be destroyed.
At any time, this thread is not 4 to 5 threads seperated from the story of the 9 year old who was mauled by dogs. How many stories do we keep reading of kids being mauled by dogs on this message board? Also how many posts do we see linking to well balanced, displaced dogs who are one day away from the needle, simply due to circumstance?
This boxer mix -as described- is a walking *when* we read about the mauling he's involved in. Put him down and give the home to a dog who is not a walking lawsuit waiting for another child to be another statistic.
A problem dog is a puppy who is uncertain about strangers, perhaps shows a fear response, growling or other uncertainty.
The OP posts a description of an aggressive dog, who even after being removed from immediate exposure to this child, continued to express extreme aggression towards the child.
Going off what the OP describes, put the dog down. It is irresponsible of people to come onto a message board, describe a situation of open, continued, unrelenting hostility from a dog towards a child and expect someone to come along with the Dog Whisper answer to make everything better.
Either the OP over exagerated the event or the dog needs to be destroyed.
At any time, this thread is not 4 to 5 threads seperated from the story of the 9 year old who was mauled by dogs. How many stories do we keep reading of kids being mauled by dogs on this message board? Also how many posts do we see linking to well balanced, displaced dogs who are one day away from the needle, simply due to circumstance?
This boxer mix -as described- is a walking *when* we read about the mauling he's involved in. Put him down and give the home to a dog who is not a walking lawsuit waiting for another child to be another statistic.
by NoCurs on 19 July 2010 - 00:07
What is the point of behavioral trainers if we just recommend anyone with a problem dog to euthanize it, there's some good trainers out there that could possibly work with the dog and the family.
I certainly respect where you are coming from, because so very often "bad" dogs are just dogs without proper management. And I think the purpose of dog trainers is to show dog owners how to manage their dogs - not to fix "hardwire" problems.
I guess I am ultra sensitive since the dogs I love so dearly are being persecuted so horribly at this time. Being killed and banned and destroyed and vilified. I guess when humanity gets a handle on that, comes to realize that crappy dogs need to NOT be taking up homes that sound dogs could be in, then we can sweat the "small stuff" that dog trainers can help owners with. I worked as a pro trainer for several years: and helping people learn how to walk their dog, and meet its exercise needs, and keep it from jumping up (if that is what they wanted) was rewarding. But never did I tell someone to hang on to a dog that was A DANGER TO HUMANS IN THEIR HANDS. Repeat: THEIR HANDS. A dangerous dog would probably be fine with you, as you are an intellifent person with experience. But most dog owners are idjits who need nothing more than Snoopy out back.
I think the Cesar Milan show - with its its ALL the dog owners fault massage - has set dog/human relations back a long way. Of COURSE a dog's actions ARE COMPLETELY controllable by the owner - that's management - but it is condesending to say that ALL dogs are perfectly sound. Poppycock! No more than all humans are mentally sound!
I certainly respect where you are coming from, because so very often "bad" dogs are just dogs without proper management. And I think the purpose of dog trainers is to show dog owners how to manage their dogs - not to fix "hardwire" problems.
I guess I am ultra sensitive since the dogs I love so dearly are being persecuted so horribly at this time. Being killed and banned and destroyed and vilified. I guess when humanity gets a handle on that, comes to realize that crappy dogs need to NOT be taking up homes that sound dogs could be in, then we can sweat the "small stuff" that dog trainers can help owners with. I worked as a pro trainer for several years: and helping people learn how to walk their dog, and meet its exercise needs, and keep it from jumping up (if that is what they wanted) was rewarding. But never did I tell someone to hang on to a dog that was A DANGER TO HUMANS IN THEIR HANDS. Repeat: THEIR HANDS. A dangerous dog would probably be fine with you, as you are an intellifent person with experience. But most dog owners are idjits who need nothing more than Snoopy out back.
I think the Cesar Milan show - with its its ALL the dog owners fault massage - has set dog/human relations back a long way. Of COURSE a dog's actions ARE COMPLETELY controllable by the owner - that's management - but it is condesending to say that ALL dogs are perfectly sound. Poppycock! No more than all humans are mentally sound!
by CrysBuck25 on 19 July 2010 - 01:07
I would agree with NoCurs...Not all dogs are mentally sound, and it's wrong to think that every one can be fixed.
A dog with serious aggression issues is a huge liability in the hands of anyone, regardless of whether they can control it or not. Even if that aggression is channeled or controlled through some sort of training, the fact still remains that unless someone who has good solid fences, lots of experience, and the time, steps up and takes this dog, willing to keep it FOR A LIFETIME, there's no way of knowing what might happen. So you do some major training and socialization, and everything seems fine, but one day the dog just snaps, sees a little kid or whatever, and gets out a window, or the door's not shut fast enough, then what? You cough up all the money to pay the lawsuit, because you would not do what needed to be done, to protect the children. Yes, it may be hard to find a vet that will put down a five month old puppy, but I think I'd keep looking. Running it back to a no-kill shelter is like putting an ticking bomb in the hands of a child...You KNOW that someone will get hurt. Maybe not this baby, maybe not this year, but you KNOW it will happen.
I know there are a lot of folks who don't believe in killing a puppy, regardless of what's wrong, because it can always be fixed. Cesar Millan aside, dogs are not humans. If it's really "messed up in the head", why take a chance with the life of an innocent child? There are just some dogs, like some humans, that just should not be alive. It may be illegal to kill a human, no matter how bad they are, without wasting millions of taxpayer dollars, but fortunately, it's not that bad with dogs yet.
I have heard too many cases lately, even here in North Idaho, of dogs just snapping and showing inappropriate aggression, with no reason to. A friend of ours who sells AFLAC insurance was doing a presentation at a potential client's home. He gave the presentation, and as he was leaving, their "bulldog, Pit Bull," or whatever you want to call it, just went from being a calm, friendly dog to latched on to his arm. It had gone for his face, but he got his arm up in time. Several surgeries later, he has a nasty, icky looking scar to attest to the friendliness of the dog. It was fine, and then it wasn't, with no warning. Again, a bully breed of some sort. The dog was quarantined, then euthanized. The majority of the attacks I've heard of around here were not the type where a dog nailed a kid that was running, or squealing, or touched a toy. They involve a perfectly calm dog just "snapping" and going after someone.
I firmly believe that what has hurt the reputation of the Pits, the Rotts, and the majority of the other strong breeds is people who believe that every dog is good, every puppy must be saved, every animal must live, no matter how bad it is. That's what's led to the decline of so many breeds of dogs today, even the ones that go back hundreds of years. We have humanized our dogs, and come to see them as furry humans, and they are not. When the problems are not culled, when the weak (mentally, physically, emotionally) are not culled, they contribute to the overall decline of the population, and the breeds deteriorate. Name one breed today that is not suffering from health or mental problems as a result of modern breeding and rearing practices. I can't think of one.
Hackles up, teeth bared? That's not play behavior. I wouldn't take a chance. You are taking the risk with a child's life, and if something happens, that blood is on the hands of the one who would not make the necessary choices.
As for killing the dog yourself not being legal, I would check on that.
A dog with serious aggression issues is a huge liability in the hands of anyone, regardless of whether they can control it or not. Even if that aggression is channeled or controlled through some sort of training, the fact still remains that unless someone who has good solid fences, lots of experience, and the time, steps up and takes this dog, willing to keep it FOR A LIFETIME, there's no way of knowing what might happen. So you do some major training and socialization, and everything seems fine, but one day the dog just snaps, sees a little kid or whatever, and gets out a window, or the door's not shut fast enough, then what? You cough up all the money to pay the lawsuit, because you would not do what needed to be done, to protect the children. Yes, it may be hard to find a vet that will put down a five month old puppy, but I think I'd keep looking. Running it back to a no-kill shelter is like putting an ticking bomb in the hands of a child...You KNOW that someone will get hurt. Maybe not this baby, maybe not this year, but you KNOW it will happen.
I know there are a lot of folks who don't believe in killing a puppy, regardless of what's wrong, because it can always be fixed. Cesar Millan aside, dogs are not humans. If it's really "messed up in the head", why take a chance with the life of an innocent child? There are just some dogs, like some humans, that just should not be alive. It may be illegal to kill a human, no matter how bad they are, without wasting millions of taxpayer dollars, but fortunately, it's not that bad with dogs yet.
I have heard too many cases lately, even here in North Idaho, of dogs just snapping and showing inappropriate aggression, with no reason to. A friend of ours who sells AFLAC insurance was doing a presentation at a potential client's home. He gave the presentation, and as he was leaving, their "bulldog, Pit Bull," or whatever you want to call it, just went from being a calm, friendly dog to latched on to his arm. It had gone for his face, but he got his arm up in time. Several surgeries later, he has a nasty, icky looking scar to attest to the friendliness of the dog. It was fine, and then it wasn't, with no warning. Again, a bully breed of some sort. The dog was quarantined, then euthanized. The majority of the attacks I've heard of around here were not the type where a dog nailed a kid that was running, or squealing, or touched a toy. They involve a perfectly calm dog just "snapping" and going after someone.
I firmly believe that what has hurt the reputation of the Pits, the Rotts, and the majority of the other strong breeds is people who believe that every dog is good, every puppy must be saved, every animal must live, no matter how bad it is. That's what's led to the decline of so many breeds of dogs today, even the ones that go back hundreds of years. We have humanized our dogs, and come to see them as furry humans, and they are not. When the problems are not culled, when the weak (mentally, physically, emotionally) are not culled, they contribute to the overall decline of the population, and the breeds deteriorate. Name one breed today that is not suffering from health or mental problems as a result of modern breeding and rearing practices. I can't think of one.
Hackles up, teeth bared? That's not play behavior. I wouldn't take a chance. You are taking the risk with a child's life, and if something happens, that blood is on the hands of the one who would not make the necessary choices.
As for killing the dog yourself not being legal, I would check on that.
by Ruger1 on 19 July 2010 - 03:07
Everyone,
I think that many posting on this thread are assuming way too much about this pup.There is NO WAY that anyone could justify by the contents of this one post that the couple put their pup down or take him out in the backyard and ***** the poor pup. I am not against putting a dog down if it is necessary. Sadly, I had to put down a male that I adored because of his aggression. I think that it is irresponsible for anyone to suggest such an act against this pup based on this information. IMO having the pup evaluated by a professional is a prudent thing to do before going to such an extreme . I will try to refrain from anymore preaching on this topic......
Ruger1
I think that many posting on this thread are assuming way too much about this pup.There is NO WAY that anyone could justify by the contents of this one post that the couple put their pup down or take him out in the backyard and ***** the poor pup. I am not against putting a dog down if it is necessary. Sadly, I had to put down a male that I adored because of his aggression. I think that it is irresponsible for anyone to suggest such an act against this pup based on this information. IMO having the pup evaluated by a professional is a prudent thing to do before going to such an extreme . I will try to refrain from anymore preaching on this topic......
Ruger1
by NoCurs on 19 July 2010 - 03:07
I respectfully disagree for this reason:
How many times do you hear about people like this on a "message board"? They "don't know what to do", or "aren't sure" or "want advice about placing the dog", etc.
If THEY don't know what to do, they shouldn't have the dog/pup.
Now. Second part of the equation... just "who" wants a "young dog, showing aggression toward children"? Boy, I want TWO! In reality, what normal, decent home takes this dog in? Anyone with an IQ understands liability. You can cube that responsibility when the lawyers find out they "knew" they were getting a dog who "didn't like kids".
Acceptable homes are in short, short supply. People who want to take in unsound dogs bother me. (Unless they are looking for a guard dog type situation).
These folks want "just a dog", as do most folks. Are they set up to handle an unsound dog? Wiol they spend the money on containment and "training"?
I guess the reason I am so dang harecore is that after having raised so many litters (a few of mine, a lot of rescue) I have seen AGAIN AND AGAIN where one or two pups in a litter will just not be "right" compared to the others. I for onoe just don't "get it" about going all out to get these dogs on a shrink's couch and try and "fix them" when the other 5 pups in the litter are sound.
Do puppies go through "fear stages"? You bet. Do they get spooked? You bet. Do they have weird days? You bet. Just like people. But, and this is a HUGE BUT.....
There is a difference between Little Tommy pulling Little Janey's hair in class, and Little Tommy walking in with an AK40. THIS is what an experienced dog person must come to understand. The good ones can tell the one from the other. And the good ones make sure t hey put down the ones which are unsound.
How many times do you hear about people like this on a "message board"? They "don't know what to do", or "aren't sure" or "want advice about placing the dog", etc.
If THEY don't know what to do, they shouldn't have the dog/pup.
Now. Second part of the equation... just "who" wants a "young dog, showing aggression toward children"? Boy, I want TWO! In reality, what normal, decent home takes this dog in? Anyone with an IQ understands liability. You can cube that responsibility when the lawyers find out they "knew" they were getting a dog who "didn't like kids".
Acceptable homes are in short, short supply. People who want to take in unsound dogs bother me. (Unless they are looking for a guard dog type situation).
These folks want "just a dog", as do most folks. Are they set up to handle an unsound dog? Wiol they spend the money on containment and "training"?
I guess the reason I am so dang harecore is that after having raised so many litters (a few of mine, a lot of rescue) I have seen AGAIN AND AGAIN where one or two pups in a litter will just not be "right" compared to the others. I for onoe just don't "get it" about going all out to get these dogs on a shrink's couch and try and "fix them" when the other 5 pups in the litter are sound.
Do puppies go through "fear stages"? You bet. Do they get spooked? You bet. Do they have weird days? You bet. Just like people. But, and this is a HUGE BUT.....
There is a difference between Little Tommy pulling Little Janey's hair in class, and Little Tommy walking in with an AK40. THIS is what an experienced dog person must come to understand. The good ones can tell the one from the other. And the good ones make sure t hey put down the ones which are unsound.
by Ruger1 on 19 July 2010 - 04:07
NoCurs.....I agree with you on most everything. I was reading some of your other posts on no-kill shelters and liked what you had to say. I am just not comfortable with giving this poster that advice about this pup. I will leave it at that....promise...lol..Ruger1
by NoCurs on 19 July 2010 - 05:07
Sounds fair to me. But are you saying that you would not suggest euthanasia if the dog persists in unsound behavior?
by Ruger1 on 19 July 2010 - 14:07
NoCurs.....if this pup persisted in unsound behavior IMO euthanasia would be wise. IMO euthanasia is more humane than to risk this pup being placed into the wrong hands or worse harming a child.
Ruger1
Ruger1
by VonIsengard on 19 July 2010 - 15:07
Oh, for Gods sake. We have experienced dog people saying "put it down" when some of you know as well as I do that many owners can't read a dog to save their life. What they think looks "vicious" could be a puppy thinking, "OMG a tiny person let me play with it now now now now!!!!!" Many boxers are vocal in play.
I am all for putting down a whack job dog when nice ones rot away in shelters and are needlessly euthanized every day. Yes, if it's truly nasty toward children at 5 months old, that's a horrible accident waiting to happen. Forget it and get a nicer dog.
But I have also met dozens and dozens of dog owners who are WAY, WAY off base on their dogs behavior, what they describe on the phone can be nothing like what the dog is when I meet it. An experienced trainer never would simply say put it down based on secondhand information about a dog they've never even seen.
I am all for putting down a whack job dog when nice ones rot away in shelters and are needlessly euthanized every day. Yes, if it's truly nasty toward children at 5 months old, that's a horrible accident waiting to happen. Forget it and get a nicer dog.
But I have also met dozens and dozens of dog owners who are WAY, WAY off base on their dogs behavior, what they describe on the phone can be nothing like what the dog is when I meet it. An experienced trainer never would simply say put it down based on secondhand information about a dog they've never even seen.
Contact information Disclaimer Privacy Statement Copyright Information Terms of Service Cookie policy ↑ Back to top