Is it bad dogs? Or bad dog owners?!

[Caleb'sMom]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by German Vanegas:
Amy,
In my opinion, once the government, whether be federal, state, or local, gets involved in dog legislation, there will be from mild to gross misinterprations and errors in the enacting and enforcing of those laws. I am frightened about the threat of the government regulating dog breeds. Look at what happened in the United Kingdom (Great Britain), Singapore, Germany, Holland, Denmark, France, etc. Those are typical examples of politicians wrongly interpreting an issue, because of that many breed fanciers and dog owners got terribly hurt. Most dog laws are senseless and draconian, and are based mostly on ignorance about canine behavior! See, if the same politician you talked to, had been bitten by a Standard Poodle, would that warrant to propose the banning of that breed?!... Absolutely no! Food for thought </font>

What do we do? I agree there's bad owners and bad breeders. We can't stop them. Then there's people who want to pass legislation.
Why can't we marry the two?

Othewise, aren't we in an infinite loop? We stop the legislation, but the bad practices go on and on.

If we direct these people in correct way, and stay involved so that we stop them when they're *incorrect*, won't we be doing it right all around?

Your food is always delicious.

[Caleb'sMom]

Ill be back on line later on this afternoon.

[German Vanegas]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Caleb'sMom:
What do we do? I agree there's bad owners and bad breeders. We can't stop them. Then there's people who want to pass legislation.
Why can't we marry the two? </font>

Politicians may decide to ban certain dog breeds, restrict other breeds, implement a ridiculous temperament test that could be even hard for "Lassie" to pass, request senseless licensing for breeders and/or dog owners, and so forth and so on. Politicians have a hard time dealing with issues like social and ecomomic developmemt, defense strategy, health, enviroment, public safety, etc. What makes you think that politicians will do better with dog legislation?!... Do you really think they know about dog breeds? Canine behavior? What really triggers dog aggression? What a Rottweiler dog is all about? What is genetic transmission? What positive rearing of a dog means? etc. They don't know dog $#@*!

[luvarott]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by German Vanegas:
However, let us not overlook that also INDIVIDUAL dog ownership plays an important role in the positive rearing of the dog. It is not secret that fine well-bred dogs are ruined by DOG OWNERS, inasmuch as an ethical breeder tries to place the puppies in the best suitable homes, it is near impossible to prevent that the dog owner will ruin the dog.
</font>

It is not "near impossible".....there are fine reputable ethical breeders out there that do a ton of educating their puppy buyers before that puppy leaves....plus they start preliminary training on their puppies (bite inhibition to humans can start with very young pups)...the homes are very well screened and the breeder is always there for help by phone or in person......part of the contract can include insistence on the pup going to a puppy K type class, where a great number of potential problems will be nipped in the bud....
That an owner is ignorant can be traced to the breeder....

[German Vanegas]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by luvarott:
It is not "near impossible".....there are fine reputable ethical breeders out there that do a ton of educating their puppy buyers before that puppy leaves....plus they start preliminary training on their puppies ...

That an owner is ignorant can be traced to the breeder....</font>

So you really think that there may be guarantees that a puppy cannot be ruined if an ethical breeder does a good job?!... You are right in that ethical breeders can do their best in TRYING to educate potential buyers about the breed and related issues. But again, will that guarantee no failures by the dog owner? There is only so much an ethical breeder can do. In any case, that is only ONE solution to the problem. Responsible dog ownership is part of the solution too

Anyway, I have sometimes given sound advise to many dog owners about different issues conernig dogs and, nevertheless, some of them have misinterpreted or misapplied my advise and ended-up messing their dogs even more!... I tell you with some people is really hard!

[Caleb'sMom]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by German Vanegas:
Politicians may decide to ban certain dog breeds, restrict other breeds, implement a ridiculous temperament test that could be even hard for "Lassie" to pass, request senseless licensing for breeders and/or dog owners, and so forth and so on. Politicians have a hard time dealing with issues like social and ecomomic developmemt, defense strategy, health, enviroment, public safety, etc. What makes you think that politicians will do better with dog legislation?!... Do you really think they know about dog breeds? Canine behavior? What really triggers dog aggression? What a Rottweiler dog is all about? What is genetic transmission? What positive rearing of a dog means? etc. They don't know dog $#@*!
</font>

True.

[German Vanegas]

Amy,
I can see you are "digesting" my food for thought. Thanks!

[WorkinDogz]

There are so many valid points on both sides of this coin it's hard to disagree with either "side".

Breeders have the initial responsibility to place puppies in well informed, experienced homes and provide a means of communication for the buyers.

Buyers have a responsibility to raise a puppy as a dog that will be a credit to the breed and society...EVEN IF THE BREEDER doesn't want to speak to them ever again after the puppy is picked up. There are far too many means to educate one's self in behavioral and training of dogs to place the entire blame for dogs gone bad on breeders.

When good dogs go bad; the dog pays the price...and I don't disagree with euthanizing dogs that aren't a credit to society; only a threat.

There ARE bad dogs with great owners...but those aren't the dogs that cause the maulings. THOSE owners know their dogs are jackasses and don't give them the opportunity to harm anyone. I OWN one of those jackasses! She would die for me; but she would hurt someone terribly if given the opportunity!

She is anything but "easy" to own. She's WORK. She's a pleasure for the family to be around...very social and very devoted..but she IS a liability. I don't ever let my guard down with her even for a second.

I know what she is capable of. Her breeder did too. He painstakingly placed the 9 remaining litter mates. 8 of which are active police K9s in Germany, the other he kept as his working sport dog.

We all have our responsibilities...and I truly believe that the question "If in making you happy; is your dog making someone else UNHAPPY" sums up the owner's end of the responsibility.

[Caleb'sMom]

That makes perfect sense too.

I just responded to the BSL forum on this topic. Basically, somthing's got to be hammered out, or at least the beginnings of it, or we're going to lose.

I brought up the idea of a spot check. You can take a look at it in that forum. Wdgz, your dog is 'one of those dogs.' But, since you are a responsible owner, wouldn't you have control over your dog when someone comes to your door? I mean visible mental control, not hanging on for dear life by the 'jackass's' collar.

And, would all of you say that anyone with a vicious, yet trained dog, could do the same, and pass some sort of a check?

Animal control does a check, sees a fence. Sees the animal is well cared for. Sees the animal is trained, and controllable, and the owner is trained, too. With the owner's presence, an animal control officer can come into the residence without harm. Dog passes, game over for two years....

thoughts? I know this is far fetched and simplistic, I'm trying to get the beginnings of ideas, see if it can take us somewhere.

[German Vanegas]

Workingdogz,
I was waiting!

[whitney greenway]

This is my take,
It is the breeders responsiblity to make sure that they are SENDING out sound dogs! It is our responsiblity to make sure that we RAISE sound dogs! I think that it goes hand and hand! The sad thing is when someone drops the ball, on either side, the dog and breed suffers!

[WorkinDogz]

Oh yes Caleb'sMom, she is one of "those" dogs...one of "those dogs" that could EASILY be a statistic in the wrong hands. I also own her sire who is the ABSOLUTE opposite of her in the social-butterfly department. HE is the "typical" German Shepherd Dog. Aloof yet social. She is "all work and be damned that play".

Her breeder and I knew what she would be before Aik "donated" to his bitch. SHE was planned. Her drive and her no-holds-barred temperament were also planned.

IF someone who owned her dam were a lesser dog person, let's say a BACKYARD BREEDER; there would be 10 DANGEROUS dogs in society because to see her interact with the family; it would be easy to say "awwwww...how sweeeeeet she is! Let her have puppies!!"

Yes; absolute control is what I train for and what I EXPECT...and am given in return.

I don't have to hold the 'jackasses' collar; because she's given a "platz" and it's reinforced 100% of the time. It's not a mystery owning dogs! It's TRAINING, using your HEAD and NOT making excuses for dogs!

In short...it's being RESPONSIBLE.

German....

How long did you think I could remain silent LOL

[Caleb'sMom]

Please don't get me wrong, I agree with all of you.

What's happened is that a slew of people have dropped the ball and if we don't clean it up, we're going to lose. No?

I guess that's what I want to try to do, figure out how to clean it up.

WD, you are the example of how a strong dog can live with us. Do you, and others think that that is a standard that we should try to write up, and suggest as something to enforce, rather than let them figure out how to do it?

For example, if the 10 dogs that shouldn't have been given out, were, and are out there without the kind of control you can provide, what would WE want to do about it? Not them.

Since they want to do something about it, can't we use them to do what we want? I'll cut my idea out of the other forum:

I know that we don't want to attach stigmas to our breeds, we don't want to perpetuate the notion that these dogs are bad, because they're not. BUT we honestly do have a problem with the ownership and breeding of them.... So although the layperson doesn't know the how and why behind the problem, the problem still exists the way it does. They're biting and killing. I mean, it seems like we have a common ground here. They don't know it, but they want to stop ruination of the breed, too, for some of the same reasons. We as owners have even more reasons, and we also have preservation as our top priority. There's got to be some way we can all get the result we're looking for, fewer attacks.

It's five minutes later and I'm still sitting here trying to think of ideas. What about a 'door spot check.' An animal corrections officer from the town comes and does a spot check every two years to all registered dog owner's homes. The owner has to open the door, and if the dog is uncontrollable or vicious according to a set of guidelines concurred upon by animal and training experts, then the owner will be required to follow up with further behavior evaluation.

I know it doesn't satisfy all the situations that can arise, some dogs are more unpredictable. But maybe it would satisfy the legislature, and maybe it would take care of more obvious cases, weeding out some of the people that we all don't want to be owning or breeding.

Should I just log off and let it go?

[rottmommie]

Heck, I would like to defend the rottweiler....and see the dog bite stats, in a fair way! you say that 70% of dog bites occur on ones personal property....do we know if those stats are with invited or uninvited guests??? Could 30% of those bitten have been commiting a crime??? are these just rottweiler bites??? could it be that some of these stats relate to rising crime rates??? not trying to start argument, I am just very curious who gathers the stats, and how they are gathered, taking all things into consideration!

[Grumbler]

German,

Jackass........no........BIG DOG...Yes...LMAO. Yes you are a busy man as probably most of us on this forum are; men and women. You hit upon a sensitive and important subject as most of your posts are. No one, including me has taken that away from you. We have the problem identified, now how do we change it? I don't know about you, but I face problems and issues straight on. I come to people more experienced than I and I respect for their knowledge and training......that would be you Ranger

Be careful..... because I heard St. Peter isn't to happy lately.

Hooah!!

------------------
GUCCI'S DAD
Doug