This topic is depressing. Here’s Gemma being cute.
shel·ter
noun
1. a place giving protection from bad weather or danger.
2. a place providing food and accommodation for the homeless.
3. an animal sanctuary.
4. a shielded condition; protection.
Shelters kill dogs and cats. So why do we call them shelters when they don’t offer actual shelter?
Do you know what we call places where we keep unwanted things for picking over by strangers until they are regularly thrown away? Garbage Cans. And do you know what we call places we send the old and infirm to die because we can’t handle it ourselves? Hospice. And do you know what we call places where we send our offspring when we can no longer take care of them in hopes a new family will raise them? Orphanages.
I find it rather unfortunate that we’ve combined these four concepts into one institution for dogs and cats. It really does not make much sense to merge a homeless shelter with an orphanage with a hospice with a garbage dump. All the priorities are different.
In humans, no one would support treating orphans like garbage or treating the homeless like terminal cases. Garbage has lost its utility, its potential. Orphans must be cared for to become independent. Terminal cases are guided with love into death and the homeless are guided with love back to self sufficiency. These are all very different tasks.
When you “rescue” an animal from the shelter, who are you rescuing it from? That’s right… the shelter. Not the location, the THREAT. It is the SHELTER which is the threat to the animal. THEY are the one who put a death sentence on that animal and it is THEM you are “rescuing” the animal from.
Much of the AR hysteria dwells on blaming breeders and owners for putting dogs in shelters, but it is not breeders or owners or anyone else but the shelters who put the death sentence on those animals.
Why don’t we “rescue” children from orphanages? Maybe because they don’t slaughter kids if they aren’t picked up after 72 hours. Likewise, grandma isn’t given a countdown when she enters hospice to die fast or get the shot. And we don’t gas our homeless, at worst we return them to the streets.
We can dig deep in to all the reasons and major causative factors for why people leave their children in orphanages or foster care, why adults end up homeless or chronically on the streets. And we can wring our fists at why people throw away things which we believe still have value. But first I think we need to ask why we think the same institution is necessary and sufficient to handle all these cases well.
Breeders don’t kill dogs, they create them. Owners don’t kill dogs, they care for them. Only shelters make it their business to routinely kill dogs. Don’t blame breeders, don’t blame owners. They were told that shelters provide shelter. When you get self righteous over buying a used dog, which you aggrandize yourself with the title of rescuer of a rescued dog that needed rescuing, recall that the only danger that dog faced was from the “shelter.”
* * *
Comments and disagreements are welcome, but be sure to read the Comment Policy. If this post made you think and you'd like to read more like it, consider a donation to my 4 Border Collies' Treat and Toy Fund. They'll be glad you did. You can subscribe to the feed or enter your e-mail in the field on the left to receive notice of new content. You can also like BorderWars on Facebook for more frequent musings and curiosities.
* * *
Anton
Christopher
Lawrence Dillard
Lech
Stephanie
Essere
There is a vet in our community now who does exclusively *hospice for dogs* and euthanasia.
Reasons animal shelters aren’t called garbage cans, hospice, orphanages or homeless shelters.
Most people won’t value something they get by picking it up from a trash can.
Animal shelters aren’t paid to house residents until they finally die of old age – it’s not where the profit margin lies.
Animal shelters take all animals, not just the ones with dead parents.
Homeless shelters are considered a temporary respite – just like animal shelters. Except once their time is up the homeless are deposited back on the street…with their hunger, mental illness and addictions intact.
Shelter: : a structure that covers or protects people or things.
Animal shelters do feed and house the animals in their care. They take in the lost, starved, misused and unwanted.
I’m not saying I agree with animal shelter policies, they tend to vary from one to the next. I am saying your argument is weak.
janet huntington recently posted..Know Your Horse
There’s nothing weak about my argument. Shelters kill animals. It’s a very simple fact. No one forces their hand to do this. You don’t deserve any sympathy for “taking in the lost, starved, misused and unwanted” if you just kill most of them 3 days later because you suck at what you claim you can do. If you pick up a hitchhiker and then murder them, you are NOT A GOOD SAMARITAN just because you picked them up off the street in their time of need.
Yeah, you’re kidding me, right? Shelters are the places that take in the dogs that other people have not been sufficiently responsible for. Without them, we’d return to the days of high populations of stray and homeless dogs. The shelters are not the ones to blame here, but that bit of small reasoning seems to have escaped you.
Yeah, you must be dense, right? Places that take in dogs and then KILL THEM are not shelters. You can put that name on the door and collect money for sympathy, but you are not a shelter if you take in animals and then kill them a few days later. Those are called slaughter houses. And at least they sell the meat and people eat it. Taking animals in and dumping them dead in the trash is not the appropriate response to “we will take your unwanted, abused, lost, sick, dying animals.”
The shelters are the ONLY ones to blame for killing dogs here. They do it. No one forces them. This obvious fact has clearly escaped you.
If all breeders and owners were completely responsible, I would agree with what you have written. Sadly they are not, and that is where shelters come in. Shelters didn’t just open up one day hoping to murder a bunch of animals. They are an effect, not a cause.
Please keep in mind that I am not anti-breeding. I am anti-irresponsible breeding and ownership of all pets.
Having worked at kill shelters in the past, I can tell you the people killing the animals are never happy doing it. It is a heartbreaking and draining job at it’s very best. Come the spring they have to face the deaths of perfectly healthy puppies and kittens that are the product of unaltered animals/ irresponsible people. The only reason they are put to death is due to lack of space. I cannot tell you how many times I saw litters turned in due to purposeful breeding that simply could not be homed, or became “too much work”. Often, it’s the same people year after year dropping off a box of babies because “we don’t want to change her personality by spaying her”.
A lot of the animals at kill shelters are adult animals turned in by their irresponsible owners for reasons that could have been avoided. More often than not, the animal is well past the cute baby stage, making adoption so much more unlikely. Everyone wants a baby. Some of the more popular reasons I heard over and over again: found out they live in a building that doesn’t allow pets, someone has an allergy a year later, moving to a place which doesn’t allow pets, pet became too large, pet has too much hair, can’t afford to keep pet, work started, school ended, no time to care for pet, pet became to rambunctious, didn’t know pet needed so much training, etc.
Demonizing kill shelters, while failing to recognize why they exist in the first place is a gross oversight on your part. I’m not even sure what the point is to this post. Go work in a kill shelter for a couple of years and see the dogs that show up. See how you feel after putting perfectly healthy animals to sleep due to age, space and issues they need not have. Look the employees and volunteers in the eye after the day is done, and every animal there is cared for to the best of their ability, and tell them all about their “garbage can” existence.
> If all breeders and owners were completely responsible
This doesn’t matter at all. It’s like saying “if people just stopped pooping, we wouldn’t even have to have plumbers and then it wouldn’t matter if there were plumbers who tried to fix your toilet, gave up after 72 minutes and then blew it up instead.”
The completely obvious and well documented truth is that the demand on shelters has done nothing but drop precipitously for DECADES. They’ve had fewer and fewer and fewer dogs to deal with and more and more and more people to house them with. ALL of the factors have done nothing but gotten profoundly better for decades.
There’s no excuse.
Just because shelters have existed as killing houses for years doesn’t mean they need to continue that way. Frankly, that’s why breed rescue works so well and there are so many of them, people are sick of the shelters sucking horribly at their jobs and just killing animals left and right.
It’s downright disgusting that if you do accidentally lose your dog, they’re better off NOT being found by the dog catcher and taken to a shelter.
> Shelters didn’t just open up one day hoping to murder a bunch of animals.
Actually they did. You really need to read up on the history of shelters and the toxic Progressive movement.
> They are an effect, not a cause.
So? That doesn’t mean that their poor behavior should be condoned. EVERYTHING is an effect. The reasons that motivate your actions are NOT justifications for callous incompetence for what you do.
If you hang out a shingle as a Doctor even though you’re not one, and someone comes to you with appendicitis and you kill them because you don’t know what you’re doing, their dire situation doesn’t justify your incompetence and fraud.
Shelters that kill don’t get off because you want to bitch about breeders and owners and any of that. Those are already figured into the equation before shelters even come into it. And time and time again, there are people who have shown that you don’t have to just mass slaughter animals to deal with the “supply.” And again, the supply has done nothing but drop like a rock and available homes rise like a balloon.
> the people killing the animals are never happy doing it
So? They still do it. In fact, the horrid human cost shelters extol on people is just another sign of how bad they suck at their jobs, how incompetent their business model is, how unnecessary the slaughter is.
> The only reason they are put to death is due to lack of space.
This is a bogus argument. Not only has Nathan Winograd destroyed this one, just looking at the numbers makes it a joke. Killing for “space” is killing. Get better, adopt more dogs, and don’t take in animals if that means you kill another one. I doubt there aren’t enough shelters to get the job done, especially because the demand side is a fraction of what it was when most of these places were built, but even if there is some “too many dogs for space” arguments, there are much better solutions. TRANSFER dogs to shelter with space. CLOSE new entry and let the market feel the effects instead of hiding them by killing. FOSTER those dogs instead of house them.
It’s actually incredibly stupid to blame “breeders” and owners and then do nothing but say “we’ll take your dogs in no matter what (and then just do a shitty job of rehoming them so we kill a bunch).” Shelters aren’t even honest about how much they suck, let alone pushing back on the demand side.
Why don’t they just be honest about their methods? Why not change the sign outside to read “Dog disposal” and they’ll take in your unwanted dog for free so long as you watch them kill it in front of you. Delaying this reality by a few hours and calling yourself a shelter doesn’t really change the facts of what they do.
I’m going to reply to your good reply, just to tack this on:
On the contrary, quite a few of the people I worked with did not seem to mind putting the animals down.
Not in the sense that they were happy, but more of a “look at me, I’M THE ONE who must sacrifice in order to pay for the sins of others” sort of satisfaction on kill day.
Now, to be very honest there were those who hated that day on the staff and board and tried very hard to get animals whose time was up out before that day, but unfortunately they were outnumbered by the ones I just described.
So no, not happy, but that day has become a sort of ritual for them — just observe people on that day over a period of time, you’ll start to pick out the ones that do this — and they do seem to have gotten fond of it.
There’s a home for every pet?
All who believe that can park outside the kill shelters and stop those admitting pets. Offer to take those 6 year old cats and the two year old pits. Don’t let the sadistic workers get their hands on the pets in the first place!
Take the pets home and get them new homes.
Close the pounds. They aren’t needed, as each pet simply needs a little help to find it’s home, already out there, waiting to save it, right?
Heck, you can use Craigslist for free!
Chris, You live in Colorado… that helps to explain your viewpoint. I know rescue people who do transport of shelter dogs from NM (generally from reservation areas) *to* Colorado. So it really is true that Colorado has a shortage of shelter dogs. I don’t know much else about the situation there. Although I will say that I’ve found Colorado to be a “dog unfriendly” state in terms of leash laws which make it really hard to find any place to give your well trained, mannerly dog a good run. I haven’t been trapped by violating those laws. But I don’t live in Colorado. I find it problematic to even drive through!
Location is actually irrelevant to my argument. It’s not an excuse. We have a thing called roads in this country, and we put things from location A and take them to location B. Everyone else but shelters can figure this out.
Have you volunteered at an animal shelter before? Multiple shelters? More than once? More than a few hours? I hope that you have.
Not all shelters kill the animals that walk through their doors. The 3 we have in my county do not. However, not all shelters have the options of “no kill”..they house until they find an adopter or a foster home. However when they run out of room to house, they turn people and animals away. What happens to those animals?
What is a shelter in a large city to do when they can intake upwards of 100 animals PER DAY. Unless they are adopting out at the same rate they are taking in, they would run out of room incredibly fast. What then? Turn animals away to be dumped on the street or abandoned in some other fashion? Not to mention that not all shelters are allowed to turn animals away.
So, I really hope you have volunteered and have experienced many types of animal “shelters” before forming your opinion.
It’s far easier to point a finger and criticize from afar instead of helping make changes from within.
The North Shore Animal League averages 20,000 animals per year and is No Kill.
Berlin’s central shelter (claimed to be the largest animal shelter in the world) is no kill and run like a pet resort.
Numbers aren’t an excuse. Even bogus numbers like your hypothetical.
And any shelter can become No Kill. You just stop killing animals. In fact there’s a whole list of No Kill shelters that aren’t run on tax payer money. They find or make the money and don’t slaughter animals for incompetence and tradition.
And change isn’t going to happen if no one says the status quo is unacceptable.
So that’s a no…you’ve never volunteered and experienced a shelter from within. If you had, you’d know that my 100 animal per day number isn’t made up. You’d also know that there is no such thing as a “no kill” shelter, and why. It’s not for the reason you think.
You absolutely pulled that number out of thin air. Let’s look at some data.
The ASPCA quotes 13,600 community animal shelters in the USA. They see 7.6 million animals a year and kill 2.7 million. That’s seeing 1.53 new animals coming in the door every day on average. They kill 0.54 animals per day.
So your bogus “100 dogs per day” number is TWO orders of magnitude out of line. But go ahead, find me a US shelter that takes in 36,000 animals per year.
Not only are your numbers entirely ignorant and bogus, even if they were real it’s a self defeating argument. A community big enough to produce 100 unwanted animals a day is big enough to have homes for that many dogs and cats too.
https://www.aspca.org/about-us/faq/pet-statistics
Chris some agree: Dogs better off dead than in a shelter.
http://www.thedogplace.org/PETA-Better-Off-Dead_Starr-1412.asp
Its true some “shelters” don’t make much effort at all to rehome their dogs. They see the only solution to the sheer numbers of abandoned dogs is to kill them.
This also seems to be a problem the world over. Where I live at the moment in Hong Kong the SPCA is such an organisation. They have very few dogs waiting to be rehomed because they put them down instead.
I found a few puppies on my road, still tiny, eyes pale blue, little bodies shaking, they looked like standard poodle puppies apricot and black and some larger Tibetan mastiff types. I gathered them up and took them straight to the SPCA only to be told right away they would be put down unless I kept them. In fact it was a little different to that as they first tried to make me responsible by implying the puppies were mine. This made me see red as I had just explained how I had found them on a lonely stretch of forest road in the mountains and rushed them straight to what I thought was safety. They could have been up there all night crying and crawling amongst the leaf litter and dirt, just lucky they weren’t eaten by a wild pig or python.
Our SPCA make their money by running vet practises that charge the same as any other vet, sell products and promotional items and take donations. I will never give them any of my money or use their vet practises after what I discovered. They aren’t actually helping unfortunate animals at all, the closest they come to this is a kitten foster programme. They let private individuals, volunteers do the caring and rescuing in their own homes. What they do with some of their funds is put animals down, pay staff and invest the rest to what end I haven’t a clue, though Im sure they have to be audited once in awhile but who knows out here and given that they think they’re a charity.
I was totally shaken by my experience.
At the time their vet practise where I went was full of expats like myself doing their “duty” by patronising the saintly SPCA veterinarian practise. Im not sure this was a particularly good thing because they all became very vocal and uppity when they heard the exchange I was having. So the woman took the puppies only to try and restore calm. I of course didn’t hold back in my anger but at the same time I was thinking of the little puppies and didn’t want to make things worse for them by frightening them even more. I was also in shock at this treatment so reeling out of there people shouting their heads off I left the puppies to their fate and have felt guilty ever since but I won’t make the same mistake twice.
I soon discovered after voicing my opinions loudly on the internet that there was a far better organisation called HKDR Hong-Kong Dog Rescue operating here. They take great care and invest money and time to rehome unwanted and abandoned dogs to the right owners. Unfortunately due to the sheer volume of abandoned dogs and puppies here they have to be selective in who they take on board. A few times a week they go to the government pound (as do a few other organisations) and select dogs they think will have good chances of being rehomed the rest get put down by the government. Their criteria is fair an honest and doesn’t involve just pedigree puppies though a lot are which are abandoned here and these do have a better chance of finding homes and quickly.
Dogs that don’t find homes are fostered out as well but this is messy and often detrimental to the dogs in my opinion, these dogs often end up going through numerous owners or ending up back to square one.
It would be lovely if dogs could be shifted around between countries that might have better chances at rehoming a lot of the dogs put down here but it’s an extremely expensive and time consuming thing to organise. Mostly its shipping coals to New Castle in that almost every country has a problem with unwanted animals so it raises some moral questions as well given the costs. A lot do end up overseas of course as many many dogs are “adopted” by expats and get taken back to their home countries, a number also get rehomed yet again of course which is not ideal.
We do have a big problem with puppies being sold in pet shops here being supplied by puppy mills in apartments which are truly horrific. A lot are bought on impulse and dumped when they become slightly older, treated like disposable toys. I do blame the puppy mills the pet shops the public and in our case the media the latter a long story in itself. A lot are also dumped because they have costly illnesses and diseases brought on by being inbred pedigree dogs. So I do blame some breeders that aren’t puppy mills too.
In short there is an endless supply of abandoned dogs which is a problem here. We are more or less for most living here at least one big city the majority living in cramped apartments. You would be extremely surprised at the dogs abandoned ranging from poodles to Borzoi to monster mastiffs no limit to the variety certainly not restricted by living arrangements, climate or costs.
This may apply …
PETA accused of snatching a pet dog from family’s front yard, driving it away and then KILLING it – before returning with a fruit basket to apologize
Animal rights group PETA has been accused of stealing a family’s beloved dog, driving away and then killing it by the pet’s distraught owners.
Surveillance footage appears to show the animal rights group taking away Maya – a Chihuahua – from the front porch of her family’s trailer in Parksley, Virginia.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2838829/PETA-snatched-family-s-dog-porch-drove-away-van-killed-came-fruit-basket-say-sorry.html#ixzz3Kloo3D00
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
Also, the carbon footprint of a pet dog is horrendous. Think about the carbon footprint of those “shelters”
http://www.worldcarfans.com/112081347208/dogs-have-larger-carbon-footprint-than-suvs-says-study
Save the planet — eat a dog!
http://oneworld.org/2009/11/20/time-to-eat-the-dog-2
I don’t know how many Prius’s I’ve seen with multiple rescue dogs in back speeding down the road (burning gas) to the dog park or doggie daycare (two houses for a pet)!
Times change in my opinion. The term “Shelter” hardily seems appropriate today politically or in reality correct . I agree issues of profit margins as Janet mentions.
Let us consider: 1. http://www.dogfoodadvisor.com/dog-food-industry-exposed/euthanized-pets-dog-food/
The Rendering Process
Raw materials (meat byproducts and dead animals) are ground and placed in cookers, which evaporate moisture and free fat from protein and bone.
A series of conveyers, presses and a centrifuge continue the process of separating fats from solids. The finished fat (tallow, lard, yellow grease) goes into separate tanks, and the solid protein (meat and bone meal, poultry meal) is pressed into cake for processing into feed.
What happens to the bodies of unclaimed euthanized pets even at the Vet office?
http://www.naturalcanines.com/gpage8.html
2. Now let us consider the Manatory spay/neuter laws now decades old movement.
http://www.saveadog.org/documents/effectsofspayneuter.pdf
numberous studies do not support early spay and neuter today.
http://www.caninesports.com/uploads/1/5/3/1/15319800/spay_neuter_considerations_2013.pdf
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/24597888/ns/health-pet_health/t/pet-sterilization-laws-raise-health-concerns/
http://www.akcchf.org/news-events/news/health-implications-in-early.html
h
I worked (notice the past tense) for a county “shelter” — and not a bad one by the usual standards — what Chris is saying is true for the most part.
On one hand, the pound (I prefer that title, it’s more honest) has to operate within budget, and can’t take in everything if the numbers spike (which oddly enough, never seemed to be a problem when we had a high publicity case — people will flock to take those dogs in, and ignore the possibly nicer dogs that are just turn and the pound will go out of its way to take all of those animals in and rehome them, even if they may not be suitable for rehoming…that right there is worthy of discussing imhao). Some of the dogs we got in were simply unsuitable to be rehomed (a very small, small number, but they are there) — this mainly had to do with aggression issues (bad aggression issues; serious aggression issues) with a smattering of congenital health defects usually excerbated by a lack of care (usually due to owner ignorance not wanton neglect, although a couple of the puppy mills that got shut down fit that category, see the situation illustrated above). Imagine that.
So I’m not really on board with the notion that all of the animals can be saved.
Nonetheless, a much better job can and should be done. Because while working there I did notice a mentality/set of behaviors coming from members of the staff and board of directors (not all, but some, and they all worked up front not in the kennels or cattery…imagine that) which wasn’t conducive to fixing the problem — and in some ways made it worse. They were not realistic at all — had a very poor notion of how dogs really act, how people act (heck, they couldn’t even read cats all that well). And they were the ones running the show, so a lot of things that could be done to get the numbers down wasn’t being implemented.They didn’t seem to care if it got better either — the blame was always shifted onto backyard breeders and irresponsible owners, never any of the “good” guys.
I think this says something about society and how we all operate in it.
One of the biggest issues I see: not enough proactively done to keep animals from winding up there in the first place. Except for spay and neuter — which they go about in a completely hamfisted and incorrect manner, again imhao — absolutely no steps are taken to help people who might be having a hard time keep their pets (which a lot of them do, and contrary to what some of my esteemed peers thought/think, eating the dollar store bargain pet food, while not prime stuff, is still probably better than taking the walk to the needle). And they don’t market well at all (relying on intimidation of the buying public and shaming rather than honestly hawking their wares — if hawking one’s wares can really ever be completely honest!).
I’m not optimistic that this is going to change any time soon; in fact, it will likely get much worse.
This isn’t about dogs or cats; this isn’t about helping anybody or thing. This is (from my experience) an excercise in toxic narcissism. That would have to change before things got better, and I’m not seeing it happening.
> So I’m not really on board with the notion that all of the animals can be saved.
You won’t see that argument here. I’ve never been a “save them all” type. Even when I discussed No Kill and Winograd I made sure to distinguish the “I believe in No Kill be cause I can’t come to terms with killing for any reason” the sort of Vegan argument, and the argument of efficiency and competency which Winograd also makes. I’m not really impressed with the “don’t kill the doggies” argument. I don’t have a deep problem with killing dogs for reasons of temperament (while your experience suggests that only a few animals were inappropriate to be rehomed, I see any number of rescued dogs which should have been put down. All breeds but especially pit bulls. There’s an inane amount of victim fetish with that type.
I also don’t outright object to using euth as a solution to market forces… i.e. it’s rather clear that pit bulls are way over produced in comparison to the lasting and stable demand. Some call this an over-population problem, but in general it’s not pit bull puppies. So it’s probably a poverty problem and the choice to get pit bulls more from some sort of breeding efforts versus getting older ones from the pound. So buyer choice problem? Either way, the killing dogs problem in this country has become more and more a killing pit bull type dogs problem, and most data shows that this has less to do with a growing pit bull problem versus a rapidly shrinking problem with all other types, leaving the extant pit bull problem as more obvious, with greater market share of the killing even if whole numbers aren’t changing greatly.
My issue is that if you’re killing pit bull types because they are discards from poor people or just shit dogs people get rid of or they are over bred or any other reason, call it what it is. Trying to put a “Rescue” spin on it is bullshit. And you certainly aren’t offering “shelter.”
Places that do try and offer shelter, like almost all liberal conservation sanctuary efforts fill up quickly at best, and at worst become hoarding situations that burn through resources and then fail. I don’t see much external value in running pit bull sanctuaries really. It’s not like the genetics are rare or important. In fact, quite the opposite. It’s sort of like running a Honda Accord sanctuary.
Without pit bulls in the mix, killing of all other breeds combined is almost negligible. Certainly to the point where shelters could go back to the business of finding the original homes for stray animals instead of killing them or pushing them into new homes as fast as possible.
Got ya, and we do seem to be on the same page.
With the pit bulls, what I see is: a lot of the dogs being produced are not bred with any specific breeding goals in mind (except for the fighters — and that’s not the sort of dog that makes for a good pet, or well, anything besides a fighting dog) and a lot of people got them because they’ve become fashionable (which is a horrible reason for getting a dog).
Even a nice pit bull is a difficult dog to own for an inexperienced dog owner — which was the majority of people getting them (a couple of years ago 99 percent of the pit bull adopters here would have had a problem with an easy, already trained Golden Retriever — so you can guess what it was like when they got pit bull puppies). Which is exactly about shelters pushing them out the door as fast as possible. They aren’t assessing them well, and they aren’t educating prospective owners well either — and that usually means dogs back at the shelter with a whole other layer of problems tacked on to them.
Fortunately, the public seems to be catching on, slowly, I’m seeing fewer pits in the area, and more of the ones I see are not the extreme type in looks or behavior, and their owners seem to know how to manage the breed — and the local community is having fewer dog problems. It’s actually nice to run into those dogs out on a walk, and if they manage to get out which is a rare occurance they’re not causing chaos and panic (they actually can be returned back to owners who are actually out looking for them), all of which makes life a nicer thing.
Of course this causes a lot of the local rescue people to throw up more pictures of cute pit bulls and urge people to not “bully” them — of course, people are now on to pit bulls so the campaign to bully people into getting them has picked up (hopefully this will be good for those dogs in the long run — I have nothing against the nice ones I’ve seen, but they are scarce, and as a whole breed type their problems are many).
I shudder to say it, but I’m afraid Border collies are now becoming a fashionable dog to own (they are cropping up more and more). I can understand; they really are exceptionally nice dogs, but what this holds in store for the breed I hate to consider; hopefully BC breeders see the signs and take appropriate steps to head off any problems.
BCs are a cryptically popular breed. They never show up on “Top Breed” lists that are compiled from AKC registration statistics (most of them) but they outnumber half of the top 10 breeds in terms of registration numbers, just not within the AKC. Since there are very few numbers that are compiled outside of registries, it’s hard to know where they really do stand, but my guess is that they might still be a top 10 breed in a good number of states.
The acrimonious breed split also means that there’s little hope of any sort of breeder alliance to head off over-saturation. The cat is already out of the bag on that, IMO.
The other issue, just in my opinion, is that BCs do not make good shelter dogs, at all. They are prone to strong bonds, they get separation anxiety, they are on the more-reactive end of the scale, and being ignored and cramped and around other stressed out dogs… it’s a wonder they ALL don’t come out of shelters with PTSD. I, personally, would never recommend someone get a shelter BC if they’ve never had the breed before and aren’t willing to do a good amount of therapy for that dog. Some breeds handle kenneling well, I don’t think BCs are one of them.
No, they would make horrible shelter dogs — besides all that, not many shelter people are going to understand the breed well enough to know how to fix a problem or be willing/able to. Aussies used to be a pretty common shelter feature — they are rather like BCs — so I base my opinion off of the experience there.
I just have noticed more BCs — as in the population is getting big enough for someone to say: wow, lots of those dogs around now; like they sprouted or something. So, I’m hoping this doesn’t become a bigger problem (imhao BCs are a better bet for the average home than a pit bull, but they have their own set of demands, and if people are starting to breed them like hotcakes, then this could get ugly…and I like BCs so I especially don’t want to see them in more trouble).
I agree with this, I also don’t think BC’s make a good pet for your average owner either. In this respect they share some of the pitbulls problems. That “more reactive end of the scale” is why.
I think owning a BC takes more than just a lot of dedication it needs 100% dedication if it’s not to become a nuisance to itself and everyone involved.
For the pitbull one replaces the word “nuisance” with “danger” though certainly a BC can be a danger too in the wrong hands, a different kind of danger but the potential exists as it does for any breed.
Are you really this dense or did you just figure out that there are kill and no-kill shelters and that there are not enough homes for cancer ridden/elderly/behaviorally abnormal dogs? What do you expect people to do on a limited amount of money? Sit there and warehouse animals that people don’t want?
No one rational is going to cry over a cancer ridden dog being put down humanely, nor an unsafe dog being killed. The 2.7 million figure does not include such dogs. The RSPCA specifically says healthy adoptable animals. As for healthy older dogs, that German shelter I linked to before does it. They don’t WAREHOUSE them because they didn’t design their shelter like a warehouse! If zoos can keep animals engaged and in good conditions in an institutional setting, why can’t a “shelter” do the same thing?
We don’t have any pitbull rescues at all in Hong Kong, they were banned as a breed a number of years ago and we haven’t had the staffies, American pitbull/bulldog craze following the banning of the proper English pitbull. This is very different to the UK for example and mainland China and America.
I think I might have had one from the last litter ever here in Hong Kong. Long story but I didn’t even know it was pit bull I was getting but a more athletic loving girl I don’t think I will ever have the privilege to ever live with ever again. Nothing compares. To the point I think her and her types genetics must be valuable, certainly unique to the dog world. Yes highly prey driven and extraordinarily capable to the point of being a killing machine. Nothing on one (snails) two, four, six, eight legs was safe except people who she adored unconditionally like most well bred English pitbulls. Small, “light” lithe and extremely game she killed king cobras for the pure thrill of it, a walking ecological disaster area.
I would never get another one you need to be in your absolute physical prime and have a very good reason and strict managment prowess, nor would I rescue a pitbull as I could never be certain it was well bred enough not to be a loose cannon as far as humans were concerned. A purely fighting English pitbul strain woud make me hestitate but I still wouldn’t fall for it even though they are some of the cutest puppies on earth.
Most of the dogs put to sleep in the “pound” are village dogs, sadly also one the most functional long lived and suitable as pets types around. Pedigree dogs with problems and their mixes make up most of the dogs that find homes and with extra promotion a fair number of the “better looking” village dog puppies that tend to be marketed as Shar pei or general promoted as being something they aren’t but could be type thing. People still adhere to pedigree is better even in a “rescue” but no pitbulls or their mixes anymore.
Here there is definitely a breeder problem too be they puppy mills or not that keep the dogs coming. Behavioural problems pop up in all types pedigree or not, this is certainly caused by environment and genetics.
I suppose truly responsible breeders don’t contribute to the problem and irresponsible ones do around the world. But try telling a pedigree show dog breeder they are part of the problem and you wont get far in convincing them, even if they’re putting puppies to sleep that don’t have a ridge or are blue instead of brindle or that their dogs end up with crippling diseases because of “how well they are bred” or rather inbred /inebred. Many owners cant afford their dogs to be in intensive care their whole lives not here at any rate and so end up being abandoned. Maybe this is different in America?
Please don’t take this as me harshing on you: Part of the problem with pit bulls is people admiring them for being “capable of being a killing machine”, a “walking ecological disaster area” which nothing on any legs is safe from (except humans — which I’m sorry, is just not true — if they are that aggressive towards other things, they will likely at some point be aggressive towards humans).
People seem to get a kick out of owning such animals — but it’s a bit misguided imhao.
I prefer the attitude of a friend of mine, who owns two pit bulls, whose comment was “everything should be ))))) well safe around my dogs unless I tell them it isn’t”. And true to form, she chose her two dogs with that in mind and raised them with the same attitude — and her dogs have been safe around other animals and people. They are still really athletic, high drive, game dogs (as in it takes imo a very game dog to jump out of a second story window and then go 5 miles on a broken paw to their owner’s work place, just to be with master, but I think the world could cope with that sort of gameness much better than one that leaps over a 5′ fence just to get at whatever is walking on the sidewalk — the first is an inconvenience and a vet bill, although rather touching; the latter is a hazard, perhaps a trip for some unfortunate to the ER and not touching at all).
If more pit bull owners and potential pit bull owners started demanding this, then maybe, just maybe pit bulls would stand a chance (of course this might make them “just another dog” but that would likely be better for them).
The pit bull thing is large, it has to be if the numbers are anywhere near right… some advocacy groups claim 500k-1M pit bulls KILLED per year (I have doubts that it could be that high) which is 20-30x as many PBs killed (supposedly) as BCs are even bred every year. So I recognized that no one thing answers the totality of why there are so many of them, why they are popular, why they flood shelters, why their bite and kill stats are problematic, etc.
The other thing is that almost all of the affinity groups for the breed annoy me. I hate the entire idea of dog fighting, so the hard core “working” i.e. “fighting” breeders and fans are just vile to me. And I hate the smug pibble mommy brigade who think they can “change minds” by being hyper obnoxious. I don’t even like the “manage” types who are at least aware and willing to deal with the dog’s natural drive, to me “crate and rotate” is basically being a warden in doggy prison. No thanks!
Then the sort of popularity owners are annoying too. The hipster popularity owners. The red neck labrador popularity owners. The sort of fringe gang culture popularity that sort of blends in to the status dog types who get a watered down pit bull for the same reason they get Air Jordan shoes or Beats Headphones or black leather jackets with chain wallets. Fashion. Conformity. Convenience.
Any way, there’s just nothing that makes me happy about pit bulls. I hate that they make it more likely that all dogs are going to get killed in a shelter too soon should they go stray, I hate that they are implicated in and victimized so much in human-dog violence of both directions, etc.
Well, unfortunately the pit bulls do have a huge problem with that — although I’m of the opinion that liking a particular type of dog because of its “image” isn’t necessarily bad insofar as we have to ask ourselves why we like the dogs we do (I’ll admit that a BC’s looks I find very attractive, so that’s probably one of the reasons I’ve got one; plus I like smart dogs, so that’s another reason, and trainable ones and so on).
I guess if you like the looks of a pit bull and are willing and able to be sensible about getting and keeping one, then there is a place for them My friend with the pit bulls will laughingly admit that she got her dogs because she was in her twenties and fancied herself a bit of a rebel with a cause sort of person, and thus she picked pits with that in her mind — but she was not completely without sense, looked for dogs with good dispositions, and then put the work into them. She will admit that she’s over her wannabe rebel stage (age seems to do this) but she still likes her dogs — partially for the dogs, but she also likes their looks and their personalities (pits are really not my type of dog, but her dogs are quite nice — the female in particular is just one of those dogs that makes people go “oooh want one!”, just a very attractive, balanced dog with a temperment to match; her male isn’t that nice, but he’s a pretty good dog, even as other dogs go — stellar for a pit), but the tough image and the pibble thing are now relics of youth (and she has admitted that she isn’t sure she wants another pit bull, as she isn’t convinced she can find replacements for her, now older, dogs). I wish that more pit bull owners were like her, or followed her path of evolution — there would be a lot less problems.
It’s the other side of the equation — the other sorts of image that seem to be causing the problems for/with pits — and yep, you pretty much gave a run down of the people involved in that (and the assorted images plus the dog itself is a very big problem — I don’t own a sheep ranch, I don’t want to own a sheep ranch, I didn’t get a BC because I wanted to work sheep, but chances are my BCs can be safely and happily put onto some other work, and they can fit in pretty well without ever seeing sheep again, and their genetic instincts probably will not be causing headline features should they get into trouble with society, if they ever do; the same could be said for the Labrador owner who has no intention of duck hunting yet likes that rugged Eddie Bauer look and really wants a dog that will play fetch and go swimming with him; the same cannot be said for a lot of the people with pit bulls). It’s probably not going to go away, nor if it does quickly enough.
It does make me feel very badly for the dogs as well as for the people who seem to like them and have some grounding in reality/sanity and do well by them — they’ve kind of been screwed all the way around to my thinking.
You know, when I think about it: the only thing that might help a little bit with the pit bull problem is a 3 – 10 year moratorium on adopting them out. Dry up the primary outlet and the supply side might conversely drop.
It wouldn’t fix the problem entirely, but it might help. It would be incredibly harsh to do for the individual dogs (who are the only innocents in all of this).
Of course, it would never be done.
I don’t Jennifer obviously people do have different reasons for owning one mostly bad, if there is a right reason at all Im not sure.
I do disagree about pure fighting English strains of pitbull being a danger to humans. In as far as there are any of these left in America, I doubt it but I truly don’t know Im not up on dog fighting circles there.
Just as a good working retriever will pose no danger to a dead duck so does the good fighting dog pose no danger to its handler or anyone else. Both are working dogs with a job to do both are useless unless they can do their job. Biting your handler is/was considered useless especially in the heat of a fight. Both have been bred and selected purely for these working abilities and rather ruthlessly so in the case of the English pitbull.
A biting pitbull is as useless as a fighting dog is as a showing retriever is in the field of duck shooting.
I abhor the fighting dog fraternity and everything they think they stand for and the cruelty involved, in the same way I abhor the sport of boxing to be honest except for kick-box. Kick boxing is facinating I find the whole ritual and sport quite bewitching and go when ever Im in Bangkok. Blood sports to me though start and end with a fowl for dinner, might add here Im actually partial to most game eaten in the West. I have researched the breed though and had contacts in the fighting dog world as a result also as a result of the dog I got. Some of those contacts retired from the sport now and a lot wiser I surprisingly still have today. As a result what I say is not just anecdotal evidence far from it.
There is simply something quite miraculous about the dog involved here no doubt about it. The breed is an anomaly amongst dog breeds.
Im not sure where its prowess, physical ability and drive come from or 100% how it got there but you could almost speak of a super dog amongst dogs. It’s probably due to it not being selected for looks but ability almost alone and over centuries, I don’t know. Certain elements seem to be persistent both good and what we might today consider bad even in crosses and dogs not considered true English pitbulls. The good does impress me. They are born much like wild animals are up and running (fighting) competing surviving. There is something primitive about the breed, a primitive functionality which so many breeds have lost. I do admire this, I can’t help but admire this especialy given the state of pedigree dogs today.
It was this functionality that was the reason I ended up living with one, completely naive about the dogs true purpose. Language constraints and cultural confusion might have also had a lot to do with it. But for better or worse I spent 14 years with one, the best bred English pitbull you could ever wish to find.
I never crated Lilly Bulb the prettiest dog you ever saw, a rich dark chestnut red and bright clear white about the size and build of a small Dalmatian, she had the freedom of our large garden, the forest beyond and she got on very well with our large entire male dog of a guardian mix breed. He and I were her mentor from almost her first steps in life. For the rest we could only stand back and “learn”.
Much like a leopard, Cheetah or wolf she was a hard wired predator that that was that.
At four weeks the bless tender and way too early age for any dog she arrived and she was beheading wasps already, anything that buzzed bees a favourite too. She would later assemble us by first cornering the prey then sounding. I can still hear it today a bark that literally meant come and come quickly the funs about to start! It had that urgency that thrill it almost always meant she had something that was going to be a real delight and challenge to dispatch, something mostly toxic or poisonous like a large venomous snake, scorpion or centipede or even a large rogue male Macac up a tree or monitor lizards the size of crocodiles had her sounding the same. All was fair game. She never lost but once when a bamboo viper caught her head and she nearly died. She would climb trees, dig trenches, move boulders then work it, dance with the enemy calling until we got there then one look in my eyes go in with a vengeance.
Ignoring her never helped she could spend the entire day at it non stop calling until she was shivering wet with phlegm and exertion, seemingly a physical wreck, but when she saw us she was reborn with pride and delight. She was never much interested in fluffy innocent little things like baby birds or mice she would catch them sure yes but more or less deposit them unharmed at our feet or play with them. Forest rats however she absolutely couldn’t abide, I think she picked that up from the maid who was terrified of them. These she would skin like snakes from the tip of the nose to the end of the tail by shaking from side to side thrashing against walls stones boulders anything after having first neatly broken their necks, though snakes she would often actually kill this way if they were very large. I can’t tell you how often I would be covered from head to toe in snake blood and entrails, once twice a week at least its not a nice smell either like rotten fish. They live to please and live very large.
More of cat than a dog in some respects so light lithe and deadly.
Coupled with this they are an extremely sensitive dog in the psyche department extremely. They hurt easily and bond strongly to anyone up for it even just for the afternoon, a complete stranger will do. Terrible watch dogs, completely useless. They wouldn’t bite anyone its an anathema to them. Even in a dog fight one eye is always watching out the side where the handler might be to see they are pleased but also to be so sure they avoid biting them. I almost think they would rather die than bite a human. People don’t realise how sensitive they truly are. They suffer horribly with lack of interaction, without human companionship and from being locked away. I will leave that there in case I start sounding like an apologist which Im really not.
If we could take that primitive functionality athleticism character and preserve it without the dog and animal aggression element I would be first in queue for another one. Absolutely. I think some Jack Russell’s come quite close here though most often they also seem ever ready for a brawl. Maybe you just can’t have the one without the other who knows.
The better the fighting dog genes the better the example of the breed the English pitbull is unfortunately in all respects. Most you see in shelters I imagine are not bred for the “pit” they haven’t been ruthlessly culled against human aggression so you end up with a bit of an unpredictable mess. Then management and other environmental issues also come into play.
Not a dog suited to our time perhaps but there are aspects of the breed that I also think would be a real tragedy to lose.
I will agree that there are some pit bulls who display some characteristics that I would find sad to lose — but these have dogs that would have washed out of any fighting program (all of them — not one pit that I would consider a nice dog has shown any potential as a fighting dog; they are not aggressive enough). It is at this point that I would point out that pit bulls are a mixed bag of different types (they used to be more diverse than they are now) — and some of the hog stopper types (who are much less “pitty” than what we presently consider pits to be) often don’t have the temper issues that their sport cousins display (this type however, is very hard to find anymore — probably for the very reason that within the pit bull community they are considered far too mutt-like, in appearance as well as behavior, to be allowed to reproduce…the sins of the purity brigade happen outside of the AKC too).
Every last one of the pits I’ve known and liked fell into that category at least to a degree of 25% of their morphological traits fell into the category of looking a bit mutt-ly by today’s standards of what a “real” pit bull is supposed to look like:not muscular enough, not a heavy enough head, too small, too tall/rangy, too much coat, etc. And yes, I have seen a connection between their lack of “pit bull” looks (by today’s standards) and their (imhao) better more suitable dispositions.
Of course they were all neutered: there is a lot of pressure to neuter pit bulls, and of course a responsible owner is going to do this — and also there is pressure from the pit bull world to get rid of these “mutts” (responsible people don’t breed mutts, right?), so their owners are doubly encouraged — this is probably the right thing to do given the overpopulation problem, but I can’t help thinking that these are the sorts of dogs that might actually be the salvation of this breed…and they are going the way of the dodo, not their less suitable cousins!
I also think it is a fallacy that the fighting dogs are genetically predisposed to not be a danger to humans — aggression is aggression. I don’t know where this notion came into being, but it certainly didn’t come from the fighting world (the tales of whose dogs aggression towards humans are well known within their world — nobody handles them but their masters).
Most of the unstable temperments I’ve seen in shelter pits (and pet pits) have been the result of the predominance of fighting dog types being the most bred (they are now THE type that even the pit bull world considers “true and pure”; that’s what’s going to get bred then).
It really isn’t a case of the dogs being haphazardly bred (in this sense — in others they completely are) — it’s that the wrong type has been actively, selected for (don’t want to be a “backyard breeder” after all).
Sorry Anton pit bull fighting is alive and well in the United States.
Sorry dogs you mean. Its also alive and well on the Mainland, China sadly.
In China its less of an accessory to a lifestyle or social class if you like and more of serious sport patronised by some very well heeled owners indeed. It’s also not illegal, though money changing hands or gambling is generally illegal outside of Macau.
How organised is dog fighting in the United States and is it legal in some states? What types of PB are being used?
Yes, Anton the social and economic class of individuals who see pit fighting a sport exist as well in the United States. Pit fighting is a felony in 50 states to my knowledge. It is a misdemeanor to attend such an event. The organization therefore exist in a mob or gang like social environment. I know a Vet who challenged the illegals weary of sewing survivors together. Unfortunately, any scars many Vets tale warning of clients activities in pit fighting. It can be dangerous also for pet owners to have their pets stolen to take part in pit fighting. The pit bulls often that I have seen too often are cross breeds with white heads and faces.
China is in a lot of respects what we might call backwards, literally behind rather than as an insult. Dog fighting as a tradition is on the rise after being put on hold for various reasons not least famine and the rise of the communists but is now an activity for the new rich in that country even though gambling is strictly forbidden.
From what I know in the early stages of the “sports” renewed vigour (hand in hand with China’s economic rise) American dogs where initially imported when weight/size was considered an advantage but later British/European lines where considered having the edge. Lighter more agile more original pit bull terrier which is now what they use in the South at least.
Doing a very little research I was quite shocked to learn that (according to a CNN news report apparently) in the US 40, 000 people are involved as professionals in the “sport” as a commercial activity. Im not sure how formal or informal this all is but it’s still incredible given it’s “banned in 50 states”???
A completely different can of worms but I do wonder why its proving so difficult to ban?
Anton America has always been a melting pot of different cultures and ideology first from European ethics and value system.
Immigration today brings to our Nation large numbers of peoples with very different culture and ethic values. Example decades ago Asian cultures and not in such large numbers served neighborhood cats in restaurants Americans first took action by making laws against this practice.
Western Culture question and deplores the use of Dogs in Blood Sports long established by law of the morals and integrity of Americans. The growing numbers of peoples with little regard for our four footed friends exist either in those first generation immigrants and those who see them as means to make money with generally no education or working skills.
Yes I understand that, so in some senses it develops as a country and in others it continues to stay the same.
I suppose it’s an interesting dichotomy, a present day vibrant, powerful, long term or more or less sustainable world economy coupled with a developing world’s maturity. Many of these problems often look like the historical teething problems most developed countries went through a long long time ago in the histories of their development. Certainly old world countries. Just take the importance of religion for one example.
Not to open a can of worms but I also often wonder if the Federal system of governance is all that fantastic, though?
I suppose that statement is like feeding bears (or is it elephants) and hoping they will stay away or at least shut up at Chris’s proverbial dinner table ha ha!
Anyway Im not exactly an expert on the American political system so a lot confounds me, as will be obvious to any who are and reading this. But there does exist a certain sense of entitlement in that country for what ever reason. I think domestically at least and only partially backed by the historical uncoupling of that country from its colonial past. We shall fight dogs, we shall bear arms and etc and no government will tell us otherwise, even a right to entitlement. This could be considered a bit immature to most other established democracies, perhaps?
Anyway if you see what going on in Europe particularly in France, Paris today you could think history also has a dogged way of repeating itself, well maybe in some respects anyway.
As far a dog fighting and pitbulls are concerned I was astonished and also slightly appalled to read on my way “out of Africa” via SA’s Oliver Tambo international airport yesterday that dog fighting is thriving in that country. Thriving to an extend that “mimicking” dog fights is a popular game amongst young school children in the playing fields there.
Two children on all fours rip into each other whilst the others place lunch money bets. Seriously, biting one another, again seriously actually inflicting damage! Even removing the slightly expected sensationalist element from the particular publication I was (given on boarding my plane) reading it’s still disturbing. I would prefer them to be playing rugby, soccer or some other sport quite honestly anything other than that.
I think at this point it would be well to point out that dog fighting isn’t just the domain of what we think of as a lower economic class of people.
As in China, a lot of the people involved in pit fighting are pretty wealthy.
That’s one of the problems I see with the battle against this “sport” — the general public has gotten the notion that only gangstas and good ol’ boys from the ‘hood, barrio, or backwoods are involved in this. That isn’t the case.
Now, I will admit that what’s cropping up in shelters are the poorer progeny of the professional dog fighters (more like great, great, grand-progeny, but people will get the point). As with AKC registered show dogs or trialing BCs, these folks are just as sold on the notion of breeding “pure” and to a standard and pedigrees are important, and the wash outs have to go somewhere — the difference is what their dogs are selectively bred for.
Jennifer and Anton found both viewpoints quite interesting. If history of blood sports in America is recorded correctly in America began as premodern participatory contests of strength, skill, and speed. In the beginning they were unorganized local competitions with simple rules. However, as the nation modernized, sport became highly organized with formalized rules and national competition. Sport became commercialized with expert athletes entertaining paying spectators.
The first sportsmen were Native Americans, who competed for religious, medicinal, and gambling purposes. In 1850 America a bachelor saloon sports like subsculture existed like bare knuckle fights, which grew to legal boxing for example. Billards, dog fighting,cock fighting, bear baiting and the ideology towards gambling, drinking and swearing took its middle class clergy morality stronghold in American culture. The philosophical foundation of ethical veganism apparently took root. We likewise realize today sports such as prize fighting competitors often come from uneducated poverty roots.
The violent ideology and enjoyment of cruelty
often grotesque entertainment gradually gain stronger opposition among sensitive folks with a utilitarian based philosophy. Now do we see Animal Shelters and Ethical Vegans participating in cruelty they fail to recognize?
Kathy, in order to understand bloodsport and the dogs it produced, one has to understand that it got its real boost from the attendance and participation of the more wealthy classes of people. That’s why it has its lingering cachet for the poor — it’s something the ballers do, the big time people, the people with money.
While certain types of American immigrant had (mostly religious, socio-cultural) issues with pit sport, there was an entire section of the country where it was quite the thing for a well heeled gentleman to go and see — along with other forms of gentleman’s leisure. They may not have been the ones standing directly in the pits, but they certainly went for the “entertainment” and threw down the gambling money/purse money. This was brought directly over from the Old World, same thing over there.
Boxers (a pretty decent analogy) may indeed come from poor backgrounds, but a lot of the people in the stands, doing the betting and the cheering have money.
The same with dog fights.
So we have to divorce ourselves from the myth that the higher socio-economic classes are somehow more sensitive and kind. They aren’t the beautiful people.
The sooner people get a grip on that, probably the sooner we truly come to terms with the problem.
No, absolutely yes they’re/we’re not. (:
One look at the racing industry will tell you that too. Pardon me ma’am, the Queen herself is involved in one of the most wasteful of animal life and cruel industries in the world, horse racing. Hardly a horse gets past its first few years in life without lungs that have literally burst, haemorrhaged.
We dont keep pitbulls though not many of us as they are associated with low life scum and they are dog aggressive which is difficult in this day and age living mostly in urban areas as we do.
I was looking through the dogs for adoption pages on some American and British dog rescue sites and it is quite incredible how many pit mixes and derivatives like staffies etc are looking for homes.
I think a lot of these would be problem dogs in any other than expert hands quite frankly and yes judging by the location of the dog rescue centres alone that they mostly do come from lower income areas.
Personaly I dont think there is a place for dog aggressive dogs in the world.
The Thoroughbred industry, like the racing greyhound industry, can be a very abusive one (I have connections with it; I worked in it) — however, those sports, in and of themselves, are not necessarily cruel. It depends quite a bit on who the people are — I have met some very good, ethical owners/trainers in both sports who try very hard to keep their animals healthy and find them homes after their racing careers are over…and quite a lot of both retired racehorses and retired race dogs go on to make lovely companions and even partners in sport. I am a big supporter of rehabbing and rehoming TBs and Greys if for the only reason that my experiences with both have been so very positive (they really are lovely animals — if you’re into their type, which is remarkably the same, go figure); and then the aspect of what I believe to be their genetic/phenotypic potential gifts to their respective worlds (they are super athletic, super healthy — no, really! — and their temperments are imo, often very conducive to producing good working traits), and only lastly do we get to the do-goody side of things (which, to be honest is there: they have been “working men and women” and it’s nice to see them find homes…as they usually wind up with a short, scary trip to becoming chicken feed, which they have usually done nothing to deserve other than not being fast enough anymore or getting hurt or the somebody ran out of money).
The same cannot be said of the dog fighting world in most regards. The only dog fighters and their dogs that the general public tends to see are the goons who do the “street fighting” — and they are usually low income, low education,, low moral idiots (we do have some college types who decide to get into it along with other things…probably as a way of slumming and rebelling against Mommy and Daddy, which imo makes them even worse). Their dogs often make it into ads and shelters; as they are never antagonistic towards making a buck, and the same dog they’ll market as a stone cold killer to one person, they’ll say is a sweetie goochie goo lambie pie (whom they never ever bred to be vicious!) to some pittie mommy/daddy — and you can guess how much thought went into breeding them (brother/sister matings for 3 generations? why not!)…and then those dogs get bought up by people enamored of the pit bull mystique…which does involve a sense of violence and danger (one can guess my thoughts about that).
Nonetheless, even the big boys in the fighting dog world aren’t producing dogs that would fit into a general population (they are at least honest about this though, unlike everybody else).
But it is true that most of the dogs in the shelters are indeed the offspring of dogs that a few generations back washed out of a dog fighting breeding program; most of the pits anymore are now the offspring of those…as that is the landrace type of the breed that is ascendant (the farm type, which was always well, pretty much a “mutt” although maybe a better dog to develop into a pet, has been tossed out in favor of the true type — which is true, but not a good choice…a case of sometimes the mutt version is perhaps the better dog).
Yes. I couldn’t agree more. I in fact grew up riding TB’s, you develop a feel, the light touch, riding warmbloods is/was very different. These days warmbloods are of course more or less a reinvention of the TB, the light sport horse.
A lot of riders at the very top of equestrian sport still prefer that feeling, its like a sports car versus a four door saloon. On a TB I can ride using nothing other than my seat aids from almost day one, the rest of the aids are what are called the “waiting aids” on horses with a lot of blood in em, ask once is all it takes.
Most riders will only learn these aids at a very advanced level, if at all, ever. When I see someone riding with spurs pumping away like impotent wings as though they want to take off, hands everywhere (most do even at top levels of dressage) Im appalled. Its meant to look effortless almost like telepathy but it almost never is. On most TBs it is. It does feel like the horse can read your mind, just relax your pinkie finger and they will change up a gear ….thats how it should be.
Yes retraining horses off the track is very rewarding and as far as Im concerned also very easy. A lot of the best ones are literally worth a fortune and later as studs or brood mares so are off limits of course. I dont get too excited when I spot one with fantastic movement and uphill build because its usually out of reach as a riding horse. Often the those that do well on the track make the best material for riding. However the same type warmblood is going to be very much cheaper. But there are plenty of jumpers amongst the less than prefect especially in the sprinters or short distance runners, more downhill types. Many also make very good eventers amongst the stayers.
I feel they are much easier to train than most warm bloods too, its critical they be let down, allowed to mature properly by being given a year or more off work which is also expensive. It’s definitely worth it though. I would ideally like to see every trainer have at least three or four hopefuls in their yard.
Unfortunately the sheer unbelievable volume of horses involved plus other sport horse industries means the majority are seen as simply disposable.
I also think they are a healthy lot generally, if they survive the industry they have to be thats for sure.
Strange things going on wth my post?
I suspect that other reasons pits are so common (at least in the South) are:
1) very high fertility: I once met someone who bragged that his bitch had thrown 100 pups. That’s hard to believe . . . but litters of 10+ seem to be pretty common and there seem to be a lot of idiots around who see 10 x $200 as a big windfall.
2) large population belonging to people who cannot or will not afford proper fencing and/or are not inclined to spay/neuter. A staked bitch on season is a litter of pups on the way.
Considering United States of America ranks very low in term of anatomical knowledge, it cannot be expected of someone to know how to handle an intact dog.
The number of people who don’t know the correct name for their penis or where the urethral opening is located… jaw-dropping.
Efforts would be better placed into providing sexual education (at least in term of the human anatomy), subsidizing containment methods and ensuring veterinary offices are within commuting distances.
Dave recently posted..2014 Post-Season Weight Optimization
Dave I do not see the correlation of lack of knowledge in animal husbandry to human sexual human terminology? The only correlation is a total lack of responsibility and respect of others. I do not believe Americans hold the top cards in this department either.
You are missing the big picture. If one has ever took a biology course in other countries, lectures on anatomy inevitably leads to discussion about how they function; and when it comes to human being, it also encompasses health, prevention and self-care.
But sadly, in North America, that topic is taboo and is often left to the parents; who themselves don’t always teach their children. It’s really pitiful when I, a male, have to teach a female university-student with high SAT score the basics of venereal diseases and how menstruation cycles occur just because her parents opted out of sex-ed classes based on religious grounds.
So, no, someone can be a brilliant professor and still be ignorant.
Dave recently posted..2014 Post-Season Weight Optimization
Dave recently posted..2014 Post-Season Weight Optimization
Yes this is incredible in this day and age and in what most would consider a developed nation.
I of course believe in freedom of religion but there is so much wrong with religion that it takes a back seat in most developed nations these days and religion has had to modernize. This is not the case in America which has the same level of religious participation as most developing nations and appears to happily embrace teachings often at odds with the level of scientific or plain knowledge available to the modern world. The effect of this on education cannot be underestimated so I take on board what Dave is saying as hard as it is perhaps for many of us to believe.
This would of course have an effect on many dog owners not just pitbull owners.
I’m in Africa at the moment over the Christmas holiday and for mostly financial reasons the majority here don’t in fact spay their dogs or castrate them. However for reasons I cannot explain there don’t seem to be as many feral dogs as there used to be but the pounds or rescue centers are full of dogs “pedigree” dogs. Think this has something to do with a rapid urbanization and “upliftment” or economic improvement of the population so you are getting more and more “pet” as opposed to working/hunting or informal dogs.
I was visiting the neighboring farm for a few days last week loaded amongst other things with some highly prized new released novels I brought over from Europe and was surprised to see six new rescue dogs in residence. An Australian cattle dog, a sheep dog, two yorkies a lab and a Italian grey hound!!! This is Africa and the breeds do surprise me. Maybe disposable income equals abandoned dogs world over.
I was delighted by two lovely looking American pitbulls on the beach yesterday, very well built, low,wide skulled types. Bearing in mind this is the deep rurals and I was alone with nothing but a book and a towering backdrop of dune forest full of birds and primates it was something of a surreal experience. They came running across the vast wild beach fast as they could each taking up position on either side of me tails wagging full tilt, smiling broadly. I had one under each arm looking out over the crashing waves racing up the sand. Ten minutes at least passed before the owner arrived with his fishing rod when they galloped off after him down to the sea throwing themselves on top of one another as they chased into the water.
It is certainly very sad what’s happening to these magnificent dogs in the world and seeing them so happy and in tune with their surroundings and in their skin was a wonderful moment I will cherish.
Anton you might be interested to know there cultures within cultures of dog breeders in the United States. I know three women who for the last few years in Maryland developing a new breed from a breed in Africa. Yes, and they are showing this species at AKC shows developing a Standard. This project has had them going to Africa the last several years in different areas of the country. It is quite a large dog and seeming like the Great Dane quite even tempered. It basically is a hairless dog with a hide the color of pottery.
Strangely, these three women have been in conformation show dogs for years in different breeds. Weary, the health issues and politics of varies pure breed clubs decided to start from scratch. The beauty of freedom of a country that is losing respect and responsibility of the price of freedom.
Yes. This sort of thing has been going on for a long time. The creationist in us. I suppose this is how we ended up with so many breeds. I can just imagine the nonsense written about their history, function and characters.
I think this sort of thing is always doomed to failure as inevitably heavy inbreeding to fix a standard with just a handful of dogs leads to a pedigree mutt with all the same problems even possibly more facing long established pedigree mutts, just getting there in record time.
No doubt they are “rescuing” an ancient breed which is also uniquely American at the same time.
I agree this dog they are developing by returning to varies location in Africa for choosing the next breeding. They are attempting to create a large foundation breeding lines in the United States. Interesting and certainly as you state some ancient breed. Originally took me by surprise at a dog show. It is large and was so well behaved and still I thought it was a statue not a live dog. Seeming domesticated and quite intelligent and was a direct import? Yes, these Ladies Dave know their biology and animal husbandry.
It really has nothing to do with lack of knowledge of human sexual anatomy Dave.
The high fertility levels of pit bulls is something that has been selected for — just like their fighting ability.
This (the legendary fertility rates of pit bulls) isn’t the case of backyard, uncontrolled doggie liasons so much as people seeing them as a money making proposition and actively selecting for the traits that will give them the best returns…in the case of pit bulls: robust dogs are a product of that selection; the old breeders of pits desired a robust, fertile dog because that’s the type that would hold up and eventually give some financial return for them in that world (it is one of their better traits, and yes there was indeed an element of hybrid, as in bred for performance, not looks, so their traditional breeders have been more open to an outside influence that might give an advantage — but even that has been eroded with people who don’t know how to breed dogs jumping on the pit bull express; a lot of this is because the dogs have drifted from their old demographic of owners to new ones; a lot of the modern pits I’ve seen have been just as plagued with inbred dog problems as any I’ve seen).
I think it’s a mistake to consider these dogs are the product of some backwoods cretin: they were produced by people who did know what they were doing (what they were doing was perhaps not something an animal lover would find savory, but they did not show ignorance in how they went about producing the animal they did). I find that the pibble folks are usually far more ignorant about these dogs — and it’s that phenomena which has really spurred on “backyard” pit bull breeders *they know there is a demand for this sort of dog, and they also know that there is a great place to place the ones they can’t sell.
And that’s the problem — the dog that was produced a dog that can be really, really dangerous dog, and now it is in the hands of people who really are dog ignorant (that’s not a good combo).
I agree on most points everyone has made on Christopher’s subject. Lack of knowledge of Bull and Terrior descending from the Amstaff. It is my understanding good Pit Bull Breeders cross the Amstaff. These are the breeders who do not breed for fighting? So is this where a good responsible breeders might begin?
American Staffordshire Terrior share its origin with the Staffordshire and the Bull Terrior is somewhere between on the genealogical tree. A Pirate named Paul Jones began the Pit Bull Breeding.
Actually, I would contend it’s the lack of sexual education in America; especially since it’s a taboo topic and the states with the worst shelter problems are also incidentally the same ones which peaches abstinence the most.
It always amazes me how many Americans in their 20s and 30s don’t know how babies are made, especially ones who never grew up on a farm. These are the same people who are clueless why their hamsters gave birth, or how their random mutt got knocked up.
If one looks at other countries with pet-population issues whether it is in Canada, in Romania, in Spain or Italy: it’s always in regions well-known for its poverty or subpar educational standards.
But United States really hit the home-run due to lack of federalized education when it comes to ensuring all programs are equally funded and are expected to meet a certain kind minimum.
Blaming it on money-seeking Pitbull breeders is only a small part of the equation, especially since there isn’t even enough professional or hobby breeders to meet the market demand.
Dave recently posted..2014 Post-Season Weight Optimization
I blame it very much on 1) people who breed animals to turn a buck — this could be any breed — without some thought to how healthy or suitable those animals are going to be (I’ve worked in industrial ag. situations — pits are bred a lot like market hogs: high fertility rates are selected, plus a favoring towards highly unnatural traits: excessive bulk, abiility to exist and thrive in unnatural conditions…and with a mind to a high turnover, low long term survival rate) — the money is in high production, so that’s what you get (a quick look at the average litter size of wild canids gives us a clue as to what a good sized litter should look like — pits usually have more); 2)people who get dogs for all the wrong reasons — and are unwilling to evolve — most people get pits for all the wrong reasons, and rather than grow up they have the outlet of the pound; 3) shelters which aren’t really doing their job, refuse to grow up themselves, and instead whine about how incredibly hard it is: well life is hard sometimes, hard choices have to be made for the best — and you did put yourself out there — now, do your job.
I’m pretty sure those pit bull breeders (many of them at least) do indeed know where baby pit bulls come from (these dogs who are winding up in shelters are not all the outcomes of “oops” litters; they were bred with intention).
I also think that one of the biggest problems we have in confronting this issue is to use it as a vehicle to safely discuss our own little bigotries towards other people (“those” people if you will). This is taking away from the topic at hand and is muddying the waters.
Of the three categories I mentioned, just how many of them truly, 100% fit into the definition of “those people” (and I think we’re all pretty clear on the groups “those people” belong to)?
Yeah, that’s right, there are no categories that do — so we need to drop that.
I’m not sure fertility is something expressly bred for in the pitbull, I think it’s a direct result of selecting for performance over looks or conformation alone. Sure certain things are tinkered with like weight and size but its more a direct result of avoiding inbreeding to maintain vigourous healthy animals. Like to like. A weak immunity compromised sack of bones is not going to win a dog fight that’s for sure no matter how long it’s pedigree.
Much like some breeds of cattle becoming more and more popular today that can survive harsh “local” conditions remain good doers, put on weight with relatively poor quality forage. These animals calve regularly with no problems and more often than inbred animals, they also remain docile even when hardly ever handled, the latter not like pitbulls at all of course. Cattle breeders will be the first to tell you their showing animals don’t thrive under typical conditions, they are there just to promote the breed if you like and many have stopped showing all together as its no longer cost effective because criteria has so changed away from showing criteria.
I think a lot of pitbull breeders who breed for dog fights know their stuff, it’s just not the kind of stuff a dog needs to be safe from itself and society unfortunately. A more hardy vigourous robust breed of dog is hard to find these days.
I think it’s true out of the hands of the dog fighting world rubbish is being produced that is really really dangerous as they aren’t breed with the same strict criteria, human aggression for example looks to be rife in these dogs as a result.
So far have never met a person who breeds pit bulls know much if anything about animal husbandry. The ones that get ripped apart are generally thrown out of a car to look like a road accident dying or already dead. We have Douglas in our area, who was a survivor. This is because a neighbor took him to a Vet to sew him up and paid his Vet bill. Douglas did not like to fight it seems obvious.
Maybe they used to know a lot about breeding “good” dogs when the sport was socially acceptable in America I don’t know.
Yes absolutely these dogs have genetic vigour and it shows in the litter sizes. My dog came from a littler of twelve, every single one a doer every single one sold before they were born even the runt was fought over.
Most pedigree dogs today would battle to produce more than a max of about four or five if it was a large breed significantly less for the smaller breeds.
Fighting pitbulls have a very robust gene pool here in China at least, except for the American pitbull showing number which is popular at dog shows in in places like Japan.
Another interesting breed that has the largest litters I’ve ever seen is the South African Boerboel, sixteen seventeen is not unusual in their home of origin.
I might add the pitbull terrier is not a closed stud book.
Good point Jen staked or running free the mutt breeding is high among those individuals. Surprising when you find a college professor participating with intact females running loose have mix breed pit bull puppies.
The lack of parasite prevention takes a number of those Pit Bull mix puppies. The skin problems are horror that I have seen. Large litters is another interesting point. You see when a Collie breeder recently had a female produce 14 puppies many were shocked. Large litters were the average of 10 to 12 puppies. Now mostly small litters are reported.
Yes, Anton the hybrid vigor can be retrieved with large litters of strong youngsters in my experience eliminating inbreeding with new breeding techniques through scientific technology. Sadly, this adoption of new breeding protocols takes study and facing the fact that lack of fertility is just nature’s way of self elimination. A fact of Life Cycle that many like an ostrich put their heads on the ground and refuse to accept the reality.
Christopher back directly on topic: Why call them Shelters? Seems it is a social issue of Moral Bankrupcy Liberalism.. An ideology that is fundamentally in my opinion unquestionably accepted as a pure and noble ends in themselves. Liberalism does not ask the big questions because it fails to scruntinize but to corporate power.
This is an interesting discussion, but from where I am sitting, the issue isn’t “we euthanize too many dogs”, the issue is we do not euthanize enough. My sister was badly bitten last week by her “temperament tested, sweetest dog, with-out a mean bone in his body” (according to shelter staff) rescue dog, I can tell you what life is like in the Shangri La of the “Land of No Dog Overpopulation” problems.
What happens when s/n education, leash laws, a more educated demographic, and a higher standard of living combine to make the problem of dog overpopulation disappear? All of the soft, social types of dogs no longer land in shelters, because they are not being born. Most large shelters are naturally located in or near urban areas, and the dogs that end up there are predominantly bully breeds and other hard, aggressive fighting or guarding breeds. These are predominantly purpose bred dogs, not accidental litters, and they are bred as weapons, cheap burglar alarms, guard dogs for illegal activities, for dog fighting, or simply as thug fashion accessories. You won’t see anyone walking down Blue Hill Ave, in Dorchester, with a Golden Retriever. The types of dogs coming out of these areas pit bulls, some molosser breed mixes, and the vast majority would fail a temperament test that screens for aggression.
Other dogs that land in shelters/rescues are senior dogs, dogs with health problems, and dogs with significant behavioral problems.
But the demand for pet dogs is still high….so what do shelters and rescues do? They simply redefine the term “adoptable”. Eighty pound pit bull that “doesn’t like to share toys and bones”, is “mouthy”, and “needs to be an only dog”? Come in and adopt him, he will make a perfect family pet! A young Fila that is “uncomfortable with strangers”? She will make a GREAT family dog, she is a sweetheart, never mind her size and breed!
Still, most prospective pet owners don’t want these dogs, so the solution is to import dogs from the South, Puerto Rico, California, the Caribbean…even Europe. And how does that work out?
What could have been a logical solution to pet overpopulation has become another reason to avoid adopting from a shelter. Sick, underage puppies (you know, the kind we like to rant about when they come from puppy mills) are flooding into New England, bringing infectious diseases like Parvo with them. Half feral strays, dogs with aggression issues, MORE pit bulls labeled as “lab mixes”, all being shipped up by “No Kill” rescue groups. No screening or temperament testing done, because having a formal record of a failed temperament test could bring liability when the dog bites someone, and if the dog fails, so what? We have already lowered the bar as to what constitutes an safe, adoptable dog. No one working in animal welfare wants to put on their big girl panties and make a tough decision to euthanize anything other than an out and out rager. Couple this with the fact that most of the people involved in “saving dogs” know little to nothing about dog behavior and ethology. The result is that most shelters/rescues here can be a very bad place to find a pet dog.
Bravo this well written reply! There surely is a problem with the negative ‘politics’ now surrounding dog breeding by those willing to go the whole nine yards with care and development of great puppies. I think that the people acknowledging that as a legitimate, valuable service are in the minority. The popular public opinion is to suggest that guiliting people into taking shelter dogs is appropriate.
Bravo!
And the scenario you mention in the first part of your reply is already upon us.
Most of the dogs in urban shelters are now almost pure street fighting line (debased professional line) pit types.
The only reason we see some of the older style pits where I am at is due to being out in the country (and most would consider them “mutts”, even if they are a lot more sane/safe than their more typey street fight style brethern…probably because they are mutts). That has been changing though — because even the breeders of those temperment trainwrecks don’t want to be labelled “backyard breeders”…so they make sure they inbreed really typey looking pits — the puppies will look like the ones on the tv shows…see? purity!
And the shelters and society at large will keep on screaming at people to never, ever get their poochies from anyplace other than the shelter, and to help drive dog breeders out of business because they are the true evil.
Meanwhile some toddler gets eaten, and it will cause another round of navel gazing and rolling in the ashes — until dogs as pets are banned altogether.
That’s perhaps a little apocalyptic, but I don’t have much stock of faith in my fellow humans ability to not be led into stupid outcomes.
…and I’m sorry I keep coming back to the pit bulls, but they are THE shelter dog now. Which kind of compounds and confusicates the whole no-kill shelter problem.
On one hand, I would like to see the amount of animals at shelter saved; on the other — eeehhh…these dogs are by and large not a good fit for the average dog owner, certainly not a novice dog owner, nor even one who isn’t incredibly fit and of the proper temperment — and that would be with the otherwise no problems/no worries dog, which a lot of them aren’t that at all.
I’m rather with Dogmatic in regards to this sort of thing: I love dogs, but I also don’t like to see people bitten or other people’s pets.
And I’m not really a pit bull “hater” necessarily!
I think dogmatic can think even further afield. I witnessed a buyer of French bulldogs puppies in Thailand who said they were going to America via eastern Europe, he had bought twenty puppies up to the point I met them.
Problem is who is a responsible breeder? These french bulldog puppies being collected were show rejects from top winning breeders, stenotic nares lopsided ears too large etc. The same kind of breeder in the States will tell you not to touch these imports and yet they sell the same to the public there?
Its a mine field buying a pedigree dog never mind a taking on a rescue.
I think the best bet is to get educated, then find a breeder who appears to be a sensible individual who is also fairly educated about dogs/their breed/etc., appears to have good dogs (and good, aka. not inbred out the wahzoo, pedigrees on their dogs), wants their good dogs out doing good things (and has bred them for a purpose, even the purpose of just being a good, healthy, stable pet), and who is willing to stand behind said dogs.
I personally don’t care if the dog is a “purebred” or a “mutt” (aka. a crossbred unfairly tagged with the term “mutt”) in this regard. I’d rather see sound “mutts” than unsound purebreds and consider that the breeder who was trying for sound animals, even if mixed, was being the better breeder.
That’s the sort of person who also deserves to be promoted, whose animals deserve to be promoted, and there’s that.
As for shelter dogs: it used to be fairly easy to find a nice one; it’s gotten tougher…be educated and be ready to shop around (just like you should always do when picking out a breeder) I’d say. Some people do a good job of rehoming rescue dogs and aren’t insane doggimaniacs about them — it’s worth the time and effort to find and wait on folks like them.
(and if Greyhounds might be your type, go check them out — I’ve had pretty good luck with those, as they have less chance of winding up in rescue because of temperment/health issues that would affect their ability as pets…some have, but we’re playing percentages and betting on them here).
I agree that “shelter” is a bogus name. They used be called “dog pounds,” an honest name in that it suggested a place that served the PEOPLE who didn’t want homeless dogs around. To make believe it’s for the good of the dogs is sort of like making believe people that kill termites are doing it for the good of the termites.
Yet, the people who leave pets at “shelters” deserve plenty of the blame themselves for abandoning them rather than finding new homes for their pets themselves. Landlords who almost universally don’t allow dogs (even though they often have pet dogs themselves) deserve some blame as well – as do women who have a baby and all of a sudden feel an overwhelming desire to dump their pets off to be euthanized.
The whole sorry lot of humanity!
Yes, absolutely.
It might interest you to know that at our local “pound” alone last year some 4500 little dogs called BB were abandoned. The majority almost certainly surrogate children for couples yet to have their own.
This is a horrible, pathetic, sad state of affairs. Why can’t people curtail their manic maternity, biological clocks until they fall pregnant and save thousands of little dog’s the terror, pain and suffering of being abandoned.
Often these dogs are also suffocated in love, treated like infants, barely allowed to walk on their own, dressed and carted round in prams, fed a diet only suitable for human babies……it must be a syndrome though I don’t know the name.
Maybe a bit late but “The Paris Hilton Air Head Syndrome”?
You can tell the types, young mostly slim childless couples who drift into pet-shops on the weekend to ooh and aah over the tiny fluffy toy breeds, or can be seen carrying their BB in a baby harness, selecting doggie clothes, filming BB’s every move ……the boyfriends going along with the whole sordid thing as though this was their first born.
These ironically make up a significant portion of the dogs being thrown on the street, given up to shelters, rescue centres every day. If the dogs are very lucky they sometimes end up with other members of the family but not often as these are also often high maintenance dogs, so they often get abandoned a second time.
If only there was a way to stop this in it’s tracks before it happens. Instant electro therapy? Some kind of high voltage collar susceptible woman can wear…..if they get too near a petshop.
After the fact maybe some kind of compulsory injection for pregnant mothers that prevents this sudden illogical fear of the little cute hairy animal that all those months even years, have been treated like their very own spawn.
Suddenly little bless BB with the cute, pert, wet nose is seen as a monstrous, oily, slippery, viper, the emotional repulsion that they’ve kept such so close to their bosoms all the while, a vile terrifying threat to the throbbing foetus within.
It must be a very powerful force for them to end up acting so cruelly, very as it goes against all instinct. As powerful as the urge to mother some innocent dog……….twisted.
OK, shelters do the actual act of killing because they are vastly underfunded and don’t have enough space or resources to support all of the homeless dogs. The cause of the homelessness is not the shelters, but rather the prior owners of the dogs. Who abandoned these dogs to begin with? They are the source of the problem and are ultimately responsible for the dogs’ demise.
And in response to the pitt bull comment, I adopted a rescue and had her for 10 years until she died from cancer. Best dog ever. Keen intelligence, gentle with kids, love bunny. The people who breed these gentle animals for fighting are monsters.