How Far Are You Willing to Go?

ORIGINAL: spiritdogs

probe1957
quote:

ORIGINAL: snownose
It makes me raging mad when people think animals are disposable


People own dogs for different reasons. Not everyone has a dog for a pet. For example, some people own dogs to do a specific job and some people own dogs for hunting.

When I used to own pit bulls, I hung out in a couple of forums that were specific to that breed. I learned a lot there and one of the things I learned is that not everyone owns APBTs as pets. There were a a couple of guys there that raised APBT's for hog hunting. If the dog wouldn't hunt, they shot the dog. Their contention was that by the time they determined the dog wouldn't hunt, he was past the point of making a good pet.

To some people, a dog is a tool. You have to take care of your tools but if that tool doesn't perform its intended purpose, they get rid of the tool. Are they wrong? Not in my eyes. There are fates worse than death.

ORIGINAL: probe1957

ORIGINAL: snownose
It makes me raging mad when people think animals are disposable[:@][:@][:@]

People own dogs for different reasons.  Not everyone has a dog for a pet.  For example, some people own dogs to do a specific job and some people own dogs for hunting. 

When I used to own pit bulls, I hung out in a couple of forums that were specific to that breed.  I learned a lot there and one of the things I learned is that not everyone owns APBTs as pets.  There were a a couple of guys there that raised APBT's for hog hunting.  If the dog wouldn't hunt, they shot the dog.  Their contention was that by the time they determined the dog wouldn't hunt, he was past the point of making a good pet.

To some people, a dog is a tool.  You have to take care of your tools but if that tool doesn't perform its intended purpose, they get rid of the tool.  Are they wrong?  Not in my eyes.  There are fates worse than death.

Billy, just when I was starting to almost like you...[:'(]   The fact is, I believe that there are some people who have little respect for the animals that serve them, even in agrarian or hunting pursuits.  I prefer the native way of thinking about animals with gratitude and respect, even if we are eating them or using them to herd our livestock, or keeping warm within a buffalo hide.  The callousness with which people regard the animals that sustain them is appalling.  Mitakuye oyasin.

Billy, I think that it is not necessarily humane to shoot a dog, rather than spend the money to have it euthanized.  Pain of a bullet, versus pain of a needle stick.  Somehow, I'd opt for the latter.  But, when you support the idea of dogs *only* as "tools", then what the heck, right?  But, there's probably no telling anyone who hog hunts for sport, and the others, who are using dogs in farming operations, that they should bear the expense of vet-assisted euthanasia...sad, but true.  There's really only a hair's breadth between agriculture and barbarism.  I understand the farming/ranching mentality, but humane treatment of animals should be a normal cost of doing business.

ORIGINAL: spiritdogs
I prefer the native way of thinking about animals with gratitude and respect, even if we are eating them or using them to herd our livestock, or keeping warm within a buffalo hide.  The callousness with which people regard the animals that sustain them is appalling.  Mitakuye oyasin.

 
Here-here! [sm=clapping%20hands%20smiley.gif]
 
 

Just a guess, but you don't know much about bovine behavior do you?

 
No, I don't , but I know 1 thing for certain, when cattle get startled they can start running and bowl over anything in their way, a stampede if you will.
 
I am just a little in shock over how easy it is for you to just shoot a dog without even trying another alternative, makes me sad actually.

I understand the farming/ranching mentality, but humane treatment of animals should be a normal cost of doing business.

The vast majority of times humane treatment is the norm in farming and ranching. Unfortunately, sometimes the only solution to a problem will involve destroying an animal. My uncle has had to shoot dogs from a nearby town that formed packs and were taking down calves. He recognized several of the dogs and warned the owners but they still didn't tie or kennel their dogs. There was no animal control in his rural area, and the sheriff told him that he should shoot the dogs.

My father-in-law has had to do the same thing with the neighbors dog. The dog would go into his cattle lot and chase the steers around. Eventually, the steers would chase the dog and the dog would run home under the fence. He told the neighbor what was happening, and the neighbor even admitted to seeing it himself. After replacing the fence twice and paying the vet to fix a steer who nearly impaled himself on a post, my FIL called the sheriff, who told him to shoot the dog next time it happened. So he did. This could have been prevented if the neighbor had controlled his dog, he had been warned by both my FIL and the Sheriff.

Both my uncle and FIL love dogs and have had dogs all their lives and did not enjoy doing this. But they did what they had to do to protect their livestock. They have never shot harmless strays that were on their property. In fact, there was a couple heelers that were adopted by my uncle and became good farm dogs. But both my uncle & FIL will take care of any dogs that threaten their livestock if the owners won't. And they make sure that their dogs stay on their property and don't cause problems for other farmers. Don't blame the farmers or ranchers for a problem that is caused by the owners.

Okay, but what I don't get is this. Here in the big city, when a loose dog is harassing and potentially harming other dogs, adults, children, etc.... we call animal control, animal control and/or the police come and capture the dog and if it's a continual problem, the owner does not get the dog back. The dog *may* be euthanized or it may be adopted out to someone else.  There might be lawsuits over damages, and the dog may be put down in the end, but the dog at least gets a chance and the human actually does get punished, cited and fined.

I used to live waaaay out yonder. Even the county I lived in had a dog catcher. It didn't have a pound or shelter, but it did have animal control (the ound was in another county). And yet, I lived in constant fear that someone was going to shoot my dog rather than just calling the dang dog catcher if there was ever an issue.

I had a flock of pedigree lambs destroyed by three pet dogs in one night, just a few minutes of "fun and games".  Three of them actually survived that night, only to die slowly and painfully over the course of the next two weeks.  I learned three difficult lessons from that experience (these were my first sheep).

1. It is somtimes kinder to euthanize quickly, by whatever means available, than to attempt to sustain life.  My neighbor offered to shoot the surviving lambs and I refused - I wouldn't refuse that today.  Actually I would cut their throats myself.
   
2. Dogs do not "kill" stock in the sense that felids and wolves strangle or sever the spine before consumption.  Stock killed by dogs die from shock or blood loss - from having bites ripped from them while they are alive.
3. When it comes to getting owners of dogs to take responsibility for their dogs, it's a lost cause.  It's up to the livestock owner to protect stock from ravages such as described above.  I use electric fences and livestock guardian dogs, and would not hesitate to destroy dogs chasing my stock, instantly.  The lab who was the main instigator in the killing spree came back many times subsequently.  His owner was not some redneck with old cars in the yard.  His family had a 4000 square foot home with a quarter mile concrete driveway and acres of groomed lawn, and not one linear inch of fence.  The father was a deacon in the local church but refused for months to take any responsibility for his dog.  I always laughed when I got invites to that church.   The dog finally got hit by a car.
   

Now about shooting working dogs that don't "make the grade".  We are not talking about culling a show prospect pup that turns out to have wonky structure.  We are talking about a dog that may have been intended for a life far different from the typical pet life. 

It is tremendously condescending to boil down what some of these dogs are bred for, as "killer instincts."  I knew a guy who rounded up feral cattle and hogs for animal controls all over the southeast.  It's a big problem.  I don't think you'd like to meet a feral boar in rut while out for a nice walk through the woods, with your dog.  Ditto a bull or goat buck.  And hunting wild pigs serves the purpose of keeping the herds healthy in the absence of  large predators (yes, our fault, but we can't exactly bring back panthers to the outskirts of Atlanta).

Hog dogs are bred for a combination of toughness, drive, persistance (think stubbornness), and a sensitivity which leads to a "my way or the highway" attitude that works really well when sizing up and moving tough stock - or keeping the stock from attacking following humans on horses.  Hog dogs also have the instinct to "bay up" their stock - a deep, penetrating, and carrying bark - porcines have poor eyesight, especially in brush, and the baying acts as eye does on a sheep - threat without true force, to cut off escape.  They can and do run for miles in heavy brush to track game - some of these dogs are descended from bear and big cat hunters and their ability to scale and push through obstacles and keep going at a dead run, is tremendous.

Now, what part of this package would you like in your backyard?  Or worse, your dog-ignorant neighbor's backyard?  Your neighborhood?

All right, so your hog hunter or feral stock beater has bred a litter of hopefuls, his next generation.  He's matched his best working bitch to another male that matches best what he does (I say "he" for convenience's sake because I don't happen to know any female "beaters").  In two to three years or possibly even longer, he realizes that one of the pups he's kept just isn't making the grade.  Perhaps the dog lacks confidence, or doesn't have enough stamina, or lacks some hunting quality.  Maybe the stock just doesn't respond to him appropriately and he just can't put his finger on it.  What's he to do?

1. Rehome the dog as a pet.  I think that would be pretty obviously incorrect.  Unlike many, many working dogs, there just aren't good pet homes for dogs like this.
2. Rehome the dog working another kind of stock - cattle dog or goat dog, for instance.  The problem is, stockdog handlers like to get their dogs from breeders who work the same kind of stock as them, or at least close.  These dogs are both bred and trained to come on very hard.  I'm retraining a cattle dog to work sheep right now and even that is a tough change for the dog.  By cattle dog and sheep dog I mean dogs who work those kinds of stock, not the Kennel Club names for breeds.
3. Keep the dog.  Most of these guys spend all their time on the road.  Even if they have a permanent home, any dog left there will spend the rest of its life rotting in a kennel.  This happens to a lot of Border collies who don't make the grade and it tears me up to see it.  It's no life for a dog bred to go-go-go.
4. Euth the dog.  Most of the guys I know who are in this, believe it is more moral to take care of this with their own hand.  They despise the thought of putting it off on a vet - the hand that brought that pup into the world, or spent all that time in training, should rightly take the dog out.  I frankly don't see how a bullet in the brain is any worse than stopping the heart with drugs. 
   

So now the dog is dead, however that happened.  The dog neither lives with the misery of constantly being unable to do the job it was bred to do, nor is it terrorizing someone's neighborhood and creating horrific crossbreed puppies, nor is it attermpting to relearn its job and failing and probably dealing with the result of some farmer's frustration (and creating horrific crossbreed puppies).  I don't see the problem.  We still need these dogs - there would still be herds of feral livestock roaming the Gulf Coast if it weren't for folks like my friend George and his horses and his pack of "killer" dogs.

None of this addresses the ethics of how these dogs might be trained or handled or kept.  That's a seperate issue.  You can be a kindly person, treat your dogs like family members, and still hold to the principles I've outlined above. 

Shoot my dog?  I could if I had to - say if my dog were in pain, I lived 100 miles from the nearest vet, and I knew how to do it.  I had an old dog who actually belonged to someone else - he let me use him his final years and I kept him on as a pet when he got too old to work.  His "dad's" only request was that when the time came he would come back to the farm where he spent the first 11 years of his life.  I took him there but I couldn't stay - I knew Steve would want to be alone.  I did leave him a little rosemary plant to put over his grave (Greg loved to gnaw the rosemary leaves in my kitchen garden). 

Steve never told me about it but his wife did later after Steve himself went on to meet his old dog at the Bridge.  Steve carried him to the pine-shaded hill where Greg used to lay and watch the young dogs work, and while Greg lay looking at the sheep, he stood behind him and put a bullet in his head.  Can you say that was inhumane?  I see a certain amount of dignity in it that seems lacking in a vet's office.  Not many vets will drive out to the farm and put your dog to sleep on a breezy hillside with the lambs frisking below and the first smell of early spring in the air.

I'm not saying it's better - just a different way of looking at this.

Before you jump all over me re the stock-chasing dogs, or the way animals die, I was not referring to the act of shooting dogs that are "worrying" or killing livestock.  Farmers need to protect their animals.  I was talking about the culling of dogs that do not meet a hunting standard or a stockdog standard.  Once you know that, you euthanize or you rehome the dog, but shooting is archaic and not humane in some cases - when I was a kid, I witnessed a state cop miss on a horse that was injured at a county fair - horrible.  On the other side of the coin, you do not let your pet dogs chase other people's livestock, or dogs, or children, lest they get shot, which is allowed even in many jurisdictions where there is an animal control officer.  No one is suggesting that you wait for an injured animal to bleed out before dispatching it, but you better be sure a vet couldn't have saved it, lest you get yourself embroiled in a world of crap.  This happened to a petting farm operator I know, and he lost his business and property when a couple of people reported that he had taken matters into his own hands and "culled" some animals.  We aren't a predominantly agrarian society any more, and, right or wrong, there will be people who will question those actions.  

I hate the idea of shooting dogs, too, but understand the times and places where an immediate quick end is necessary (suffering with no vet around, etc.)
 
In the case of these dogs deemed not suitable for their intended purpose... I got to thinking from the reverse side - pet dogs.  Dogs that are deemed not suitable for the intended purpose of pets in homes are often culled out of animal shelters/rescues every single day.  So, should THOSE dogs have been re-homed in some other way, as some are suggesting out of the dogs raised for hog hunting, and deemed not suitable?  How does the argument apply differently for hunting dogs, than for pet dogs?  Again, folks who come up with temperament tests are culling dogs deemed not suitable for pet homes right out of animal shelters...
 
Granted, those dogs were not RAISED for animal shelters - they just happened there.  But, I wondered what other people thought about this...
 
(and I've lived in areas where dogs trained for wild boar hunting was pretty common, so I understand the concepts and practices to get the dogs to hunt like that.)

We've pretty much just reduced this to hog dogs, because hog dogs tend to be volatile and aggressive in order to do their jobs and definately would be a potential dangerous liability as pets.  But, what about other types of working dogs. Don't you think a coonhound who won't hunt would make a pretty good pet? A border collie who just doesn't, well, I won't even pretend to know anything about herding, but who just doesn't have it in them?
 
Temperment is everything. Yes, those dogs who are euthed in shelters because they fail temperment tests or simply just run out of time are "culled" so to speak. But they got a chance to prove themselves as either of potential pet quality or not and they got a chance to find someone who was willing to work with them. Maybe they missed the chance, but it was offered.

I still don't get the "shooting is not humane" thing.  Dumping on the side of the road is not humane.  Abandoning the dog in the woods is not humane.  Letting the dog rot in a kennel or on a chain is not humane.  Most farmers and hunters know where to shoot, unlike your basic highway patrolman (unlike a person, you don't EVER shoot a quadruped between the eyes).

We may not live in an agrarian society anymore but we do live in a society where there are many dogs that are homeless, thanks to irresponsible owners/prior owners/breeders.  Do you know how hard it is to find a home for an active dog, when breeders are producing custom sport models for the peformance crowd, and designer dog breeders are taking over the companion dog market?  Once upon a time farmers and hunters COULD place these dogs in active homes but they tell me these days, between the dogs overrunning the shelters, the BYBs, the designer dogs, and the sport dogs, no one wants a retired hunter or stockdog.  If anyone wants one, let me know - I know two different farmers desperately looking for homes for a couple great dogs.  They won't shoot them, by the way - they have OK lives, they are just out of place and would like families of their own.

As a long-time rescuer, I'll shake the hand of any man or woman who takes personal responsibility for what they have wrought, whether that means finding appropriate homes for their sterilized dogs, or euthanizing dogs that are unable to find or live in a pet home, for whatever reasons.  There are all too many, as mentioned before, who dump in shelters or the side of the road, abandon them, or place them inappropriately (For sale, blue tick hound bitch, won't hunt, $50, has papers).

hog dogs tend to be volatile and aggressive in order to do their jobs and definately would be a potential dangerous liability as pets

Actually, I'm on a Catahoula group, and Catahoula hog dogs are commonly kept as pets. They're bred to be all-around dogs that can help bring in cattle one day, hunt hogs the next (they "bay" hogs by keeping them surrounded in one spot - they DO NOT "hold" hogs by biting them), then hang out in the yard with the kids in-between. Like with pitties, the qualities that make them good fighters do not necessarily make them poor pets. They just need good owners!

But, culling of dogs is a big controversy in hog dog circles, too. Don Abney, who literally wrote the book on the history of the Catahoula, describes the old way of culling like this:

Those folks that used dogs to hunt would keep a few dogs around for hunting and breeding. The breeding was to replace the dogs that were lost during a hunt, better the ones they had, or used in trading for other things that were needed. There was a method used by hunters that was effective in producing the best hunting dogs. That method, if it were used today, would bring outcries of cruelty from animal rights groups. The method has been called "Culling" or "Lining". These are the two references I have heard the most. The manner of "Lining" was for an owner to take up a position where he knew deer had been crossing. An entire litter of approximately 6 months of age would be brought to that location. The dogs would be enticed to track the deer and then released as a pack The last two to cross the "Line" taken up by the owner were shot. The reason for this was that the dogs did not show enough interest in doing their job. The rest of the litter was allowed to go about tracking and/or baying the scent of the deer. As they returned, the first two to cross the line were also shot. The reasoning for this was that they didn't show enough interest to remain with the pack. The remaining dogs were considered the most promising dogs and would be raised up to adults and put to work. This practice would continue from season to season and litter to litter. It would insure that only the best dogs were kept for hunting and breeding. In those days, hunting was not just a sport. It put food on the table. Working a ranch dog meant not having to pay someone to help with rounding up or herding cattle. It didn't make any sense to keep and feed a dog that didn't do the job and do it well.

He isn't necessarily agreeing with the practice, but readily admits it's why the breed is as versatile and well-rounded as it is.

Even the Dalmation Club of America was under fire recently for recommending the culling of deaf pups, which honestly doesn't solve anything. You can cull all the deaf pups you want, but if you keep breeding the dogs that whelped them you'll just get more. Anyway, culling, whether at birth or at the shelter will continue as long as there are too many unwanted dogs. Whioch is another topic altogether!

Houndlove (Cressida?  my apologies, never noticed that before):

Border collies adapt very well to suburban life in the right hands.  I think a lot of other working bred dogs do too, for reasons I've gone over in the past.  I won't go into all the details but for the most part working temperament has a lot to do with cooperating with people, or it should focus on that (I realize it doesn't always, in some pursuits).

Border collies can "fail" for a lot of reasons.  The whole package is extremely complex, and sometimes the dog can't work at all (ie, can't be trained), or the dog specifically can't do the particular work it was intended to do.  Curly here is like that - he's too sound sensitive to work around loading chutes - it's one teeny thing that took six years for his owner to decide was just not going to improve, and in fact was endangering him.  Curly is a nice dog and would adapt to any lifestyle from light cattle work, to sheep work, to sheepdog trialing, to sports, to being someone's active companion.  He's destined to work geese off golf courses, actually, but his adaptability comes from being bred to work.

Sometimes I think people are nuts for turning their noses up at these secondhand dogs.  They housetrain almost instantly, even if raised and kept in kennels their whole lives.  They are used to looking to you for leadership, train quickly, and sometimes already know some basic commands, including the most drop dead reliable recall you'll ever wish to have on any dog you trained.  A dog that is three or four has already been worked to the extent that you have to be pretty sure of its soundness (and clinical tests can confirm the specifics).

I place the vast majority of these dogs of tremendous potential, as pets in highly active homes, because the performance world has gotten downright snobby, frankly.  Many of these dogs are trained to move off pressure and some have been roughly treated, it's true, but  nothing that cannot be overcome with some training.  But I'm told now that the thing is to have a dog that can perform for a maximum amount of time, with a minimum amount of training or retraining.  So sports homes are pretty much non-existant anymore, unless the dog is unusual in some way (bred like a current winner, very small, candy colored).

Now imagine what a farmer faces, trying to place a dog without the resources that I have to find families interested in a high-needs, highly active dog.

This is the source of my frustration.  These dogs have to be bred, and trained, and there's no way to tell whether you've "missed" until the dog is quite mature.  In the case of placeable dogs, the homes are very scarce and the farmer or hunter competes with many other dogs who need homes, too.

This is why breeding dogs for pets punishes the responsible breeders so heavily, particularly working breeders who need a larger gene pool to work from.

(I just added my name down there, you didn't miss anything. When I first enter a forum I usually don't let my name out there since it's unusual and you can google search it and find out everything about me pretty quickly and easily. I'm just paranoid like that. But I felt it was time to make The Big Reveal here. Anyway....)
 
Thanks for the info. I feel also a little personally invested since I have a former working dog as a pet too. And I also am very not liking pet-quality-only breeding for the reasons you stated. I'm sort of only working with what I know from coonhounds only, and that is that most "coonhound hunting people" are very ANTI-rescue, and I can't figure that out because that is the solution to having to dump/shoot/inappropriately sell your failed dogs. Why be anti that? I don't understand, but maybe because I do see all those dogs as individuals who deserve a chance to live. Just a chance. It may not work out, but that will never be known until it's tried.

I don't know Marlowe's story, whether he was dumped for being a failed hunter or just lost, but he did get a chance and he is an awesome dog. Even being kennel-raised, he's a working dog so he's highly intelligent and adaptable and a problem-solver by nature. Those traits make him an excellent pet as well. I'm glad he at least got the chance.
 
Jen, what would be the difference between shooting and just selling the failed dogs as pets with a spay/neuter agreement to get them out of the breeding line? Or droppign them off at a pound or shelter where they'll get fixed before being adopted out?  It's not 1920 any more.

ORIGINAL: spiritdogs
Billy, I think that it is not necessarily humane to shoot a dog, rather than spend the money to have it euthanized.  Pain of a bullet, versus pain of a needle stick.  Somehow, I'd opt for the latter.  But, when you support the idea of dogs *only* as "tools", then what the heck, right?  But, there's probably no telling anyone who hog hunts for sport, and the others, who are using dogs in farming operations, that they should bear the expense of vet-assisted euthanasia...sad, but true.  There's really only a hair's breadth between agriculture and barbarism.  I understand the farming/ranching mentality, but humane treatment of animals should be a normal cost of doing business.

 
I don't disagree with any of that EXCEPT to add that if I shot a dog, it would be humane.  He wouldn't even hear the BOOM! 

ORIGINAL: snownose
No, I don't , but I know 1 thing for certain, when cattle get startled they can start running and bowl over anything in their way, a stampede if you will.

Really?  Hmmmm.  Never have seen that, except on tv.  Have you?

I am just a little in shock over how easy it is for you to just shoot a dog without even trying another alternative, makes me sad actually.

Don't be shocked.  Dogs are shot for harrassing livestock every day.  Would it actually be preferable to you to allow the dog to chase cattle and kill sheep until you could implement an "alternative" to shooting him?  Is the suffering of the cattle and sheep unworthy of any consideration?