Am I being a hypocrite: RE Vick conviction

No, I don't think you are being a hypocrite at all. I would write a thought out reply but I'm short on time. I don't think dog fighting and ridgebacks coursing and catching prey are comparable. If someone puts a ridgeback in a pen, and the deer in the same pen, with no chance of escape whatsoever, then that would be getting close to dog fighting. However, in reality, you are not forcing either species to fight, so there is a big difference in that respect. I have 2 setters so I have hunting breeds like you said, and I definitely think there is a big distinction in morality, humanity, and ethicality between dog fighting and dogs hunting wildlife.

If someone puts a ridgeback in a pen, and the deer in the same pen, with no chance of escape whatsoever, then that would be getting close to dog fighting.

I'd not considered that. The distinction gives me a little comfort; sort of like the difference between a canned hunt and hunting in the woods in a considerably less controlled environment.  I guess dog fighting would be the equivalent of tying a rabbit to a lure coursing line instead of a plastic bag. And yes, there are many ways to show bully type strength and prowess that don't require killing the dog - weight pull, bite work, etc.

The dog fighting equivalent to hunting with our dogs would be to tie the deer, rabbit, groundhog, pig, etc to a tree and setting the dog on it. There's no real pride of athleticism in that at all.

Thank you! You really put my mind at ease. I'm going to paste this back at the original message on the other board.

See ISG, young, energetic and self-aware!

Paula

There is a huge difference between fighting and hunting with dogs, IMO.
 
In fighting dogs, there is most assuredly going to be a fight, there is a ring set up, the dogs cannot escape, and this is entirely set up for the amusement and profitability of the humans.
 
In hunting with dogs, the prey animal has more advantage than the dog with respect to terrain.  The prey animal must use it's wits, speed, and various survival skills to escape-unless it is a canned hunt, the prey animals chances are greater than the predators.  Deer are faster thank ridgies and most other dogs as well.  Rabbits, hares, antelope, and other small prey are quite a bit faster than the dogs used to course them as well. 
 
Think of it this way, in the wild most predators are only successful 10 percent of the time-even the cheetah, which often has it's prey stolen from it by another predator/scavenger.  So there is NO guarantee of a kill.  Even when a kill is made, that kill traditionally was used for food, either for the humans or for the dogs....
 
See this [linkhttp://www.kelb-tal-fenek.com/rabbithunt.htm]link[/link], for a good description of using sighthounds in a traditional setting:
[linkhttp://www.kelb-tal-fenek.com/rabbithunt.htm]http://www.kelb-tal-fenek.com/rabbithunt.htm[/link]

Xerxes,

We posted at the same time, and came to the same conclusions.

Paula

ORIGINAL: paulaedwina

Xerxes,

We posted at the same time, and came to the same conclusions.

Paula

It's still one of the most amazing of all sights to watch a hound course.  It's stunning, absolutely beautiful.
 
check out this [linkhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rznf7pwc0yo]video[/link] (turn speakers down but not off...there's alot of barking)
 
[linkhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rznf7pwc0yo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rznf7pwc0yo[/link]

We lure course our Borzoi (the ones that like it). I enjoy watching them perform the task for wich they were bred. They are a beutiful sight to behold at full run in an open field. The difference is that there is NO live prey and no real danger to the animals. Also we have 2 Borzoi who have absolutely NO instinct for the sport and they just come to watch the others run. They are still loved members of our family.

ORIGINAL: IrishSetterGrl

....... However, in reality, you are not forcing either species to fight, so there is a big difference in that respect. .....

Really? What choice does the prey animal have in this case? To just stand there and keep munching on the grass or bushes? The prey can run for it's life, and maybe survive or it can be killed on the spot. If this doesn't constitute forcing the prey animal to participate, I don't know what would.

From my admittedly limited knowledge of dog fighting, my understanding is that the dogs are willing participants. The goal of dog fighting is supposedly to test the dog's bravery. The dog that attempts to escape loses, it isn't forced to continue to fight. Of course, that dog that attempts to escape probably isn't rehomed with a loving family, but as far as the fight itself, I think the whole idea is that if the dogs aren't eager to engage they aren't kept for fighting.

ORIGINAL: Xerxes
Think of it this way, in the wild most predators are only successful 10 percent of the time-even the cheetah, which often has it's prey stolen from it by another predator/scavenger. So there is NO guarantee of a kill. Even when a kill is made, that kill traditionally was used for food, either for the humans or for the dogs....

So, would you be ok with dog fighting if the dogs were only killed 10 % of the time, and the victims were then used for food?

I actually do understand why one gets a thrill from watching a dog do what it was bred to do, even if that involves a dog chasing and potentially killing prey. I admire those Wild Kingdom scenes of cheetahs too. But it's not the killing wildlife part that I admire, even though I intellectually understand that the cheetah or wolf or coyote who killed another of my lambs last night does it as a matter of survival, and even though I intellectually understand the role predators play in regulating populations of herbivores. I accept the killing of prey by a predator, but I don't get a thrill from watching it. What I, and I trust others in this thread, appreciate is the speed and grace of the predator. In the case of our well fed pets, I think that one does have to find some other way to allow the dog to express his speed, agility, and athleticism besides just turning him loose to harass wildlife that has "only" a 10 % chance of ending up dead after being terrorized and run to exhaustion. And it's not like disrupting an animal's feeding to run it to exhaustion doesn't eventually take a toll on that animal, even if it survives the chase itself.

On the other hand, I could point you to some thriving coyote populations that I probably wouldn't shed a tear about seeing thinned a bit, so I'm a hypocrite too.

Really? What choice does the prey animal have in this case? To just stand there and keep munching on the grass or bushes? The prey can run for it's life, and maybe survive or it can be killed on the spot. If this doesn't constitute forcing the prey animal to participate, I don't know what would.

From my admittedly limited knowledge of dog fighting, my understanding is that the dogs are willing participants. The goal of dog fighting is supposedly to test the dog's bravery. The dog that attempts to escape loses, it isn't forced to continue to fight. Of course, that dog that attempts to escape probably isn't rehomed with a loving family, but as far as the fight itself, I think the whole idea is that if the dogs aren't eager to engage they aren't kept for fighting.

The prey animal has the ability - granted, not probability - but ability to escape. Also, dogs killing prey is part of the food chain in the wild, it is how they survive (think wolves). Yes, people don't need to bring their et dogs out to the field to catch prey and survive, but it is a natural part of "doghood", and provided the circumstances are fair for the hunter and hunted, it is not nearly on the same level as dog fighting.  Dog fighting is obviously not necessary for survival, and with the pit bulls, this "instinct" was bred into them by people. I apologize if this sounds confusing as it is kind of hard to clearly express.

And yes, in dog fighting the dogs are willing participants, the people aren't opening and closing their mouths for them, that's for sure! But they may as well be, since people (please note I'm referring to the irresponsible, unethical, dog fighters here) have bred pitties to have dog aggression, and encourage it. Have you ever heard of a bait dog (pit bull bait)? I won't go into detail as it is disturbing, but if you care to- look it up. People DO force these dogs to fight, they taunt them, cheer them on, and I've seen (not in real life) where people actually push the dogs onto the other dogs to get them to keep going. If a dog won't fight the other, which is somewhat  unlikely since these dogs have been encouraged to do so since puppyhood in a lot of cases, the people are not going to say, "oh well, no match today then....", they make it fight. Or use it as bait. Or, as I read in a newspaper article, hang, electrocute, etc. it.

Dogs hunting prey is a part of nature. Granted, a wild dog (wolf, dingo, etc.) may fight with another, but that is also nature. It's when a sea of people are around two domesticated dogs, taunting them and forcing them to fight, that it becomes not nature or anything of the sort - but pure and disgustingly evil.

Anyway, I'm not trying to just disprove your ideas because I appreciated your "arguments" and they brought some good points up, just trying to provide further distinction. []

BTW - Paula, glad I could help and thanks for the nice message!
Oh, and I think your question was a really, really good one. I'd never thought about the similarities between the two things mentioned here, so it was very interesting!

So, would you be ok with dog fighting if the dogs were only killed 10 % of the time, and the victims were then used for food?

 
Oh my Buster, you've totally misread my post.
 

  I intellectually understand that the cheetah or wolf or coyote who killed another of my lambs last night

 
But had you a livestock guardian dog, that most likely would NOT have happened.  Although you would have had to worry then about the safety of that LG-though most are plenty big enough to dispatch predators.
 
I understand that you are angry at losing a lamb, I would be angry at that as well. 
 
However, I did NOT say that I'm ok with dogs fighting.  There is no indication of that in my post whatsoever.  I was comparing a dog fight to a canned hunt.  I do not approve of either.
 
Do I approve of live coursing?  Absolutely.  We humans have killed off the predators with alarming regularity.  The prey species are breeding in unregulated numbers.  When humans hunt them we tend to kill off the strongest only.  When animals hunt they kill the weak, the old, and the young.  Thus the strongest are allowed more access to resources and they breed-strengthening the gene pool of that particular prey animal.
 
Prey animals are faster, better camouflaged, and have keener avoidance systems, and usually work in cooperation to foil predators.  In a live coursing, the hares are on their home turf-they know where the bolt holes are.  Smarter, older hares and rabbits, as well as coyotes and foxes, have been known to lure their pursuers into areas with sudden drop offs, lots of sinkholes, rocky terrain and other terrain that would cause certain injury or death of the predator.  So I don't feel sorry for them.  Nor would I feel sorry for any of the thousands of squirrels or chipmunks that delight in teasing dogs.  It's their home turf, they have speed, terrain knowledge and hundreds of thousands of years of evolution on their side.

And yes, in dog fighting the dogs are willing participants

 
not all the time. I watched a clip on CNN the other day that when the handlers released their dogs, the dogs actually licked each other and were wagging their tails. Then, the owners got them riled up and then they wanted to fight. The dogs looked like big softies

I don't, for the record, allow my ridgebacks to harrass wildlife. They are a hunting breed and given the opportunity they will hunt. I have about an acre yard in the woods and they take a great deal of pleasure trying to keep it rabbit and squirrel free. If I did hunt, and Yoshi was trained (because there is more to a hunting dog than instinct) he would make an incredible hunting companion. His prey drive is very high, he is athletic and fearless. If I did hunt it woudl be a joy to hunt with him because of these qualities, but I don't hunt. His prey is small and offers little risk to him - a groundhog would definitely put up a fight; which is why I say a 'little' risk. I don't know how I would feel about hunting big cats, for example; I have more empathy for big cats than squirrels I guess, and hunting big cats - or wild hog - would afford more risk to my dogs than I would be comfortable with. Maybe that's the difference between dog fighting and hunting? We arbitrarily assign animals to categories - those we eat, those we keep as pets, those we find cute, those with whom we have empathy. Maybe my horror at dog fighting is because we keep dogs as pets, and have a great deal of empathy for dogs, so we would be reluctant to hurt them (generally speaking). Beyond that, speaking as a hunter (theoretically), to use ISG's example, the dog fight equivalent (putting a deer in a pen with a ridgeback) would be like a canned hunt -generally considered unethical and without honor.

I think what I'm finding is that I have no problem decrying this illegal venture, and abhoring the poor treatment of the dogs - as I do the treatment of racehorses and greyhound - but I can't fight the righteous indignation against the activity itself. It is not something I find appealing in any way, and not something I would like to witness. At the same time, not everyone takes pleasure in watching a sighthound run down and kill a rabbit or a deer species.So this Vick guy deserves to be punished for breaking the law and for mistreating these dogs, but it would be hypocritical of me to be apalled by dog fighting I think. 

And yes, in dog fighting the dogs are willing participants

not all the time. I watched a clip on CNN the other day that when the handlers released their dogs, the dogs actually licked each other and were wagging their tails. Then, the owners got them riled up and then they wanted to fight. The dogs looked like big softies

 
You're right, sorry if I was misleading in what I said. It's true that the handlers do get the dogs all excited so they will want to fight, I just meant that the dogs ultimately fight with each other one way or another. That's so sad about the dogs having to go from wagging their tails at each other and then fighting... : (

So I'm watching this thread on two boards. Here's one big distinction between me and the animal industry (dogfighting, dog racing, horse racing, etc). If my ridgeback doesn't have a lick of instinct I'm not going to kill him for being useless as a hunting dog.

Paula