any pitbull or pitbull mix owners?

[JESSICAinMD]

I have the sweetest pitbull. My 10 month adores him. He is a quick learner and is very obedient. My shih tzu is the trouble maker. In a loving family, they are loving dogs.

[Jenny Piaaree]

Your puppy is very cute. Of course most pit bulls don't end up biting anyone, and I have met some that were sweet. However, please be vigilant.

 

Some things to consider: It is fine for you to achieve dominance over your dog, but don't overlook your children. If the dog gets it into his head that he's next in line to you, then he could still be agressive with your kids. We had a dog that obeyed my dad well, but she growled at me a couple of times. My dad's current dog obeys him and me, but pushes my mother and grandmother around. He actually bit my grandmother.

 

Also, I know you intend to keep him in your yard or leashed, but how will you be sure he doesn't get out loose, esp. as so many are pointing out that huskies are escape artists? I don't know any dog that doesn't escape sometimes, especially if you have kids, who may think they latched the fence, but didn't quite get it, etc. Have a back-up system.

 

As I said, I have met some sweet pits, but I have also had some bad experiences with some. I have been rushed by a barking pit that got loose from its back yard and ran aggressively towards me and my toddler while we were across the street. I recently had a pit who had been left in the parked car next to mine lunge out the open window barking as I tried to get to my car. A man in my old neighborhood had a pit that he tied in the front yard, and that dog acted like it wanted to rip you open if you passed its house. My friend's cat was killed by a pit in that same neighborhood. Also recently a young pit came rushing out from its yard to approach me and my old dog, who was on a leash. Its approach was friendly enough, but my dog can be unpredictable with other dogs, so I didn't know how she would act. In fact, there were a few tense moments. Basically, I REALLY don't appreciate it when people don't have their pit bulls under FIRM control. If you are going to have this kind of dog, besides being exceptionally vigilant, you will also need to be oustandingly sensitive to others' feelings and fears about them. That's what I think, anyway.

 

Again, the odds are in your favor, but it is still a risk you must prepare for. It sounds like you are trying to do just that, so kudos for thinking ahead and trying to be responsible.

[sadiegirl]

So....your dog killed their dog, and you generously offered to pay half of the vet bill? :confused:

 

Are you confused because we only offered to pay half? Or that we felt obligated to help in some way. It was a terrible thing for all those involved and we just felt like it was the right thing to do. We offered to pay as we felt bad for them...as well as for our children who witnessed the incident AND the effects of the hatred and anger that followed. We wanted to express our apology for it happening and yet we didn't feel that we had to pay for it all as they knew before they took it to the vet that it wasn't going to survive. Would I buy a pit again? No, but that doesn't mean that this same thing couldn't have with a different breed. It was a no-win situation for us with these people.

[Joker]

The pit wouldn't bother me so much. I grew up with one of the sweetest pure pit bulls. She never harmed anyone. The husky part would give me pause though. Our neighbor growing up had a husky. Once my brother was playing with the neighbor boy in his back yard (as he had several times before) and the husky took a chunk out of my brother's back. The neighbor said the dog must have felt threatened. We let it go since he was in their yard. A few months later the husky jumped the fence and killed our cat. My mom stood in the driveway yielding a baseball bat until the dog left and we were all inside. When my mom confronted the neighbor he said that the cat must have taunted the dog. :confused: My mom finally made some calls and the dog was gone. I'd really research both breeds before you make a decision and then be really careful.

[hornblower]

So....your dog killed their dog, and you generously offered to pay half of the vet bill? :confused:

 

as they knew before they took it to the vet that it wasn't going to survive. .

 

 

Well, add me to the confused list. Taking an injured dog to the vet is a necessity regardless of whether you think it'll survive. It also seems reasonable that the vet would try to save it if they thought there was a chance. Of course, if coming in the situation looks very dire, the humane thing is to euthenize gently by a vet. Either way - attempt to treat or euthenize - I think the owner of the dog who did the damage should pay 100% of costs.

 

 

 

One thing I do want to say is that a lot of people are mixing up aggressive behaviour towards dogs (or cats or other small animals) with aggressive behaviour to people. These are entirely different things. A dog can be aggressive towards dogs/cats/small furries and be a total marshmallow & absolutely bomb proof with people. Vice versa is also true, esp with semi-feral dogs who get along well with dogs but may be very wary around people.

 

 

BTW, for dog people interested in aggression & behaviour in general, the dogread yahoogroup (where a 'dog' author discusses their book for a month at a time) has a very interesting author on right now. Lots of very good discussion (or arguments!) about what is the true nature of dogs.... & how we've messed up certain breeds.

 

This is her site http://www.nonlineardogs.com

 

& the dogread yahoo link:

 

http://pets.groups.yahoo.com/group/DogRead/

[SonshineLearner]

And of course, the last story in the last few weeks. Family dog... raised from a pup... went outside with little 4 year old... killed her. I have the SWEETEST dog... and I am VERY careful when he's around kids. I wouldn't let a pit around my children. Bummer... many of them look so sweet. :(

[IdahoHomeschooler]

I guess I am one of those people who breed discriminate. There are specific characteristics that pitbulls were especially bred for. It was not to be a family friendly dog. Other breeds may have a higher incidence of reported bites, like the Golden Retriever, but I imagine that would be in large part due to their overwhelming popularity and the sheer volume of Golden Retrievers that are in households today. Plus, I would much rather myself, my child, or my small ankle biter get bit by a Golden Retriever than a pitbull any day. There are *so many* good choices of dogs out there for a family, I can't imagine why anyone would choose to go down this path? And, no, my child would not be allowed at your house, and you would definitely be persona non grata as a neighbor.

[hornblower]

babynurse11 - I don't have a problem with people choosing not to own a certain breed of dog. But you are misinformed about pitbull terriers and their breed characteristics & their original suitability as a family dog.

 

Do you remember Our Gang & Little Rascals? Petey was a pit bull.

http://www.pitbullsontheweb.com/petbull/pete.php

 

The breed was developed for bull baiting, bear baiting and dog fighting. But it was never developed for human aggression. It does not make a very good guard dog. A well bred pit is very human friendly. Many of them are also not very interested at dogfighting & would probably try to lick a bear :D

 

One other thing to remember - very few dogs were bred solely for human companionship. Labs & goldens are retrievers - they're hunting dogs. Most dogs were bred to guard property & people, herd sheep/cattle, flush game, catch game or retrieve it. I don't disagree with you that many of these dogs exhibit breed characteristics which make them fit into family life well. But well bred pitties (as well as dobermans, rottweilers, mastiffs, gsd's etc etc - lots of people don't approve of these either) can also be excellent family pets.

 

I personally am opposed to this type of stereotyping and breed bans.

[sadiegirl]

Well, add me to the confused list. Taking an injured dog to the vet is a necessity regardless of whether you think it'll survive. It also seems reasonable that the vet would try to save it if they thought there was a chance. Of course, if coming in the situation looks very dire, the humane thing is to euthenize gently by a vet. Either way - attempt to treat or euthenize - I think the owner of the dog who did the damage should pay 100% of costs.

 

 

We felt like offering to pay half of the vet costs was fair...in fact, the animal control officer that interviewed us said that that was unusual for us to even offer that amount. The police officers that came to our house afterwards were surprised we paid any at all considering the event occurred on our property and how they turned this event into such an ordeal in the neighborhood. Until you experience something like this, I think it is hard to say how you would handle it and believe me, we tried so very hard to do the right thing for ALL involved. As far as the owner taking the dog to the vet, I wanted her to do that...but I don't know whether the vet encouraged to do her to enthenize the dog or not...we weren't there but of course we would want them to do what they could to save the dog...

[FaithManor]

Things must be very different in your neighborhood or state. I am shocked that you were able to get away with paying only half.

 

We used to have a black lab that was chained and kenneled. He was a good dog.

 

The neighbor boy, who had twice been thrown off the property for abusing our animal and hitting our kids, came over, let himself in the kennel and beat the dog with the limb of a tree. This was so premeditated that he had covered a length of the limb with duct tape to make a nice handhold.

 

Our dog, according to another neighbor (I wasn't outside to witness the event) said that Jack took the beating for quite some time, and then finally bit the boy. Jack was still in his pen and on his chain. He was bruised and bleeding from the blows, one ear was cut open, etc.

 

The boy went blubbering home to his parents. They called an ambulance (the bite was superficial) which made the ambulance company mad. Their insurance refused to pay for the ambulance call. We were required by law to pay for the ambulance call even though the child was not transported. We then had to pay for two follow up doctor's visits - the doctor's report stated that the wound was so minor that it couldn't even be absolutely atributed to the dog and wondered if the kid fell. We had a homeowners deductible so we paid this out of pocket - probably for the best because our premiums did not go up. The sherriff's department demanded that Jack be euthanized because that is the local law in our area. All dogs who bite, no matter what the circumstances, must be euthanized. Jack was put to sleep, on a weekend at our expense ($250.00 at the only vet's office that returned our phone call on a Saturday - but we faced legal action if he wasn't euthanized within 24 hours).

 

Though we attempted to bring charges against the 13 year old boy for animal abuse, trespassing, destruction of private property, etc. The police refused to do anything other than to warn him never to come on our property again. We even had a copy of the letter we had sent that kid's parents two months previous to the event stating he was NEVER welcome on our property again. I had the registered receipt showing that they had received the letter.

 

Two adults and one other neighbor child witnessed the beating. Jack was still put to sleep.

 

So, I would advise anyone who keeps a dog to check their local laws. We have never had a dog since then and probably never will. The liability is too great and the list of breeds we can not own and still have homeowner's is quite large - german shepherds, poodles, chow's, terriers of any kind, pits, saint bernards, huskies, and golden retrievers to name a few.

 

Faith

[Laurie4b]

Things must be very different in your neighborhood or state. I am shocked that you were able to get away with paying only half.

 

We used to have a black lab that was chained and kenneled. He was a good dog.

 

The neighbor boy, who had twice been thrown off the property for abusing our animal and hitting our kids, came over, let himself in the kennel and beat the dog with the limb of a tree. This was so premeditated that he had covered a length of the limb with duct tape to make a nice handhold.

 

Our dog, according to another neighbor (I wasn't outside to witness the event) said that Jack took the beating for quite some time, and then finally bit the boy. Jack was still in his pen and on his chain. He was bruised and bleeding from the blows, one ear was cut open, etc.

 

The boy went blubbering home to his parents. They called an ambulance (the bite was superficial) which made the ambulance company mad. Their insurance refused to pay for the ambulance call. We were required by law to pay for the ambulance call even though the child was not transported. We then had to pay for two follow up doctor's visits - the doctor's report stated that the wound was so minor that it couldn't even be absolutely atributed to the dog and wondered if the kid fell. We had a homeowners deductible so we paid this out of pocket - probably for the best because our premiums did not go up. The sherriff's department demanded that Jack be euthanized because that is the local law in our area. All dogs who bite, no matter what the circumstances, must be euthanized. Jack was put to sleep, on a weekend at our expense ($250.00 at the only vet's office that returned our phone call on a Saturday - but we faced legal action if he wasn't euthanized within 24 hours).

 

Though we attempted to bring charges against the 13 year old boy for animal abuse, trespassing, destruction of private property, etc. The police refused to do anything other than to warn him never to come on our property again. We even had a copy of the letter we had sent that kid's parents two months previous to the event stating he was NEVER welcome on our property again. I had the registered receipt showing that they had received the letter.

 

Two adults and one other neighbor child witnessed the beating. Jack was still put to sleep.

 

So, I would advise anyone who keeps a dog to check their local laws. We have never had a dog since then and probably never will. The liability is too great and the list of breeds we can not own and still have homeowner's is quite large - german shepherds, poodles, chow's, terriers of any kind, pits, saint bernards, huskies, and golden retrievers to name a few.

 

Faith

 

That is totally disgusting and unfair. What ridiculous laws you have in your area.

[hornblower]

We used to have a black lab that was chained and kenneled. He was a good dog.

 

:svengo:

 

I'm sure he was a good dog at some point but chaining & kennelling is well known to create aggression in dogs.

 

Chaining is not only inhumane for dogs, but has taken a severe toll on this nation’s children as well. In the period from October 2003 through today,there were at least 296 children killed or seriously injured by chained dogs across the country. Chained dogs, unsocialized with humans, can become very territorial of their tiny space, and any two year old who wanders into this space can be attacked and killed before adults can intervene. A recent attack in Arkansas in October 2009 left 2 year old Matthew Clayton Hurt dead from head and neck wounds. He was attacked and killed by an unspayed female chained in the backyard, with puppies.

Would you for one second choose to live the life of these dogs? No matter what reason is given, the bottom line is that it is NOT ok to chain a dog for life. Dogs should not have to live chained or penned as prisoners, yearning for a place in a family, craving acknowledgement, respect, and love. They DESERVE BETTER, and we as caretakers have the obligation to provide it for them.

Please consider today how you can help the dogs in your neighborhood. If you see a chained dog or a penned dog daily, it is time to take action. Please join Dogs Deserve Better today in taking a stand against this mistreatment of dogs.

 

http://www.dogsdeservebetter.org/

 

 

BTW, the insurance issue is, I think, a regional thing & totally insane. If I were an insurer I'd refuse to insure anyone who had a gun. The stats I've seen show less than 20 fatal dog attacks/year, but close to 900 accidental gun deaths.

My house & property are fully insured.

[EKS]

I didn't read it as meaning she was going to tie it up in the yard and ignore it. I read "leash" and thought. "Good, she's going to keep him from running off and getting lost or killed."

 

Every husky breeder I've ever met has told me not to let them off-leash. This seems to be a perplexing thing to non-husky owners. It is, nonetheless a very common and well-know practice among husky breeders and owners. Not only do they run, they run away from you fast and in a straight line--none of that teasing circling thing the herding breeds do when they're feeling naughty. They don't look back and seldom come home.

 

I used to belong to a yahoo group where many of the owners had titled obedience dogs and STILL kept their dogs leashed in unenclosed areas and even had to give up competing once in a while when it became apparent the dog was not in the mood to stay in the ring on that particular day.

 

http://www.siberescue.com/Common/Leash/leashTRUST.html (a bit dramatic, but gets the point across).

 

They do, however benefit from LOTS of exercise so take good long walks and if you can, find a nice safe enclosed area for him to run. Supervised! They can also be escape artists. :tongue_smilie:

 

My feeling about it is, no matter what the breed, that if you don't have a fenced yard that is fenced securely enough to contain the dog, then you should either keep the dog inside or not get the dog (and my preference would be for the latter). On the other hand, keeping the dog on leash during walks (which I agree should be regular and often) is also critical.

[Haiku]

I think that there might be confusion about what it means to "chain" a dog. We have two dogs and a fully fenced yard. Both of our dogs are master diggers and have learned to dig out of the yard. This spring we will be re-doing our fence so that they can no longer do this, but this winter we have had our dogs "chained" (we say "on a line") when they go outside.

 

THIS DOES NOT MEAN THAT OUR DOGS SIT FOR HOURS, ALONE, IN THE BACKYARD, UNSOCIALIZED, UNLOVED, AND LEFT TO LANGUISH.

 

It means that when the dogs tell us they need to pee, we attach the line to their collar and let them do their business. They bark when they want to come back in. One dog barks almost immediately. The other likes to lie in the sun, sometimes for two or three hours. Sometimes the kids are out playing with the dogs. Sometimes the dogs are out alone. The line is in a place where they can't reach anything, so there is no danger of them becoming tangled in a swingset or fence. When a dog is out on the line, I check on them every few minutes. We don't leave our dogs outside on a line if they don't want to be there, and, as I mentioned, they know that if they bark we will come let them in.

 

you should either keep the dog inside or not get the dog (and my preference would be for the latter)

 

I completely disagree with this. Our dogs are well-loved and get lots of play time and affection. They are happy dogs. We take them on walks and for car rides. The kids play with them constantly. They came from shelters (one a no-kill shelter, one a kill shelter). One of our dogs would have been euthanized within a week had we not adopted him. The other of our dogs was going to be euthanized because she had heartworms and the shelter wouldn't (couldn't afford to) treat her. We took her on a foster basis and found a place to help us with low-cost treatment. We then adopted her.

 

I'm looking forward to redoing our fence so the dogs can't dig out, but even if we had to use a line every time they went out for the rest of their lives, I don't buy it that it would be better if we didn't have them.

 

Tara

Edited March 17, 2010 by TaraTheLiberator

[Laurie4b]

babynurse11 - I don't have a problem with people choosing not to own a certain breed of dog. But you are misinformed about pitbull terriers and their breed characteristics & their original suitability as a family dog.

 

Do you remember Our Gang & Little Rascals? Petey was a pit bull.

http://www.pitbullsontheweb.com/petbull/pete.php

 

The breed was developed for bull baiting, bear baiting and dog fighting. But it was never developed for human aggression. It does not make a very good guard dog. A well bred pit is very human friendly. Many of them are also not very interested at dogfighting & would probably try to lick a bear :D

 

One other thing to remember - very few dogs were bred solely for human companionship. Labs & goldens are retrievers - they're hunting dogs. Most dogs were bred to guard property & people, herd sheep/cattle, flush game, catch game or retrieve it. I don't disagree with you that many of these dogs exhibit breed characteristics which make them fit into family life well. But well bred pitties (as well as dobermans, rottweilers, mastiffs, gsd's etc etc - lots of people don't approve of these either) can also be excellent family pets.

 

I personally am opposed to this type of stereotyping and breed bans.

 

But isn't it true that in actual practice, pitbulls are largely owned and bred by people who are not reputable dog owners/breeders? It's because of who is most likely to own the dogs that makes me think it's wise to require some extra layer of regulation. For instance, to get to tutoring, which is in a Habitat for Humanity neighborhood, I drive through a dangerous section of town. Every single dog in that neighborhood looks like a pit, with the exception of a German shepherd or two. Our area also has a lot of underground pit bull fighting, which to me makes it more likely that the pits around here have been bred for aggression. (There are attempts at enforcement. It is not tolerated. Just underground.)

 

I'm thinking it would be wise to require a license before you own a pit. If the license was given, like a driver's license, after demonstrating knowledge of handling dogs, then it would give greater assurance that people who own a breed capable of inflicting greater damage or which is used regularly in dog fighting have had to jump through extra hoops. I'm thinking that would make the breed less attractive. Would these same owners jump through all the hoops? I doubt it. I think it would be a step to reversing the breeding genetics of pit bulls.

 

One could argue that being licensed to own a dog should be required from all dog owners. That might not be a bad idea either. However, for the protection of the rest of us, I would really like that for owners of the breeds who inflict the most damage. I'm not concerned about rate of bites, but rates of damage done to humans. Little nippy dogs probably bite more because their owners tolerate it, but they don't have the ability to inflict the same level of damage.

[Laughing Lionette]

I'm so sorry this was your experience! I have to say that this is NOT necessarily a pitbull-only reaction. QUOTE]

 

Amen! We have a "pure bred" Akita (technically she is a half 'n half - half Japanese and half American...). When we first had her we were living next door to a Cocker Spaniel who thoroughly enjoyed yapping at our, at the time, seven pound puppy. As our seven pound puppy grew into a thirty pounder (out weighing the Cocker by about fifteen pounds) the Spaniel thought it was so much more fun to irritate the gentle-nanny-type-getting irritated pup. The cocker spaniel was an older couples "child replacement," since their children were adults and had moved away. Our neighbors were wonderful people whom we interacted with on a relatively regular basis (even if this meant just saying hi while watering the lawn). One day we heard a strange screaming type yelp in our back yard. The little Spaniel had gotten into our yard, yapping at our now fairly-large Akita. Diamond, our "puppy," did not appreciated this at all. Without so much as snarking at the little dog, she grabbed it and throttled it nearly to death. Being a foolish nine year old, I grabbed Diamond collar only to be bitten by one of the dogs (I didn't know any better at the time and have no memory as to which dog it was that bit me).

Unfortunately this terminated the relationship with our neighbors completely, even though we payed for the entire vet bill. It was a horrid experience!

Yes, Akita's are in the top-ten "most aggressive dogs," on whatever dog census there is. To be honest, we have never had a more gentle, wonderful, family friendly, completely beautiful dog. She's now ten years old, and my two younger siblings have grown up with them, laying on her back, sitting on top of her, and her reaction is to open her eyes, lick 'em, and go back to sleep in a sun-beam.

I would give a lot to have another dog like her! Gentle, firm training. She's stubborn and hard headed, and I haven't been able to teach her anything more than "sit," "come," but she responds to her name and stops when told, ASAP - even when that Spaniel trespassed on our (aka. her) property.

 

Currently, we are taking care of our 10 year old lady Akita, who enjoys being a rug amidst the kids and being with people in a location that she can observe all human action (before the house-fire she would sit an area between the living room and dining room, where she could also see the action in the kitchen, basement door area and front door - a social dog, you could say ;)). My parents also allowed me to bring into the home an "Australian Shepherd," which I have found has just as much Rottweiler as shepherd (perhaps with some other breeds as well, such as Labrador and possible husky). Have gone through beginners puppy training, and a correction collar with the now year old mix, and she is a fantastic animal. And no, I don't trust her with the children alone. To be honest, I don't think I could ever trust any young dog (under 5 years old) with children under the age of ten, alone. Too many risks. The kids don't know, and the pup is a spaz :001_smile:

 

Congratulations on your new dog, good luck and do your research (as you are doing - lol :001_smile:)

[hornblower]

One could argue that being licensed to own a dog should be required from all dog owners. That might not be a bad idea either. However, for the protection of the rest of us, I would really like that for owners of the breeds who inflict the most damage. I'm not concerned about rate of bites, but rates of damage done to humans. Little nippy dogs probably bite more because their owners tolerate it, but they don't have the ability to inflict the same level of damage.

 

yeah, it's all very tricky. You're not likely to die from an attack by a chihuahua or a min pin (which I have been bit by...I've been bit by several other dogs btw & I don't particularly like it :glare:. Never needed stitches so never really serious but blood, yes. Still have a scar from a gsd bite on my hand...)

 

Actually, I could get behind being required to be really well licenced to own any dog.

I think there's been a bit of a push to get people to get their dogs the Canine Good Citizen (US) or Canine Good Neighbour (Canada) certificate instead of mandating breed specific legislation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canine_Good_Citizen

 

The wikipedia page says:

 

The program has also been an important option for some communities wrestling with whether to adopt breed specific legislation (BSL), such as cities like Pasco, Washington, which has experienced pit bull owner problems. Their hybrid program allowed owners to either secure very expensive insurance or have their dog pass the CGC test. The test, in this case, was actually more a Good Canine Owner test and led to a drastic reduction of dog threats and attacks.

 

 

 

I think there is also a problem with our attitudes to dogs. Sometimes it seems there are people who like 'tough' dogs, and then the rest expects all dogs to be like Lassie or a mellow guide dog - & often expects that to be innate & not require any training. There's not a lot of tolerance for what I think is normal dog behaviour & I think we're really stressing dogs, esp with urban living which requires a lot of compromises on their part in terms of abandoning their social rules in favour of ours.....

 

Difficult issues, I grant you.

[Penelope]

I'll be one more wet blanket. My children do not play at homes where there is a pit bull. Yes, many of them have sweet personalities. But *if* something ever sets one off, it can be *devastating* in a way that many other dogs are not.

 

Ditto.

 

Pit bulls and swimming pools are deal breakers for me.

[hornblower]

Ditto.

 

Pit bulls and swimming pools are deal breakers for me.

 

LOL - I love people with swimming pools. I'd invite ourselves over as much as I thought I could politely get away with. :lol: Just goes to show you how different people are.

[hornblower]

. For instance, to get to tutoring, which is in a Habitat for Humanity neighborhood, I drive through a dangerous section of town. Every single dog in that neighborhood looks like a pit, with the exception of a German shepherd or two.

 

I was just thinking of something else. I'm guessing it's correct to say that many of these dangerous neighbourhoods have a certain ethnic or racial profile as well. This is true in my area anyway. I believe however that we generally try to not stereoptype beyond those neighbourhoods, right? Just b/e x dangerous neighbourhood has a high proportion of people from such and such a country, or an identifiable ethnic or racial profile, we don't say ALL those people are gang fighting, drug dealing, violent individuals. I think the same logic needs to apply to the dogs.

 

Oh & just on the subject of dog fighting - Vick sucks; I'm disgusted he's back.

[Mejane]

Our big lab is not allowed to roam freely in our house. He is just too rambunctious even at nine years old. His bed is kept off the kitchen/family room so he can feel he is with us. He goes outside several times a day for walks or ball-playing, whenever we're doing yardwork, or on his run.

 

I've had people scold me for confining him within the house. I then remind them that, as we are homeschoolers, he gets much more attention than most dogs whose people are at work or school all day. Two of our neighbors pay my son to let their dogs out during the day, but most are crated or confined inside for eight hours a day. :sad:

[TravelingChris]

Penelope- I gather either your kids don't know how to swim or are too young to swim, right?

 

We had a pool at our last house. But our youngest was 8 or 9 when we moved in and a great swimmer. I was always cautious about the pool and never offered to have a book club where several members had small children who would tag along because of my pool. I only invited older children who knew how to swim and then monitored them. But I wouldn't invite non-swimmers nor little ones.

[TravelingChris]

WHat place restricts poodles? Do they restrict only standard poodles or even mini and toy poodles and why? I have a minaiture poodle now and he not only doesn't bite, he doesn't yap either unless there is someone coming up the driveway and I am glad he does that. (He also barks at deer and I am happy about that too.) But he only weighs 15 pounds and if someone thinks you can't have a dog like him, what kind can you possibly have? My cat is more aggressive than him though like him, he is also an indoor pet.

[FaithManor]

Hi, I only know what is common in our area. Insurance companies compile state dog bite statistics and then restrict the breeds that over ten years have the most bites reported. So, chihuahua and poodles are on there but I think the toy poodle is considered the offender of the poodle breeds. Apparently, really little dogs feel easily threatened and are very excitable.

 

I forgot to also list Doberman Pinchers and Rotweilers. Some companies won't cover bites from these dogs, others charge you a higher premium. That's our area. I would imagine that every state is different.

 

Of course, in our rural neck of the woods, dogs not contained or controlled is about as common as sparrow sightings! Dog bite reports are at an all time high, so we probably fall within some sort of high risk area that causes the insurance companies to start "banning" breeds.

 

Faith

[IdahoHomeschooler]

babynurse11 - I don't have a problem with people choosing not to own a certain breed of dog. But you are misinformed about pitbull terriers and their breed characteristics & their original suitability as a family dog.

 

Do you remember Our Gang & Little Rascals? Petey was a pit bull.

http://www.pitbullsontheweb.com/petbull/pete.php

 

The breed was developed for bull baiting, bear baiting and dog fighting. But it was never developed for human aggression. It does not make a very good guard dog. A well bred pit is very human friendly. Many of them are also not very interested at dogfighting & would probably try to lick a bear :D

 

One other thing to remember - very few dogs were bred solely for human companionship. Labs & goldens are retrievers - they're hunting dogs. Most dogs were bred to guard property & people, herd sheep/cattle, flush game, catch game or retrieve it. I don't disagree with you that many of these dogs exhibit breed characteristics which make them fit into family life well. But well bred pitties (as well as dobermans, rottweilers, mastiffs, gsd's etc etc - lots of people don't approve of these either) can also be excellent family pets.

 

I personally am opposed to this type of stereotyping and breed bans.

 

 

 

 

You tell me that I am misinformed about the " breed characteristics & their original suitability as a family dog," then go on to tell me how they were bred for" bull baiting, bear baiting and dog fighting." Um, okay. So where am I uninformed about the suitability of pits being family dogs? Because I breed animals, and I know that temperment is quite often genetic, and breeders were selecting for very specific charecteristics to acheive a dog who, in your own words was for " bull baiting, bear baiting and dog fighting."

 

I have no doubt that a well-bred pitbull would be suitable as a family dog. A very long standing breeding program with a highly qualified breeder carefully selecting for temperment could very well produce some good family dogs. However, I am certainly not going to assume that every pit out there is the product of such a program. I am going to assume, as in the case of the OP, that the pit is likely the result of some backyard breeding. I'll continue to err on the side of caution, thank you very much.

[Mermaid Mama]

Things must be very different in your neighborhood or state. I am shocked that you were able to get away with paying only half.

 

We used to have a black lab that was chained and kenneled. He was a good dog.

 

The neighbor boy, who had twice been thrown off the property for abusing our animal and hitting our kids, came over, let himself in the kennel and beat the dog with the limb of a tree. This was so premeditated that he had covered a length of the limb with duct tape to make a nice handhold.

 

Our dog, according to another neighbor (I wasn't outside to witness the event) said that Jack took the beating for quite some time, and then finally bit the boy. Jack was still in his pen and on his chain. He was bruised and bleeding from the blows, one ear was cut open, etc.

 

The boy went blubbering home to his parents. They called an ambulance (the bite was superficial) which made the ambulance company mad. Their insurance refused to pay for the ambulance call. We were required by law to pay for the ambulance call even though the child was not transported. We then had to pay for two follow up doctor's visits - the doctor's report stated that the wound was so minor that it couldn't even be absolutely atributed to the dog and wondered if the kid fell. We had a homeowners deductible so we paid this out of pocket - probably for the best because our premiums did not go up. The sherriff's department demanded that Jack be euthanized because that is the local law in our area. All dogs who bite, no matter what the circumstances, must be euthanized. Jack was put to sleep, on a weekend at our expense ($250.00 at the only vet's office that returned our phone call on a Saturday - but we faced legal action if he wasn't euthanized within 24 hours).

 

Though we attempted to bring charges against the 13 year old boy for animal abuse, trespassing, destruction of private property, etc. The police refused to do anything other than to warn him never to come on our property again. We even had a copy of the letter we had sent that kid's parents two months previous to the event stating he was NEVER welcome on our property again. I had the registered receipt showing that they had received the letter.

 

Two adults and one other neighbor child witnessed the beating. Jack was still put to sleep.

 

So, I would advise anyone who keeps a dog to check their local laws. We have never had a dog since then and probably never will. The liability is too great and the list of breeds we can not own and still have homeowner's is quite large - german shepherds, poodles, chow's, terriers of any kind, pits, saint bernards, huskies, and golden retrievers to name a few.

 

Faith

 

I am disgusted in your police department.

In a few years it will be another human that he maims or murders and maybe then they will take notice. Absolutely disgusting. I think I would have to fight that on so many levels.......

 

So so so sorry that your poor dog ended up being treated this way. Poor kids too!! I just can't imagine how I would feel....... What a very sad injustice.

[Scarlett]

I am disgusted in your police department.

In a few years it will be another human that he maims or murders and maybe then they will take notice. Absolutely disgusting. I think I would have to fight that on so many levels.......

 

So so so sorry that your poor dog ended up being treated this way. Poor kids too!! I just can't imagine how I would feel....... What a very sad injustice.

 

I didn't read all the posts but I too was disgusted by this PD. Ugh.

 

Anyway, wanted to chime in that we owned a Boxer/Pitt mix. He was mostly Boxer and looked Boxer. To the original poster I would definitely refer to your dog as a Husky or Husky mix. It will lesson the stereotype for you.

 

Our dog was incredible. He was no more or less dangerous to humans or other animals than any other breed. We raised him to be a pet not a fighting monster. He was territorial but I believe and have read that is a Boxer trait as much as the Pitt trait. He did not let strangers into our yard (or cats :glare:) but we took him out with us in our open Jeep often and he would not approach or be aggressive toward anyone. Even on walks he would just sniff at a cat on the sidewalk where as he would try to kill any cat that came into our yard.

 

Animals are animals. I never trust them with small children.

[PineFarmMom]

never mind :)

Edited March 19, 2010 by Texas T

[TravelingChris]

I checked my insurance (USAA) and the guy laughed with me and said mini poodles are fine. What isn't fine are : Rottweilers, Pitbulls, Akitas, German Shepherds, and one other breed that escapes me right now but it is a large breed.

[mammaruss]

I only read the first couple pages----it is not just pitbulls or the larger breeds--such as shepherds & dobermans that can bite--ALL DOGS CAN BITE---they are animals--animals are not perfect and put under the wrong condition or backed into a corner, or for a number of other reasons --they can all bite!!

We own a dog training/boarding kennel. After years of working with dogs of all shapes and sizes, we have honestly found that the smaller breeds have more of an attitude problem and have a tendency to bite... We do show all dogs respect and expect the same in return--but in our experience it is the little "ankle biters" that have caused us more problems over the years than any of the bigger breeds. :confused:

[weaver_67579]

I did not read the rest of the replies.

 

There is no breed that is bad. It is important to get the right breed or type of dog for you and your family. No breed is right for everyone. I had loads of them in obedience classes-never had a problem. To own them, you need to be absolutely on top of everything. They need a confident owner that takes the time to properly train and socialize them. Training and socialization is a lifetime commitment. My old dogs range in age from nearly 12 to nearly 16 and I still make them do some obedience now and again to keep them on their toes.

 

I would say the best thing you could do is take the puppy to a puppy socialization class where they get to interact with other puppies and people. A good instructor can guide the interactions and can also help you identify any starting problems to deal with before they get to be bad habits. Do not brush off any questionable behavior. If you are concerned even a little bit about anything-seek out a trainer. Most all of the horror stories you hear about dogs that "just snapped" are a bunch of bunk. (There are a few exceptions to this that include true mental illness such as RAGE in spaniels-but that is exceedingly rare-I have only seen one case myself as a vet-tech) The dogs were more than likely exhibiting some signals and issues that were just not noticed or were overlooked. Remember-anything that you would not want the dog to do as an adult, should be stopped now as a puppy.

 

Good luck

Let me know if you have any questions

 

Jeanette