If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Shelter Dogs
This whole discussion was starting to sound awfully familiar so I looked
back in my sent mail and found that we'd had the discussion as recently as October. Back then we were talking about food aggression as it relates to choosing which shelter dogs to put down (kill). Here's what I had to say on the subject then: ------------------------------------ For me, the question isn't so much whether the food aggression test is fair or not-- it obviously isn't-- it is whether the food aggression test is more fair than some other. Let's imagine that you have 200 dogs you'd like to find homes for but money and space for only 100. You also know from past experience that only 75 good homes looking to adopt a dog are likely to walk in the door in any given week. The sad truth is that 100 dogs are going to have to be killed. How do you choose which ones? You could put numbers in a hat. You could come up with some formula based on how long the dog has been awaiting adoption. You could look at the age and health of the dog. You could look at how much time and training the dog would need to become a good pet. You could choose based on size or furriness or whether adopters tend to like long ears or short tails. When you get down to it, pretty much any method you choose is unfair. If you had space for 100 dogs, only 50 dogs, and more adopting families than you could supply with dogs, then you'd want to adopt out every dog you had. The only dogs that would be killed would be ones that were so vicious and unable to be rehabilitated that they presented an immediate danger to people. A minor food aggression problem or an imaginary food aggression problem wouldn't enter into it. ------------------------------------ I wonder if this is one of those long discussions where we spend a lot of words coming to the conclusion that we all basically agree. Perhaps it all comes down to the interpretation of the age old cry of "THAT'S NOT FAIR!" Some will hear that and immediately think "that's not fair and therefore steps should immediately be taken to come up with a more fair system and implement that system." Others will hear "that's not fair" and sympathetically agree with the crier. They'll both feel better for yelling and letting off steam but not feel the necessity to do anything about it. Perhaps the result of the "that's not fair" in this instance is to work to make fewer dogs in need of homes (not breeding dogs who don't have homes all lined up) and to work to make more homes (better training efforts for people who want dogs). Let me go off on one of my extended metaphors. My lit class spent a little time on the Puritan Revolution in England. I've thought about it a lot because I'd always studied that spot in history from the perspective of its influence on the U.S., not on England itself. For the first time I thought about what a paradigm shift that must have been for a nation of people who were used to thinking in terms of the divine right of kings to execute their king for treason. Before then, the mindset was that one could get a bad king and one could complain about a bad king, but it was like complaining about bad weather. You didn't really believe anything could or should be done. That's my analogy for the different ways we look at the cry of "that's not fair!" --Lia |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
: So, instead of crafting an adoptable pool of dogs by removing : potentially difficult dogs, perhaps another solution would be to appeal : to the better-prepared, dog-oriented potential adopters? Who are mostly too smart to want a PITA dog? ;-D I've adopted 2 adult dogs from the shelter I work with. One was a found dog of ~1, one was a surrendered dog of 2. Both were "easy" in almost every way. Heck, Lucy was/is a piece of cake. She moved in here with another dog and 2 cats like she had lived here all of her life. Should I have left her for a person who didn't have as much "dog skill" and adopted a tough dog instead? At the time I adopted her, I wasn't looking for a dog. She was meant to be mine though, and I think we've both benefited from the arrangement enormously! Every once in awhile, someone attempts to make me feel guilty for taking the "good one". I don't get that. OTOH, my purebred purchased as a puppy dog is not a dog who would have done well in a lot of homes. He's not a "difficult" dog, but hes not for everyone either. Janet Boss Best Friends Dog Obedience "Nice Manners for the Family Pet" Voted "Best of Baltimore 2001" - Baltimore Magazine www.bestfriendsdogobedience.com |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
: So, instead of crafting an adoptable pool of dogs by removing : potentially difficult dogs, perhaps another solution would be to appeal : to the better-prepared, dog-oriented potential adopters? Who are mostly too smart to want a PITA dog? ;-D I've adopted 2 adult dogs from the shelter I work with. One was a found dog of ~1, one was a surrendered dog of 2. Both were "easy" in almost every way. Heck, Lucy was/is a piece of cake. She moved in here with another dog and 2 cats like she had lived here all of her life. Should I have left her for a person who didn't have as much "dog skill" and adopted a tough dog instead? At the time I adopted her, I wasn't looking for a dog. She was meant to be mine though, and I think we've both benefited from the arrangement enormously! Every once in awhile, someone attempts to make me feel guilty for taking the "good one". I don't get that. OTOH, my purebred purchased as a puppy dog is not a dog who would have done well in a lot of homes. He's not a "difficult" dog, but hes not for everyone either. Janet Boss Best Friends Dog Obedience "Nice Manners for the Family Pet" Voted "Best of Baltimore 2001" - Baltimore Magazine www.bestfriendsdogobedience.com |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
: So, instead of crafting an adoptable pool of dogs by removing : potentially difficult dogs, perhaps another solution would be to appeal : to the better-prepared, dog-oriented potential adopters? Who are mostly too smart to want a PITA dog? ;-D I've adopted 2 adult dogs from the shelter I work with. One was a found dog of ~1, one was a surrendered dog of 2. Both were "easy" in almost every way. Heck, Lucy was/is a piece of cake. She moved in here with another dog and 2 cats like she had lived here all of her life. Should I have left her for a person who didn't have as much "dog skill" and adopted a tough dog instead? At the time I adopted her, I wasn't looking for a dog. She was meant to be mine though, and I think we've both benefited from the arrangement enormously! Every once in awhile, someone attempts to make me feel guilty for taking the "good one". I don't get that. OTOH, my purebred purchased as a puppy dog is not a dog who would have done well in a lot of homes. He's not a "difficult" dog, but hes not for everyone either. Janet Boss Best Friends Dog Obedience "Nice Manners for the Family Pet" Voted "Best of Baltimore 2001" - Baltimore Magazine www.bestfriendsdogobedience.com |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
J1Boss wrote:
: So, instead of crafting an adoptable pool of dogs by removing : potentially difficult dogs, perhaps another solution would be to appeal : to the better-prepared, dog-oriented potential adopters? Who are mostly too smart to want a PITA dog? ;-D Yahbut, your PITA may be my sweet baboo. I don't think any of my dogs has been particularly difficult, but I've been assured by others that Sam's activity level, Noah's bullying tendencies, Ranger's ball obsession and Duke's lumpishness are considered highly undesirable traits by Normal People. (Honestly, Duke's probably the "easiest" of my dogs, and he's the one most likely to make me crazy nuts. His Lab-normal reactions are just so Not Heeler that I find him a little difficult to understand sometimes.) Every once in awhile, someone attempts to make me feel guilty for taking the "good one". I don't get that. Like there's only one "good one" ever, and you've condemned the rest of humanity to "bad" dogs somehow? You get the dog you get, and sometimes that's an easy dog and sometimes that's a difficult dog and you do the best you can by the dog you get. THAT's the real difference between successful adoptions and failed adoptions, far more than how "easy" or "difficult" a particular dog might rate on some general scale. OTOH, my purebred purchased as a puppy dog is not a dog who would have done well in a lot of homes. He's not a "difficult" dog, but hes not for everyone either. g Sam is the reason I'm not getting another puppy. Ever. His puppyhood was as much puppyhood as I'm likely to ever want, thanks. Difficult? Not really. PITA? Oh, yeah. -- Mary H. and the Ames National Zoo: Regis, Sam-I-Am, Noah (1992-2001), Ranger, Duke, felines, and finches |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
J1Boss wrote:
: So, instead of crafting an adoptable pool of dogs by removing : potentially difficult dogs, perhaps another solution would be to appeal : to the better-prepared, dog-oriented potential adopters? Who are mostly too smart to want a PITA dog? ;-D Yahbut, your PITA may be my sweet baboo. I don't think any of my dogs has been particularly difficult, but I've been assured by others that Sam's activity level, Noah's bullying tendencies, Ranger's ball obsession and Duke's lumpishness are considered highly undesirable traits by Normal People. (Honestly, Duke's probably the "easiest" of my dogs, and he's the one most likely to make me crazy nuts. His Lab-normal reactions are just so Not Heeler that I find him a little difficult to understand sometimes.) Every once in awhile, someone attempts to make me feel guilty for taking the "good one". I don't get that. Like there's only one "good one" ever, and you've condemned the rest of humanity to "bad" dogs somehow? You get the dog you get, and sometimes that's an easy dog and sometimes that's a difficult dog and you do the best you can by the dog you get. THAT's the real difference between successful adoptions and failed adoptions, far more than how "easy" or "difficult" a particular dog might rate on some general scale. OTOH, my purebred purchased as a puppy dog is not a dog who would have done well in a lot of homes. He's not a "difficult" dog, but hes not for everyone either. g Sam is the reason I'm not getting another puppy. Ever. His puppyhood was as much puppyhood as I'm likely to ever want, thanks. Difficult? Not really. PITA? Oh, yeah. -- Mary H. and the Ames National Zoo: Regis, Sam-I-Am, Noah (1992-2001), Ranger, Duke, felines, and finches |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
J1Boss wrote:
: So, instead of crafting an adoptable pool of dogs by removing : potentially difficult dogs, perhaps another solution would be to appeal : to the better-prepared, dog-oriented potential adopters? Who are mostly too smart to want a PITA dog? ;-D Yahbut, your PITA may be my sweet baboo. I don't think any of my dogs has been particularly difficult, but I've been assured by others that Sam's activity level, Noah's bullying tendencies, Ranger's ball obsession and Duke's lumpishness are considered highly undesirable traits by Normal People. (Honestly, Duke's probably the "easiest" of my dogs, and he's the one most likely to make me crazy nuts. His Lab-normal reactions are just so Not Heeler that I find him a little difficult to understand sometimes.) Every once in awhile, someone attempts to make me feel guilty for taking the "good one". I don't get that. Like there's only one "good one" ever, and you've condemned the rest of humanity to "bad" dogs somehow? You get the dog you get, and sometimes that's an easy dog and sometimes that's a difficult dog and you do the best you can by the dog you get. THAT's the real difference between successful adoptions and failed adoptions, far more than how "easy" or "difficult" a particular dog might rate on some general scale. OTOH, my purebred purchased as a puppy dog is not a dog who would have done well in a lot of homes. He's not a "difficult" dog, but hes not for everyone either. g Sam is the reason I'm not getting another puppy. Ever. His puppyhood was as much puppyhood as I'm likely to ever want, thanks. Difficult? Not really. PITA? Oh, yeah. -- Mary H. and the Ames National Zoo: Regis, Sam-I-Am, Noah (1992-2001), Ranger, Duke, felines, and finches |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Jack wrote:
Do you have a reference for that, Sarah? A jurisdiction and/or ordinance number, maybe? If nothing else, I can use as an example of "what not to do." I chaired the Vicious Dog Hearing Board for 4.5 years. I can quote the law in my sleep. "A vicious dog is any dog that has bitten or attacked a human being or another animal, or has attempted to bite or attack a human being or another animal and was only prevented from doing so by a leash, fence, or other means" It's a hard one to prove and one that never was presented to us, but I see a huge potential for misuse of the law. Janet Boss Best Friends Dog Obedience "Nice Manners for the Family Pet" Voted "Best of Baltimore 2001" - Baltimore Magazine www.bestfriendsdogobedience.com |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Jack wrote:
Do you have a reference for that, Sarah? A jurisdiction and/or ordinance number, maybe? If nothing else, I can use as an example of "what not to do." I chaired the Vicious Dog Hearing Board for 4.5 years. I can quote the law in my sleep. "A vicious dog is any dog that has bitten or attacked a human being or another animal, or has attempted to bite or attack a human being or another animal and was only prevented from doing so by a leash, fence, or other means" It's a hard one to prove and one that never was presented to us, but I see a huge potential for misuse of the law. Janet Boss Best Friends Dog Obedience "Nice Manners for the Family Pet" Voted "Best of Baltimore 2001" - Baltimore Magazine www.bestfriendsdogobedience.com |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Jack wrote:
Do you have a reference for that, Sarah? A jurisdiction and/or ordinance number, maybe? If nothing else, I can use as an example of "what not to do." I chaired the Vicious Dog Hearing Board for 4.5 years. I can quote the law in my sleep. "A vicious dog is any dog that has bitten or attacked a human being or another animal, or has attempted to bite or attack a human being or another animal and was only prevented from doing so by a leash, fence, or other means" It's a hard one to prove and one that never was presented to us, but I see a huge potential for misuse of the law. Janet Boss Best Friends Dog Obedience "Nice Manners for the Family Pet" Voted "Best of Baltimore 2001" - Baltimore Magazine www.bestfriendsdogobedience.com |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Shelter Dogs | dogmurderer | Dog breeds | 4 | December 16th 03 06:52 AM |
Shelter Dogs | Tricia9999 | Dog behavior | 0 | December 14th 03 09:56 PM |
Need Advice and Help in placing 4 dogs in a no-kill shelter | Tara O. | Dog rescue | 50 | October 6th 03 11:24 PM |
[Fwd: Mass Gassing of Shelter Dogs, San Antonio, TX]] | Ken | Dog rescue | 0 | August 5th 03 07:24 AM |