Best site for finding a dog?

Thanks for all the compliments guys.

I never blamed any of you for what happened and I said that. I just said that you should think carefully before pushing someone to go and get a sheltered pet. I guess I should have explained what I meant by that better, but time was short. I am sorry for that.

I simply meant that I believe that getting a sheltered pet is more riskier then getting one from an owner that knows the dog (which is how I have gotten almost every one of my many great dogs throughout my life). Most (Not all, most) of the dogs at shelters have been rejected by their owners. People in general do not REJECT good well balanced dogs without problems. They either keep them themselves or make sure they find a good home if they can't keep them. This is just plain common sense. That is not to say that dogs do not end up in shelters for other reason, or that all dogs in shelters are bad; it just means that when get a shelter dog, you run a greater risk of getting a pet that has been rejected because they have some kind of problem.

You guys have made judgments about me based on you limited understanding of the situation. There was my wife, two sons and daughter-in-law involved in the process. I did not not even want to get Gus myself. We went to the "Pound" after going to the ASPCA, where we met people from the City of Abilene Animal Shelter, who asked us to come by. We went there looking for a small dog, not a yellow lab. When my family saw Gus, they instantly wanted him, but I said no, because we did not know anything about him. I resisted for three days against unbelievable pressure from all of them. I finally agreed to give the dog a try under the agreement that if I saw anything I did not like in the dog, he would go away. So guys, you can throw all the mud at me you want for not listening to you and your advice about going to a shelter, but it just won't stick.

I never said that shelters should not investigate the dogs they give out, but I don't feel they have the right to investigate me. I don't need anyone to tell me what I NEED. I know exactly what I want and need. I just need them to answer my questions about the dog. I can make the decision whether or not a dog is right for me. I don't need anyone else's opinion about it.


I know most of you here think that you are more intelligent then me. I want to give you a chance to prove that. I want you to give me an intelligent, non emotional answer to this question.

What makes a dog of more intrinsic value then any other animal?

Let me give you an example of what I mean by this. I raise pure bred show chickens. Here are some pictures.



I invest heavily in the care of these birds. Many of them I hand raised from chicks. I derive great joy from raising them. What makes a dog of more value then my chickens?

I am looking for an intelligent answer.

Ok, in your experience getting a shelter dog is riskier than getting one from a previous owner. That's not always the case because people often lie. In shelters, they ask questions to the surrendering owner but have to still test the dog because again, people will lie because they are worried people won't want a dog with problems. And no, you are wrong again. Plenty of people reject dogs with no or few problems. Some of the biggest reasons dogs are in shelters is because their owners are moving, they affected someone's allergies, they were born to a stray/unwanted dog, they themselves were a stray,by heir owners die/get ill/go into a nursing home, they were given to someone who did not want them, people 'lose interest', and because they get abused and are removed by the police. Are dogs turned in for health and behavior issues? YES. But at least half--probably more dogs are turned into shelters through no fault of their own. And plenty of their behavior issues are just wrong homes. A 'crazy' or bad Border Collie in the suburbs with small kids may be perfection working sheep on a farm. It may feel like 'common sense' says dogs aren't rejected without reason. But it may be common sense all parents love their kids. Neither thing is true, because it's not based on common sense but rather common decency--which most people don't have. I have been involved in the shelter world since I was 12 and have read, researched, experienced and learned all of this. So I do know what I'm talking about.

You may say no one needs to tell you what you need and that your family ultimately made this poor choice. Fair point. But after this bad situation can you not see the need for screening potential adopters and matching dogs with proper homes? People a shelters aren't really concerned with your needs--they're concerned with the animal's needs. In finding out your lifestyle, what you want from the dog and your experiences, they can find the proper home for each dog. When that doesn't happen dogs get returned--which is exactly what happened to you!

I do not think I'm more intelligent than you. (Although you should learn the proper usage of then/than). However I do think that you consider your intelligence and wealth of life experiences to make you skilled in arenas you are not skilled in. I may not be smarter than you but I know more about dogs and shelters, and that's what this question was about.

Quite frankly your chickens have nothing to do with this. I don't even understand why you're bringing them up because chickens and dogs are drastically different animals that are kept for different purposes, and there aren't millions of homeless chickens waiting for a home, nor ridiculous numbers of people breeding chickens as pets. Yes, it's often great to get a dog from a skilled and ethical breeder but again, that's not the point.

John,

You have stunning birds. Thank you for sharing your photos.

In regards to your question, I don't think that a dog has any more intrinsic value than any other animal kept as a pet. One of my friends has always bonded very deeply with birds and has a sun conure that he loves as much as he would a child. A cat could provide the same enjoyment and companionship as a dog as well.

I would like to address this point in your last post:

John Howard said:

Thanks for all the compliments guys.
I simply meant that I believe that getting a sheltered pet is more riskier then getting one from an owner that knows the dog (which is how I have gotten almost every one of my many great dogs throughout my life). Most (Not all, most) of the dogs at shelters have been rejected by their owners. People in general do not REJECT good well balanced dogs without problems. They either keep them themselves or make sure they find a good home if they can't keep them. This is just plain common sense. That is not to say that dogs do not end up in shelters for other reason, or that all dogs in shelters are bad; it just means that when get a shelter dog, you run a greater risk of getting a pet that has been rejected because they have some kind of problem.

Click to expand...

To some extent, you are right. My first shelter dog, Maru, most likely was ignored in someone's backyard. He was picked up as a stray and probably escaped an enclosure by digging under a fence. He had had no previous training and did not know how to behave within a home. He was reactive to people, especially men. He was a classic "project" dog, and when I realized that I couldn't provide him the training he needed, I placed him in a no-kill shelter.

However, a few months later, I adopted two amazingly wonderful dogs from a public shelter: Jesse and Miles. Jesse is now living with a close friend of mine, another first-time dog owner, and except for wanting to be the only dog in his home, he is a terrific dog. My friend thanks me time and time again for finding the "perfect" dog for her family. And, Miles, the dog in my avatar, is the happiest, most lovable, most well-balanced, companion dog that anyone could wish for.

The question is how these two dogs ended up in a public shelter in a poor neighborhood. Jesse most likely was an indoor dog who ran out of an open door and was struck by a car. He had a broken paw, and I wouldn't be surprised if his previous owner didn't reclaim him because of the likelihood of high vet bills. Miles was clearly a much-loved, pudgy, senior dog who quite possibly belonged to a senior citizen and brought to the shelter by the owner's children. He's such a homebody that I can't believe that he had ever gotten lost. So, yes, one can find "project" dogs like Maru or Gus in public shelters. However, there are also wonderful ones like Jesse and Miles.

What we all hoped that you would do was to consider adopting through a rescue group that would help you select the best available dog for your family and your home. The reason you've gotten so much exasperated responses is that you strongly rejected that advice and then seemed rather critical of the members of this forum.

Right off the bat, I'd say you are totally wrong about this forum. I've been a member of a few forums and this one is by far the most responsible when it comes to helping people find dogs. There's no breeder hate, as long as a good breeder is able to be found. The answers you received were well on par and had you and your family been more willing to take them to heed, you may have had a different story.

I would say that rescue dogs are "riskier" than dogs that are bred by reputable breeders (individuals that invest significantly in their animals). They're not really any riskier than your run of the mill "hobby" breeder, because frankly many of the dogs in shelters CAME from those breeders.

Then you have to consider that 9/10 reputable breeders are going to vet you just as thoroughly as a rescue, so you'd really be in the same boat anyway.

I really don't have too much to contribute as I really don't think we'll ever see eye to eye. I do think some rescues can be over the top; however I don't have a problem with a rescue suggesting dogs that might be a better fit than the dog I'm interested in. If I don't agree, I can move on. But as the general public is rather uneducated about dogs, they don't have any real reason to believe that I know any better, and anyway, they know that particular dog more than I would as I wouldn't have had any experience with that dog. They're just trying to find good, forever homes - nothing at all wrong with that. There is too much unnecessary turnover when it comes to dogs.

I think your question is a little arbitrary because what is intrinsically motivating for me won't be intrinsically motivating to you. One of our family friends breeds chickens - bearded Brahmas in particular. They're a breed of his own created (well, the beard anyway) and he values his chickens very highly. I have several purchased from him and I have to agree: of all the chickens I've ever had these are some of the kindest, hardiest, best layers, etc. They're just awesome birds - even the roosters!

But, I don't breed or show chickens. It doesn't interest me, so even though I love my chickens dearly I guess I'm not intrinsically motivated to spend time with them in the same way I am with my dogs or even dogs in general. I am passionate about rescue dogs, more so since I brought home my own difficult, reactive rescue. He is a true example of the need for rescues to KNOW their dogs and to make good home matches. He is the kind of dog that would have ended up back in a pound had he not made it to our home - some of his issues I think you'd find too extreme. He's also a true example of the importance of responsible dog ownership and the need for GOOD breeders (he was from a hoarder/mill).

Anyway, hopefully that dog is able to find a decent home and you eventually find a dog that fits your requirements.

There are never any guarantees when it comes to dogs regardless of source...

Dogs end up in shelters for many reasons...

Ime with my shelter (volunteer and serve on the board) and as a trainer, very often there's nothing wrong with the dogs. It's on the people end...

The majority of owner surrenders are there because the owner made bad choices. They chose a breed not suitable to their lifestyle and did zero training... They got a dog when not allowed by landlord. They got a dog right before a move. Then there the ''allergies'' and ''had a baby so don't want my dog anymore'' dogs. We also get dogs that are surrendered due to death or moving into a nursing home and family cannot take on the dog.

Even the strays are normally just loose dogs that go unclaimed for whatever reason. They are normally in good shape and often have a collar without tags. It's extremely rare we get a true stray.

Frankly most dogs in shelters are coming from the same sources and situations the vast majority of privately rehomed dogs do...

As for dogs from reputable breeders...
Still no absolute guarantees. I typically have approx. half rescue/shelter and half pb dogs from breeders (not always what I consider reputable) in classes. There's no real trend with one group having more behavior problems than the other. Stuff pops up accross the board. And generally all have the same normal dog issues like jumping, puppy mouthing, and pulling on lead.

Furthermore... And completely anecdotal, but thinking of the reactivity and aggression seminars I attend, there are actually often more dogs from breeders than rescue/shelter. Owners often have had dogs since puppies and intended to show... There are plenty of reasons to explain this trend (likely owner's original intent to show/compete plays a part) but also at least in my area, reactive and aggressive dogs tend not to make it out of the shelter in the first place as they are not deemed adoptable.


End of the day, you and your family made a poor choice in selecting a dog. You also made some poor choices and errors in management after bringing this dog home.

I do hope you find a good fit. But if you are unwilling to talk to and answer at least some simple questions you continue to run the same risk. Both good shelters/rescues AND reputable breeders are going to require info to ensure a good match.
Posted via Mobile Device

John Howard said:

What makes a dog of more intrinsic value then any other animal?

Click to expand...

I think the fact that I am taking the bait on this proves my LACK of intelligence, but never mind about that. I honestly do not care what anybody else thinks about my intelligence or lack thereof. The question that you posed has nothing to do with this thread beyond the fact that I think you should stick to your chickens as you obviously know more about chickens than dogs.

So the answer to your question is ...... nothing. The only objective value of an animal is in its financial value, in which case a good stud bull or horse would be worth way more than most dogs, but of course by definition that is not part of its intrinsic value.

The intrinsic value that is assigned to an animal varies from person to person, for one person it may be cats that hold the highest value, another dogs, another chickens.

This forum is a dog forum, so I am guessing a lot of people here would consider a dog to have more intrinsic value than any other animal.

However your question is total moot as the intrinsic value of any animal is by definition totally subjective therefore cannot be reliably quantified and compared to the intrinsic value of any other animal.

John Howard said:

What makes a dog of more intrinsic value then any other animal?

Click to expand...

I'm bored so I guess I'll go after the red herring...

I value all life, whether it's dogs, cats, chickens, fish, reptiles, heck even insects. None has greater value in and of their selves. Now I am going to value my dogs life over your chickens if it should ever come down to it but that's because I'm emotionally attached to my dog and not your chickens.

If you want an example, I have a dog and back in Nov. acquired a Betta. I love both of them and take equal care of both. They both have the best care I can provide. I just spent a couple hours last night cleaning the fish's 5 gal tank (I wish I had the space for a 10 gal for him) rearranging his plants and rock, and placing a new plant I bought for him, all in the hopes that he'd be happier in his habitat. He holds value for me, not because he's monetarily valuable but because he's a living being. I value him over your chickens and roosters because he belongs to me and I'm responsible for his well being. I do not however value him over my dog, to me they are both of equal value, although if I'm completely honest if I had to choose between them I'd choose the dog.

About the adoption process, the situation is a tricky one for shelters and rescues. I'm glad I'm not the one making the decisions at a shelter/rescue as I'm not sure how I'd base my decisions and approve/disapprove adoptions. A person who looks great on paper and in person could be almost abusive towards dogs and person who's great with dogs could just hate paperwork and the adoption process. Many of the requirements and the way some places make decisions are pretty arbitrary or downright wacky, IMO. Though, organizations are certainly free to base their decisions on whatever they desire and people are free to adopt dogs from elsewhere.

A part of the problem here is that people care way too much about what others do with their lives nowadays and that people like to fit others into neat categories. That's the reason that there's so much drama in the dog world. As long as a dog is happy and healthy, I don't care what people do. No matter what shelters, rescues, and breeders do, there will always be dogs that end up in less than ideal homes and possibly returned. Too, I do question what is inherently wrong with a dog being rehomed. Breeders are generally less strict than shelters or rescues but I think a part of that is due to the fact that people are spending at least three times as much money as what they would adopting a dog and a person is possibly more likely to put more thought into the process of getting a dog and spending that money.

The question was an honest question and I think many people provided decent answers.

The answer is very simple though, a dog has no more in intrinsic value (belonging to a thing by its very nature) then any other animal. Dogs have no more intrinsic value then a chicken, a cow, a pig or a coyote. But, in this country, dogs that are pets have only been more Assigned superior value, but that is purely an emotional societal driven idea. It is an idea that is not based on intelligent logical fact.

The reason I am pointing this out is because a lot of the criticism I have received on this forum, comes from this societal idea of a dogs superior value. I think the majority of the people here, share this sub-conscience idea that dogs are more valuable then other animals. But this is a purely emotionally based idea based on an assigned value that you have given to dogs and not an intrinsic value that they have.

Here is the reason I used my chickens as an example. Yes, I have very beautiful chickens, which I enjoy very much. But the truth about raising show chickens is that you have to cull your birds. For those that don't understand what culling is, it means that you have to get birds of lesser quality out of your breeding program. Out of a 100 chicks, I may have to cull 97%. What happens to this 97%? They are converted into food for my table.

Now, I know some of you just had a knee jerk reaction to that last sentence, but how many of you eat chicken? Or how about beef, pork, and lamb? (Please no vegan comments here. We know what you believe. Okay).

If dogs have no more intrinsic value then any other animal, why do we think that it's okay to kill and eat one, but the other (Dogs) must be treated with almost human like care? Why is it that a state government that passes all kinds of laws to protect dogs from abuse, also hires full time professional hunters to chase down kill coyotes (Dogs) from helicopters by the thousands? (I can post video if you don't believe me about this.) I bet there are even people on this very forum that go out and kill coyotes (wild dogs), but think that their pet dogs deserve to be treated like humans. The truth is that the fact that we hold a much higher standard for the treatment of dogs in this society, is just proof that we have "Hypocrisy of Ideas".

I could go on and on demonstrating the ideological hypocrisies of the American society concerning domesticated dogs, but it is not necessary. You get the point.

Many of the comments and even advice here have been based on this illusion of supreme value that has been assigned to dogs. I think the reason so many of you are critical of me is because you don't seem to get yet that I don't share your value system for dogs. Or if you do, you don't like me for it. The problem is, that you have ideas that you live by that are not founded in logic or intelligence, but are founded in emotion. You are free to disagree, but you would then bare the burden of making an intelligent argument for why domesticated dogs hold a higher intrinsic value then other animals, and I think you know that you can't. The only argument you might make would be based on utility (whether physical or emotional), but that would still place them in the same category as livestock.

Listen, I am not saying you are wrong from loving your dogs. It's just wrong for you to ask everyone to value domesticated dogs the way you do, or judge them for not living by your emotional standards.

Personally, I view dogs in the same manner as I do my chickens. They exist for my purposes, not me for theirs. I do not exist to provide them with a good home, they exist to provide me with enjoyment. Not ascribing the same emotionally based illusion of superior value to a dog as you do, does not make me a bad pet owner. My animals are very well taken care of and generally live full lives with me and die of old age. I would challenge anyone here to come and visit me and tell me if any of the dogs that I have owned in my life were not the most friendly, well balanced, healthy dogs you have seen.

Why am I saying all this? Because, I just want you to understand who you are dealing with. I hold a completely different value system then you. I do not subscribe to the modern American cultural ideas about dogs. I understand that I am in the minority here and that there are many people that are fanatical about their FEELINGs towards dogs that are based on this emotional illusion of superior value. Unfortunately, a lot of them volunteer at shelters.


I am looking for a dog that meets my criteria, not me their. If I get a dog that does not fit my needs, he will be culled, just like Gus was (Taken back to the pound). To some of you, this qualifies me as a person that is "Not taking the subject of pet ownership seriously". But that would be you asking me to live up to your standards of dogs having a higher value then my chickens.

I know what kind of dog I am looking for. I have found many great dogs on my own in my life without anyone else's help. I bet I can do again. I don't need some fanatical idealist shelter volunteer telling me whether they think I qualify to own one of their PRECIOUS dogs.

John Howard said:

in this country, dogs that are pets have only been more Assigned superior value, but that is purely an emotional societal driven idea. It is an idea that is not based on intelligent logical fact.

Click to expand...

Intrinsic value by definition is based on perception, it is emotional, it is societal, it is an idea. If you had wanted assignation of value based on intelligent logical fact, why ask about intrinsic value?

John Howard said:

I think the majority of the people here, share this sub-conscience idea that dogs are more valuable then other animals. But this is a purely emotionally based idea based on an assigned value that you have given to dogs and not an intrinsic value that they have.

Click to expand...

Well actually intrinsic value is by definition perception and can be assigned in any way that the assigner feels or thinks. Also going to a DOG forum with the expectation that dogs would not have high intrinsic value in the perception of most of the forum members does not make sense.

John Howard said:

Many of the comments and even advice here have been based on this illusion of supreme value that has been assigned to dogs. I think the reason so many of you are critical of me is because you don't seem to get yet that I don't share your value system for dogs. Or if you do, you don't like me for it. The problem is, that you have ideas that you live by that are not founded in logic or intelligence, but are founded in emotion. You are free to disagree, but you would then bare the burden of making an intelligent argument for why domesticated dogs hold a higher intrinsic value then other animals, and I think you know that you can't. The only argument you might make would be based on utility (whether physical or emotional), but that would still place them in the same category as livestock.

Click to expand...

Again intrinsic value cannot be based on utility.
A couple of years back I wanted to buy a car. I actually prefer bicycles (which have way more intrinsic value for me but much less utility), but I wanted a car. For advice I went to a car forum mostly populated by car enthusiasts. My love of bicycles is purely based on emotion. However I decided that individuals fueled by a passion for cars would be more involved in researching and purchasing their cars and it would be good for me to seek advice from them. I was advised that the car I was interested in purchasing sometimes developed gearbox problems a couple of years down the road and it may be a better idea to lease it for a while and see. I did that, and sure enough the car developed problems. Thankfully it is only a lease and everything is 100% under warranty, so my car is repaired and running great. I will probably choose a different car when the lease ends though, as this one is a little small for my family. If I had not chosen to follow the advice of the CAR enthusiasts on the CAR forum, would I have been justified in going back and criticizing them because I had an unsuitable car, and saying that their opinions were invalid anyway because I think bicycles have a higher intrinsic value? Should I get mad at the dealer for seeing me show up with my husband and kids and suggesting I get a larger car? In fact should I tell him to stop asking me questions and just pick the car I want regardless of his knowledge of cars and ability to help me choose the right one for me?

John Howard said:

I do not exist to provide them with a good home, they exist to provide me with enjoyment.

Click to expand...

I do not exist to provide my car with a good home, but if I do my research properly, get the right car and drive it well and perform proper maintenance on it and generally take care of it well, it will perform much better and provide me with far more enjoyment than the wrong car not properly serviced and maintained.
Whether I am obtaining an animal or a car or a piece of kitchen equipment, I always find it helps to research and get the right one for me and my family, then to treat it with care.

John Howard said:

I know what kind of dog I am looking for. I have found many great dogs on my own in my life without anyone else's help. I bet I can do again.

Click to expand...

Then there is no need for you to be on this forum asking for help or advice. Goodbye, don't let the door hit your *** on the way out.

I think this world would be even more sad and miserable than it is at times, if the majority of people in our society still thought about companion animals like you do, John.

I adopted 2 dogs in the past 3 years. One, Jaya, was severely abused, kept isolated for the first 5 years of her life. She was almost completely feral when I got her. The other, is a full bred Golden Retriever, HaHa, who was born slightly retarded.

Neither of these two dogs should be allowed to live if 'culling to keep the best' and throwing away (like trash) the badly injured or not so trainable animals, was a popular idea.

One of my favorite quotes came from the book/movie Seabiscuit who was a real life thoroughbred. Tom Smith, the trainer, stops an injured race horse from being shot. The horse was too injured to race anymore but if given a little time and care, he still thought the horse could heal up ok. Asked why he would want to waste time and effort on a horse that would never run again, Tom said:

"You don't throw a whole life away just 'cause he's banged up a little."

Thankfully, someone saw the value in the two broken animals that eventually became my dogs. They were kept alive until the right person could be found to give them a home. My home.

I had to answer a whole lot of questions to get Jaya..as the agency who had her wasn't going to turn her over to anyone given her feral ways. Same with HaHa, he needed a home where he could be watched over, because he'll always be a doggy version of a little kid...he won't ever mentally grow up.

According to the culling ideal - only perfect animals should be allowed to live. Well, what's perfect for some, isn't perfect for someone else. Very very few people would want a dog like Jaya or HaHa, but for me, at this point in my life, they are the perfect dogs. I wanted a project dog, but if I didn't have the knowledge on how to handle such a dog, then the questions the agency asked me would have reveled that fact and they would have told me 'no'.

In fact, passing their scrutiny made me feel good...that others felt confidence in me, in my knowledge about dogs...because I let them know how this dog was going to be managed once in my care.

My life has been wonderfully enhanced by my broken dogs. I get a lot of satisfaction in knowing I'm helping Jaya mend. I can't do much with HaHa, as far as training, since he has major issues with forgetting things, but he's just as friendly as a normal dog and I don't really need a dog I can teach tricks to, so his mental short comings are hardly noticed by me.

I'm glad that what is being culled from our society is archaic ideals...such as yours...that animals are 'things' to be tossed away if they are not perfect.

I think you've missed out on 90 percent of what owning a pet can be about. I've learned a lot about my own self due to my interactions with my pets. They've taught me patients, and how to think outside the box when it comes to training, and the wonders of how love and kindness/compassion can change both humans and animals for the better.

All you got from pet ownership it seems is that they should entertain you.
I find that to be very very sad.

Stormy

John Howard said:

The question was an honest question and I think many people provided decent answers.

The answer is very simple though, a dog has no more in intrinsic value (belonging to a thing by its very nature) then any other animal. Dogs have no more intrinsic value then a chicken, a cow, a pig or a coyote. But, in this country, dogs that are pets have only been more Assigned superior value, but that is purely an emotional societal driven idea. It is an idea that is not based on intelligent logical fact.

The reason I am pointing this out is because a lot of the criticism I have received on this forum, comes from this societal idea of a dogs superior value. I think the majority of the people here, share this sub-conscience idea that dogs are more valuable then other animals. But this is a purely emotionally based idea based on an assigned value that you have given to dogs and not an intrinsic value that they have.

Click to expand...

I stated that no living being has greater value in and of their self, so I do agree with you their. I don't assign dogs more value then any other animal, BUT I do assign my dog more value then any other dog. He's MY dog so he has more value to me, and yes that's based on emotion. I like nearly all dogs, I love my dog.

My criticism had nothing to do with how I view my dog, or any other dog, but rather then fact that, you asked the best site for finding a dog and then seriously objected to the process of adopting a dog through a decent rescue or animal shelter. This is what you wrote " My suggestions to all of you, is to think hard before you again make the recommendation and encourage people to get a dog from shelters. I am not saying anyone here is responsible for what happened, but I had not thought about looking at shelter dogs before I was encouraged to do so on this forum." You wrote it because you went to a shelter that let you adopt a dog that was not suitable for you, and you went to that shelter because, near as I can tell, the reputable shelters were daring to try to match you up with suitable dogs rather then letting you pick for yourself.

John Howard said:

Here is the reason I used my chickens as an example. Yes, I have very beautiful chickens, which I enjoy very much. But the truth about raising show chickens is that you have to cull your birds. For those that don't understand what culling is, it means that you have to get birds of lesser quality out of your breeding program. Out of a 100 chicks, I may have to cull 97%. What happens to this 97%? They are converted into food for my table.

Now, I know some of you just had a knee jerk reaction to that last sentence, but how many of you eat chicken? Or how about beef, pork, and lamb? (Please no vegan comments here. We know what you believe. Okay).

If dogs have no more intrinsic value then any other animal, why do we think that it's okay to kill and eat one, but the other (Dogs) must be treated with almost human like care? Why is it that a state government that passes all kinds of laws to protect dogs from abuse, also hires full time professional hunters to chase down kill coyotes (Dogs) from helicopters by the thousands? (I can post video if you don't believe me about this.) I bet there are even people on this very forum that go out and kill coyotes (wild dogs), but think that their pet dogs deserve to be treated like humans. The truth is that the fact that we hold a much higher standard for the treatment of dogs in this society, is just proof that we have "Hypocrisy of Ideas".

I could go on and on demonstrating the ideological hypocrisies of the American society concerning domesticated dogs, but it is not necessary. You get the point.

Click to expand...

You could also ship the birds off to a rescue if you wanted to go that route, you could not breed so many of the chickens, you could not let so many of the eggs hatch. You choose to use them as a food source, frankly I don't care. At least your birds likely had a better life then the ones they sell in the supermarket that come from commercial breeders.

Yes they cull coyotes, let their population get to large and they become a nuisance animal and would likely just get shot by ranchers or make a living snatching people's pets. They also cull dogs, only they don't call it that. They call it euthanizing them after their short stay at the high kill shelter is done. I bet you your flock of chickens that they cull a heck of a lot more dogs then they do coyotes. It's just a lovely fact of the dog over population in this country. Don't get me started on the number of cats that are culled.

Actually I do not treat my dog like a human, I do not baby him, he is treated like a dog. I do not expect anyone to take care of their dog as I take care of mine, but I do expect them to meet a minimum level of care. I do expect people to provide their dog with appropriate shelter, exercise, fresh food and water, vet care, and to not abuse the dog. If they want to provide dog beds, fancy collars, hire trainers, multiple toys, etc, that's up to the individual

John Howard said:

Many of the comments and even advice here have been based on this illusion of supreme value that has been assigned to dogs. I think the reason so many of you are critical of me is because you don't seem to get yet that I don't share your value system for dogs. Or if you do, you don't like me for it. The problem is, that you have ideas that you live by that are not founded in logic or intelligence, but are founded in emotion. You are free to disagree, but you would then bare the burden of making an intelligent argument for why domesticated dogs hold a higher intrinsic value then other animals, and I think you know that you can't. The only argument you might make would be based on utility (whether physical or emotional), but that would still place them in the same category as livestock.

Listen, I am not saying you are wrong from loving your dogs. It's just wrong for you to ask everyone to value domesticated dogs the way you do, or judge them for not living by your emotional standards.

Click to expand...

No see there you are mistaken. I don't care if you don't value dogs the same way I do. I find it sad and think you may never have the same level of enjoyment, pleasure, or love, that I and my dog have, but I don't dislike you for it. So long as the dog is well taken care of I don't care about a person's personal beliefs.

Emotions will always play a role in how we value living beings. Using your chickens as an example. If you and a friend had coops set up next to each other in a barn and the barn caught fire, are you going to save your chickens or your friends? If you are going to save yours then why? The chickens are just chickens they have the same value so why not save his? Then again maybe you place more value on yourself and wouldn't risk your self to save any of them.

John Howard said:

Personally, I view dogs in the same manner as I do my chickens. They exist for my purposes, not me for theirs. I do not exist to provide them with a good home, they exist to provide me with enjoyment. Not ascribing the same emotionally based illusion of superior value to a dog as you do, does not make me a bad pet owner. My animals are very well taken care of and generally live full lives with me and die of old age. I would challenge anyone here to come and visit me and tell me if any of the dogs that I have owned in my life were not the most friendly, well balanced, healthy dogs you have seen.

Why am I saying all this? Because, I just want you to understand who you are dealing with. I hold a completely different value system then you. I do not subscribe to the modern American cultural ideas about dogs. I understand that I am in the minority here and that there are many people that are fanatical about their FEELINGs towards dogs that are based on this emotional illusion of superior value. Unfortunately, a lot of them volunteer at shelters.

Click to expand...

I think maybe you should try and understand why the adoption process is in place in the majority of the good rescues and shelters. It really has very little to do with American cultural ideas about dogs and a lot to do with seeing the worse of humanity.

Maybe you should try volunteering at a shelter or rescue so you understand why many of them feel as they do. You say that you take great care of your animals, well many that end up at rescues or shelters come from abusive or neglect situations. Many of those volunteers have worked day and night to save an animal and theirs no way they are going to let them go back into a similar situation. So yes, they interview prospective adopters, and then work to find the dog that will best fit the living situation. If the dog is not good with children then they are not going to let it go home with a family that has twin 6 year olds. If it has high prey drive then it won't be suitable for a home with small pets. If it's shy then a person that likes to throw parties is not going to be an appropriate owner.

When I'm looking to adopt a dog I'm also looking for one that fits my criteria, but I'm wise enough to know that if I go to a good shelter or rescue the people their are going to be my best bet to find that dog. They know the dogs, they work with them, they care for them. Now maybe you are Dr. Doolittle and can talk to the dogs and don't need the shelter personnel to help you. Maybe you can ask the dog, "Hey buddy, how do you feel about having little children touch your bone?", and have the dog answer, but as much as I wish I could I cannot.