Dog Forum banner

41 - 50 of 50 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
556 Posts
Discussion Starter #41
I would have a huge huge problem with speutering my dogs by 6 months. Being required to have it done by 4 months is insane. The dogs not even done growing yet. I wouldnt be able to live somewhere with laws that tight.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,481 Posts
They should take into account vet and research recommendations for breeds as to when it's safe to spay and neuter young animals. I don't know about pitbull type specifically, but large breeds like Rottweilers and Labs vets are recommending to wait longer to neuter to prevent cancers and other health issues later. So pitbull crosses or mixes with those breeds would be impacted in that way.
I wouldn't feel comfortable spaying or neutering any pet as young as four months old and putting them through surgery and anesthesia that young. At least at six months they're a little bigger, stronger and have more immunity and have had all their early vaccinations plus extra time to develop immunity and recover from any stress from vaccines before putting their young bodies through the additional stress of surgery.
And if I had reason to believe there was an increased of cancer or joint issues down the line from neutering that early I'd want to wait. I'd be careful about keeping my pet from getting loose and accidentally breeding but I'd still want to do what's best healthwise for my pet.
Very good posting! I would never s/n my dogs at 4 months old! Even if they were just pets, no way.

I understand and agree it's good to prevent people from backyard breeding and fighting dogs but there's already a lot of unfair fear and discrimination as well as misinformation and prejudice about pitbull type dogs in general. No other breeds are banned anywhere that I'm aware of.
Breed bans vary by location. Within the US cities / counties have enacted bans against certain breeds including (but not limited to)
American Bulldog
American Pit Bull Terrier
American Staffordshire Terrier
Bullmastiff
Bull Terrier
Cane Corso
Dogo Argentino
Fila Brasiliero
Presa Canario
Rottweiler
Staffordshire Bull Terrier
Tosa Inu

Some other places have them too
UK banned Pit Bull, Dogo Argentino and Tosa Inu

And yes there were a lot of pitbull mixes when I walked through the shelter looking at my current dog to take home, but the rescues and other shelters had lots of every other kind of breed and mix imaginable.
When I walked through a different shelter years ago to get my last dog, he was one of only two or three pitbull mixes, the rest were all other breeds.
Mandatory spay and neuter of only pitbull type dogs and not other dogs in any area seems discriminatory and wrong. There's tons of strays suffering, dying and being put to sleep every day. Make this mandate for all pets.
I agree it is very wrong and doesn't solve the rest of the dogs being byb
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
442 Posts
Prince George's County, MD has had a ban on "pit bulls" for over 20 years, and you can get a pretty good idea of the effectiveness of blanket breed restrictions by looking at their population at any given time. These are their adoptable dogs: note the distinct lack of "pit bulls", which doesn't quite correlate with the actual dogs shown: www.PetHarbor.com Animal Search: ADOPTABLE
Clearly there are still dogs of "pit bull type" in the area, despite the fact that they have been illegal to own for decades.

Also note the prevalence of other large, powerful breeds, including some that I would wager are considerably less common in other areas (Neos, Cane Corsos, Presas, etc)... I suppose that's what law abiding citizens who want a "tough" dog get when you ban their breed of choice.

To get an idea of the true scale of the pit bull population, you have to change from "adoptable" dogs to "found/stray" dogs (it wouldn't let me direct link the page). There are dozens more dogs labeled both as pit bulls as well as other breeds who likely have at least some pit bull heritage.

My point is that there will be a significant percentage of individuals who defy legislation restricting ownership/breeding of a specific breed, and another percentage of those who DO comply (not breeding/owning pit bulls) will simply find another breed to breed or own, which will perpetuate the existing problem if they are irresponsible in either activity.

Alternatively, I would support legislation which significantly punishes owners who allow their dogs to run at large, and possibly legislation which charges a flat litter registration fee for all litters born (since more dogs in a population = more enforcement costs). Maybe compulsory microchip identification so that owners can be held responsible for their dogs' activities, or at least mandatory microchipping of dogs which have "offended" in some way (at large, "dangerous" behavior, owner penalized previously for non-compliance). My local animal services division seems to be requiring all stray animals reclaimed by owners to be altered prior to release, and while I'm sure there are rare cases in which a responsible breeder has a dog get out, I support that rule in general, as if you can't keep your dog confined, you probably aren't up to the task of responsibly keeping an intact dog. Don't want your dog altered? Don't let it roam or "escape". I wouldn't support legislation that singles out any breed or even multiple breeds, as it is an owner issue, not a breed issue.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,885 Posts
yep, lots of strangely-labeled pit-types or apparent pit-X'es tagged as other breeds

.
@busannie -
I went thru all 38 pages of "stray" dogs, & was astounded by the # of apparent pit-mixes labeled as "anything but". :eek:

Bosco in particular - spozedly a Pit X B&T Coonhound?!?! - g'wan, pull the other leg. :rolleyes:

Tthere were at least 3 or 4 "Plott Hound mixes" who looked like bog-standard pibble types, in brindle -
w/ or w/o white markings [toes, tail-tip, bib or blaze on the chest, etc]. They had rose ears! :p

I was also astonished to see Montgomery Co shelters, listed among the various Md & VA shelters. Penna, Md & VA?
that's a helluva large area to cover...

- terry

.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,279 Posts
It's pretty well established that it's not at all reliable to try to identify dogs by breed based on what they look like. My current dog looks like a chocolate lab. Some arrogant people who have had labs will argue with me and insist that he's a lab and I don't know my own dog even though he doesn't have many lab traits. They'll also insist that he has a pit bull head. He hates water, won't go out in the rain, hates even getting wet in the boiling heat, won't go in water for anything, just absolutely hates it. Also hates fetch, will reluctantly play it for treats or to steal another dogs squeaky ball and play keep away not to retrieve.
DNA testing said he's 12.5 percent lab and 12.5 percent American Staffordshire terrier. 25 percent Chow Chow, 25 percent boxer and 25 percent German Shepherd mixed with shepherd/herding type dogs. He acts much more like a German Shepherd, very intelligent and protective and will herd horses. He plays like a boxer, and has an independent defiant streak and takes off like a Chow. I assume his separation anxiety and ibd/food allergies come from his German Shepherd and lab genes and I've heard boxers can have separation anxiety too.
Plus his history factors in as well. Genetically he's black or black brindle, not brown or chocolate.
The danger with calling dogs pitbulls in shelters or anywhere else just based on looks is the media already calls every dog who ever bites anyone a pitbull or pit mix whether it is or not. Just perpetuates the bad reputation and discrimination based on assumptions and misinformation, not facts.
I've been bitten by more overzealous labs and golden retrievers with resource guarding issues in the dog park trying to play fetch than any other dog. Not seriously, but enough that I just won't even try to play fetch or tug unless I'm alone in the park with my dog. I've seen other people bitten to the point of drawing blood over a tennis ball from non pit bulls and non aggressive breeds.

Stereotypes are ridiculous, it's about how the dog is trained, raised and socialized.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
442 Posts
.
I was also astonished to see Montgomery Co shelters, listed among the various Md & VA shelters. Penna, Md & VA?
Probably Montgomery County, MD, which is a Maryland suburb of D.C.- right on the MD/VA line. https://www.google.com/maps/place/Montgomery+County,+MD/@39.1435871,-77.4882804,10z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m5!3m4!1s0x89b6323583b8a387:0x780b190677a96873!8m2!3d39.1547426!4d-77.2405153

Distance wise, closer to VA than to Baltimore, and given the number of people commuting to DC from outlying suburbs of both states and even further areas ( know someone who commutes to DC from PA), makes total sense to put themselves out there as "serving" both states.

I get why the PGCAMD staff identify pit bull looking dogs as anything but (who wouldn't get sick of seeing perfectly nice dogs that make up greater than 50% of your shelter population euthanized just because of their appearance?), but I wish they could label the dogs more appropriately so potential adopters don't waste time looking at dogs they wouldn't want (searches for "coonhound" and only finds pit bull mix looking dogs); and they know what they are getting when they adopt a given dog labeled as "x" breed (who in this case is really "Y", who has totally different breed traits). I find it amusing that even the government run shelter is circumventing the government regulation, which is a testament to how ridiculous and ineffective the regulation is.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,885 Posts
Maybe a remote rescue... I'll look for an interested rescue-org.

Probably Montgomery County, MD... a Maryland suburb of D.C.- right on the MD/VA line.

...
.

Nope - 3 or 4 Mont. Co., PA, shelters, that are networked - Perkiomenville, PA, is home to one. :) Conshahocken hosts another.

Montgomery County SPCA - Animal Adoptions

I'm tempted to try to set up a long-distance rescue for some of the Penna dogs - VA is a long way, but Pennsy is do-able.
About 80% of the dogs in metro-Boston are adoptees from out of state. I think we could place some Pennsy dogs - i'd just need to find a rescue group to pull them, & i can also offer B-Mod if they get some shy or otherwise not-ready-for-prime-time individuals.

- terry

.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
785 Posts
BSL. Its nuts. Unscientific. I am against it. I am also against rehoming dangerous dogs to pet homes, neglegence. I am 100% confident that there are people who are experienced and qualified to assess a dogs temperament. When it goes/how it is likely to react. And there are many validated assessments to follow for this. I am in favour of PTS any dog with dangerous to humans. Any sick dog. Any nervous dog in a pound too. Any breed or species. The world is filling up with dogs that are sub standard specimens of their species. So im more than breed specific. Species specific?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,885 Posts
Voting with yer wallet: BSL & travel plans

.

The single best-answer to BSL is "The Netherlands".
Holland passed a very-strict BSL bill, & approx 15-years later, with extensive data, recognized the law did NONE of what it was supposed to do.

Despite the elimination of all banned breeds, BITE NUMBERS did not fall.
BITE SEVERITY was unchanged - the fraction of bites that caused severe injury even rose slightly.
Ppl developed a false sense of security, as if all 'breeds not banned' were somehow bite-proof.

15-years after passing nationwide BSL, with proof of its complete failure as a policy, the Netherlands rescinded it -
granted, with less publicity than when it was passed, as lawmakers were embarrassed. But they were also logical -
& fair. Legislation that fulfilled none of its promised improvements & caused nothing but grief, was cancelled.

_________________________


Some years back, I was one of many USA-apdt members who wanted to move the annual conference.
Planned to be held in Denver, Colo, they'd recently passed anti-pitbull BSL. // The BoD overruled the majority, insisted it would be too costly to shift the conference, & that we could "educate" Denver's govt by "showing them what training could do".

Since that same BoD had already banned dogs other than SDs from the annual conference, none of us could fathom exactly how we were spozed to "demonstrate" how training made BSL superfluous.
What we knew was that moving the USA-apdt conference would cost the city of Denver millions of tourist-dollars & taxes in revenue, & we lost a golden opportunity to provide negative punishment to Denver's power structure.

Several years later, the state of Colorado passed a bill that forbade breed-specific bans - & pigheaded Denver took the state to court, claiming a home-rule exemption, which, astoundingly, was granted.
So these many years on, LOGIC still has nothing to do with dog-law, particularly BSL; Denver still firmly adheres to BSL like a limpet to its home-rock, & I still tell dog-owners or dog-lovers of any breed to boycott DENVER as a destination - not for a conference, a weekend, a vacay, nada. // Spend yer money & yer time elsewhere, with intelligent legislation that ignores breed, & focuses on human & canine behavior.
California is nice - choose mountains, desert, surf, history, foggy mornings or upland forests, & they have a model statewide Dangerous Dog law that Colorado lawmakers might want to read, one of these decades... :rolleyes:

- terry

.
 
41 - 50 of 50 Posts
Top