Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
short hair ..... not for the shedding factor so much as the tangle/matting factor...... i really like just having to brush with a curry comb or zoom groom a few times a week to remove loose/shedding hair........
small-medium to medium sized ..... at 50 and 55 lbs, both of mine are a little bigger than i was originally planning on, but when the dog chooses you, there is not much to be done......
breed?? the more in the mix, the merrier, as far as i am concerned....... although i did try to avoid the more hyper, terrier types......
there are definitely some breeds/mixes that i think are cuter than others (pits, greyhounds, scruffy terriers, boston terriers, and lots of others), but i am open to anything. what's important to me is the dog's personality & behavior, not their looks. and i'm willing to put some work into behavioral issues.
the only real disqualifiers that aren't a matter of personality/training are:
1. i like to take long walks & run with my dog, so really small dogs are out.
2. i never thought of this before i got my dog, but having a dog i can lift is also a good thing, so really big dogs are out too.
3. i don't want a dog who needs a ton of grooming.
4. i'd rather not have a dog who sheds or drools a ton, although it wouldn't disqualify an otherwise good dog.
as far as my dog goes, she's pretty perfect for me - she's willing to walk for as long as i am, and willing to lounge around for as long as i want as well. she's low-shedding, easy to train and totally non-aggressive towards people. her only major problem is that every once in a great while (mostly when she's in our backyard), she can react aggressively to a dog. i'm pretty sure the other dogs start it, but she'll react to the point of fighting, and won't back down. oh and she hates camping, which is a bummer. you can tell she wants a couch.
I'm interested more in why you wouldn't own a specific breed. There's no such thing as a 'bad breed' of dog, it's all in how they're raised. So if you're deciding to not own a specific breed because they're 'mean', you're just uneducated.
The facts are clear that there are some breeds that are much more inclined to be vicious than other breeds. It has nothing to do with being uneducated or ignorant, it's fact.
The facts are also clear that it takes a knowledgeable owner and trainer to properly socialize one of those breeds. The problem with that is it only mitigates the chances that the animal will hurt someone, it does not remove them. Yes, any dog can bite, but some are instinctually more inclined to do so than others.
Now, before you bring up the fact that there are small breeds who are at high risk for biting, I know that is true as well. They aren't nearly as likely to permanently maim or kill someone when they go on the attack, though.
There are certain breeds that I believe should be allowed to die out and not be bred anymore. I know that you rabidly pro 'bullybreed' people are going to flame me to hell and gone for making that statement, but it is my opinion and I stick by it.
As far as the original question goes: I would not own any dog that makes my homeowner's insurance rise simply by what breed they happen to be.
your post is probably going to get this thread locked eventually, but i just want to get in that bully breeds are bred specifically to be NON aggressive towards humans. even the ones that are raised for dogfighting are culled if they show any aggression towards humans, because no one wants a dog in the fighting ring that will turn on its handler.
look for the pit bull thread in the politics board for lots and lots of information about the fact that dog bite statistics by breed are inherently unreliable and that pit bull attacks are grossly overrepresented in the media, to the point where attacks by other breeds and even other species are reported as pit bull attacks.
oh and i don't own one of those breeds, by the way.
The facts are clear that there are some breeds that are much more inclined to be vicious than other breeds. It has nothing to do with being uneducated or ignorant, it's fact.
The facts are also clear that it takes a knowledgeable owner and trainer to properly socialize one of those breeds. The problem with that is it only mitigates the chances that the animal will hurt someone, it does not remove them. Yes, any dog can bite, but some are instinctually more inclined to do so than others.
Now, before you bring up the fact that there are small breeds who are at high risk for biting, I know that is true as well. They aren't nearly as likely to permanently maim or kill someone when they go on the attack, though.
There are certain breeds that I believe should be allowed to die out and not be bred anymore. I know that you rabidly pro 'bullybreed' people are going to flame me to hell and gone for making that statement, but it is my opinion and I stick by it.
As far as the original question goes: I would not own any dog that makes my homeowner's insurance rise simply by what breed they happen to be.
Statistically speaking, pit bulls, presa canarios, and rottweilers account for the majority of canine homicides in the USA:
"The Clifton study of attacks from 1982 through 2006 produced similar results. According to Clifton study, pit bulls, Rottweilers, Presa Canarios and their mixes were responsible for 65% of the canine homicides that occurred during a period of 24 years in the USA. (Clifton, Dog attack deaths and maimings, U.S. & Canada, September 1982 to November 13, 2006; click here (http://www.dogbitelaw.com/Dog%20Attacks%201982%20to%202006%20Clifton.pdf - broken link) to read it.)
Other breeds were also responsible for homicides, but to a much lesser extent. A 1997 study of dog bite fatalities in the years 1979 through 1996 revealed that the following breeds had killed one or more persons: pit bulls, Rottweilers, German shepherds, huskies, Alaskan malamutes, Doberman pinschers, chows, Great Danes, St. Bernards and Akitas. (Dog Bite Related Fatalities," Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (ftp://ftp.cdc.gov/pub/Publications/mmwr/wk/mm4621.pdf - broken link), May 30, 1997, Vol. 46, No. 21, pp. 463 et. seq.) Since 1975, fatal attacks have been attributed to dogs from at least 30 breeds."
However much you may not like it, that's what it is.
Now before you go and get all offended by my saying what I've said, note that I didn't say they should all be rounded up and gassed. I said that certain breeds should be allowed to die out. There's a big difference.
the problem with dog bite stats is that the breeds are identified by witnesses, the media, etc. those reports are rarely accurate - how many people do you know who could accurately guess the breed of a dog in any situation, let alone the confusion and adrenaline rush of a dog attack? there are dozens of breeds and countless mixes that are routinely mistaken for pit bulls, and numerous documented instances where attacks by totally disparate breeds were reported as pit bull attacks in the media. there was even a case where an attack by a ferret was somehow reported as an attack by a pit bull.
"pit bull" isn't even a breed. to most people it's a vague physical description that encompasses anything from an american pit bull terrier to a dogo argentino to a boxer to a bulldog. and that's not even factoring in mixes.
can you pick out the american pit bull terrier in this group? do you think the average person could?
I'm sorry their are NO breeds inclined to be more vicious. There are several breeds which are by nature very protective and independent thinking. These breeds are not for the novice dog. They require a lot of socialization and they all need to be trained, but some of these so called vicious breeds are the most gentle dogs anyone could have in their family, yet will kill a wolf, die for their family. If you don't know what your doing these dogs could be vicious, but they are not inclined to be vicious they are protective working breeds who take their jobs seriously.
QUOTE=Mercury Cougar;11251603]The facts are clear that there are some breeds that are much more inclined to be vicious than other breeds. It has nothing to do with being uneducated or ignorant, it's fact.
The facts are also clear that it takes a knowledgeable owner and trainer to properly socialize one of those breeds. The problem with that is it only mitigates the chances that the animal will hurt someone, it does not remove them. Yes, any dog can bite, but some are instinctually more inclined to do so than others.
Now, before you bring up the fact that there are small breeds who are at high risk for biting, I know that is true as well. They aren't nearly as likely to permanently maim or kill someone when they go on the attack, though.
There are certain breeds that I believe should be allowed to die out and not be bred anymore. I know that you rabidly pro 'bullybreed' people are going to flame me to hell and gone for making that statement, but it is my opinion and I stick by it.
As far as the original question goes: I would not own any dog that makes my homeowner's insurance rise simply by what breed they happen to be.[/quote]
Statistically speaking, pit bulls, presa canarios, and rottweilers account for the majority of canine homicides in the USA:
"The Clifton study of attacks from 1982 through 2006 produced similar results. According to Clifton study, pit bulls, Rottweilers, Presa Canarios and their mixes were responsible for 65% of the canine homicides that occurred during a period of 24 years in the USA. (Clifton, Dog attack deaths and maimings, U.S. & Canada, September 1982 to November 13, 2006; click here (http://www.dogbitelaw.com/Dog%20Attacks%201982%20to%202006%20Clifton.pdf - broken link) to read it.)
Other breeds were also responsible for homicides, but to a much lesser extent. A 1997 study of dog bite fatalities in the years 1979 through 1996 revealed that the following breeds had killed one or more persons: pit bulls, Rottweilers, German shepherds, huskies, Alaskan malamutes, Doberman pinschers, chows, Great Danes, St. Bernards and Akitas. (Dog Bite Related Fatalities," Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (ftp://ftp.cdc.gov/pub/Publications/mmwr/wk/mm4621.pdf - broken link), May 30, 1997, Vol. 46, No. 21, pp. 463 et. seq.) Since 1975, fatal attacks have been attributed to dogs from at least 30 breeds."
However much you may not like it, that's what it is.
Now before you go and get all offended by my saying what I've said, note that I didn't say they should all be rounded up and gassed. I said that certain breeds should be allowed to die out. There's a big difference.
i already have a headache today, so am not going to beat my head very hard against this particular brick wall.......
feel free to live in your prejudiced world..... i will happily inhabit my own where i know that it is not the breed.... it is the owner.....EVERY SINGLE TIME..... with the possible exception of a neuro issue or something else related to over-breeding or inbreeding...... unfortunately for the breeds you paint with such a broad brush, they have reputations for being aggressive (justifiably or not), so many of these poor dogs wind up in the wrong hands for all the wrong reasons..... and the cycle perpetuates......
two examples from my own life.......
i used to do radon testing when i had a building inspection company with my ex ..... in 15 years of going into people's houses .... as many as 20 per week..... there was only house i would not go into because of a dog..... and that dog was a golden retriever......
i let a friend stay at my house while he tried to get himself back on his feet for over a year.... turned into a no-good-deed-goes-unpunished situation...... long story short, he had a 98 lb yellow lab that he had never bothered to train or discipline by one iota.... when i kicked the guy out, he abandoned the dog with me.... i had to give him up to a lab rescue because of the lack of training and discipline ..... was too much dog for me..... and he was a very real potential liability because of his "protectiveness" of bailey and me......
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
