Dogs and being Kept outside, What is your opinion? (allergic, terriers, yorkie)
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.
Working dogs of all types are at some degree of risk whether they are S/R, MWD, assistance dogs, herding, LGD, hunting, etc., but a responsible handler does everything they can to mitigate danger including proactive management of a given situation, training, and realistic expectations relative to each dog (age, training level, etc.).
Risk needs to be weighed against benefit. Is the risk necessary? Can the risk be justified? Age appropriate training that progresses relative to the dog's maturity level, temperament, and physical ability should prepare a working dog to handle the risks inherent in the job. If not, then they go to pet homes or are channeled into another job. Not all dogs will ever get to a point where they can safely and reasonably do the work they were trained for. Not all Malinois are cut out to be LEO just as not every border collie is fit to work sheep.
It is irresponsible to put a dog into a situation it isn't ready for or not able to handle- for multiple reasons. You wouldn't place an 8 week old Great Pyrenees in with a flock of mature sheep any more than you would send a green border collie in to manage an angry ram or a fearful Malinois out to sniff bombs.
So yes, I do think it is unconscionable to put a dog at risk when it isn't necessary just so "a dog can be a dog". We humans are the ones with the big brains; as such, we know the dangers of allowing dogs to roam freely which include close encounters with vehicles, people who would harm them, wildlife as discussed, as well as injury from any number of random incidents. As for the argument that "stuff happens", yes of course but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't do what we can as thoughtful owners to manage those risks that we can.
What I don't understand about this conversation is why it is suddenly controversial to expect owners/handlers to make the informed reasoned decisions needed to keep their dogs safe. I thought that was what responsible owners did.
Working dogs of all types are at some degree of risk whether they are S/R, MWD, assistance dogs, herding, LGD, hunting, etc., but a responsible handler does everything they can to mitigate danger including proactive management of a given situation, training, and realistic expectations relative to each dog (age, training level, etc.).
Risk needs to be weighed against benefit. Is the risk necessary? Can the risk be justified? Age appropriate training that progresses relative to the dog's maturity level, temperament, and physical ability should prepare a working dog to handle the risks inherent in the job. If not, then they go to pet homes or are channeled into another job. Not all dogs will ever get to a point where they can safely and reasonably do the work they were trained for. Not all Malinois are cut out to be LEO just as not every border collie is fit to work sheep.
It is irresponsible to put a dog into a situation it isn't ready for or not able to handle- for multiple reasons. You wouldn't place an 8 week old Great Pyrenees in with a flock of mature sheep any more than you would send a green border collie in to manage an angry ram or a fearful Malinois out to sniff bombs.
So yes, I do think it is unconscionable to put a dog at risk when it isn't necessary just so "a dog can be a dog". We humans are the ones with the big brains; as such, we know the dangers of allowing dogs to roam freely which include close encounters with vehicles, people who would harm them, wildlife as discussed, as well as injury from any number of random incidents. As for the argument that "stuff happens", yes of course but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't do what we can as thoughtful owners to manage those risks that we can.
What I don't understand about this conversation is why it is suddenly controversial to expect owners/handlers to make the informed reasoned decisions needed to keep their dogs safe. I thought that was what responsible owners did.
Sorry if I wasn't clear. I was not asking about dogs unprepared for their job...really, that's just silly. My question for you was regarding working dogs and to me that means a dog that is trained for the job and proficient at it...working. I never posted "just so "a dog can be a dog"." so maybe you are confusing me with someone else on this thread?
What comes to my mind is the working stock dog who can so easily be on the receiving end of a kick when working cattle in the chute.
I think the conversation just morphed as so many do. I didn't see anything here as controversial about making informed decisions to keep dogs safe except for Threerun's detour into machismo. When you wrote: "Whatever the "historical" role of dogs and their breeding- which is very much up for debate, even by qualified scholars- in contemporary culture it is utterly irresponsible to put your dog in a potentially dangerous and totally avoidable situation and then expect them to protect themselves (and you)." it struck me that you might be against working stock dogs since that is their historical role, it is a potentially dangerous situation and certainly avoidable if the dog wasn't intentionally used to move cattle. These dogs are expected to protect their owners from bulls and often do. Sometimes to their own demise.
Personally I am a huge proponent of dog safety. For example, I am very observant when walking an agility course to make sure equipment is properly maintained and footing is suitable, etc. I work my Aussies on sheep but I won't do cattle as it's way too easy for them to get hurt. And I just bought a Variocage...nuff said! But I recognize the enormous value of a working cow dog to farming/ranching families. And I don't consider that use irresponsible.
How do you feel about cow dogs that risk foreseeable injury on a routine basis? Is that level of risk acceptable? I remember you wrote that you understand the role of LGDs. They also risk foreseeable injury on a routine basis. Is that level of risk also acceptable? Not trying to argue here. Just curious how you rationalize those.
Quote:
Originally Posted by twelvepaw
Working dogs of all types are at some degree of risk whether they are S/R, MWD, assistance dogs, herding, LGD, hunting, etc., but a responsible handler does everything they can to mitigate danger including proactive management of a given situation, training, and realistic expectations relative to each dog (age, training level, etc.).
Risk needs to be weighed against benefit. Is the risk necessary? Can the risk be justified? Age appropriate training that progresses relative to the dog's maturity level, temperament, and physical ability should prepare a working dog to handle the risks inherent in the job. If not, then they go to pet homes or are channeled into another job. Not all dogs will ever get to a point where they can safely and reasonably do the work they were trained for. Not all Malinois are cut out to be LEO just as not every border collie is fit to work sheep.
It is irresponsible to put a dog into a situation it isn't ready for or not able to handle- for multiple reasons. You wouldn't place an 8 week old Great Pyrenees in with a flock of mature sheep any more than you would send a green border collie in to manage an angry ram or a fearful Malinois out to sniff bombs.
So yes, I do think it is unconscionable to put a dog at risk when it isn't necessary just so "a dog can be a dog". We humans are the ones with the big brains; as such, we know the dangers of allowing dogs to roam freely which include close encounters with vehicles, people who would harm them, wildlife as discussed, as well as injury from any number of random incidents. As for the argument that "stuff happens", yes of course but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't do what we can as thoughtful owners to manage those risks that we can.
What I don't understand about this conversation is why it is suddenly controversial to expect owners/handlers to make the informed reasoned decisions needed to keep their dogs safe. I thought that was what responsible owners did.
I was trying to address both your question about acceptable risk for working dogs and the unnecessary risks associated with letting a dog roam loose at will directed at threerun.
The risk associated with working dogs is managed by training, and ideally minimized, but yes, some still are injured or killed. Yes, this is an acceptable and necessary risk providing the dog is well trained and physically, mentally fit to do the job, and the handler knows their dog.
I absolutely wholeheartedly support working dogs. Working dogs, including hunting dogs, love what they do and provide invaluable service and support to the people they work alongside. LGD's protection of their flocks is critical to the farm economy, border collies live to work, MWDs have saved the lives of countless soldier not to mention providing comfort and stress relief when off-duty, S/R dogs risk their lives to save the living and bring closure for the families of the dead. I have nothing but respect for these dogs and their handlers.
I probably shouldn't have commingled my responses to both you and threerun, and I think that is what confused things.
I was trying to address both your question about acceptable risk for working dogs and the unnecessary risks associated with letting a dog roam loose at will directed at threerun.
The risk associated with working dogs is managed by training, and ideally minimized, but yes, some still are injured or killed. Yes, this is an acceptable and necessary risk providing the dog is well trained and physically, mentally fit to do the job, and the handler knows their dog.
I absolutely wholeheartedly support working dogs. Working dogs, including hunting dogs, love what they do and provide invaluable service and support to the people they work alongside. LGD's protection of their flocks is critical to the farm economy, border collies live to work, MWDs have saved the lives of countless soldier not to mention providing comfort and stress relief when off-duty, S/R dogs risk their lives to save the living and bring closure for the families of the dead. I have nothing but respect for these dogs and their handlers.
I probably shouldn't have commingled my responses to both you and threerun, and I think that is what confused things.
You mean crating is how most people don't bother to train their dogs.
No, I typed "train", and that is what I meant. Many people do not want their dogs making a mess all over the house (and yes, well-trained dogs can certainly make a mess) so crate training is very useful. It also mimics a dog's natural yearning to have a "den" - a safe place. I know you know all this...not sure why I am even typing.
No, I typed "train", and that is what I meant. Many people do not want their dogs making a mess all over the house (and yes, well-trained dogs can certainly make a mess) so crate training is very useful. It also mimics a dog's natural yearning to have a "den" - a safe place. I know you know all this...not sure why I am even typing.
Because I completely disagree that you need to crate your dog in order to have an intact home. I do very much agree that using the crate at the beginning of their training is very useful.
Maybe not you, but most people I know who crate their dogs all day do so because they haven't bothered to train them out of pooping and peeping or tearing up their stuff.
After they are puppies and they have been adequately trained, they no longer require the crate. They can have their crate available for the den-like experience at any time. But that should not be where they spend the majority of their time.
I will tell you one thing. Once they were allowed to have full run of the house, not one single dog I have ever had returned to the crate willingly for any reason. That is why all my crates are stuck in my garage. And keeping them in one location is as easy as shutting a door, if that is what you need.
There was no machismo implied, merely illustrating the outdoor / working dogs in my life and how I respect and admire them. I cried like a baby the day I had to watch Blue (or any of my dogs) pass this world.
I care profoundly for any animal under my care or husbandry, including stock animals we owned as a family. As far as I'm concerned I think others may have misconstrued my argument and illustrations in defense of 'outdoor dogs/pets'.
There was no machismo implied, merely illustrating the outdoor / working dogs in my life and how I respect and admire them. I cried like a baby the day I had to watch Blue (or any of my dogs) pass this world.
I care profoundly for any animal under my care or husbandry, including stock animals we owned as a family. As far as I'm concerned I think others may have misconstrued my argument and illustrations in defense of 'outdoor dogs/pets'.
I've read your posts and have seen your pictures. I think your dogs have a great life. The best of both worlds, doing what they love and were bred to do, and much loved and cared for family pets.
There was no machismo implied, merely illustrating the outdoor / working dogs in my life and how I respect and admire them. I cried like a baby the day I had to watch Blue (or any of my dogs) pass this world.
I care profoundly for any animal under my care or husbandry, including stock animals we owned as a family. As far as I'm concerned I think others may have misconstrued my argument and illustrations in defense of 'outdoor dogs/pets'.
Threerun...from your posts it seems that you are a caring, responsible dog owner and that your dogs lead very full, happy lives.
This statement was out of character with the rest of your comments and where I got the sense of machismo peeking through: "If they want to stay outside all day like they did today, great! I'm not fearful of the mountain lions, coyotes, eagles, bears or other 'scary' animals that roam the north hills that may harm my precious." The "precious" reads sarcastic since a cougar (and possibly even a bear though much less likely) could very easily harm your dogs.
Not saying your dogs shouldn't be outside. I have a good friend whose dog lives outside...the dog prefers it that way...in cougar country. He's a big Lab mix but I still think he'd lose that argument. Regardless, he guards their chickens and he can't do that from inside.
Because I completely disagree that you need to crate your dog in order to have an intact home. I do very much agree that using the crate at the beginning of their training is very useful.
Maybe not you, but most people I know who crate their dogs all day do so because they haven't bothered to train them out of pooping and peeping or tearing up their stuff.
After they are puppies and they have been adequately trained, they no longer require the crate. They can have their crate available for the den-like experience at any time. But that should not be where they spend the majority of their time.
I will tell you one thing. Once they were allowed to have full run of the house, not one single dog I have ever had returned to the crate willingly for any reason. That is why all my crates are stuck in my garage. And keeping them in one location is as easy as shutting a door, if that is what you need.
I have far too many family members with dogs to agree with you. And two have professionally trained hunting dogs, that sleep in their crates. Both of these dogs are trained to a remarkable level...I mean, these dogs don't move unless told to move. But they sleep in crates, and when either dog is "in a mood" that crate is where they want to be. You may not mind your dogs shedding all over furniture, carpet or beds, but not everyone wants that. My sister's dog LOVES her crate...and will whine uncontrollably if not given access to it. My BF's dog goes in her crate to sleep when I am sleeping over and BF leaves early to work or whatever. I always get up, and there she is sleeping in the crate. She is very happy in there - it's HER spot. Obviously, we have had different experiences.
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.
