Some Pit Education

Im again curious, what is the joy in owning half a dozen, a dozen or more dogs that cant interact with each other or all live in the same space with their owners?

*edit*

I can understand sled dog owners, not sure I agree cause I couldnt do it.

I asked the same question before and haven't gotten a response yet. Aside from "liking to admire them".

And before anyone says, 'do you want us to rehome all our dogs except one?', No. I don't think anyone is saying to start rehoming your dogs and keep only one.

However, the decision in the begining, to get more than a single dog knowing full well you'd have to keep them seperate full time is what we are questioning. Why make that choice in the first place?

For one, these dogs weren't bred to be pack animals. And I don't think it's fair to have to have a dog to babysit another dog b/c the human is too lazy to do anything with it. Some dogs were bred to be pack animals (hounds), some were not.

As for why do I have them? It's the same reason people have 2, 3,4 or more children. I love all my dogs individually. They all have their own personalities, their own likes & dislikes. I love knowing each one & working with each one. Some of my dogs are catch dogs (hog dogs--the ones that DA isn't a big issue with). One is a therapy dog who has her CGC & TT (& IS DA but I guess I should just euthanize her......) as well. All my dogs have a reason to be with me & that's just the way it is.

If you've never experienced it, I cannot express it in words. Especially when nothing I say or do is going to convince you otherwise that I don't starve my dogs, neglect my dogs, abuse my dogs, or fight my dogs. Many of y'all already have preconceived notions about us & refuse to change them for fear of being...gasp....wrong.

And just out of curiosity, why is it different with huskies? My best friend lives in Anchorage & I've haven't ever seen a yard where the dogs weren't chained. What is the difference in husky owners & "pit bull" owners that makes chainging ok with them but not with us?

And EVERYONE has answered this question, y'all just don't like the answer given: "Because we want to." Either accept it or don't, but don't claim we didn't give an answer.

Then why have more than one or two?

Sledders I understand they need a team or teams.

When was the last time you where in Anchorage?

I grew up there and I cant even say Ive seen a handful of comercial mushers opperating out of Anchorage.

Huskys arent bred for DA, they are bred to work as a team not fight another dog as the Dogmen bred. Huskys where bred to pull and enjoy it, and as such make the bush life easier.

Why didnt you finish the saying?

"Ass" out of "U" and in your case "Me".

Thats right.

And it was going so well....

You took the words right out of my mouth Jess........

I have three dogs. I have experienced the joy of owning multiples. I have one dog at my feet, and two on the sofa right now. That's why I cannot imagine having to make any dog I own live outside. I've seen how much joy they bring me by being a continual part of my life on a daily basis inside.

I don't think you abuse your dogs or fight them. I just don't agree with how you keep them chained and seperate from the family. As someone else said, if you have 7 or 8 dogs it must be very hard to rotate them all so they get inside time on a regular basis.

Once a week sure, but I don't feel that's enough. If you're able to let your dogs in more often I'd appreciate knowing how you do so. What kind of schedule you keep to allow them all frequent inside time. Thanks.

I know a family of 7 kids.

So much from one post.

I can tell you why I own 7 dogs. Because I can. Because I love them all. Because I have the time for them all. If I had time for more I am sure I would have more.

Why do breeders have more than one dog. They can't always keep them together right. But they still have more than one dog.

People have the right to own more than one dog whether the dogs have DA issues or not.

The truth of the matter is that these people ARE taking care of their dogs. They DO get enough human interaction. They ARE being fed and watered. They ARE being loved. Trust me if they weren't doing all this their dogs would not be in the shape they are in.

Yes, with other breeds it is easier to have more than one dog.

I really don't see the problem with them chaining their dogs, having more than one dog, etc., when they are still being cared for. But that is just me.
If they were not taking care of their dogs properly then yes, I would have a big problem, but that is not the case here.

What can I say? We all belong to a really tight group of APBT lovers. I would never question the love Marty has for Lil Bit- her spirit is infectious, and so is the passion we all have for our APBT's on the site. When you know and love a breed so undyingly loyal to people and willing to please, so versatile and talented, misjudged, misunderstood, witch hunted, abused, killed by the droves weekly in his own country...a strong bond forms between people who truly understand, respect and love the breed.

I mean no disrespect to any other breed types or owners, nor do I doubt the passion others have for their own dogs. I only answered your question in the best way I know how.

Yeah! I agree right there with you Mia- got some great talk going here and I also feel that was a great post- you are always an asset to any thread...

Wow, have just ploughed through this thread and find it fascinating. I don't have anything to say other than I love Miakoda's dogs ~ they look beautiful. I don't know a thing about APBT's other than I love the way they look and the ones that I have met have been in dog parks.. off leash.. and have all been as sweet as pie.. with me as well as my Frenchie.

I went through an inner "is chaining ethical" debate with myself for years - even as a rep (FORMER REP) for a well known and recently controversial anti chaining organization. (There's a hot debate for ya...) Luckily I have also ridden and trained horses my whole life so I was able to arrive at a conclusive decision: An owner of multiple show/working horses loves them equally as any indoor pet, even as they spend their nights in their stalls or pastures.
Also, owners of multiple working dogs or show dogs treat their animals the same way. A proper chain for safety of the dog as well as other animals is a necessary hold and gives them space to move, as well as retreat to their own shelter (doghouse) as they please. Almost any APBT can make short work of any kennel, putting the animal at risk for injury, theft, confiscation by AC, etc. The properly chained dog is routinely off the chain for exercise and training- just as working/show horses are out of their stalls for their training- many tethered dogs even enjoy a certain rotation with others in their yard indoors with their owners. Are chains ever abused? As with anything, of course. However, proper use of tethering is certainly comparable to proper use of stalling horses. While my dogs enjoy the life of Riley as indoor lounge lizards- working dogs enjoy a whole different life experience, which is no less fulfilling. Working dogs/horses love to work- and the outdoors is where they do it.

I am peripherally involved in a case near me in which 14 pit bulls were removed from someone's home by animal control. A neighbor had complained of barking, and animal control came in without a warrant, and found a skinny nursing bitch in the basement and 13 dogs chained in the backyard. I went and looked at the dogs at the shelter after they'd been seized, and the bitch was too thin. All the other dogs looked great, much like the dogs we've seen pictured on this thread (other than looking kind of sad in those shelter cages).

Even though tethering is legal in this county, the prosecutor is refusing to let the dogs go back to life on chains. The attorneys and judge refuse to believe that the 13 dogs are not too thin. The owners have been charged with 14 counts of criminal neglect. It is true that the owners should have had their nursing bitch eating better. I am not sure why they weren't taking better care or watching more closely. They are good people and care about their dogs, but they hadn't taken appropriate measures with regard to this one dog.

Because of the general public's outlook on chaining, appropriate care, and appropriate numbers of dogs, ALL these dogs - 14 beautiful, lovable, healthy dogs AND two puppies - are going to die. There is no way to stop it. The state is killing those dogs to make more room for more dogs they will kill later. The dogs could go back to this family who is more than willing to pay the fees, submit to inspections, and take better care. None of them will have a second chance, because, in the words of the prosecutor, "Life on a Chain is No Life" and "No-One Needs 14 Pit Bulls." (Funny how her self-righteousness is also getting her another feather in her cap at work where convictions are a must for promotion/salary increase/climbing the political ladder, and she also gets that that warm-and-fuzzy feeling one gets when protecting those poor animals ... with the needle, oh and "cleaning up the neighborhood" at the same time!)

So, my question is, who are the cruel ones here? Is death better than life on a chain? Because that's often the very sobering alternative. Are our judgments about what constitutes a good life for dogs helping or hurting?

(I personally feel traumatized by this situation, but nothing compared to what this family has experienced. Please resist the urge to bag on this family in this thread.)

You can thank the cut throut anti tethering legislation cowboys for this as well. What a tragic story- one all too common. My heart goes out to the family and dogs. With this new wave of "NO CHAINS!" laws, it isn't just a crime to be an APBT, but a safely tethered APBT has double the death dose. My gracious thanks to the high-stepping legislation-happy lobbyists for continuing to ensure this wonderful breed's demise. They may say they love animals, they are liars. They do not love the APBT.

there are hundreds of labs sitting on death row, too, you know. and they're generally not dog-aggressive at all.

probably because you keep posting about changing the dogs?? if you think they need to be changed so badly, clearly you must think they're the problem.

karen delise tells a lovely little story in her fatal dog attacks book about how after diane whipple was attacked and killed by two presa canarios and the media finally clarified that they were presas, *not* pit bulls, many of the presa breeders started getting phone calls from people looking to buy "the kind of dog that killed that lady in california".

Did I say that we went dogsledding through Anchorage? Nope. And I know what Huskies were bred to do.

So let's see, what about since I hog hunt? Should I be limited to only 1 dog b/c y'all think so & be forced to hunt with only 1 dog? Is it possible for a dog to be a bay dog & a catch dog & bring down a 300lb board by itself? I'd love to see that dog since according to y'all I have no business owning more than one dog.

And assuming doens't make an ass out of me. It looks like that b/c the person assuming is telling lies & making up stories, but the truth defends me & protects me. I could care less what y'all think of me. I'm here to defend my dogs.

And I don't understand it. Here y'all are, preaching to us how y'all are trying to fight BSL, yet the things y'all say & do are actually more along the lines of trying to enforce it. You say you love the breed, yet you don't want anyone to own it. You say you love the breed, but God forbid we actually work the dogs. You say you love the breed, but you want to change it & make it into a lab. That's not love. That's called a power trip.

Again, an assumption. No matter how many times I, we, say it, it never gets throught to people.

And I've realized one thing throughout this whole post: it's not a dog chainng issue, it's not a conditioning issue, it's a "pit bull" issue. Most of y'all are ready to rid the world of "pit bulls" so they can no longer be "abuesed". If you go to the PETA homepage, this is also their motto & way of thinking & we know what a reliable & reasonable organization they are. It's already been said that it's ok & understandable for husky owners to chain, but not us. It's ok for hundreds of thousands of labs to die in the shelters, but "pit bulls" are the only ones discussed in an effort to drastically reduce their population. It's very clear that y'all would prefer that our dogs are confiscated & euthanized b/c that's nicer than having to stay on a chain when confined.

And just out of curiosity, what do y'all think of sheep farmers who still use dogs like the Great Pyranese to LIVE with & guard their flocks? You think these dogs have ever seen a couch? Or a thick $150 bed from Petco? You think these dogs sleep in the beds with children & romp & play with their humans? Guess again. These dogs have a purpose & it's not one as a pet. They live their entire lives with the flock independent of a lot of human contact. I guess that pisses y'all off as well?

The big issue here, once again, is trying to rid the world of "pit bulls" so they will no longer be abused. But even if it did work, another breed will only take its place. And let's also rid the world of working dogs b/c it's cruel & inhumane to not treat them as pets (most true that's right, working dogs are not pets). Screw the military & the police forces, their inhumane treatment of dogs has got to go. No wonder why BSL is proving so hard to fight. Because the owners of other breeds claiming to help fight it, are actually doing the opposite. Yay.