They (the various breeds of dogs) are born with certain instincts that were bred into them. Nothing more; nothing less. That said, to quote Mark Twain, "The more I learn about people, the more I like my dog."
Badger Baiting Arrests
- Thread starter Scots_Charles_River
- Start date
- Status
They (the various breeds of dogs) are born with certain instincts that were bred into them. Nothing more; nothing less. That said, to quote Mark Twain, "The more I learn about people, the more I like my dog."
Thank you for that. And I apologize if my opinions are often cynical. 13 years of my professional life was spent in Law Enforcement and/or Corrections and unfortunately that left some rather negative immpressions of human nature. I have to constantly remind myself that the individuals I dealt with are NOT the most representative of society as a whole.
Ofcourse. I dont see how anything i said conflicts with this. Ofcourse different breeds have different traits. But just because a pit bull for example has been bred for aggression and fighting. Doesnt mean that dog will be aggressive and dangerous. Dogs are like humans in so much that they and we are a.product of environment. Not breeding. Im not arguing that some some breeds have better traits for certains tasks. Thats as plain as day. The fault of the dog lies with the owner not the breeding of it. And any breed can be a great pet. Regardless of breed. And alot of dogs can be rehabilitated i know of quite a few that have been rescued from similar circumstance.
I think a danger here is over emotionalising the subject. Animals are killed to minimise risk all the time. Rats are killed to minimise the risk of disease transmission. Cows are killed because only one of their herd carries foot an mouth (a non fatal, treatable disease), birds are killed to minimise crop damage. Dogs are killed, or restricted to minimise risk of attack. Dogs are killed (lets not use weasel words like "put down") because they have bitten humans or attacked sheep. This may be down to poor training or owner irresponsibility, but none the less they are killed. Certain breeds have had restrictions put upon because of enhanced risk (e.g. the dangerous dogs act).
At the end of the day, they are livestock, not people and anthorpomorphising what is an animal, not a human is unhelpful. Many creatures are killed to minimise risk. I believe that Toddy's point has relevance in that dogs bred and or trained to attack carry a heightened risk. It may be the most sensible and economic approach to deem that an unacceptable risk to people - in the same way that rats are killed not for what they have done, but for the risk of what might happen. A risk that is deemed unacceptable. Human activity may well have attracted those rats, or even modified their concentrations and natural behaviour, none the less they are killed.
Red
At the end of the day, they are livestock, not people and anthorpomorphising what is an animal, not a human is unhelpful. Many creatures are killed to minimise risk. I believe that Toddy's point has relevance in that dogs bred and or trained to attack carry a heightened risk. It may be the most sensible and economic approach to deem that an unacceptable risk to people - in the same way that rats are killed not for what they have done, but for the risk of what might happen. A risk that is deemed unacceptable. Human activity may well have attracted those rats, or even modified their concentrations and natural behaviour, none the less they are killed.
Red
Okay, let's clarify things.
1) I like dogs
I was even a puppy walker for the Guide Dogs for the blind
2) I live in Lanarkshire, where the original article focused on the badger baiting rings/dogs/ cretins who do it.
3) Dogs are routinely culled in this country, despite all the hype. There are never enough homes to rehouse them all. Every single rescue service has limiting criteria, just have a read of the small print.
Army dogs, in tiny numbers might become family pets, they most certainly do not all.
As to the fellow in Greece's comment that,
"In offering this scenario i'm trying to show Toddy that.
a/ She is wrong in assuming any and every dog taken in these types of activities is dangerous
b/ That it's not pitbulls and Rottweilers that are used for cruelty and fighting
c/ It's reasonable to assume that by favouring a sweeping statement like that it will be a death sentence for many dogs that haven't even had a chance to form ANY personality and character yet, never mind that of a killer. "
a) Doesn't matter a damn whether it killed or not; it's caught two ways, in the act of baiting, and as a deterrant for the owner not to participate. Put it down.
b) I never once mentioned rottweilers and pit bulls. To my certain knowledge two dogs found with local badger baiters were a terrier and a lurcher. I'm mouthy enough, I don't need you to put words to me that I didn't say.
c) I find myself unmoved by your argument. See a)
In an ideal world maybe, but this isn't an ideal world, and dogs have always been culled. Foxhounds for instance, greyhounds......
Where I live the badgers visit the back garden, back lane, nature walks, etc., so do the local poachers, (who's dogs are labradors before anyone starts)
The law says that badger baiting is illegal, and society, as a whole, finds it repugnant........especially here, mind we banned hunting with dogs in this country.
Dogs are amongst the best of mankinds companions but I have no compunction in being practical about the issue.
Don't do it, or suffer the consequences.
Toddy
1) I like dogs
I was even a puppy walker for the Guide Dogs for the blind 2) I live in Lanarkshire, where the original article focused on the badger baiting rings/dogs/ cretins who do it.
3) Dogs are routinely culled in this country, despite all the hype. There are never enough homes to rehouse them all. Every single rescue service has limiting criteria, just have a read of the small print.
Army dogs, in tiny numbers might become family pets, they most certainly do not all.
As to the fellow in Greece's comment that,
"In offering this scenario i'm trying to show Toddy that.
a/ She is wrong in assuming any and every dog taken in these types of activities is dangerous
b/ That it's not pitbulls and Rottweilers that are used for cruelty and fighting
c/ It's reasonable to assume that by favouring a sweeping statement like that it will be a death sentence for many dogs that haven't even had a chance to form ANY personality and character yet, never mind that of a killer. "
a) Doesn't matter a damn whether it killed or not; it's caught two ways, in the act of baiting, and as a deterrant for the owner not to participate. Put it down.
b) I never once mentioned rottweilers and pit bulls. To my certain knowledge two dogs found with local badger baiters were a terrier and a lurcher. I'm mouthy enough, I don't need you to put words to me that I didn't say.
c) I find myself unmoved by your argument. See a)
In an ideal world maybe, but this isn't an ideal world, and dogs have always been culled. Foxhounds for instance, greyhounds......
Where I live the badgers visit the back garden, back lane, nature walks, etc., so do the local poachers, (who's dogs are labradors before anyone starts
) The law says that badger baiting is illegal, and society, as a whole, finds it repugnant........especially here, mind we banned hunting with dogs in this country.
Dogs are amongst the best of mankinds companions
but I have no compunction in being practical about the issue.Don't do it, or suffer the consequences.
Toddy
Last edited:
True not ALL military working dogs get adopted (for that matter not ALL of ANY rescue dogs get adopted) but here at least, it's not a "tiny number." It's the vast majority; there's usually a waiting list of adopters.
I also don't mind laws that are intended as a deterent; but just why would the baiting participants even care if their dogs are put down? As has been pointed out, the dogs are only livestock; they can be written off and replaced. Likewise a ban on ownership has little or no influence on criminals who deliberately break laws anyway.
Last edited:
That site either doesn't know jack or its mis-written. A lot of those breeds were and still are SPECIFICALLY bred for different purposes. Specifically used by choice of baiters perhaps. Their original creation was not for baiting , more for hunting and despatching of specific quarry/quarries. Eg. The bull terrier was SPECIFICALLY created for the Victorian rat pits. Sealyhams were bred for fox and badger digging, NOT baiting. Airedales....king of the terriers , all round hunters , heroic war service dogs , guardian of home an family, HOW DARE THEY try to misinform the world to these noble dogs origins ????
Sent from my HTC Explorer using Tapatalk
don't you think they would have been called Rat Terriers then ?.......it's all in the name matey
http://www.bullterrier.kiev.ua/bullterriers/bullterriershistory.html
Last edited:
Toddy,
I think you are confusing the matter.
I personally don't like the fact that any will be put down, but as a realist i understand there are limited resources, so some of the tougher cases will not have the opportunity to be rehabilitated.
Tough pill for me to swallow but ok i understand.
My problem with your statement was i don't think it's right to kill ALL the dogs from these raids.
ONLY THIS.
The reason i disagree is:
You have absolutely no evidence to suggest that these dogs are a danger to society.
Even IF these were unsociable, dogs in subsequent raids could well be the best behaved dogs in the world.
It's immoral and socially wrong to put down a job lot of dogs simply because they were unfortunate to be bought by some disgusting human beings.
The dogs need to be evaluated and taken on their merits.
Again i think your extremely naive if you think that having their dogs put down is a deterrent to these people.
These people breed, train and are entertained by watching their dogs be ripped to shreds by a badger, why on earth do you think they would care in the slightest about their dogs, they're just sport to them.
Just to clarify here.
I'm no veggy, wooly jumper wearing, greenpeace activist here.
I have hunted with air rifles, rifles, shotguns and ferrets and have spent most of my formative years working on farms, so i'm not some "killing any animal is murder" nut.
To kill 100% of these dogs, 100% by association ONLY is a disgusting IMO, and to be honest i strongly believe that to do that, is only fractionally better behaviour than the scumbags simply by the fact that the outcome is the same, but with a LOT less suffering.
IF the dogs have behavioural problems, IF the dogs cannot be rehoused, IF the dogs are suffering OK (ish), other than that, disgusting.
I think you are confusing the matter.
I personally don't like the fact that any will be put down, but as a realist i understand there are limited resources, so some of the tougher cases will not have the opportunity to be rehabilitated.
Tough pill for me to swallow but ok i understand.
My problem with your statement was i don't think it's right to kill ALL the dogs from these raids.
ONLY THIS.
The reason i disagree is:
You have absolutely no evidence to suggest that these dogs are a danger to society.
Even IF these were unsociable, dogs in subsequent raids could well be the best behaved dogs in the world.
It's immoral and socially wrong to put down a job lot of dogs simply because they were unfortunate to be bought by some disgusting human beings.
The dogs need to be evaluated and taken on their merits.
Again i think your extremely naive if you think that having their dogs put down is a deterrent to these people.
These people breed, train and are entertained by watching their dogs be ripped to shreds by a badger, why on earth do you think they would care in the slightest about their dogs, they're just sport to them.
Just to clarify here.
I'm no veggy, wooly jumper wearing, greenpeace activist here.
I have hunted with air rifles, rifles, shotguns and ferrets and have spent most of my formative years working on farms, so i'm not some "killing any animal is murder" nut.
To kill 100% of these dogs, 100% by association ONLY is a disgusting IMO, and to be honest i strongly believe that to do that, is only fractionally better behaviour than the scumbags simply by the fact that the outcome is the same, but with a LOT less suffering.
IF the dogs have behavioural problems, IF the dogs cannot be rehoused, IF the dogs are suffering OK (ish), other than that, disgusting.
Last edited:
At the end of the day a well reared, cared for and trained dog is a brilliant companion and often a skillful asset in many jobs too.
That's regardless of breed, incidentally; the gentlest mutts I know just now are two alsations and a rottweiler while the wee doormop of a terrier across the road is never allowed out off the leash for a blooming good reason, but her owner controls her ( if all else fails she just picks her up ) and loves her wholeheartedly.
However, badger baiting is not just an emotive issue, it's a legal issue. The urban/rural mix in this area means that people live in close proximity to each other. A dog that is not utterly reliable isn't ever going to be seen as a good thing.
A dog found in a baiting situation being rehomed/re-trained and maybe living next door to a household with wee kids? no, that's not going to sit well.
Sometimes the head has to rule the heart.
Toddy
p.s. Lucy, my neighbour's beautiful alsation
http://celticvinebooks.com/#/blog/4557582665
and often a skillful asset in many jobs too. That's regardless of breed, incidentally; the gentlest mutts I know just now are two alsations and a rottweiler
while the wee doormop of a terrier across the road is never allowed out off the leash for a blooming good reason, but her owner controls her ( if all else fails she just picks her up ) and loves her wholeheartedly.However, badger baiting is not just an emotive issue, it's a legal issue. The urban/rural mix in this area means that people live in close proximity to each other. A dog that is not utterly reliable isn't ever going to be seen as a good thing.
A dog found in a baiting situation being rehomed/re-trained and maybe living next door to a household with wee kids? no, that's not going to sit well.
Sometimes the head has to rule the heart.
Toddy
p.s. Lucy, my neighbour's beautiful alsation
http://celticvinebooks.com/#/blog/4557582665
Last edited:
At the end of the day a well reared, cared for and trained dog is a brilliant companion
That's regardless of breed, incidentally; the gentlest mutts I know just now are two alsations and a rottweiler
However, badger baiting is not just an emotive issue, it's a legal issue. The urban/rural mix in this area means that people live in close proximity to each other. A dog that is not utterly reliable isn't ever going to be seen as a good thing.
A dog found in a baiting situation being rehomed/re-trained and maybe living next door to a household with wee kids? no, that's not going to sit well.
Sometimes the head has to rule the heart.
Toddy
So if the scumbags house was raided and they had a pet poodle you'd have that put down as well?
Or just dogs that are caught in the act of fighting?
Do you deliberately not read what I have actually written ??
I have said clearly, several times, that if the dog is found baiting, put it down.
Poodles incidentally are nippy wee yaps that grab ankles or huge great beasts quite happy to plunge into water to retrieve shot birds, it's what they were bred for.
Toddy
I have said clearly, several times, that if the dog is found baiting, put it down.
Poodles incidentally are nippy wee yaps that grab ankles or huge great beasts quite happy to plunge into water to retrieve shot birds, it's what they were bred for.
Toddy
thats got to be one of the daftest questions i've read.
I think your too emotionally involved cbr6fs, any dog that has been trained or bred to kill will only ever be one thing.....a killer ( and that is really really sad, i love dogs ) however well re-homed it is, it will still have that instinct / desire to please... to kill, be it a rat, pet rabbit, cat, next doors yorkshire terrier or god forbid a child..........it would be utterly irresponsible to take that risk.
If i missed you specifically stating that then i apologise, i do try and read every word before i reply to others, but it's late here and it's been a long day
Do you know that this is the case with these dogs?
Just to be clear, i'm not agreeing with you, as any dog could have been thrown into the fight, there is not a dog or animal on the earth that wouldn't defend itself in that case, doesn't mean it's a danger to society though.
But i am clearer on your opinion.
I'm not really sure why, even IF you can have a daft question, i'm simply trying to clarify an opinion
If a Jack Russell is thrown in with a badger then that Jack Russell will whatever it can to protect itself, that does NOT make it a killer.
There are extremely easy and extremely reliable tests for dogs and their behaviour, OF COURSE a dog would need to be tested before being sent out with a family, i assumed everyone would understand that as it is only common sense.
But don't get fooled by the fact that because a dog defends itself against a badger or chases and kills a rabbit that it's a dangerous dog in a social environment, as that is complete rubbish.
I have been round working dogs all my life, from lurchers, sheep dogs etc through to armed forces guard dogs and i have never felt threatened even as a kid, when we are back in the UK the kids sleep with a Jack Russell that is nick named the rabbitator because of it's rabbiting abilities, again without any socialisation problems round other dogs or people.
of course it will defend itself ! it will also run away from a bigger more agressive opponent,...why ?....because it is not bred OR trained to fight ! a dog that is trained or bred to fight has only one instinct or desire to please....thats all it knows......to fight and kill......this is not defence....flight is not an option to them.....they fight and kill through instict and training. this makes them ( unfortunatly ) unstable in any other "social" enviroment.
lets try a situation............
you have rescued two fox hounds from being destroyed when the local hunt was disbanded and they have been you faithfull companions for a couple of years, then along comes a baby
)).........now tell me honestly, would you leave the baby alone in a room with those two dogs ? ( i hope to god your answer is no ) or would you be a bit concerned that the dogs would revert to instinct and kill what they may only see as small prey ?
Last edited:
I strongly disagree.
Dogs inherently do not want to fight.
Dogs fight for many reasons and circumstances, i've come across many many dogs that were not abused nor knowingly trained to be aggressive, yet they were.
It took patience but in many of those instances it was the owner that was the problem NOT the dog.
A dog will follow a pack leader, it will take it's actions from that leader.
It doesn't matter how a dog was trained or abused before, IF you have the patience and knowledge you can retrain it.
Obviously you would need to be careful of not putting it in environments and circumstances where these limits are tested, but that's the same with any dog and is part of being a responsible dog owner.
lets try a situation............
you have rescued two fox hounds from being destroyed when the local hunt was disbanded and they have been you faithfull companions for a couple of years, then along comes a baby
I would not leave any baby alone in a room with ANY dog, simple as that.
My dog is left with the kids and my previous dogs (2 Doberman's and a Rottweiler) were left with kids BUT these were older kids that i trusted enough to be responsible around dogs.
Again it's part of being a responsible dog owner by not letting a dog be in a situation where it feels it needs to be defensive or attack.
...lets try a situation............
you have rescued two fox hounds from being destroyed when the local hunt was disbanded and they have been you faithfull companions for a couple of years, then along comes a baby
Not a baby no. As cbr6fs already responded NO dog should be left alone with a baby. That said older children (3 years or older) are commonly left alone with coonhounds. Essentially the same principle as a foxhound (a breed that specifically exists to chase and kill raccoons instead of foxes) Or with beagles (a breed we specifically breed to chase and kill rabbits)
We're talking about badger baiting though and TBH I don't know enough about the dogs used. IF, and I repeat IF they are only taught agression towards badgers, then I really don't see much danger to the public. Most dogs trained to hunt and kill a specific game animal (I know badgers aren't really a game animal but the principle still applie) are taught to do so by capturing one of the intended prey and letting it attack/bite/harass the puppy at a young age so that it develops a hatred for THAT particular species. It's still the way we train coonhounds and foxhounds here today. Although we don't use horses when we fox hunt; usually 3 or 4 hunters and less than 6 dogs (and it's normally done at night here) Likewise with coon hunting
- Status
