not logged in
| re: Bully dog question | |
Posted by:  |
pidunk 06:03 am UTC 07/26/07 |
| In reply to: | re: Bully dog question - Leesa 12:58 am UTC 07/26/07 |
> Susan, > > This was just too stupid to let this go. Spuds McKenzie > (Honeytree's Evil Eye, "Evie", bred by my good friends > David and Peggy Selk, and finished her championship under > my co-breeder)was one of the biggest curses our breed had. > There are always millers around to fill the needs of > people who want animals they simply shouldn't have, hence > the shelter numbers. I'm not saying that some pet buyers/adopters are not irresponsible. This kind of thing happens to baby chicks every Easter season. It happens with all breeds of dogs and cats, that a fad is a fad, and then a problem, like Dalmations had some years back because of 101 Dalmations. People discovered the emotional needs of Dalmations were too much to handle. It takes a special kind of pet owner to handle a pet who needs alot of attention. What I have learned of BT's is that similarly to Dalmations, they need a great deal more from their owners than other breeds of dogs typically need. The Taco Bell Chihuahua has also created a large area of problems with regard to that breed, which has good and bad rescue units alike. I met a highly abusive so-called Chihuahua rescuer several years ago, who I saw was treating their warehoused animals poorly, and told me the tale of their wife having died and making the wish that ten of her standards and teacups be put to sleep to be buried with her, which demand was met. Indeed, the nightmare of this tainted my perception of those who discuss rescues of breeds, that sometimes the dogs are better off with less than perfect owners, than with less than helpful rescuers. I saw also warehousing of cats, including ferals which made my skin crawl. These people were awful, and I was powerless to do anything about it....they made sure to hide their tracks when they caught wind I was calling animal organizations inquiring as to their standards of practices. I didn't like having to see those things. I resented their volunteering me shelter and then giving me that nightmare instead. I was at that place for ten days, during which time I had a walking pneumonia I needed rest from, otherwise I would not have been so docile. And while I was there I segregated my Simon from all those, gave him his tag, and kept him in a crate on the bed next to me, his own food, water and sandbox. He came out of it and so did I physically healthier than we came in, but not by any accident or without effort. Since then, one member of their organization has been forced out of operation, but not by any of my doing. Since they took their own sense of self-importance from this one, I am certain that they turned their own tails too. >When Evie became popular, rescue then > became part of our national club--the numbers spiked. > These are not dogs for everyone, anymore than pitbulls or > even rotts are for everyone. And not everyone does their > homework. That is very true with respect to any animal or even toy, when you come to think of it. People make too many assumptions and want the reality to fit their dream in toys at Christmas, or in pets for children or for their home. Pit Bulls especially are in too greater numbers than I understand, being as they have such abilities to turn on anyone in a minute. In Los Angeles, one sees this dog more often than any other breed. Second seems to be the Labrador. >Underbreeding is a responsible thing to do in > the sport of purebred dogs--we have enough dogs already of > every sort in the shelters, for Christ's sake! The thing that I have a problem with is the concept of "sport" attached to these animals. I can't consider any part of animal husbandry a sport. A friend of a breed, breeds the breed and maintains the friendship with responsible placement. The whole idea of showing dogs, is something that I feel has too much regimentation to it, and this goes with cats too though I would have gladly have shown my Simon if ever the opportunity had arisen just because he was so beautiful and amazing. Showing dogs and cats for sport, is one step away from fighting them except a more demure way of being cold to the animals. No offense to those who proudly show their animals, but as a feeling, I just sense that it is hard to be personal with a commodity of display. Then there are the personal differences between individuals so I do not intend to make an unfair generalization. Sport, is not for the love of an animal. Sport, is for the use of an animal, and there are uses, and their are loves, and love is no sport I know. >You don't > see overall numbers when you visit a microcosim. Many bull > breeds are euthanised upon entry. Breeed specific > legislation which deems certain breeds illegal makes it a > race to a shelter--we've lost bullies a couple times > because 12 hr lead time wasn't enough. Where are bullies illegal? I'm not referring to Pits. >We sell our dogs > for LESS than millers and many of us guareentee our dogs > for LIFE. Isn't this a bit redundant? When the dog dies, the guarantee is null. Gee, what a surprise. I think I believe you mean that you support the dogs' health status for the twelve years of life expectancy. But really, would you not instead rather see them live to twenty? This part is something that I can't sign on to with understanding because I don't like the idea of control to this extent. If I buy a dog from you, it is none of your business where I am six years down the road, and you have no business tracking where this dog goes once it leaves you. Why not educate vets and pet shops, write and publish books about the breed to help support those who are most inclined to be responsible owners of the breed you know, and let God take his hand to it? >And as for shows, we mainly compete at > specialties, i.e., just Bull Terriers, for 2 > reasons--first, most terrier judges in all-breed shows are > not fond of the bull-type terriers and usually send > Benji-type terriers to group. Where has this happened? They have the ugliest dogs represented in every general breed show. What's all this singling out of BT's? I'm really not sure about this at all. Seems like an excuse. All types of terriers get into the terrier group. Especially the clown face of the bullie. Can't look at that face and not smile. Next time someone gives you trouble, put a red nose on one. :) >Secondly, all-breed shows > often only have 2 or 3 bullies entered and it's hard to > earn points to championships and ROMS are out of the > question in such small class sizes. Show weekends are very > expensive. So the specialties around the country are well > attended, as are our yearly nationals. My co-breeder won > Westminster last year so we're definately out there. That's good.....which category? I don't tend to follow those shows every year. > Their 'secrecy' keeps them rare'--I laughed out loud. > Yeah, that's it. My god...! Molly as the Target dog hides > really well behind that red bullseye! Actually, that red bullseye does detract from appreciation, including knowledge of the breed. Nobody notices the kind of dog it is. They just see the bullseye. >Anyone who really > wants a bull terrier can find one. A responsible breeder > who will stand behind their dogs and charge LESS for a > quality, well-bred, healthy pet seems a bit better than > buying from a miller providing the polar opposite. Most > millers don't deal with our dogs because they are a > labour-intensive breed. Most bitches don't whelp alone--I > spend about a week sleeping beside the whelping box each > night before the litter arrives. They aren't retrievers > that you can lock in a barn and be presented with a > litter. Labour is money and they are not cost-effective > mill prospects. Some millers DO sell them however and you > just see sometime how they do it and be really glad they > have a right to raise and treat dogs as such--maybe > responsible breeders fiercly protective of their breed > won't look so bad. You think it's about 'control'--well, a > breed such as the pits HAVE no 'control'/responsible > group. And they are fabulous dogs which have been allowed > into the hands of marginals seduced by street swagger who > betray the fierce loyalty they have and use them as > weapons until they die doing what their masters ask--and > most of those dogs have sounder temperments over all than > ours. WE have PR and a damned good breed club. And yeah, > maybe control to a point. You decide which breed is better > off overall. You have to understand there is no other breed like the Pits, where they are bred for fighting each other and that is cruelty at its highest level. The kinds of treatments of those animals just prime them for aggression, and the reason there is nobody on their side is because their side is a hard one to be on. The people who buy them actually buy them because of their vicious natures. The only breed that needs controls is the Pits. > And your take on our rescue is just amazingly naive--you > don't have a realistic clue at all--you have NO idea what > our 20 yr history has been. Because you don't see more > than 20 (20 too many...) BT's listed in rescue up for > adoption, doesn't mean that hotspotters as myself (I alone > covered 2 states for several years)and regional club > members aren't fostering, nursing, or evaluating 10 times > that many dogs not ready for (and may never be ready or > placeable for) adoption. If a dog can be fostered, it can be placed. If you can tolerate a dog, someone can give that dog a home. I don't believe that anything short of incorrigible is unplaceable. >Meanwhile, their costs fall on > us. You talk about a labour of love. Every rescue I've > ever had through here has been a stop to our vet on the > way home--never under $300 out of my pocket except > once--that was $150. BTCA reimburses part of that about 6 > months later. And many of these animals are unsocialised, > problem dogs or at best traumatised by time at the > shelter. Which means many all nighters up with dogs. And > some of these dogs stay 6 months or better! Homer, (the > poet, not Simpson) was a blind 7 yr old tossed over a > shelter fence over night in Des Moines--if we'd not been > there in 24 hrs to collect after the call came in, he'd > have been euthanised. He was a fabulous dog but died of > his advanced renal failure in my arms 2 months later. This is surprising that you allowed him to die naturally in his own God chosen time. Most animal "experts" euthanize animals at the first sign of terminal in the prognosis. It is a shame he died, but it is good he had some comfort. >He > was our housedog the entire time we had him and a real > joy. But this shit is painful. We clean up messes. I'm > bitter about the type of people who create them and I have > a short fuse with those who don't understand. The dogs are > the ones who pay. We might seem an arrogant lot, but there > is nothing, especially ourselves, more important than > these dogs. One should, perhaps meter the doling out of arrogance and temper it with a moderate dose of generosity. The education you mention is exactly what I mean. >The more we educate, the better the dogs will > fare. I sincerely apologise to you for failing to help you > more directly more quickly for what you had asked me > earlier--I was guilty of the seeming 'elitism' I've > accused fellow members of years back. It was my gut > reaction to a bad situation. I still only hope that this litter comes out okay. I do worry if these are products of siblings like you mentioned, and I just hope that the least problems to them arise. I saw one puppy happily upside down attached to his mother's teat, sucking, sucking, and drawing it all in, and I thought that was strange, but she was very content. I'm told there is only one male. I only had the one peek, and don't intend to look in any further. The mom is highly protective, and that is good, she is diligent in caring for her pups. > We don't have a problem in rescue as you see it and it's > all our fault...gee, if we were more 'popular' then we'd > have a BIGGER problem, then we'd be filling a need, then > we'd have the right to bitch about the problem we > created! I think the viewpoint you get is the worst of them. Most people who have their dogs love their dogs, and your view is perhaps not naive, but I like naivety, because people who do right, have the right to be naive. > Yupper...glad you have cats. > Leesa I'm glad I have cats too. I adore mine. I've had cats for many years and know I don't have to worry about anyone chewing up one of my shoes. Not to say they don't scratch them, though. But I don't let them scratch any good shoes. > | |
| reply | | |
| Previous: | re: Bully dog question - Leesa 12:58 am UTC 07/26/07 |
| Next: | re: Bully dog question - Leesa 03:37 pm UTC 07/26/07 |
| Thread: |
|