# Opinions....Dog park...required Spay/Neuter?



## Stacydub (Sep 9, 2009)

The last time I went to the dog park, there were two new signs up. One said "No Pitt Bulls" Awesome. That's a Little Rock law, and fair. The only two Pitt Bulls I'd seen there before were asshats. One tried to attack my poodle and the other was kept on a leash and growled at everything that moved. 



But the second sign said "all dogs must be spayed/neutered if over 6 months old". Not sure how I feel about that one. Helmet is not fixed (no, I'm never going to breed him, but I mean...he's a poodle with a mohawk for Jesus Sakes. Let him have SOME dignity!) And Crash? I'm not going to spay her at 6 months. Isn't the rule 2 heat cycles before you spay?



I get it...the rules are the rules...and I'm just going to say "hey, new dog park". but I'm curious...how many of the dog parks near you have the same ruels? What's your opinion on required spay/neuter?


----------



## faerie (Mar 27, 2010)

i don't get dog parks because they just seem a ground for problems (always owners who say ... oh my dog is not aggressive, then chomps someone's dog)

and i also hate the bad rap pit bulls get. my son has a red nose pitt and she's the best behaved, well trained dog. she's super good. 

good owners make great dogs.

anyway, about the spay/neuter. guess it could cause issues if a bitch is in heat there.

i am not sure about spay time (was going to post & ask myself). i have a 7 month female and was considering spaying her any time now since i won't be breeding.


----------



## Stacydub (Sep 9, 2009)

I'm honestly not sure. I hear some people say to spay before the first heat cycle, some say to wait until after one or two cycles....I think it's a matter of personal preference.


----------



## Harley_chik (Nov 7, 2008)

So breed bans are awesome but not a rule requiring spay/neuter at the dog park? I'm at a loss there.

How do you plan to keep your dogs separate when your female goes into heat? Neutering doesn't affect a dog's dignity at all. I have a family member w/ an intact dog and she used to have an intact female as well. The poor male was miserable everytime she was in heat. He whined, refused to eat and was obviously upset the entire time. I felt it was a little cruel to put him through that. I personally would never keep an intact male and an intact female in the same home. I think you should neuter your male or have your female spayed before the first heat.


----------



## Aidan (Mar 4, 2009)

Breed bans are just wrong. If you think it starts and ends with pits, you're also wrong. If you let them ban one breed pretty soon they will find a reason to ban ANY breed. Yes, even your adorable poodle.

It's also irresponsible to own a PET dog and leave them intact simply to give him "dignity". He's a DOG, he doesn't know what dignity is. He's not a person.

In fact your dog will probably be much more comfortable snipped..he won't go nuts everytime a bitch goes into heat..he'll be less likely to want to leave home when he does smell a bitch in heat.. intact males can be quite a handful.

I've met some shady pits at the dog park..but i've also met some aggressive golden retrievers..before I started dog grooming I hated poodles because the few standards i met were just horrible dogs. I figured standard poodles were just mean animals with goofy haircuts. I had no idea I would own three wonderful spoos later on!

I just don't understand the point of your post really. If you wanted to start a heated discussion I imagine you will get your wish.


I do think pit bull owners should stay away from the dog park. Not because they don't have a right to be there (they do) but because the general public are jerks when it comes to bully breeds. If a black lab attacks a pit..and the pit fights back to defend himself..they are ALWAYS going to blame the pit bull. Why? Because it's a pit! It doesn't have to start a fight, it just has to be involved to be blamed.

That's why I think pit bull owners should be very careful entering a dog park. You might have the most well behaved pit bull ever...but if some other jerk has a poor mannered animal and your dog gets involved...it won't matter..and it's not fair, but that's just how it is..at least at the few parks i've gone to.


----------



## Karma'sACat (Jun 1, 2010)

Heh...yea, pit bull bans are fair. My pit bull and Catahoula (who looks enough like a pit bull to those who don't know) would both be banned despite the fact they are both exceptionally dog friendly and well-behaved. And my 'houla could have been seized when she was working despite her service dog status simply because she has a square head.

I don't go to the dog park because there is no guarantee of the dogs' manners/socailization. I know that if I went and one of my girl's got attacked and so much as growled, they would be blamed. Instead, they go to day care where dogs are tested before being allowed in.

The S/N requirement is likely there to prevent fights and accidental breedings. You don't want fights over bitches in heat and you can't trust that Joe Shmoe knows not to bring her or to stop a dog mounting her in time.


----------



## roxy25 (Dec 18, 2008)

Aidan said:


> Breed bans are just wrong. If you think it starts and ends with pits, you're also wrong. If you let them ban one breed pretty soon they will find a reason to ban ANY breed. Yes, even your adorable poodle.
> 
> It's also irresponsible to own a PET dog and leave them intact simply to give him "dignity". He's a DOG, he doesn't know what dignity is. He's not a person.
> 
> ...


IA 10000000000% with both HC and Adian !

Breed bans are not awesome and I think you have offended a few people on here by saying that. It does not stop with pit bulls at all. 

I have been around nearly over 500 pit bulls my whole life never been bit or attacked .... But I get bit and attacked by a mutt so I think we should all ban mutts now :rolffleyes:

I agree with pit bulls should not go to a dog park but , I don't think its fair to say banned. Instead it should say aggressive dogs banned !


----------



## Stacydub (Sep 9, 2009)

We talked about the first heat before we ever got the puppy. My boyfriend and I don't live together. When she goes through her first heat cycle, she'll stay here with me and Helmet will go with his Daddy for a few days. After that first cycle, I can call and set up the appointment to have her fixed. The plan all along has been to spay her. 

For the record, I didn't create the breed ban. I wasn't even born when the vote passed through the Little Rock legal system to ban Pits. I didn't get a say, a vote, an opinion...nothing. 

And if you are asking what the point of the thread is, you clearly didn't the read the entire first post-only enough to get irritated and immediatly jump into a "forum fight". Settle down, killer.  The "point" of the original post was in the last two sentences.



> but I'm curious...how many of the dog parks near you have the same ruels? What's your opinion on required spay/neuter?


Not trying to be snarky, just sayin.


----------



## roxy25 (Dec 18, 2008)

Stacydub said:


> We talked about the first heat before we ever got the puppy. My boyfriend and I don't live together. When she goes through her first heat cycle, she'll stay here with me and Helmet will go with his Daddy for a few days. After that first cycle, I can call and set up the appointment to have her fixed. The plan all along has been to spay her.
> 
> For the record, I didn't create the breed ban. I wasn't even born when the vote passed through the Little Rock legal system to ban Pits. I didn't get a say, a vote, an opinion...nothing.
> 
> ...


what was your point in bringing up the pit ban anyways ? You seem all for it ! there are some pit bull lovers and owners on here.

You could have just posted about the spay and neuter rule so you brought it on your self with your comments. :wacko::fish:


----------



## partial2poodles (Feb 11, 2010)

I have NO PROBLEM with pit bulls at my dog park. I trust that owners of that breed KNOW their dog's personality....neutered or not. I often take my un-neutered male to the par with my 2 little neutered males. The 3 LOVE going together but I usually have my husband. I (as one person) cannot properly supervise 3 dogs, especially the intact one. My husband keeps his eyes on BEN and I watch the 2 little ones. There is always that initial meet N greet and the males have to size eachother up. My BEN is never the aggressor but will not back down if a really mean, bossy dog tries to pin him. I always looks for testes. If I see them, I tell my husband to "watch" that one dog and make sure Ben is being friendly at all times. If I get one weird vibe, Ben gets his leash on and stays by us. The two little guys have a ball with all the other small dogs....it has a big dog and a small dog section.


----------



## Stacydub (Sep 9, 2009)

So there were two signs. I mentioned both. Should I ignore one? The topic to the thread didn't mention the second sign. The questions in the post didn't mention the second sign. And I don't think that anybody is respecting the value of infleciton lost in typing. 

"awesome!" being totally different than "awesome.". 

I don't personally care either way. I don't have a Pit Bull. Not intrested in them. Not anymore so that I would be in a Weenie dog or Dobbie or Rottie or lab. The ban doesn't affect me or my opinons in any way. The entire point of the thread is about bans that Dog Parks have and people's reactions to the rules. I believe I've only gotten ONE valid response. If people really want to just fight/bicker, then they should go to a forum designed to do so. This forum is about poodles and a mutual love/respect for them. I'll never understand why people feel so badass behind a computer screen. If they second sign is so offensive, then I welcome anybody to come down to Little Rock, go to the dog park, stand at the gate, and yell at the piece of paper hung there. 

Good luck with that. 

Now, can we please...FINALLY....get back on topic?


----------



## WonderPup (Oct 26, 2008)

I kind of took the comment on the pitt ban being fair differently I guess. As in it was fair to ban them at the park since they happened to be banned in your area in the first place? Maybe I am misreading. 

I am totally 100 % against banning breeds and totally 100% against requiring owners to spay or neuter their dogs. It should be up to the owner. Any surgery has risks and while the risks of that one are low and the benifits of having it done are very high it should still be up to you. 

For the record I agree that pets should be spayed or neutered unless they are show dogs and perhaps part of a responsible breeding program. That said Saleen isn't spayed yet I'll admit. I wanted to wait for her to grow up and then had unexpected health issues and bills associated with my pregnancy so the funds are not there at the moment. I will get her spayed but it isn't an emergency to me right now. More of an annoyance when she goes into heat that's all.


----------



## Fluffyspoos (Aug 11, 2009)

I am in full support of altering _pet _dogs. There's no reason for them to be going through the hormones unnecessarily. Whenever I look at the lost dogs in the classifieds in my area guess what.. 90% of these dogs are intact. At the dog park they can focus on play instead of focusing on mating.


... just sayin'.


----------



## WonderPup (Oct 26, 2008)

Fluffyspoos said:


> I am in full support of altering _pet _dogs. There's no reason for them to be going through the hormones unnecessarily. Whenever I look at the lost dogs in the classifieds in my area guess what.. 90% of these dogs are intact. At the dog park they can focus on play instead of focusing on mating.
> 
> ... just sayin'.


Yeah but it should still be the owner's choice on if and when to do it pet or no pet. What I REALLY wish we had was better education and perhaps requirements on health testing for breeding dogs, but I suppose that is just as big an infringement on dog owners rights as a law requiring spay neuter. Plus being intact isn't going to make them want to breed everything in sight all the time at the park, unless somebody happens to be in heat in which case they shouldn't be at the park really. Howie never did when we were going. I don't go anymore b/c I feel like dog parks are dangerous and full of dumb owners... like anyone who would bring a girl in season to a dog park in the first place. Once again, that just might be an education issue


----------



## Birdie (Jun 28, 2009)

I think the required spay/neuter for a dog park is a very good idea actually... Honestly, I have nothing against intact dogs, and I have no problem with them in the park, BUT I know a lot of dogs do have problems with intact dogs. I think it's good just to "keep the peace", really. I know intact dogs aren't any more aggressive or what-have-you than any other dog, but for whatever reason, some dogs just go ballistic and get really really rude with intact males. I mean, I know so many pups on dogster and in person that just cannot STAND intact males. They smell them before they see them and are just auto-angry. It's a darn shame, as that means even the best intact dogs will get crap for no reason, but whatever. 
If your dogs are pets, you might as well neuter them. I don't see the point in keeping up with the hassle of owning an intact male with an intact female if neither will be bred or shown. Helmet will have to be away for several weeks (maybe a month) until you're SURE your baby girl is off her cycle. It's a huge pain to deal with, and I really doubt Helmet will miss his balls. :\ One less potential -oodle, the way I see it. 

Breed bans... /sigh. OP, that was a bad idea to word that the way you did. It really read as "breed bans are good, I don't want those nasty pits in my park". I DID get offended when I read that; you should choose your words carefully in regards to such heated topics. We have the same dumb sign on our dog park gate, and it's been repeatedly scratched out with keys lol. Everybody still brings their pits in.  All of the aggressors in my park have been LABS!


----------



## CharismaticMillie (Jun 16, 2010)

My vet told me to ABSOLUTELY spay my female before her first heat cycle. If she is spayed before ever having a heat cycle, she will have a MUCH less chance of developing breast cancer, etc. There is really no reason to wait for two cycles to spay your dog if you are not planning to breed her.

Every puppy class, obedience class, doggie day care, grooming facility, boarding facility, dog park, etc. in St. Louis requires dogs over 6 months to be spayed/neutered. 

My puppy is 19 weeks and she is getting spayed next week. (at 5 months)


----------



## flyingduster (Sep 6, 2009)

This is a very good article. Lots of reading, but it assesses the pros and cons of spay/neuter at what age etc.
http://www.naiaonline.org/pdfs/LongTermHealthEffectsOfSpayNeuterInDogs.pdf

I am personally FOR spay/neuter of pet dogs, BUT I am personally rather against EARLY spay/neuters... I just really would prefer a dog to be able to MATURE fully...


----------



## Spencer (Oct 7, 2009)

I don't find the spay/neuter rule to be odd. My mom can't board her intact male show dog, and has been told it's actually for his own safety. Evidently the neutered males will gang up on the intact one and hurt him. (Makes sense. I knew a horse once that was attacked by the others for this same reason.)

I also understand the breed ban. I don't necessarily agree - as I knew a wonderful pitt who was sweeter than any dog I've ever met - but I understand. Denver is among the cities that bans them and will seize any dog they think to be a pitt. Somewhat stupid... but considering what terrible people have done to the image of the breed... somewhat expected.

The dog parks I have been to just state that you have to pick up after yourself and your dog, as well as to not bring your dog if it is unfriendly... minus the fact that a mean rottie kept coming after my dogs. So evidently people can't read. (I would much prefer a rule keeping out bratty children. Can't tell you how many times I have gotten on to kids that aren't mine for *kicking or hitting* my dogs.)

I don't find the new posted rules out of line... to be honest. Personally, I think that if your dog is simply a pet... it would be a smart decision to get them fixed. What we don't need are more dogs and cats in the world with no home, and no matter how responsible people are... accidents happen. This isn't directed at anyone, just my general opinion.


----------



## Aidan (Mar 4, 2009)

We have so many dog parks in the Charlotte area that I haven't even been to them all...I know most on their websites have a spay/neuter rule but I've never noticed a breed ban anywhere.

I've always had the females spayed before the first cycle. Mostly because I don't want to deal with a bitch in heat.

Males i've always waited till one year.


----------



## apoodleaday (Feb 22, 2010)

JMO I think most dog parks have these rules to protect themselves and the cities/counties that run them. It only takes one sue happy owner to sue the facilitator of the park to ruin it for everyone. If the parks have clearly posted signs, it helps their case in court. What we really need is some common sense and common courtesy but, as we have all witnessed, these days there is a general lack of both for some people. Its always someone else's fault.
I personally spay and neuter my pets because that is what I choose. Whatever you choose, please be responsible for it.


----------



## Olie (Oct 10, 2009)

Spencer said:


> I don't find the spay/neuter rule to be odd. My mom can't board her intact male show dog, and has been told it's actually for his own safety. Evidently the neutered males will gang up on the intact one and hurt him. (Makes sense. I knew a horse once that was attacked by the others for this same reason.)
> 
> I also understand the breed ban. I don't necessarily agree - as I knew a wonderful pitt who was sweeter than any dog I've ever met - but I understand. Denver is among the cities that bans them and will seize any dog they think to be a pitt. Somewhat stupid... but considering what terrible people have done to the image of the breed... somewhat expected.
> 
> ...



Agree. Spay and Neuter away!!! My heart breaks seeing all the dogs out there needing homes.


----------



## pudlemom (Apr 16, 2010)

I dont' think dogs should be band based on breed like Jane woodhouse said "There are no bad dogs only bad owners",but what I do have a problem is irresponsible owners not controlling their dogs & not picking up their .

I took my spoos to a new park that open here recently what a mistake, there was a women there with a older dog and a puppy that keep mobbing everyone's dog a she just stood there and did nothing issed-off: the puppy had a bad case of diarrhea and she proceeded to say oh its my brothers puppy I told him he was sick to take him to the vet :doh:,I so wanted to say then what the h**l are you doing here with a sick dog but I bit my tongue I did not want to cause a seen. Need less to say I snatch up my spoos and have never gone back nor will I, what is up with people no conmen sense.:mad2:


----------



## Keithsomething (Oct 31, 2009)

apoodleaday said:


> JMO I think most dog parks have these rules to protect themselves and the cities/counties that run them. It only takes one sue happy owner to sue the facilitator of the park to ruin it for everyone. If the parks have clearly posted signs, it helps their case in court. What we really need is some common sense and common courtesy but, as we have all witnessed, these days there is a general lack of both for some people. Its always someone else's fault.
> I personally spay and neuter my pets because that is what I choose. Whatever you choose, please be responsible for it.


I think you said it perfectly
its all about Liability, I work at a daycare ((YMCA Day Camp during the summer  ))...and we can't go on field trips using the bus because it costs astronomical fees for the insurance 
this summer we get 3 bus trips out of 16 weeks...next summer our director is thinking it'll be something like 0 bus trips
oh and I have to wear sneakers and tennis shoes every day no crocs or sandals >.<

but back on topic XD 
people don't want to be held liable, so if its illegal in Little Rock to own pitties ((no matter how unjust that is)) the park still has to define that they don't want said dogs there

and I'm one of the people who say do what you want with your dog...it is yours
but I believe in spaying and neutering pets before or soon after they've matured as long as your super careful and diligent about chance matings


----------



## bigpoodleperson (Jul 14, 2009)

I think that having all dogs spayed/neutered at a dog park is a very good idea. I wouldnt bring my altered pet there. Just too much risk. If you have an unaltered dog then there are many other forms of exercise available. To the OP, as Bob Barker says, "please spay and neuter your pets".


----------



## JE-UK (Mar 10, 2010)

Not to throw fuel on any fires, here, but there is a ban on pit bulls (and a few other aggressive breeds) in the UK, as well the the Dangerous Dogs Act, which specifies actions that can be taken against owners of dogs of any breed that show a pattern of aggression.

I don't think it's an ideal solution, but better than no solution. Fully agree that there are charming representatives of any breed, and I don't think ALL pits are bad dogs, but it seems a majority of people that OWN pits are not ideal dog owners and want a pit bull for the wrong reason.

There have been a few convictions recently where people were convicted of using dogs as weapons; this is a really disturbing trend for me (Record rise in seizures of pit bulls as gangsters shun guns | Mail Online).

So while I don't fully agree with breed bans, I'm at a loss as to better solutions. When people don't WANT a well-socialised, well-behaved pet, what else can you do?

I'm not too worried about breed bans affecting poodles anytime soon; for Vasco, my miniature, to do any serious damage, someone would have to lie on the ground and cover themselves with peanut butter ;-).


----------



## neVar (Dec 25, 2009)

the reason for no intact dogs is because it helps cut down on aggression at the park. Last thing you need is a female in season coming and getting all the intact boys riled up. 

Our doggy day cares here don't allow intact dogs over 7 months. which sucks. My aussie show dog could use some doggy day care time. We do the park instead. but i don't take her anywhere for the MONTH she's in heat (not days month)


----------



## Poodle Lover (Mar 24, 2008)

I believe that it should be up to an individual to spay or neuter the pet. But, I choose to have my fixed, as a fixed male/female make a fabulous pet. My dog walker does not accept any unaltered dogs past the age of 8 months. He says that at the dog park an unaltered animal doesn't have to cause trouble, it just has to be there.


----------



## Sparkle&Spunk (Jan 26, 2010)

In general, I think its such an "American" thing to want to spay/neuter dogs. In Europe I feel the idea is very different- at least they were 7 years ago when I was there last. 
Ocsi is now 7 years old, never neutered and NEVER attacked another dog. He was playing with a spayed female behind our home almost 3 year years ago when an altered male ran up to us from seemingly no where and stood over Ocsi, bit him on the ear and leg before his owner and I could pull him off my dog. I was so pissed! I could have kicked that dog! (I didn't but did threaten to kick the owner square in the a$$ for having an aggressive dog off-leash. It wasn't that dog's first offense in the neighborhood).

Regardless- I think spay and neuter should be a PERSONAL choice when it comes to a pet you own. Who would police the law anyway if everyone had to do it, your vet? Then think about all the dogs that wouldn't go to the vets (even more so) for their yearly checkups and vaccinations.
Chicago tried to get the law passed last year and thankfully it DIDN'T pass.



Birdie said:


> It's a darn shame, as that means even the best intact dogs will get crap for no reason, but whatever.


I do agree with this statement. While Ocsi and I really use the dog park as an offleash play area to play fetch with a tennis ball, he does sometimes find himself in a match of who can hump whom (the other dog is altered nearly 99% of the time).




apoodleaday said:


> JMO I think most dog parks have these rules to protect themselves and the cities/counties that run them. It only takes one sue happy owner to sue the facilitator of the park to ruin it for everyone.


I think this is the BIGGEST reason that daycares and dog parks try to get this rule passed. You hit the nail on the head.


Again, Ocsi has a responsible owner who has not let him breed, he hasn't run away and he doesn't cause drama or not listen to me- why should I be required by law to neuter him? I shouldn't. 

Btw, Fallie was a rescue from the shelter we adopted nearly 6 months ago, he is totally in love with her and yes, wanted to hump her for nearly 2 weeks when we first got her but with kindness and the help of a baby gate he finally got the picture that there was no reason to try to tell her he was the boss of the house. She's been spayed since day one, so his reasoning behind humping her were none other than territorial.


----------



## Karma'sACat (Jun 1, 2010)

JE-UK said:


> Not to throw fuel on any fires, here, but there is a ban on pit bulls (and a few other aggressive breeds) in the UK, as well the the Dangerous Dogs Act, which specifies actions that can be taken against owners of dogs of any breed that show a pattern of aggression.
> 
> I don't think it's an ideal solution, but better than no solution. Fully agree that there are charming representatives of any breed, and I don't think ALL pits are bad dogs, but it seems a majority of people that OWN pits are not ideal dog owners and want a pit bull for the wrong reason.
> 
> ...


Do you really think that anyone but the good dog owners will follow a breed ban? If they are crappy owners or doing other illegal things, why would they pay attention to this?
The other problem is breed bans don't lower the instances of dog bites. They are expensive and ineffective. What needs to be done is punish owners whose dog actually do bite people and place restrictions on those dogs. My pit bull is the least likely to bite anyone but we have to look over laws carefully before we go anywhere. My Catahoula was my service dog and we couldn't go to any places with BSL because Catahoulas look enough like pit bulls that she could have been seized and possibly destroyed. She is a natural alerter (like many medical alert service dogs) so I didn't intentionally pick a dog I knew would be banned. Do you really think it is the best way to regulate this if I couldn't go to some cities because the dog who allowed my freedom could be seized because of her looks?!
Doing nothing because you think your breed won't be affected is sticking your head in the sand. The media will get tired of pit bulls bashing and will move on to another breed, just like they did with German Shepherds, Rotties, etc.Once they ban all of those breeds, what is to stop them from going after yours? All it takes is enough people, media attention and your poodle might not be safe.


----------



## Poodle Lover (Mar 24, 2008)

Sparkle&Spunk said:


> Ocsi is now 7 years old, never neutered and NEVER attacked another dog. He was playing with a spayed female behind our home almost 3 year years ago when an altered male ran up to us from seemingly no where and stood over Ocsi, bit him on the ear and leg before his owner and I could pull him off my dog. I was so pissed! I could have kicked that dog! (I didn't but did threaten to kick the owner square in the a$$ for having an aggressive dog off-leash. It wasn't that dog's first offense in the neighborhood).


That's exactly why my dog walker and a lot of others will not take on unneutered males, because the neutered ones will go after them.  Maybe it's just jealousy.


----------



## frostfirestandards (Jun 18, 2009)

I have more agression problems in my altered pets than my unaltered ones. 

Thats just the way they are, Its probably my fault but it is what it is. Kaden loves going to the dog park, and When Aidan was here a few weeks ago, we took Willow, Jamie, and Brian, as well as Vega and Dodger to the dog park, no big deal there, there werent a ton of dogs present, and our guys had their fun. 

I can see why some people would want only spayed and neutered dogs at the park, but honestly, I see a lot of: 
People on their phones not paying attention
People with very shy/fearful dogs
People with no dog sense trying to force their dogs to sniff or play with others 


Its people that I cant stand. not the dogs LOL


----------



## newspoomom (Jun 16, 2010)

frostfirestandards said:


> Its people that I cant stand. not the dogs LOL


 Sounds about right....


----------



## JE-UK (Mar 10, 2010)

Karma'sACat said:


> Do you really think that anyone but the good dog owners will follow a breed ban? If they are crappy owners or doing other illegal things, why would they pay attention to this?
> The other problem is breed bans don't lower the instances of dog bites. They are expensive and ineffective. What needs to be done is punish owners whose dog actually do bite people and place restrictions on those dogs. My pit bull is the least likely to bite anyone but we have to look over laws carefully before we go anywhere. My Catahoula was my service dog and we couldn't go to any places with BSL because Catahoulas look enough like pit bulls that she could have been seized and possibly destroyed. She is a natural alerter (like many medical alert service dogs) so I didn't intentionally pick a dog I knew would be banned. Do you really think it is the best way to regulate this if I couldn't go to some cities because the dog who allowed my freedom could be seized because of her looks?!
> Doing nothing because you think your breed won't be affected is sticking your head in the sand. The media will get tired of pit bulls bashing and will move on to another breed, just like they did with German Shepherds, Rotties, etc.Once they ban all of those breeds, what is to stop them from going after yours? All it takes is enough people, media attention and your poodle might not be safe.


Yes, I agree, all breed specific legislation is most likely to punish good dog owners rather than the bad. I just sympathise with the police, who are trying to solve an intractable problem. The pit bull ban gives them an easy way to immediately address a problem with a bad owner/bad pit bull, without waiting for the poorly-socialised, untrained, aggressive dog to hurt someone.

In my perfect world, all dog owners would be required to microchip and pass a CGC test, regardless of breed. 

Banning pit bulls didn't stop dog bites in the UK, but it did greatly reduce the number of serious bites; there are stats to back that up. When they relaxed the rules of the ban a bit (allowing owners to keep them with rules about no off-lead walking and muzzles), the bite rate went up again. I agree any dog can bite, and many do. I'm sure there are bad poodles out there (or bad owners with confused dogs). But there are traits that give pits a higher potential to be a dangerous dog than many other breeds, and when you combine that with appalling teenage drug-dealer owners, it is a fantastically dangerous situation. I don't know what the solution is. But I think responsible pit bull owners don't do their breed any favours by refusing to recognise that there can be problems with the breed; pit bulls are responsible for the highest number of dog bite *fatalities*. Those numbers are probably slightly skewed when you take into account the average pit bull moron owner, who WANTS an aggressive dog, but the numbers are still pretty compelling.


----------



## Fluffyspoos (Aug 11, 2009)

JE-UK said:


> Those numbers are probably slightly skewed when you take into account the average pit bull moron owner, who WANTS an aggressive dog, but the numbers are still pretty compelling.


Like my step brothers.

*facepalm*


----------



## JE-UK (Mar 10, 2010)

Fluffyspoos said:


> Like my step brothers.
> 
> *facepalm*


Wildly off topic here, my apologies, but isn't there a weird thing with people who want big threatening dogs? I've struggled with this idea for a while and can't quite work it out in my own head, but it almost as if some people want a dog who is bigger, smarter, tougher than themselves, as if the dog represents a parent or something? Or is that just me trying to make it into a weird psychological issue? 

I don't know, but *I* want to be the toughest, smartest one in my human-dog relationship. Though I have given up on being the fastest. No chance against a lively miniature. But I do own all the treats, so I win :wink:.


----------



## fjm (Jun 4, 2010)

Interesting point, JE. Could it have something to do with the idea that dogs and owners grow to look alike? I was very tempted to get a whippet, with the vague idea I might get thinner, but then realised I would probably just end up with a plump whippet ... I do think some people - both men and women - go for the macho thing. One of the best approaches I've read to owners of snarly dogs, is "Oh what a beautiful dog! What a pity he is so fearful about everything - have you considered helping him to get more confident?" Very neatly undercuts the "My dog is harder than your dog" syndrome!


----------



## faerie (Mar 27, 2010)

i think it's a penis thing. (wonder if i can post that)

when my son got a red nose pitt bull (female), i was really annoyed. here is a 21 year old man/boy with a frickin' pitt bull. lovely. 

i nagged, train train train. i nagged, socialize socialize socialize. 

and he did. 

and he has that dog SOOOO well trained that it's amazing. she is very well behaved. she can sit down stay recall kiss climb trees etc. (she's about 4 now). he could have her do agility she's brilliant. and sweet and i'm just as proud of her as i am him.

he works with that dog daily. they are a team.

good owners make great dogs. 

but i still think it's a penis thing. 

how many posts are here about folks who have poodles and family members comment about frou frou and not manly dogs ...


----------



## faerie (Mar 27, 2010)

oh and the dogs that i've personally had the biggest problems with are the dogs who have good reputations:

golden retrievers
border collies

(won't talk about the chihuahua who attacked me when i was a pet sitter)


----------



## apoodleaday (Feb 22, 2010)

A little off topic, but a cool idea none the less. My friend just adopted a pit from a local rescue. The rescue, in order to help find homes for all the homeless bully breeds, has started a program where they will pay for all your training until you and your bully pass the CGC test. Helps promote responsible ownership helps better the perception of the bully breeds. Pretty cool I think.


----------



## puppylove (Aug 9, 2009)

fjm said:


> I was very tempted to get a whippet, with the vague idea I might get thinner, but then realised I would probably just end up with a plump whippet ...


I'm still giggling over this!


----------



## Rosary94 (May 17, 2010)

In New York City, pit bulls, rottweilers, etc, are banned from housing project areas because of the amount of violence they bring. More like the amount of violence their stupid owners put upon them. 

In my neighborhood, almost every house has a dog. I'm surprised that there's no designated park for these dogs (then again the city/state is broke, so what should I expect from them). I would travel to another park, a few blocks away from my house, to go to a park where there's enough open space for the dogs to run around.

I've seen a few pit bulls walk around the area, and they're nice and calm. I agree with one user who said that "aggressive dogs should be banned" from dog parks. On the note of dog parks, I also hate how people let their dogs crap wherever they please, and never clean it up. I don't want my dog doing #2 near another dog's (HUGE) crap. I don't know what diseases that dog is carrying, and I'll be damned if Ted gets sick from them. 

As for spaying/neutering, I had no choice as to if Ted could be neutered. North Shore S/N's all of their dogs. They strongly advocate keeping unwanted dogs off of the street to continue to be neglected. Personally, I believe that you spay/neuter your dogs accordingly to their personal needs. If the dog's too aggressive and his hormones are the problems, snip the balls off! Lol. If for safety for your bitch, then do as you please.

Although, I have seen neutered dogs mount other dogs. Ie: Ted mounting a male dog at the pet store, and my mother's friend's (male) Yorkie mounting Ted. I'm pretty sure that's a dominance thing, though. hwell:


----------



## Rocketagility (Apr 27, 2010)

I am against the bans! Ban the bad dog owners, all dog should be trained and worked. Aggressive dogs should not be in dog parks, fence off an area for them to be worked and trained.

As for S/N well I have a performance dog and I believe he needs to stay intact to prevent injury and I have no interest in breeding him and he wont ever have an oops. The reason I know this is I train and work with my dog and he is always under my control. Now if I was to neuter him I would wait till he fully matured after 3 years and if I had a female I would also prolong it till her maturity or after the second cycle.

I see so many dogs with issues that came from awesome breeders and as soon as the dog is spayed you have leaking, skin problems, allergies, etc...

I am all for controlling the pet population but don't use scare tactics to sell people on S/N.

You want to control the pet population fine people that have an oops breeding, fine and arrest backyard breeders/puppy mills. The only people that should be able to breed should be ethical trained educated breeders that want to breed to the standard or make it better. I think I read that in the States they have 3 million homeless dogs but we have people still breeding more.


----------



## Locket (Jun 21, 2009)

I don't agree with mandatory spay and neuter in general, but for a dog park, I don't have a problem with it. I think it does cut down on the problems quite a bit. All the unaltered younger dogs (6-18 months) that come to my dog park are just humping machines. It's annoying for the other dogs to be followed around by a horny/overexcited dog when all they want to do is play fetch, and a lot of the time, the owners have zero control over their dog, so it's a constant "Fluffy, come here. No! Don't do that Fluffy! No! Leave the dog alone".

Spay and neuter is really a convenience procedure for "pet" owners. Any responsible owner can keep an unaltered dog happy and healthy and abstinent, but it takes work (especially with the females) and mistakes can be disastrous. With all the dogs needing homes, and all the unwanted puppies being born daily, it's hard not to be in support of mandatory spay and neuter, but really and truly, it's not necessary. I will always neuter/spay my pets because it's easiest that way, and most likely because they'll already be spayed/neutered when I get them from the shelter/rescue.


----------



## bigpoodleperson (Jul 14, 2009)

> I see so many dogs with issues that came from awesome breeders and as soon as the dog is spayed you have leaking, skin problems, allergies, etc...


I think alot of that is just plain ol' timing. Most dogs are neutered before or around a year old. Most skin problems and allergies dont show up until around that time too. I dont think ive ever seen a puppy with allergy issues. They are all a year or older. Just food for thought.


----------

