What Happend To Dogs?

houndlove

coonhound crazy
Joined
Aug 22, 2007
Messages
711
Likes
0
Points
0
#21
I agree with Gempress.

Owners of difficult dogs are in a bind now. It's very uncool to destroy a dog and is very much looked down upon. But rehabbing a dog is not easy and until you're successful with it, you're also looked down upon for having a dog with issues. It's totally no-win. I can't snap my fingers and make Conrad not have his problems, and I can't (and won't) euthanize him, so what, I'm a lazy owner now because I use a no-pull harness?

"Back in the day" was not all that great of a time for dogs, especially dogs with issues.
 

Paige

Let it be
Joined
Jan 13, 2007
Messages
7,359
Likes
0
Points
0
#22
Dogs don't do their traditional work (usually) so I think the dogs are just getting flustered that they cannot do what they were bred to.
 
Joined
Jul 17, 2005
Messages
5,634
Likes
0
Points
0
Age
35
Location
Ontario, Canada
#23
Back in the day, "inferior dogs" were the ones that were culled. Whether it be because of behavioural issues or health. But then what was the result??? The awesome breeds we love today. Dogs were hardier because inferior specimens didnt breed. Today, to many pet people, the person who "rescues" the deaf and blind albino Doberman is a "hero". But what's actually going on here? The breeder just made some bucks off of a pup they would have normally culled. Or, they were able to hand off the problem to somoene else. If it is was really so great to keep the inferior Doberman, why wouldnt the breeder just keep it themselves???

Why are so many dogs these days so out of standard (whether it be in temperment or conformation)??? Simple. Inferior dogs being given the chance to breed, thusly spreading their inferior genes throughout the breed. Back in the day this wouldnt have happened because that inferior dog would be dead. Is it pleasant to think about? No, but can't deny that it kept lines clean and it worked.

In the balkans, LGDs typically have rather large litters. The first few days are the harshest on the pups. The shepeherds dont interupt at all, they just let nature take its course. Pups are culled naturally. Couple weeks later, the shepherd chooses a few pups whom he think are the best (healthiest, strongest and best temperment) and culls the rest. This takes a HUGE burden of the dam. Its easier to raise only a few pups. It means the pups get more nurishment because they no longer have to share with the whole litter. The dam can focus better on just a few pups to teach them life lessons. When the pups are old enough the Shepherd chooses which he wishes to keep for himself and the others are usually given away to close friends/family or sold. It isnt too pretty to think about, but the result was great genes. BTW, a lot of LGD just lived off bread, milk and leftovers. The average lifespan was and still is 13-14 years which is amazing for a giant breed. Oh ya, and they kept WORKING right up into the double digits too!
 
Joined
Jul 17, 2005
Messages
5,634
Likes
0
Points
0
Age
35
Location
Ontario, Canada
#24
Dogs don't do their traditional work (usually) so I think the dogs are just getting flustered that they cannot do what they were bred to.
Actually, it doesnt even have to be their original work, any work the dog enjoys will do ;) BCs were bred to herd but many of them thrive off of getting to do agility nearly every day instead.
 

houndlove

coonhound crazy
Joined
Aug 22, 2007
Messages
711
Likes
0
Points
0
#25
Well there's rescuing and then there's, you know, "rescuing". I see nothing wrong with rescuing if doing so in no way benefits the breeder who messed up and the dog is altered so it can't pass it's problem genes along.

My problem dog (and I suspect a lot of people's) isn't a product of anyone's misguided breeding program anyway--he's a mutt and not a designer one either. He's a product of either someone's apathy or mistake. Back in the day, he wouldn't have been surrendered to the pound by his original family, he would have been taken out back behind the shed, possible right after he was born with the rest of his litter, or later once it became clear he was not of stable temperament. Or tied up out back and had some food thrown at him every now and then (and by the look of him when we first got him, his original family may have been doing just that before they actually got around to getting rid of him entirely).
 

Lilavati

Arbitrary and Capricious
Joined
Sep 3, 2007
Messages
7,644
Likes
0
Points
36
Age
47
Location
Alexandria, VA
#26
Lizmo;937648 I'd really like to know what you mean be this. :)[/quote said:
Well, I could probably write a very long essay on the topic, but here in is in a very small nutshell.

Once upon a time, within my memory, and I am not old by any standard, it was accepted that children will be children. They will do stupid things. They will do foolish, socially inappropriate things. Sometimes they will do downright dangerous things. Not just little children, but teenagers as well. And it was believed that though of course they should be punished for those things (that's how they learn) that those things were natural enough.

Now, we live in a society where children are punished simply for being children . . . and if they do something they always would have been punished for, people start screaming for criminal charges. Why? Because we have become afraid of, and afraid for our own children. To be sure, people were always afraid for their children, but the level of paranoia today is simply beyond belief. People drive their children two blocks to school in a perfectly good neightborhood for fear of perverts . . . never let their children have candy for fear of obesity . . . won't let their children even THINK of climbing a tree . . . as for teenagers, they are hemmed in by government imposed curfews, bizarre restrictiosn from their schools . . . my two favorites are the honor student (over 18 mind you) who had moved that weekend and accidentally left a kitchen knife under her car seat (it had slipped from a box) and was expelled and criminally charged . . . and the kids who showed up at a party, discovered there was alcohol and prompty left . . .and were expelled for being at a party where alcohol was served. This is insane. Then there are the little boys punished for playing cops and robbers (this is standard fare these days) . . .

We are so afraid of and for our children that we strangle them with control. The idea of a child, or even a teenager, acting independently, and god forbid, making a mistake is simply unbearable. It must be punished. Harshly. Both child and parent. Perhaps in a way that will ruin the child's life . . . but that's what the dangerous little brat deserves, of course.

And then, of course, there is what happens to adult human males who are fond of children. Not in any purient way, they just like kids. They better have some of their own, because no one is letting them NEAR theirs.

The same thing has happened to dogs. Yes, there were advantages to the good old days, and there were bad points to them too. But I remember when dogs were considered to be, well dogs. Largely friendly animals that were kept by perfectly normal people. Pretty much everyone knew a dog or two, even if they didn't have one. Although children were taught not to mess with a strange dog, they were also not taught to fear dogs. The reaction of many adults to a strange dog was "here boy!" to look for its collar, not a panicked retreat to their car to call the police on the cell phone because a pit bull is loose. When a well behaved dog off leash in a park was simply not a big deal . . . its fear . . . fear that our little darlings will be mauled by a pit bull . . . moreover a deep and abiding fear of what can not be absolutely controlled.

Dogs can be trained, but they can not be controlled. They are not robots. Most people know this, even if they don't really admit it. And in our paranoid, fearful society, the idea of a large animal with sharp teeth that can not be absolutely controlled terrifies some people. To many it is unbearable. To be sure, the media feeds it, but I am convinced the core of the problem is this. Dogs are autonomous living things that have the potental to be dangerous . . . therefore they ARE dangerous and must be as hemmed in with restrictions as our children are. If a dog makes a mistake, from knocking someone down to scraping them with their teeth in play, to a fully justified snap, then it must be punished . . . harshly . . and that means death for the dog and charges against the owner.

Our society is in many ways so safe, that we leap in terror at boogy men and news stories. It is so safe that we must exterminate the threats that remain, even if, like the threat posed by dogs and children, they are largely imaginary. In fact, our society is so safe, by the standards of history, that some misfire in our brains keeps insisting there must be danger around every corner, even when, by the standards of history, we live remarkably safe and stable lives.

The result of this self-devouring fear afflicting our society (and it was there before 9/11) is a total lack of trust. By this I do not mean we should, or we ever did, trust blindly. But the basic trust that most dogs, most children, most teenagers, most adults, are ok. (I am reminded of the recent indicent of a child that was lost in a mall for nearly a day . . . why? Because they had been so taught about stranger danger that they would not approach ANYONE for help . . . all adults other than their parents are bad.)

That chldren will be children, teens will be teens, dogs will be dogs. That accidents happen. That people make mistakes. In our fear, in our need to control all possible 'dangerous' things, we have forgotten this.

With some reserach and more time, I could keep going . . .
 

houndlove

coonhound crazy
Joined
Aug 22, 2007
Messages
711
Likes
0
Points
0
#27
Lilavati I'm definitely buying what you're selling there, but I'm unclear as to what that has to do with the original post? I was kind of getting the impression that it was implying that dogs today are more poorly behaved because dog-owners are lazy and irresponsible, not that we're all paranoid and unwilling to accept what was previously thought of as normal dog behavior.
 

Lilavati

Arbitrary and Capricious
Joined
Sep 3, 2007
Messages
7,644
Likes
0
Points
36
Age
47
Location
Alexandria, VA
#28
Lilavati I'm definitely buying what you're selling there, but I'm unclear as to what that has to do with the original post? I was kind of getting the impression that it was implying that dogs today are more poorly behaved because dog-owners are lazy and irresponsible, not that we're all paranoid and unwilling to accept what was previously thought of as normal dog behavior.
Well, I guess I probably got off on my own tangent, thinking of a different issue of what happened to dogs (partially spawned by the comment aobut hyperactive children) but there is a connection . . . :lol-sign:

It used to be that dogs were familiar. Most people had spent some time around dogs, had seen other people with their dogs. Most people had some idea, if only a vague one, of how dogs were trained. Now, admittedly, these were mostly the 'traditional' training methods we tend to condemn here . . . but the basic idea of how to train a dog was there. Indeed, it wasn't so different from training a child, except for the crucial distinction that a dog was a dog! Now, notably, this lead to the infamous "he knows he's done something wrong . . . " but it worked well enough most of the time. My fiance, who had had exactly one dog as a child, and was not responsible for it, had a basic idea how to interact with a dog when we got Sarama. I had to teach him a bit (and say that I didn't want to train her that way in some cases) but he had the idea. I meet far, far too many people, even people my age, who simply have zero experience with dogs that aren't on TV.

Now many people are not at all familiar with dogs. If they are not afraid of them, they are simply ignorant. Moreover, they have drunk deeply of socity's neuroticism about children "Do this and you'll ruin your child for life! Don't do this and you'll ruin your child for life! You need this expensive whatever so that your child doesn't turn into a murderous junkie!" The newest fads in child care . . . . I remember one of my law school professors, an elderly, dignified old gentleman, telling us about raising children when never punishing them was the fad. His main comment . . .it was very educational, for him. He learned how ones own child can totally humilate you.

You hear the same thing about dogs. Buy this! Use this technique! Do this ! Don't do that! Or your dog will turn into Cujo. Not only is most of this stuff you have to do simply crap (it might be fine or useful, but the absolute NEED to do it or buy it is crap) but its touted as a quick fix. Think of "Dominance" . . . you dog is dominant! It will turn on you! . . . well, not only is the dog not dominant, but there's not a chance in heck that that little Shih Tzu will turn on you . . . but that's how its sold . . . and think about the whole dominant thing. Its about control. A desire for absolute control over your dog . . . or else. Sure, the or else might be it will pee on the floor and eat the couch . . . but the threat is always there that it will be worse.

Our society is unwilling to let dogs be dogs and children be children . . . some of that is laziness and consumerism, to be sure (and the fact that we are all even more busy today than in earlier times) . . . but some of it I think IS that need for control. The fear your dog or your child won't turn out right. That your dog or your child will become a monster . . . or that if you say no, he/she/it won't love you any more. Or if you don't get this book/toy/gadget . . .you get the idea. But our own neuroticism is our worst enemy . . . we ignore common sense in the face of solutions that are not only "easy" but have the appeal of being "new" and "better" . .. because the old way can't be good enough . . . dind't you see that vicious pit bull on the news . . . I need the new magic automatic dog trainer so my dog isn't like that!

The idea that there might be a simple way to do things, one just requiring patience and a bit of trust, is just not the way we think any more. One of things I find hilarious about people who think +R is too complicated . . . is that I think they feel it is complicated because it is so easy. It just requires those things that are in such short supply, patience, trust, affection and faith that things will turn out alright with some work. (And some common sense. I suspect my rants against the +R books that say just say no to no are well known by now).
 

doberkim

Naturally Natural
Joined
Oct 14, 2005
Messages
1,380
Likes
0
Points
0
#29
I agree with Gempress.

Assuming that the people that care enough to post on an internet board (and I would also venture a guess that a significant portion of this board is not yet living on their own paying their own bills, etc) are a fair representation of the real world is a misnomer. As someone who deals with the average pet owning public daily, what happens on this board is NOT real life - this board is full of people who feel differently about their dogs for the most part, than most of the world.

I don't necessarily think all the changes that have happened with dogs are a bad thing, and I think that many people DO have a romanticized version of what happens in the real world because they simply aren't living in it yet. No offense to our younger members here, many of them are quite responsible for their age. But it's true to some degree.
 

Lilavati

Arbitrary and Capricious
Joined
Sep 3, 2007
Messages
7,644
Likes
0
Points
36
Age
47
Location
Alexandria, VA
#30
I live in the real world. I have for some time.

Let me emphasize that I do not think that all the new things we have are bad. I have a no-pull harness, for example. I don't have one, but I think the automatic kong dispenser is a cool idea (Sarama would destroy one, but with the right dog, rock on.). And really, new ideas and shortcuts are great, especially if you have a troublesome dog. What I object to . . . and one reason I think that there are so many poorly behaved dogs out there . . .is that people think they are magic. A no-pull harness is a great thing . . . but it doesn't teach your dog to pull when they aren't wearing it all by itself. The other issue, and the twin to it, is the thought that you MUST have these things.

There are situations in which they are so darn helpful that I suspect that many people must effectively have them . . . but that's not the same as having to have them for every dog. If one more person tells me I need a halti for Sarama, for example, I think I shall scream. Tried it, wasn't helpful, don't have it anymore, thanks.

Then there are teh people who really think they are magic, and have no idea how to use them . . . the list goes on.

Really, I think the problem comes down to ignorance, anthopomorphism (I can't leave him in a crate, its cruel!), and people who do not have (or will not make) the time to have a dog having one anyway.

But I got off topic a long time ago . . about three posts . . . and have been trying to make a connection sense so I don't look like a fool . . . :D
 

ACooper

Moderator
Joined
Jan 7, 2007
Messages
27,772
Likes
1
Points
38
Location
IN
#31
I live in the real world. I have for some time.
Lilavati, I think Kim's post was meaning the teens at home in addition to saying that MOST of the public is NOT like Chaz (or any dog forum) in the sense that we care enough to learn more and do better for our dogs.

That is not the case in 'the real world' as the general public still goes to the grocery store and throws a bag of kibble in the cart, takes the dog in once a year for vaccinations (if the dog is lucky) will gladly have it PTS should a health issue arise, and the list of 'norms' out there goes on and on.
 

ihartgonzo

and Fozzie B!
Joined
May 14, 2006
Messages
5,903
Likes
0
Points
0
Age
35
Location
Northern California
#32
I do not mean to pick apart your post... but, my Grandmother's parents used to own & breed & work Collies. She has told me a lot about them, that disproves many of these assumptions, that dogs were "better" decades ago. Of course... this is just IMHO! C;

"Hundreds of years ago dogs were suppost to be able to get along with everyone and every dog. Most all dogs thrived on petting. Most were fed raw - left overs from a family meal. Now we feed kibble as an "easy, fast way"."

If your dog attacked a person, or another dog, there was not much tolerance at all. Generally, your dog was shot. But I do agree that dogs were around wayyy more people and other animals, and more involved in the family, being that people actually spent time outside and dogs tended to have more of a purpose besides companions. It was like built-in socialization. Considering the non-existant leash laws, dogs also got used to meeting all sorts of new people and animals while roaming around. Nonetheless, roaming dogs are not safe... especially in today's society.

Dogs, in general, weren't necessarily fed "raw". I'm sure some were... but most were fed COOKED leftovers, bread, etc, etc. Not exactly a balanced diet; but, yes, probably better than a lot of the most popular kibbles in grocery stores today! D:

"Dogs weren't thought of as kids or put ahead of people. Dogs were considered the least in families and were happy there. Now they are considered a child or better than people."

I don't agree. Most of the people I know do NOT consider their dogs a part of their family, even. Many people barely take a second look at their dogs after filling up the food bowl in the backyard. They are "just" dogs, to many people. A lot of my friends consider me obsessed with my dogs... and would probably say I treat them like children. I don't, but that's how they percieve it.

"We've created all these "short cuts" to dog owning - underground/electric fencing, automatic feeders, automatic waterers, harnesses, kibble, dog carries, things of this sort."

We have also created colored televisions, the computer, washing machines, tamagotchis, etc, etc! That is just a part of progressing, as a society. There are inventions to make everything easier, including owning dogs. I have no problem with people using technology to help them out a little, but nothing replaces time actually spent bonding with your dog.
 

doberkim

Naturally Natural
Joined
Oct 14, 2005
Messages
1,380
Likes
0
Points
0
#33
ACooper, that is exactly what I meant.
I don't think things have changed.
Sure, my dogs sleep in bed, are fed the best and coddled beyond belief because I love them so. But Joe Public still feeds Alpo, lets his dogs (intact) run around loose outside, and doesn't see the vet ever, and would rather shoot the dog himself than see a specialist for surgery.
 

Lilavati

Arbitrary and Capricious
Joined
Sep 3, 2007
Messages
7,644
Likes
0
Points
36
Age
47
Location
Alexandria, VA
#34
Lilavati, I think Kim's post was meaning the teens at home in addition to saying that MOST of the public is NOT like Chaz (or any dog forum) in the sense that we care enough to learn more and do better for our dogs.

That is not the case in 'the real world' as the general public still goes to the grocery store and throws a bag of kibble in the cart, takes the dog in once a year for vaccinations (if the dog is lucky) will gladly have it PTS should a health issue arise, and the list of 'norms' out there goes on and on.
I think that that is largely what the OP was complaining about . . . (as opposed to my tangent) . . . the enormous shortcuts that people take. Of course, they always DID take them . . . but they were different shortcuts . . . instead of walking their dogs, they just let them out for example . . instead of buying kibble, they got table scraps . . . and of course, people had more time. There was often someone at home during the day . . . I do think there was a greater awareness that there were no magic bullets and quick fixes in dog training . . but I think there was a greater awareness that there are few quick fixes in life too.


Doberkim, I will agree with you that there are definately still parts of the country like what you describe . . . and I remember that sort of thing being more widespread when I was a child in a rural area.

But I don't think that's Joe Public, at least, not in most urban/suburban areas. Even a lot of rural areas . . . society is just not as tolerant of open neglect and brutality anymore . . . (Actually, I was sort of shocked when a man in rural virginia was charged with animal cruelty for shooting and killng his dog after it attacked his child . . . when I was growing up, that would have been considered a somewhat tacky, but perfectly legal and not even unreasonable thing to do)

Even in the working class neighborhood where I live, most dogs are fixed, get yearly shots, and are fed the 'premimum' pet foods that TV have led people to believe are good for their dogs. People might not pay for surgery (couldn't afford it) but they would never shoot their dog. They'd have it PTS. THey're dogs don't enjoy a high standard of care, but their owners do try to provide for them. The problem is, in many cases, they don't know anything about dogs. Many of them do take shortcuts, and some of them are not at all helpful (fortunately, my neighborhood has a diehard core of dog lovers always willing to help if asked).
 

Members online

No members online now.
Top