So where do the scary dogs go?

deadlybuzzman

A random question popped into my head that maybe someone on here might know the answer to.
So generally the dogs going into rescues are neglected pets, harmless dogs, strays etc.
What happens when human agressive dogs (failed/neglected guard dogs, poorly socialised big dogs etc) get taken in?
Is there specialised places for these dogs or am I being an innocent idealist?

njs030

It depends really. Most dogs its might be possible to rehabilitate them and that will happen.
If a dog is just too dangerous then for their own good they will be pts. It would be incredibly unfair to keep a dog locked in a cage 24 hours a day because they can't be handled.
I've only heard of that happening once in the last few years though and it was quite recently.
Guard dogs are so expensive they don't really end up in rescue tbh.

Rescue don't just take in the cute and cuddlys, I've worked with pitbills, staffs, gsds, the most "dangerous" are usually labs and collies. All my bite scars are from them.

Pounds are a different story altogether some will kill the restricticted breeds as soon as their 5 days are up. A lot are good and try to pass on to rescue though.

deadlybuzzman

notjustsweet wrote: »

Rescue don't just take in the cute and cuddlys, I've worked with pitbills, staffs, gsds, the most "dangerous" are usually labs and collies. All my bite scars are from them.

It's funny that you say that as Ive never been able to walk my Amstaff/pittie/whatever she is down my own Road as Ive always been hemmed in by a bitey collie on one side and a pack of twitchy labs on the other that give off a really bad vibe.
It's good to know that those dog's are given a chance too, sometimes I look at our dog and thank God she was given to a rescue as a pup, she's as good as gold now but I do think she could've turned out very very differently in the wrong hands

Knine

The friendly scary dogs are given a chance but the aggressive ones are PTS. Too risky to place them and money is often better spent on the dogs that are rehomeable.

I know of some Pits who went to the pound and never made it into a pen. It was the responsible thing to do in these particular dogs cases.

njs030

Knine wrote: »

The friendly scary dogs are given a chance but the aggressive ones are PTS. Too risky to place them and money is often better spent on the dogs that are rehomeable.

I know of some Pits who went to the pound and never made it into a pen. It was the responsible thing to do in these particular dogs cases.

I don't know where you're talking about but I can tell you with 100% surety that's not the case in the rescues I've helped in or ones I know of.

What pound is putting dogs down without their 5 days?

deadlybuzzman

Knine wrote: »

The friendly scary dogs are given a chance but the aggressive ones are PTS. Too risky to place them and money is often better spent on the dogs that are rehomeable.

I know of some Pits who went to the pound and never made it into a pen. It was the responsible thing to do in these particular dogs cases.

See this is why I was asking. My dog for example isn't human aggressive in the slightest , however she will fearlessly guard the house when my wife is home and say if something happened me and my wife, and someone needed to enter the house, a stranger could easily judge her as being dangerous when in fact, she's only defending her home
In fairness if a stranger tried to get into the house she's no more dangerous than me but nobody would be looking to kill me.
It's scenarios like that and also bad guard dog training that had me wondering what the standard practice was

Knine

notjustsweet wrote: »

I don't know where you're talking about but I can tell you with 100% surety that's not the case in the rescues I've helped in or ones I know of.

What pound is putting dogs down without their 5 days?

Surrender Dog aggressive Pit Bulls. I know what happened. These dogs would eat through a crate to get to another dog. Game Bred for one purpose.

njs030

Knine wrote: »

Surrender Dog aggressive Pit Bulls. I know what happened. These dogs would eat through a crate to get to another dog. Game Bred for one purpose.

I did say in my post that pounds are different to rescues, you didn't specify surrender or that they were dog aggressive so that's why I asked.

That's more about the owner who bred them like that than an issue to do with pounds tbh and falls into the category of dogs that can't be helped and would be cruel to cage - as I mentioned too.

deadlybuzzman wrote: »

See this is why I was asking. My dog for example isn't human aggressive in the slightest , however she will fearlessly guard the house when my wife is home and say if something happened me and my wife, and someone needed to enter the house, a stranger could easily judge her as being dangerous when in fact, she's only defending her home
In fairness if a stranger tried to get into the house she's no more dangerous than me but nobody would be looking to kill me.
It's scenarios like that and also bad guard dog training that had me wondering what the standard practice was

It is a problem for emergency services when dogs are loose and they need to get into a house. Though if something has happened to you they usually find a way tbh even if it means locking the dog in a room. Dogs can be weird and know when someone is trying to help anyway.

Knine

Yes I agree. Nothing could be done for these dogs and they were a grave danger to the public with pet dogs. There was a conviction for dog fighting involved but was still allowed keep dogs.

The Restricted Breeds list is a joke when you see some of the breeds the tough men have now.

deadlybuzzman

Knine wrote: »

Yes I agree. Nothing could be done for these dogs and they were a grave danger to the public with pet dogs.

Does the Michael vick dogs documentarys not put a big hole in that assumption?
Plus in the same way how is a dog agressive APBT any different to any large dog agressive dog that's always muzzled when in public?

Knine

deadlybuzzman wrote: »

Does the Michael vick dogs documentarys not put a big hole in that assumption?
Plus in the same way how is a dog agressive APBT any different to any large dog agressive dog that's always muzzled when in public?

Have you ever seen a dog Aggressive Pit Bull in action? Actually killing another dog? Do you honestly think the person involved is going to be a law abiding citizen? Not every dog can or should be saved.

njs030

deadlybuzzman wrote: »

Does the Michael vick dogs documentarys not put a big hole in that assumption?
Plus in the same way how is a dog agressive APBT any different to any large dog agressive dog that's always muzzled when in public?

I'm going to take a guess that you've never seen a dog agressive dog in action?
Even a small staffie has enough strength to drag a fully grown person into traffic when it sees another dog and it's fighting spirit is up.
All the muzzle does is stops the bite, it doesn't stop the anger and strength and anxiety the dog goes through.


The best interests of the dog has to come first.

deadlybuzzman

Knine wrote: »

Have you ever seen a dog Aggressive Pit Bull in action? Actually killing another dog? Do you honestly think the person involved is going to be a law abiding citizen? Not every dog can or should be saved.

Seeing a dog agressive dog going full clip would not inform me about them any more than seeing someone getting hit by a car would tell me don't stand in the middle of the road, it's already obvious what you need to know.
I grew up on a farm, a bull tried to kill my dad, a massive cow tried to kill my best mate, 2 other neighbours were nearly killed by bulls, none of them held a grudge against the animals as all of them knew that's their nature, sometimes animals will try and kill you so know that and don't give them the chance
They didn't pass judgement that an animal was to live or die based on if it deserved to or not, it was based on safety mainly to do with facilities.
I don't see how a dog agressive dogs any different, that dog has no business being in a built up area, if for example however I had that kind of dog itd be constantly indoors unless when it'd be out in 30 acres of empty mountainside.
Saying that not every dog should be saved is clearly passing a moral judgement on an animal which is silly. It's no different to the sheep farmer that demands a dog is killed in revenge for killing his sheep when all that's required is that the dogs secured

njs030

deadlybuzzman wrote: »

I don't see how a dog agressive dogs any different, that dog has no business being in a built up area, if for example however I had that kind of dog itd be constantly indoors unless when it'd be out in 30 acres of empty mountainside.
Saying that not every dog should be saved is clearly passing a moral judgement on an animal which is silly.

You're missing the point I think.
It's about the welfare of the dog not about how we as humans would be sad about putting a dog to sleep.
Keeping a dog indoors all the time is wrong. Aside from that you're saying "if I had that dog" but they could sit in a cage in rescue for years before anyone comes along that would have acres of land for them to run in.
For those years, twice a day every day they would have to be dragged in and out of their kennel in a highly anxious and aggressive state trying to fight with all the other dogs and winding up all the dogs around them - some of whom will have been used as bait dogs and the staff will be working their ass off trying to raise their confidence levels.


Do you really think that's a good life for these poor sweet animals? In the hope that some day someone might come along who is willing to overlook the puppies and labs and cute dogs and take on the dog agressive one?

Or is it better to let them go and not have them suffering anxiety and misery every day and focus on the ones who can be rehabilitated.

You have to do what's right for them - BTW did you choose an older agressive dog?

deadlybuzzman

notjustsweet wrote: »

I'm going to take a guess that you've never seen a dog agressive dog in action?
Even a small staffie has enough strength to drag a fully grown person into traffic when it sees another dog and it's fighting spirit is up.
All the muzzle does is stops the bite, it doesn't stop the anger and strength and anxiety the dog goes through.


The best interests of the dog has to come first.

My own dog is an Amstaff which is nearly double the weight of most staffys so I'm well aware of their capabilities.
The presumption of this post and the previous one seem similar, that dog agressive dogs are running loose.
My point of view is real simple if you think a dog might possibly attack anything, then you separate it from that thing. If it's in a rescue and the dogs breaking it's teeth on a cage trying to get the dog beside it and there's nowhere else for that dog to go then yeah absolutely, that dog will have to be killed

dr.fuzzenstein

What is a "dog aggressive dog"?
Some kind of new term? Never heard it before.

Dial Hard

dr.fuzzenstein wrote:

What is a "dog aggressive dog"? Some kind of new term? Never heard it before.

It's a dog that's aggressive only towards other dogs, not humans or other animals.

zoe 3619

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

What is a "dog aggressive dog"?
Some kind of new term? Never heard it before.

I'm guessing it's a dog which is aggressive towards other dogs.

deadlybuzzman

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

What is a "dog aggressive dog"?
Some kind of new term? Never heard it before.

To be fair it can be just aggression or it can go the whole way up to proper intention to kill, same as a Terrier Rag Dolling a rat only it's not a rat it's another dog.

dr.fuzzenstein

OK, thanks.

deadlybuzzman

notjustsweet wrote: »

You're missing the point I think.
It's about the welfare of the dog not about how we as humans would be sad about putting a dog to sleep.
Keeping a dog indoors all the time is wrong. Aside from that you're saying "if I had that dog" but they could sit in a cage in rescue for years before anyone comes along that would have acres of land for them to run in.
For those years, twice a day every day they would have to be dragged in and out of their kennel in a highly anxious and aggressive state trying to fight with all the other dogs and winding up all the dogs around them - some of whom will have been used as bait dogs and the staff will be working their ass off trying to raise their confidence levels.


Do you really think that's a good life for these poor sweet animals? In the hope that some day someone might come along who is willing to overlook the puppies and labs and cute dogs and take on the dog agressive one?

Or is it better to let them go and not have them suffering anxiety and misery every day and focus on the ones who can be rehabilitated.

You have to do what's right for them - BTW did you choose an older agressive dog?

Absolutely I'd agree with everything you say there, if it's a straight choice between giving the time money and work into say 4 regular dogs or just one hard case then that's a straightforward choice.
If the dogs not even getting a chance then that's different.
In our case we went for a bulldog as I wanted something that had a physical presence for peace of mind for my wife and also because they are overlooked and neglected by alot of people.
It was also our first dog so it would've been silly getting in over our heads with a major hard case of a dog

DBB

Two other things to throw into the mix...
Firstly, aggressive dogs are far more likely to remain in their kennel/foster home for much lengthier periods, thus taking up a space that could have been used for multiple easy, readily rehomable dogs.
Secondly, for a rescue to rehome a dog that they know to present a real danger to other animals or people, is a major risk, and indeed may invalidate their insurance should there be a recidivist incident that results in the adopter or affected party claiming from the rescue. There have been some incidents that I'm aware of whereby, despite signing no-blame contracts, rescues have got into a world of trouble. As a result, the vast majority of rescues are hesitant now to take in very aggressive dogs, or to try to rehome them.

kylith

deadlybuzzman wrote: »

Seeing a dog agressive dog going full clip would not inform me about them any more than seeing someone getting hit by a car would tell me don't stand in the middle of the road, it's already obvious what you need to know.
I grew up on a farm, a bull tried to kill my dad, a massive cow tried to kill my best mate, 2 other neighbours were nearly killed by bulls, none of them held a grudge against the animals as all of them knew that's their nature, sometimes animals will try and kill you so know that and don't give them the chance
They didn't pass judgement that an animal was to live or die based on if it deserved to or not, it was based on safety mainly to do with facilities.
I don't see how a dog agressive dogs any different, that dog has no business being in a built up area, if for example however I had that kind of dog itd be constantly indoors unless when it'd be out in 30 acres of empty mountainside.
Saying that not every dog should be saved is clearly passing a moral judgement on an animal which is silly. It's no different to the sheep farmer that demands a dog is killed in revenge for killing his sheep when all that's required is that the dogs secured

The difference being that no-one expects to be able to walk a bull down a street full of people.

deadlybuzzman

kylith wrote: »

The difference being that no-one expects to be able to walk a bull down a street full of people.

A responsible owner shouldn't have a blanket expectation that they will able to walk their dog where theres people, kids or dogs. For plenty of reasons some dogs big and small have no business being on the streets

volchitsa

deadlybuzzman wrote: »

A responsible owner shouldn't have a blanket expectation that they will able to walk their dog where theres people, kids or dogs. For plenty of reasons some dogs big and small have no business being on the streets

Thing is though, unless the word "responsible" absolutely requires that the animal be sterilized, it can easily become more complicated than just where the dog is walked.

Someone at our canine-education class (where we are just dog-owners, I don't run it or anything!) has a beautiful looking purebred dog, a retriever FWIW, and she has already bred from him, even though he's obviously unbalanced.

(She's actually stopped coming, TBH, as she was getting nowhere with him and was coming into conflict with the educators and other dog owners. But AFAIAA, she's planning on having other pups from him, and presumably on selling them.)

kylith

deadlybuzzman wrote: »

A responsible owner shouldn't have a blanket expectation that they will able to walk their dog where theres people, kids or dogs. For plenty of reasons some dogs big and small have no business being on the streets

Where are they supposed to walk them then? In an empty field in the middle of nowhere at 2am?

There is no way for someone to 100% guarantee that they will never encounter another dog when exercising their reactive dog.

deadlybuzzman

kylith wrote: »

Where are they supposed to walk them then? In an empty field in the middle of nowhere at 2am?

Yes although the 2AM part might make them cranky

kylith wrote: »

There is no way for someone to 100% guarantee that they will never encounter another dog when exercising their reactive dog.

Course there is, do it on your own land or land you control

volchitsa

deadlybuzzman wrote: »

Yes although the 2AM part might make them cranky

Course there is, do it on your own land or land you control

So only people who own enough land to fulfill a dog's need to run off leash, but who have no other dogs or possibly small animals, and of course not sheep farmers either. In fact not anyone who might need a working dog as well as this difficult one.

I don't think the list of potential owners is going to be very long, and I'm not entirely sure what point you're making.

Choc Chip

As someone who has enough land, you also have the issue of unannounced visitors, wandering dogs, dog walkers, people camping up on the road. All of which we've experienced in the last year. Unless you have SIGNIFICANT sums you're not going to be able to secure a large area to hold an aggressive dog intent on getting to prey.
In the middle of nowhere so can't exercise at 2am- its pitch black and you can't see the dog or its potential prey. Which, btw in the middle of nowhere could include legitimate hunters and their dogs on land bordering your own.

With an extremely aggressive dog you only need one accident or oversight in any of those scenarios to cause the injury or death of a person or dog.

Having looked after 2 aggressive dogs for very short periods, I wouldn't take that kind of risk long -term. Complacency creeps in and no one can be vigilant 100% of the time.

kylith

deadlybuzzman wrote: »

Yes although the 2AM part might make them cranky



Course there is, do it on your own land or land you control

The number of people with the money and means to secure that amount of land, who are also willing to take on a highly reactive, aggressive dogs when there are a multitude of lovely friendly dogs to choose from are vanishingly small. In fact, I would go so far as to opine that most of the people who would be willing to take on a dog that will attack other dogs on sight, and be happy to never let it out of the garden, are the type of people who should never be allowed to own a dog of any sort.

So we're back to unadoptable dogs sitting in cages in shelters, taking up room that could be used for dogs that can actually be adopted.

deadlybuzzman

volchitsa wrote: »

.

I don't think the list of potential owners is going to be very long, and I'm not entirely sure what point you're making.

My point was very simple, someone had the expectation to walk all dogs down the street, I'm saying if a dog (any dog, rescue or not) isn't good with dogs then don't have it where there are other dogs.
Course these places exist, obviously most people don't live near them as that's the point, they're empty.
For example I know a guy with 2 dogs, 1 is an akita and he has acres of space that's fenced in. A dog trainer Ive gone to lives in the woods on a dead end Road and has a fenced area. If I needed I could bring my dog up 30 acres of rock bog and heather in the curlew mountains where theres not even a power line in sight never mind neighbours.
Absolutely these places aren't everywhere, theyre probably non existent on the east coast but that's not much different to the way the more densely populated an area is, the smaller the dogs there tend to be. Your environment has to influence what animals you keep