 You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
The fact that poodle is a massively available breed of animal is, in fact, a man made deal. However, the building blocks for what we now know as a poodle existed(before man got ahold of it) all on its own.
I still am skeptical that anyone can believe that an animal only exists to serve another, however.
A dog still exists in the wild. Wolves. Coyotes. Hyena. Don't see anybody with a pet hyena very often.
I'm really glad several voices of responsible dog ownership are coming out here. It's all I would ask, and when the majority are practising it's so much easier to forgive the odd 'moment'.
I'm going to be very honest here - I typed a huge, long heartfelt post just seconds before buttercup's last offering and feel it doesn't deserve to languish at the bottom of page two. So here it is again. Mods, please feel free to prick my pompousness if you feel the need 🙂
"I've been very lucky with dog ownership. I am self employed. When we took on a six month old, nervous wreck of a lurcher from the Dogs' Trust, I was able to sit up for the first fortnight dealing with his night terrors without fear of being late for work the next day. Lucky, I know.
I was able to clean up his double incontinence at 4a.m. and hose down his cage in the freezing night, before going back inside to wipe him down and resettle him.
His training sessions were frequent - two or three a day before walks for pleasure. This meant working until the early hours to keep my clients happy. I was able to look into various training methods and apply those which worked for the pair of us. Like I say, I've been lucky, and I daresay he has too.
He still isn't perfect - he sometimes takes off after wildlife and ignores me - he's a lurcher - that's generations of training for you. Try calling a greyhound off a rabbit; good luck.
All that said, I now specialise in photographing other peoples' dogs and and am constantly amazed by the total lack of training - most of my client's dogs aren't allowed of the leash (which is a right pain in the arse as it has to be photoshopped out) and very few will 'Sit!'. Surely 'Sit' is the most basic of all commands?
Sorry for the long rambling post - all I wanted to say was that it's really not that hard to invest some time training a dog - it can be done whilst watching the telly. I hope that when Kasper (the current dog) carks it, I'll have learnt some valuable lessons on training the next one, if I can lift my weeping face from my pillow."
Sorry, I've never seen David Attenborough narrating a documentary on poodles. Where exactly is it that they are native?
Oh, and if somebody strolled up with a wolf or hyena on a lead I wouldn't think twice about picking up my little girl rather than pondering whether she was being viewed as food or a petting opportunity.
Ginger.
I am glad you ensure the safety of something you love.
Most people would shy their dogs from a wolf too.
😉
UR, I saw your post right as the genetics nonsense happened. I felt bad. My last dog was rescued. They are tough work but well worth it.
It's less a reliance than a symbiosis. We may well have evolved, physically and mentally into our current forms due to our association with dogs. Less need to be club-wielding meat-heads, more time to plan for the future.
Sadly, the reverse didn't work out so well for dogs - lots of pedigree breeds losing eyes due to flat faces, falling over at the age of eight due to atrophying hips or suffering from strange liver-destroying diseases.
flat faces, falling over at the age of eight due to atrophying hips or suffering from strange liver-destroying diseases
Have you been to Glasgow? Sounds like some of the locals on a Saturday night...
Aye, but what have they ever done for us, eh? Eh?! Furkin weegies. (nae offence tae the many weegies on this fine forum bytheway, bigman, know?).
Just googled 'Fenton'. Excellent! What a muppet.
Don Simon,
It's a question of attitude though, isn't it? I find it difficult to believe that you were Mr Cordial when talking to the dog owner when you are less than objective when retelling the facts. Three sides to every story and all that...
You don't need to convince me of anything, I am a dangerous dog owner and know what it's like when confronted with a difficult situation.
This. I don't think the OP was unreasonable in his dealing with people who cannot control a large dog [b]in a public place[/b], where children are more then likely to be playing.
Regarding the different breeds and why they exist,
Poodles are retrievers or gun dogs, and are still used by hunters in that role. The poodle is believed to have originated in Germany, where it was known as "pudel". Pudel is believed to be the German word for "splash in water." The breed was standardized in France, where it was commonly used as a water retriever.[2]
Labradors make perfect guide dogs for blind and partially sighted folks; can anyone imagine how difficult their lives would be without their canine companions, or seeing-eye dogs?
My bro's Pyrenean Mountain Dog was bred to protect sheep from predators. Newfoundland's are astonishing swimmers, and get used to aid in aquatic rescues. These are just a few examples of how selective breeding has created a dog that suits the environment it lives and works with humans in, these are not dogs bred to enhance someone's lifestyle, like inbred 'toy' breeds.
Labradors make perfect guide dogs for blind and partially sighted folks; can anyone imagine how difficult their lives would be without their canine companions, or seeing-eye dogs?
Dog gets fed and sleeps in a warm place, owner doesn't walk under a truck: perfick.
My partially sighted Inverness mate was given a seeing-eye dog. It was a death-trap. Stopped to eat chips off the ground, wanted to talk to every single passerby, wandered out into the middle of the road to sniff at pigeons and God forbid he should take it to the pub - spent all night licking up spilt beer to the point where it couldn't sniff let alone see...
But that dog was the exception to the rule. Retired shortly thereafter.
buttercup - MemberA dog, is just the same as a child. Just about as useful. Just as much love given to it. if a child ran up and touched a strangers leg, and said stranger gave the child a smack.. would you accept that? Why would you accept it if it were furry and quadrapedal?
I hate to be rude here, but you are a fool.
Because a dog is an animal not a human. Different rules apply moral and legally. There is no equivalence.
I suggest if you cannot understand this then yo are the fool.
all we non dog people ask is you train your dogs properly adn make sure that yo meet your legal responsibilities to keep them under control.
Yo! Yes I agree to a point. Dogs are unpredictable and may bite or even rip and tear. A child off the leash may give a mild smack.
My dog will not savage anything over the size of a rabbit, so he's allowed off the lead in public places. Please do not walk your hamster on the links. He will kill it.
Do the same regulations apply to Grizzly Bears whilst shredding the trails in Canada? Who even owns the bears?!!! What if you cycle through a fox poo in Trinity (Edinburgh)?
Finally, SFB was able to quit this forum. I'm guessing he was advised to do so by a professional. Joking apart, it might not be a bad idea. I've considered going cold-turkey myself.
TJ,
The foolishness I speak of is of a man who would quicker decide to abuse a living creature because he felt he had a higher right than it.
The scenerio of discussion purely states the dog did nothing wrong. The nonowner was actually okey with the presence of the dog.
A dog is just the same as a child. Surely, it will not develop into the legal responsibility that a human would. but it is equally cared for and should be treated as such. You train a child the same you do a dog. Toilet training. Tricks. Boundries.
It is alive. It belongs to someone. It has a personality. A name. Above all, it was being social. No violent acts towards the child. No menacing action at all.
No need to kick in it's teeth.
Don't get me wrong. If an animal is out of line and poses an actual threat, it needs to be dealt with. As do people.
We are all animals. We all follow the same laws.
Just enforced by different sentients.
UR, I think there is almost a pecking order of who has a right to be there, it goes something like:
- us, people that is - because we are top of the food chain, and in the context of the OP this includes children
- native species, i.e. wildlife, foxes, robins, badgers and grizzly bears (in Canada that is, not Yorkshire)
- introduced species, dogs, dairy cows, grey squirrels etc.
Sometimes there are conflicts, e.g. cows vs badgers, but mostly it's fairly clear to me. We all have a responsibility toward our wildlife, and we have a responsibility to care for any animals we introduce.
So in answer to your question a fox is native and has a right to exist and behave in it's natural manner, including taking a dump some part of Edinburgh I'm not familiar with. I'm not concerned about your dog being off the lead as long as it's under control, which pretty much means it's obeying your verbal commands.
Loving the concept of teaching children 'tricks'. Oh and children aren't owned and haven't been since the children act introduced in the 80's.
All of that is irrelevant though. If you can see that someone is frightened by your dogs presence, the right thing to do is remove your dog, not lecture the person. Equally if my child was pulling the dogs tail, I'd be removing her and apologising profusely.
Rich penny exactly my point thank you!
All of that is irrelevant though. If you can see that someone is frightened by your dogs presence, the right thing to do is remove your dog, not lecture the person. Equally if my child was pulling the dogs tail, I'd be removing her and apologising profusely.
This.
It's not that hard really is it?
Wununfred!
[b]A dog is just the same as a child.[/b] Surely, it will not develop into the legal responsibility that a human would. but it is equally cared for and should be treated as such. [b]You train a child the same you do a dog. Toilet training. Tricks. Boundries.[/b]
It is alive. [b][u]It belongs to someone.[/u][/b] It has a personality. A name.
🙄
Don't get me wrong. If an animal is out of line and poses an actual threat, it needs to be dealt with.
so how would you deal with............. [b]FENTON![/b] when he gets all aggressive wilth the deer?
I suggest if you cannot understand this then yo are the fool.
And at this point any credibility in the argument is lost.
All of that is irrelevant though. If you can see that someone is frightened by your dogs presence, the right thing to do is remove your dog, not lecture the person. Equally if my child was pulling the dogs tail, I'd be removing her and apologising profusely.
The correct thing to do is to not even let the dog off the lead in the first place if you have the slightest idea that there will be other members of the public running around out of control. Prevent rather than cure. Go find somewhere that is unoccupied with uncontrolable people and childred.
One thing these threads have demonstrated to me since my return is the inability of people to live together with both sides claiming the greater right to be somewhere or do something, it's a crowded little island. You'd all get along a lot better if there wasn't all this point scoring going on.
Ok, not read all the posts so my viewpoint may have already been covered.
As a dog and child owner I can say there are definitly two firm schools of thought with this one.
1. Dogs should be under close control at all times, if they don't return on call then they should only be off-lead where they won't bother anyone
2. There are far too many over-protective parents out there who will see a dog coming and very quickly grab their child and hold them up in the air or cross the street or something else which essentially tells the child dogs are bad, and tells the dog these people are nervous.
Based on your post, it seems like point 1 is the most appropriate and the dog owners sounded like they were looking for an argument. Don't let it bother you too much, you'll always meet idiots when out and about.
Broadly speaking, dog owners make their problems everyone else's problems:
*Dog needs exercise - don't own a house with a big enough garden? Just let it off the leash in a public space.
*Dogs s--t everywhere - can't stand the sight and smell of dogs--t around the house and garden? Take it to a public space to let it spread its detritus.
*Empathy - not sure how other people will react to bounding pounds of meat and teeth? Tell small children that the dog won't b... He's never done that before..!
Dog owners = anti-social.
ourmaninthenorth: living in his own black and white world.
Can't you spot the obvious troll? 🙄
ourmaninthenorth: this is just how many of us non-dog people feel, but I (we?) accept that owning a dog is something other people enjoy so we put up and shut up. It's when irresponsibility creeps in that things come to a head.
The comment is true for *some* owners, but they can give all owners a bad name.
buttercup - Member
The fact that poodle is a massively available breed of animal is, in fact, a man made deal. However, the building blocks for what we now know as a poodle existed(before man got ahold of it) all on its own.
I still am skeptical that anyone can believe that an animal only exists to serve another, however.A dog still exists in the wild. Wolves. Coyotes. Hyena. Don't see anybody with a pet hyena very often.
Aren't hyenas more closely related to cats than dogs?
so how would you deal with............. FENTON! when he gets all aggressive wilth the deer?
a lead, some training (fenton and his 2 legged friend). a whistle, that sort of thing is surely worth a try...
failing that, a rifle. (fenton and his 2 legged friend).
What you need is to borrow my dog, she goes from very placid to a whirling dervish of snarling fangs if over bouncy or grumpy dogs get near our son.
*reads OP and ignores remainder of thread*
you should be able to self launch a power kite.
Personally I think that dog ownership in urban areas is irresponsible, anti-social and ultimately a little cruel.
If you disagree, fair enough because I guess you've decided you love your pooch.
Personally I think that dog ownership in urban areas is irresponsible, anti-social and ultimately a little cruel.
What a crock of shit. ****.
buttercup - MemberTJ,
The foolishness I speak of is of a man who would quicker decide to abuse a living creature because he felt he had a higher right than it.
correct. Humans have rights. dogs do not.
The scenerio of discussion purely states the dog did nothing wrong.
Wrong the dog was not under control. It upset a child.
Personally I think that [s]dog[/s] child ownership in urban areas is irresponsible, anti-social and ultimately a little cruel.
FTFY.
Seriously though, which urban area do you live in where there isn't easy access to green space to exercise/walk a dog?
which urban area do you live in where there isn't easy access to green space
What a [s]crock [/s] field of shit?
Regardless of the reason some people/children are scared of dogs, I think it's courteous to appreciate that and reign your dogs in if necessary.
My little whippet cross tends to act more erratically and interested in people who act erratic and you end up with a wierd mutual distrust scenario that just seems to exacerbate the situation. It's just easier to call her to heel.
Loving the concept of teaching children 'tricks'.
I've not seen a dog doing this:
I've not seen a dog doing this:
Quite possibly the worst video ever?
I do, however, have it on good authority that a dog was resposible for shooting and editing that video.
AWESOME.
Humans have rights. dogs do not.
incorrect. they might not have the same rights, but they do have rights. but let's not dwell on being reasonable.
let's not dwell on being reasonable.
Indeed.
Dogs have rights? really? Please tell me how?
You have to be a human to have rights. Can a dog sue someone? We have duties towards dogs for sure as we do to all animals but its nonsense to suggest a dog has rights
you're in your little ethical world aren't you?
try the animal welfare act.
Kevin Bridges sums it all up in a minute!
chutney13 - Memberyou're in your little ethical world aren't you?
try the animal welfare act.
No - that describes humans duties towards animals - not that a dog has rights.
my mistake, i shouldn't have commented. your grasp of semantics is to be commended. i am sure you are capable of winning many arguments, well done. Have you thought of doing a law degree, i hear the tinpot academy is good.
Chutney - you appear to have got yourself in a bit of a pickle.
You'll never beat TeeJ like that.
Its an important difference when people try to claim a dog has an equal right to a human - it does not.
Couldn't stay away from it TeeJ. I'm disappointed in you.
.
Nobby - rights? Its a legal concept only available to humans. Check it out. We have duties towards dogs, a dog has no rights at all and is not equal to a human as someone tried to claim.
So lets see some of these rights nobby
DD - Ok
So... anyhooooo... what do we think about cats? Cats are just, like, miles better than dogs, aren't they?
I'm very very disappointed this thread isn't littered with lolcats. Its a missed opportunity. Certain people (phil!) are slacking, and quite frankly need to up their game a little. Sort it out!
Some people think that dogs are stupid, mine, for example, would try to do something several times without success but eventually realised that simple repetition of the same pointless act would not achieve the result she wanted and would therefore give up.
Some people on the other hand....
[img] http://www.smileys4me.com/getsmiley.php?show=2140 [/img]
rights or Rights, right?
I really didn't want to post this, as it upset me so much the other day - but in light of TJ's comments I'm assuming he thinks the likes of this is ok?
If you're upset by cruelty to animals, I'd suggest not watching this.
Jes*s don't get me on about cats. Mine is pure nasty, screw loose tortiseshell physco. Rules the big bad scary dogs with an iron claw.
Why would yo assume that? a very strange concept. 🙄
Its an important difference when people try to claim a dog has an equal right to a human - it does not.
TJ you appear to be trying to put words into other peoples mouths, to justify your own opinions ........ again
Please bear in mind when arguing with TJ, he bases his facts on 'TJ Law' which is in no way related to the real world. Also he has never owned a dog, or been trusted to look after children, and has absolutely no legal training or experience other than from watching Eastenders and re-runs of the Bill on Dave.
So all in all, you need to be very careful when discussing things with him, as he drags discussions down to a moronic level, and then beats you with his lifetime of personal experience.
Don't great apes have rights in certain countries?
well i'm not watching that. no way,
Hartlepool?
well i'm not watching that. no way
Probably for the best. The point being, that if dogs don't have rights - then they should, to protect them from humans!
'TJ Law'
Sounds like a great TV series! Combination of TJ Hooker and LA Law!
Probably for the best. The point being, that if dogs don't have rights - then they should, to protect them from humans!
Too true, All animals should. and those right should be no different from our Human Rights
richc - wrong on all counts but why let that stop you. A make a personal attack because you cannot counter the point. Several people have claimed dogs have rights or are equivalent to humans.
if dogs don't have rights - then they should
Perhaps you could write them a constitution they could have enshrined in law? Will all the other animals have their own too? I'd hate to be the lawyer responsible for the hedgehogs one. Apparently they can be right arsey bastards. Proper militant, like!
Charlie - right to liberty? thats an end to dog owning then. No more animal farming. No more hunting.
Several people have claimed dogs have rights or are equivalent to humans.
I'd have to agree on this one TJ, as previously stated some dogs are more cleverer than some humans.
The five welfare needs
This means pet owners are now legally obliged to care for their pet properly - which most owners already do - by providing these five basic needs:•somewhere suitable to live
•a proper diet, including fresh water
•the ability to express normal behaviour
•for any need to be housed with, or apart from, other animals
•protection from, and treatment of, illness and injury.
Does this not mean that animals are afforded rights under the act?
Article 4.
•No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms.
From the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
I demand a fair wage for working dogs.
NOpe - they have needs and we have duties towards them.
Dogs do not need to be on a lead because a livestock sign is up, that sign could of been there months and even if there was livestock in the field as long as they're a respectible distance and not chasing or playing amonst them then no harm done.
No but it makes perfect sense for them to be on a lead. so they don't chase or play amongst life stock. All it takes is a rabbit and a dog will be off. A heard of cattle that is spooked by a dog is very dangerous.
Not to mention respect for others. If your on land thats not yours then you should be respectful.
People, TJ is right on this one.
Dogs do not have rights.
Humans have a legal obligation to them for many items, but that does not mean they have rights. Stop mixing your drinks.
And whoever it was who posted the video of animal cruelty suggesting that TJ thought that sort of thing was acceptable - grow up.
Surely the only right an animal has is the one about me not cooking them and eating them?
And lets face it, that only applies to certain more photogenic animals. In fact, if I was hungry enough, it wouldn't apply to any of them
And whoever it was who posted the video of animal cruelty suggesting that TJ thought that sort of thing was acceptable - grow up.
Really - I thought it was perfectly mature the people suggesting to kick a dog... 🙄
[img] 
[/img]
Does this not mean that animals are afforded rights under the act?
Not really the owner has a duty of care.
Do great apes have rights?
Right what?