The Ontario battle rages on ... see Part 1 here.
Saturday morning there was a protest at Brampton Animal Services. In attendance were approximately 100 people, and NDP MPP Cheri Di Novo (who is trying to garner support for her Bill 222 which will repeal the breed-specific portion of the law).
The dogs are being cared for by staff at Brampton Animal Services until a decision has been made regarding their fate. See below for the latest news articles:
Dog lovers plan protest in Brampton
Protesters barking mad
Monday, February 8, 2010
Saturday, February 6, 2010
Featured Rescue - Amber the Boxer/American Bulldog
In light of the situation in Brampton (please check the link if you don't know what's going on), I have decided to feature a Boxer/American Bulldog mix today. Her name is Amber. She is located at Camp LotsaDogs which is in Ontario ... I heard about this place last March - so far haven't heard much about them through the rescue network. If anyone has experience with them, please pass it on!PS - Did you notice at the bottom of Amber's page it has a section dedicated to Coonhounds and Beagles?? Here's a quote ... A lot of people think Coonhounds and Beagles are stupid but they're not! They are just joyous dingbats for sure but very trainable. They are funny, happy clowns.
Joyous dingbats ... yep - that sure makes me want to adopt one today!
Friday, February 5, 2010
Asshat Rant - Repetition
I happened across a situation the other day that made me shudder ... this is the second time I've run into this and it kills me every time.
Nothing bothers me more than idiot dog owners. You know, the ones who shout 25-100 times for their dog to "Sit" in a high pitched, shrill voice that makes you want to cut off your ears? Oh my. I could only imagine how the poor dog feels.
*headdesk headdesk*
This is what we heard ... "Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit" while the lady was chasing the dog around trying to put a leash on him.
My dogs stood there, looked at the lady, looked at the dog and looked at us as if to say "Is there something wrong with her?" It looked like they were grinning ... I wish I could have laughed but it would have been too much. The lady looked at me like I should do something, so I asked my dogs to sit and they sat. So, I sighed and helped corner the dog with a bunch of other people so she could take him home.
If you are trying to teach your dog a behaviour, you really don't have to repeat it a thousand times. Your dog is not an idiot (though some owners are - it's scary when the dog is smarter than the owners ...) so don't treat him like one.
If you have to repeat yourself when asking your dog to Sit, then one of two things is going on. One - He doesn't really know the behaviour and doesn't understand what "Sit" means. Two - He doesn't think he has to do what you ask, couldn't care less what you say and is going to ignore you no matter how angry you get; the more angry, the more fun.
This lady gets today's Dogs Deserve Freedom Asshat Award.
Nothing bothers me more than idiot dog owners. You know, the ones who shout 25-100 times for their dog to "Sit" in a high pitched, shrill voice that makes you want to cut off your ears? Oh my. I could only imagine how the poor dog feels.
*headdesk headdesk*
This is what we heard ... "Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit, Sit" while the lady was chasing the dog around trying to put a leash on him.
My dogs stood there, looked at the lady, looked at the dog and looked at us as if to say "Is there something wrong with her?" It looked like they were grinning ... I wish I could have laughed but it would have been too much. The lady looked at me like I should do something, so I asked my dogs to sit and they sat. So, I sighed and helped corner the dog with a bunch of other people so she could take him home.
If you are trying to teach your dog a behaviour, you really don't have to repeat it a thousand times. Your dog is not an idiot (though some owners are - it's scary when the dog is smarter than the owners ...) so don't treat him like one.
If you have to repeat yourself when asking your dog to Sit, then one of two things is going on. One - He doesn't really know the behaviour and doesn't understand what "Sit" means. Two - He doesn't think he has to do what you ask, couldn't care less what you say and is going to ignore you no matter how angry you get; the more angry, the more fun.
This lady gets today's Dogs Deserve Freedom Asshat Award. Congratulations, Dumbass, you're the Asshat Of the Week.
Thursday, February 4, 2010
News Reel - Rambo and Brittany on death row
I know this is sort of old news for those who have been following this story and I wasn't going to blog about it since it is so well covered by many other dog blogs ... but I can't help myself. I have to blog something. If nothing else, to show my support AGAINST Breed Specific Legislation.
On January 13 Brampton Animal Services seized two dogs, siblings, for violating the province's pit bull ban. The dogs are 2 years old and are brother and sister. They are Boxer/American Bulldog mix. Now, if that picture of Rambo doesn't SCREAM Boxer, I don't know what would.
On January 13 Brampton Animal Services seized two dogs, siblings, for violating the province's pit bull ban. The dogs are 2 years old and are brother and sister. They are Boxer/American Bulldog mix. Now, if that picture of Rambo doesn't SCREAM Boxer, I don't know what would. “We stand by the fact that the dogs are boxer mixes,” said Rui Branco, 42, whose brother owns Brittany and her parents, Jersey and Tyson. “There was no warrant, no complaints or abuse complaints. The city has been stonewalling us. We got a letter a day ago from the city ... certifying Brittany as a pit bull.”
Up until the news article today, I haven't read anything that would suggest a cause for this action from Brampton Animal Services ... until I read this:
Animal Services said that Joseph Branco had registered Tyson as a restricted pit bull in a 2008 licensing document, which means it’s against the law for Tyson to have puppies. “I have no idea how the city registered Tyson, the father, as a pit bull and I have no idea what led them here,” Branco said. “Their excuse for being at our door was to collect the licence fee. The bylaw officer said, ‘I’m going to hunt (Tyson’s pups) down, one by one,’”
I've said it before and I'll say it again. Breed bans don't fix the problem. Breed Specific Legislation (BSL) does nothing to make irresponsible owners accountable, punishes responsible dog owners and costs innocent dog lives. If you are interested in reading some of the news articles that have covered this story, check them out below.
Rambo on death row as city, owners battle over breeding - January 29, 2010
Boxer mixes caught up in pit bull controversy - February 2, 2010
Brampton Dog Battle Has Owner Fuming - February 2, 2010
Groundswell of support for two dogs on death row - February 2, 2010
Seized dogs aren't pit bulls: Owners - February 3, 2010
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
News Reel Rants - Dog Bites Family and Biting Dog
Sunday was the first time I've picked up a newspaper in months (aside from our local community news - I always check up on the Humane Society's column). I don't usually like the dog training columns in the paper because they don't generally give advice that I agree with. The unfortunate thing is that other people will read the article and then apply whatever advice given to their own dog(s). Usually it's the total opposite of what you should do or it's only partly correct. I couldn't believe it on Sunday ... I read the article Dog Bites Family and actually agreed with the columnist!
Holy Jumpin. It's a day for celebrations. Here's the quote that I ABSOLUTELY love ... "I class all truly abusive and positive dog trainers in the same category. They both hurt dogs. The former does it in an obvious way and the latter an insidious way." Beautifully written. I couldn't have said that better myself. If you have time, check out the article. There's some good info in there.
Then I get an email about this article, Biting Dog Needs to be Desensitized from a different paper and a different columnist. I read it and couldn't believe what I was reading. Basically the article said not to use punishment (positive or otherwise) because it doesn't work or if it does, it is only temporary. Check out what this columnist published ... The blue is her published work, the Red and Black are my comments:
"Leash corrections are in the same category as spanking" WTF?! Are you serious? That's one broad statement. So if a person has a dog on the leash and the dog is aggressively charging the TV (the example given - what if it were another dog or a child??), you should not use the leash to correct? What the heck do you suggest the person do? Let go? Do you even know what this "correction" is that the person who wrote in used?
The most interesting thing is that by using the word "spanking" as the comparison, the columnist has half the readership already nodding in agreement not because they disagree with leash correction but because they disagree with spankings.
Most good writers are taught what's called persuasive writing ... In fact - did you know that most grade school children are learning persuasive writing?? I have the pleasure of sitting in on some of these classes during my day job - interesting stuff ... wish I could learn some of it! HA.
Then she wrote this "Research indicates the effects may be temporary unless the punishment is immediate, consistent and severe". What research? I would like to read some research studies that prove this - it would be interesting. I don't agree with this statement. (This is where I'm going to have all sorts of readers up in arms about what I've written) Again, it is far too broad and doesn't explain spit. What does "severe" mean? Each dog will view punishment as different so you really can't make such a statement. I also don't agree that punishment needs to be immediate for everything ... while I have many examples I could use, this is the best and most recent one I can think of ...
You better believe that the day I walked in the door after work to see my nice new cat pillow shredded all over my livingroom floor, my dogs knew exactly what was going on when I picked it up and said "What is THIS?! Who ate my pillow?!" (I knew exactly who it was because only one dog was new to being out of the crate throughout the day and she is a "destructor dog".) (Granted ... living with 5 dogs I really should have KNOWN that a CAT PILLOW would not be on their Top Ten List for decorating our house but I think of it sometimes as MY house). I didn't catch them in the act. I did give them trouble about it - all of them. They haven't done it again (I have a matching pillow with a DOG on it and they seem to think that one's just fine). It's all part and parcel of training. If I had expensive crap, I wouldn't have dogs. What's the point of this story? My dogs received verbal correction, then got the cold shoulder until dinner time. The punishment was not immediate (it was possibly even hours after the behaviour), consistent (it didn't happen more than once) or severe (not physical in the slightest; all they got was me tossing my arms around my head in frustration, a bit of yelling and then the ignore button) but it worked.
"Although punishment may work for some, it can be ineffective and even has the potential to backfire" At this point in the article it sounds like this columnist is lumping all punishment in the same box. You have to think outside the box when you're training dogs. Punishment is different for each and every dog and when you find out what works for that dog, it is quite effective. You sure wouldn't use the same template on every dog. Not all dogs are the same. For some, I could use verbal. For others, I could put them on ignore. For others, I would put into isolation. For others, I can use a leash correction. For others, a time out where they aren't isolated but are limited in movement works. You can't assume that the thing that works for dog number one will work for dog number two and if you have assumed this than of course you would make a statement as above.
While this columnist has some good points ("Systematic desensitization is one effective choice. Instead of waiting for the dog to fail and then correcting it, the dog is set up for success"), these shining rays of hope are overwhelmed by the huge amount of crap she has written. It honestly sounds like she picked up a Behaviour Modification book and cut, copied and pasted certain key phrases to be interspersed with the crap. That way it sounds like she actually knows what she's talking about. She uses key phrases like "positive punishment", "learning theory", "Systematic desensitization", and "anxiety-provoking triggers" but then puts in the sentences as outlined above.
If you have a dog at home that exibits any aggressive tendencies (or other negative behaviours) you wish to resolve - PLEASE go to a trainer! Don't just read an article in the paper and assume you can fix it yourself.
Holy Jumpin. It's a day for celebrations. Here's the quote that I ABSOLUTELY love ... "I class all truly abusive and positive dog trainers in the same category. They both hurt dogs. The former does it in an obvious way and the latter an insidious way." Beautifully written. I couldn't have said that better myself. If you have time, check out the article. There's some good info in there.
Then I get an email about this article, Biting Dog Needs to be Desensitized from a different paper and a different columnist. I read it and couldn't believe what I was reading. Basically the article said not to use punishment (positive or otherwise) because it doesn't work or if it does, it is only temporary. Check out what this columnist published ... The blue is her published work, the Red and Black are my comments:
"Leash corrections are in the same category as spanking" WTF?! Are you serious? That's one broad statement. So if a person has a dog on the leash and the dog is aggressively charging the TV (the example given - what if it were another dog or a child??), you should not use the leash to correct? What the heck do you suggest the person do? Let go? Do you even know what this "correction" is that the person who wrote in used?
The most interesting thing is that by using the word "spanking" as the comparison, the columnist has half the readership already nodding in agreement not because they disagree with leash correction but because they disagree with spankings.
Watch what you read.
Most good writers are taught what's called persuasive writing ... In fact - did you know that most grade school children are learning persuasive writing?? I have the pleasure of sitting in on some of these classes during my day job - interesting stuff ... wish I could learn some of it! HA.
Then she wrote this "Research indicates the effects may be temporary unless the punishment is immediate, consistent and severe". What research? I would like to read some research studies that prove this - it would be interesting. I don't agree with this statement. (This is where I'm going to have all sorts of readers up in arms about what I've written) Again, it is far too broad and doesn't explain spit. What does "severe" mean? Each dog will view punishment as different so you really can't make such a statement. I also don't agree that punishment needs to be immediate for everything ... while I have many examples I could use, this is the best and most recent one I can think of ...
You better believe that the day I walked in the door after work to see my nice new cat pillow shredded all over my livingroom floor, my dogs knew exactly what was going on when I picked it up and said "What is THIS?! Who ate my pillow?!" (I knew exactly who it was because only one dog was new to being out of the crate throughout the day and she is a "destructor dog".) (Granted ... living with 5 dogs I really should have KNOWN that a CAT PILLOW would not be on their Top Ten List for decorating our house but I think of it sometimes as MY house). I didn't catch them in the act. I did give them trouble about it - all of them. They haven't done it again (I have a matching pillow with a DOG on it and they seem to think that one's just fine). It's all part and parcel of training. If I had expensive crap, I wouldn't have dogs. What's the point of this story? My dogs received verbal correction, then got the cold shoulder until dinner time. The punishment was not immediate (it was possibly even hours after the behaviour), consistent (it didn't happen more than once) or severe (not physical in the slightest; all they got was me tossing my arms around my head in frustration, a bit of yelling and then the ignore button) but it worked.
"Although punishment may work for some, it can be ineffective and even has the potential to backfire" At this point in the article it sounds like this columnist is lumping all punishment in the same box. You have to think outside the box when you're training dogs. Punishment is different for each and every dog and when you find out what works for that dog, it is quite effective. You sure wouldn't use the same template on every dog. Not all dogs are the same. For some, I could use verbal. For others, I could put them on ignore. For others, I would put into isolation. For others, I can use a leash correction. For others, a time out where they aren't isolated but are limited in movement works. You can't assume that the thing that works for dog number one will work for dog number two and if you have assumed this than of course you would make a statement as above.
While this columnist has some good points ("Systematic desensitization is one effective choice. Instead of waiting for the dog to fail and then correcting it, the dog is set up for success"), these shining rays of hope are overwhelmed by the huge amount of crap she has written. It honestly sounds like she picked up a Behaviour Modification book and cut, copied and pasted certain key phrases to be interspersed with the crap. That way it sounds like she actually knows what she's talking about. She uses key phrases like "positive punishment", "learning theory", "Systematic desensitization", and "anxiety-provoking triggers" but then puts in the sentences as outlined above.
Here's what really bothers me ... when you get someone giving advice in such columns and they have no idea what they are talking about. The scary thing is that people at home will take that advice and apply it to their own dogs, often making the problems worse.
If you have a dog at home that exibits any aggressive tendencies (or other negative behaviours) you wish to resolve - PLEASE go to a trainer! Don't just read an article in the paper and assume you can fix it yourself.
Monday, February 1, 2010
Black Dog Monday
Today's Black Dog is named Corey. He is a big ol' Black and Tan Coonhound (with more black than tan as you can see). He is 5 years old and is reportedly good with other dogs. He looks gorgeous ... I love hounds; with their "froppy-ears" and "a-roo-roo-roo" ... my heart melts. He is located at Sanilac County Animal Shelter which does euthanize due to space constraints. They have 14 dog kennels and 6 cat cages. "Although we try very hard, not all of our animals are placed and unfortunately have to be humanely euthanized due to limited space and funding"
If you can offer Corey a home (even a temporary one!) I encourage you to do so. One dog at a time, right?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)