PETA people have too much time on their hands, and not enough real problems to solve. Send them to Bangladesh and maybe they can find a better use for their time...

That said, one should not downplay the genetic problems. Most dog breeds want to achieve a very specific appearance. This is achieved by inbreeding over generations. From this foundation, you can then attempt to minimize the damage by using genetic tests.

If you want a family dog, buy a mutt whose parents are roughly the right size, who are healthy and whose behavior is pleasant. What does a family dog need with a show pedigree? That's just weird...

Bradley - ... buy a mutt whose parents ...

That's pedigree. Not three generations, perhaps, but pedigree nonetheless.

We've had several dogs and the only one that we had to get rid of (because he bit my daughter) was from the dog pound. We had therefore no idea what his parentage or upbringing was like. All the others have been border collies from breeders. People keep breeding records for a reason - not just weird snobbery.

Here's something that PETA never seems to realize: most animals on the planet live at our whim, now, but several species remain at large because of our efforts.

From Wikipedia:
"The Association of Zoos and Aquariums estimates that up to 12,000 tigers are being kept as private pets in the USA, significantly more than the world's entire wild population. 4,000 are believed to be in captivity in Texas alone.

Part of the reason for America's enormous tiger population relates to legislation. Only nineteen states have banned private ownership of tigers, fifteen require only a licence, and sixteen states have no regulations at all.

The success of breeding programmes at American zoos and circuses led to an overabundance of cubs in the 1980s and 1990s, which drove down prices for the animals. The SPCA estimate there are now 500 lions, tigers and other big cats in private ownership just in the Houston area."

Each of these animals requires the support, roughly, a single adult human does w/r/t resources (although they obviously have special needs). What do you think their fate will be if turned out?

Aren't consequences neat?

PeTA doesn't care about what happens when the animals get turned out.

Some group (I think the terrorist group ALF) broke into a mink farm and turned all the critters loose, and they died horrible deaths because they don't know how to survive in the wild. The assholes didn't care.

I think that people like Newkirk actually hate animals, and don't want anyone else to like them either.

I wonder what the world would look like if we had to apply the whole PeTA spiel to the letter. It would surely be a hecatomb for all the pets released to the vild and unable to deal with their new found liberty and predators.

On the other side, if that crazy girl Ingrid Newkirk tries to get my pure-badger shaving brush, she will only get it from my cold, dead hand.

The reason I have a mixed-breed is because I wanted to rescue him, I knew that there were (are) many more homeless animals that are mixed-breeds than otherwise. He is a wonderful companion - god forbid I use the dreaded word "pet" so villified by this lousy organization - and he happens to be extremely intelligent, loving, and excellent with both children and other dogs. But you know what? That's all sheer luck on my part. He's also had hip displaycia (sp?) since he was 2 years old, and it's a price I'm definitely willing to pay, but it proves that genetic disposition is as much a determining factor with mixed-breeds. I have a lot of respect for responsible breeders, and am friends with several.

That said, I abhor puppy mills, which are irresponsible and cruel, and since many of them are dominated by the Amish community, I do become irritated at the level of reverence and positive media coverage given to their community by the liberal, "open-minded" media.

I think if you want a purebred dog and you go to a reputable breeder, that's your business. I don't have a problem with it at all. What if you want a specific breed of dog that's bred with a predisposition to hunt, or to protect your livestock, or even one that's bred to be docile and good with children? Like I said, as long as you're going to a reputable breeder, I don't get the outrage. Of course, this is PETA, last bastion of stupidity we're talking about here.

That said, I prefer to rescue my pets from the animal shelter, but I'm looking for a companion animal and only care if it's cute and fuzzy and wants to hang out with me. :D

Peta's not that last bastion, unfortunately, Ann. I think it's dumb to pay all that money for a pet, but that's just me. If someone goes to a breeder that treats their animals well, what do I care what they do with their money?

DOn't you wish we could grant oblivion to all these wackos that think people need to stop breeding?

I hate PETA. I can't even think of the words to describe the dislike I feel for them.
Remember the ad they put out after that Greyhound Bus incident? http://patdollard.com/2008/08/louie-award-peta-uses-bus-cannibal-incident-in-ad-slamming-meat-eaters/
Disgusting.

What happened to the good swift punch in the nose for interfering in other people's business? My pets are my business, PETA be damned.

My neighbors have a stupid dog that they leave outside much of the time. It stays in their yard - I think they have one of those invisible fences, so except for the barking, no problem. (You'd think after four or five years it would figure out that my wife and I live here, but you'd be mistaken. It barks every time it sees us.) Well, we're not out in the front yard much.

PETA is a good example of a group with an extremist agenda sucking up all the publicity allotted to a given issue, while sensible groups on the same issue can't get enough publicity (pet overpopulation, spaying and neutering, etc.).

The other thing PETA does, to itself, is damage its credibility on any other issue it might champion, by being so over the top on its pronouncements. Some time in the future, I can envision PETA speaking out on a legitimate animal issue (see above for instance), and being largely tuned out by the general public because it's spent so long crying wolf on "animal rights".

To me, PeTA lost ANY credibility that they had when they allowed Pamela Anderson to become a spokesperson. I was sad to see Chrissy Hinde join their ranks, though. I thought she had more brains than that. o.O

People Eating Tasty Animals.
One of my favorite groups.

Hi Norman,

Border collies are special, at least in the UK. Why? Because they are still very much a working breed. They haven't yet been bread to have precisely the right color pattern, precisely the right ears, and similar nonsense. In fact, in the UK at least, it is still entirely possible to introduce non-border-collie blood into the breed, as long as the dog being bred in fits the profile of a border collie.

Compare this to the typical show-dog breeds, or even the "former" working breeds such as golden retrievers.

Also, dogs from the pound are often problems - not because of unknown parentage - but because of unknown training problems. They have often been abused and mistreated. This does indeed often lead to behavioral problems.

Cheers,

Brad

Right on, Jessica, cpabroker and Flynne.

My dad is an amateur gordon setter breeder. I do not support race breeding for pets, because of all the poor sweet bastards in the pound. How many real working dogs are being utilized these days, anyway? Bloodhounds, huskies/malemutes, and bird dogs are about it, and the bird dogs are used mostly for sport. My dad and others are now "hybridizing" their litters to increasingly combine affability with the dogs' original skills, because most people just want a pet with prestige.

I cannot tell you how much it torques me to see huskies in Paris. THAT is animal abuse; they were born to run, baby!

But if you want a pet, I am sure that you could find one at the pound. Even purebreds, although the papers will not be forthcoming, of course. If you are enough of an afficiando to pay top dollar for a purebred, you are obviously educated enough to spot one. But then you might have to put up with the unsocial behavior the dog learned in stir.

Zoos are like museums. An artificial place to harbor the most precious things. Sad but true. Anyway, I may be a conservative redneck, but think that Peter Singer was on to something.

When you get right down to it, the primary motivation behind PETA is a vicious misanthropy.

That crazy bitch Newkirk actually wrote a letter to Arafat once complaining about an incident where some PLO thugs loaded up a donkey with explosives to attack people at an open-air market. She demanded that the PLO quit killing animals. Not a peep about killing people, mind you.

To hell with Newkirk, PETA, and all of the bubble-head celebs who help them.

-jcr

While we're on the subject:

Please - if you have a domestic dog or cat, do NOT let it roam outdoors on its own. If you have neighbors who have domestic dogs or cats, ask them also to control their pets.

You might entertain some fantasy about their "quality of life". No ecology lab on the planet condones releasing a domestic dog or cat to roam without supervision. They drive native species extinct and carry disease back to you. For instance, the cute little kitties at UCF in Orlando are killing burrowing owls; cats kill for sport. There is a wild element of the Plague in rodent populations, notably in Colorado, waiting for your dog to say Hello.

Yes, your pal Buddy will run deer down with a pack. If Buddy gets far enough out of town, or his pack comes across a calving, a farmer will kill him and his pack buddies from the neighborhood. Not cheerfully, but with a "damned idiots let their dogs out" as the 12-gauge roars. Maybe Buddy will drag himself home and you can pretend somebody else was a savage, but that's not how stray dogs get shot. Dogs in control, who belong to somebody, don't get hurt. When your animal gets hurt, it's your fault. That's all there is to it.

You don't want to be desperately ill. You don't want your cat or dog sick or shot. Be informed, be responsible.

Second what Radwaste said about not allowing pets to roam. Back when I was in high school, a pack of neighborhood dogs (golden retrievers, mutts, a poodle) chased some horses through a field and over a chain link fence onto a six-lane highway. All of the horses had to be destroyed. Even though Fido wouldn't hurt a fly at home, when dogs travel in packs the wild instincts can take over.

Has PETA started protesting the removal of the Canada Geese from the flight path out of La Guardia airport?

Hint: We don't want 'em back!

I got my dog off the street. I was driving around a few years ago and saw him half a dozen times that night heading west down the road. He was just a couple of months old and had traveled about five miles down main street.

I had a job deliving pizza when I first got out of the army. Only place I could work that gave me enough time off to spend damn near every day down at the VA trying to sort out 'computer' malfunction that said I owed the army a years salary.

Anyway he stoped out side the dominoes, and just looked at me and the manager thru the door. I told him to wait there for a few hours and I'd take him home.

When I got off that night around midnight he was under my truck.
Smart dog

This is just one link, from the New York Times, regarding the Amish and puppy mills, and it's actually a relatively balanced glance. I'm trying not to completely cloud everything.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F0CEEDF123FF933A1575AC0A965958260

Also, regarding the man's response to the criticism in the above link, that they simply see dog the way we see most livestock - the problem with that is that there are distinct differences between species, in intelligence, personality, and otherwise. I have been around cows and chickens for long periods of time. They're herd animals and their success as a species is not dependent upon individuals - it's more like a beehive. Dogs, on the other hand, are more like us, even in the wild, where each pack member has a specific role to play.

But who am I to expect an Amish guy who eschews science to understand the differences from species to species?

And to reiterate my first post, and everyone else's: PETA sucks. They make vegetarians look bad. Actually, they make me want to eat meat. HUMAN meat.

Thank you, Amy, for giving my blog comment to the LA Times proper attribution. It seems to be going viral.

Unfortunately, many of those reposting it are attributing it to the vet I quoted, Dr. Libbye Miller. In some places they have even appended her name and location at the end of my words.

She is reportedly not amused, and who can blame her?

Thank you for accurately pasting my entire comment, without any folding, spindling, mutilating or adding of extraneous matter. (Thank you also, Amy, for your kind words about my words.)

Debz

PETA has done more harm than good to the animal welfare movement.

Every year in this country, 6 million healthy animals are euthanized because there are not enough homes for them. Until that number has dropped significantly, I will not support the active breeding of dogs and cats. That said, I do think the responsible breeders who truly care for the breed should be allowed to continue. However, I would guess that there are probably fewer than 100 in the country who would fit this category.

I understand people who want a specific kind of dog, but approximately one fourth of all the dogs in shelters are purebred. Save a life, rescue a dog or cat from your local shelter or rescue organization. Several rescues are foster networks, so they know how the animal responds to dogs, cats, children, whatever. Don't get one from a breeder unless you have a specific need for that specific kind of dog.

If you're in the northeast, and you're partial to Dobermans, check out Doberman Rescue Unlimited (www.dru.org).

Never forget, PETA wanted Michael Vick's dogs euthanized. That's ethical, all right.

While I wouldn't want to adopt one of these dogs, I admire those who did and those who cared enough to give them some comfort. Ingrid and her ilk sure weren't jumping to do that.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/magazine/12/22/vick.dogs/index.html

Word to Amy K. I also want to put in a good word for rescue groups. Breed can be important in selecting a dog if, say, you have kids, you need an animal that won't need to go outdoors much, you need a dog for hunting...etc. etc. Rescue groups let you get the type of breed that works for you without requiring you to go to a breeder and pay $$, and they test the animals to see how they fit with kids/dogs/cats/ferrets/whatever you have.

Plus, puppies are adorable, but they're BABIES. As in, they wake you up at all hours and have terrible bathroom habits. Give me an older dog any time. (YMMV.) There are, of course, also rescue groups for cats. Breed selection for pets isn't *quite* as important with cats, in the sense that if you pick the "wrong" breed your children aren't significantly more likely to be attacked/injured, but there are breed differences there, too.

Please - if you have a domestic dog or cat, do NOT let it roam outdoors on its own.

I second, third and fourth that. Oh, and if you no longer want your dog or cat, it is your moral responsibility to find the animal another home, or to have it put to sleep if it's too ill-tempered/sick/old to find another home. People who abandon dogs and cats in the wild are, IMHO, committing a thoroughly reprehensible act. These are animals that have been domesticated over countless generations by man. They do not fit into the food chain. They breed feral offspring that run wild and become a public problem. They cost my tax dollars and yours to deal with. Unless you have obtained an animal from a reputable breeder with a sterling history and intend to be a serious, reputable breeder yourself - either in a one-shot deal or indefinitely - get your dogs and cats spayed/neutered. No, it's not "better for them" to have a litter. No, you're not mutilating them. You're doing the responsible, adult thing to control the population of unwanted animals. Disagree with me? Fine. Go to your local shelter and ask how many animals they have to put to sleep every week. See the facilities in which they do so. You are only an escaped pet away from perpetuating that problem.

Sorry, I get all moralistic and judgey about this stuff. My felines are pound babies and most of the pets we had growing up were shelter creatures; it gets personal with me. I won't get started on puppy or kitten mills, because I'd be frothing at the mouth, but: Don't get a dog or a cat from a pet store, please (unless you're adopting one of those rescue group animals on rotating display at PetSmart).

On a lighter note, I am still convinced that PETA is secretly funded and run by representatives of the beef, chicken and pork industries. They just do too good a job of making animal rights and vegetarianism look beyond the pale.

According to this, PETA kills more than 90% of the animals it takes in as "rescues" for "adoption".

Link

Oo, since we're talking about not letting animals roam, can I toss in a plea to NOT own pitbulls? I live in the shitty part of town where they are status symbols. While I'll make no judgement on an individual of the breed, as a whole they were bred for aggression, much like sheepdogs are bred for energy and agility. So yes, they are more likely to attack. And more importantly, when they DO attack, they are physically so much stronger than other dogs in the jaw area, that they can cause an amazing amount more damage than your typical pissed-off dog. It's like owning a crocodile. So yeah, yours "might" be all sweet and cuddly, but why risk it? Should someone die just because you had to prove that paerticular dog was ok? Get a different dog! My kids and I are housebound because of the roaming, maurading pits that the county will do nothing about, us being poor and all. And having had one break down my 6 foot privacy fence to get to my cat, I give no credit to the fools who talk about "keeping it responsibly kept up". Bullshit. There is no need to own a dog that has to be kept bolted indoors. At least, no legal reason.

Acctually pit bulls are reported to have a stronger bite than a croc

Do not forget that you have a right to self-defense, even with deadly force, against a dog.

Do not make the same mistake you might make about criminals, by thinking that anyone else has the job or the capability of protecting you.

Bears aren't "cuddly". Tigers aren't "cute". Life is not all puppies and kittens, and I suggest that if you can't cheerfully, or at least practically and pragmatically, kill something which is a mortal threat to you and yours, you're not at the top of the food chain like you might pretend.

"My kids and I are housebound because of the roaming, marauding pits that the county will do nothing about, us being poor and all."

And since there are no Samaritans around there, you're on your own. Sorry about that.

But I bet Amy wouldn't be quiet about that. Are you continuing to pester your public officials? Don't forget the county commission, the sheriff, any city police chief, the manager of any housing entities nearby, etc.

Mom3
Yeah pit bulls can be sweet, some of my kids have moved down the street and now have a pit. One of the nicest dogs I ever met.
However: it is scared by small children. Don't know why; guess its cause there were none about when it grew up. Maybe just cause it is a timid dog, it will not fetch a frisbee cause it is also scared of frisbees.
All communities should have leash laws. No dogs should be allowed to roam unsupervised cause sooner or later a pack will form and people (and pets, livestock and whatever) will be attacked.

MomOf3 -

Breed-specific legislation is pushed by small-minded snots like you.

There are municipalities that have outlawed ownership of Dobermans, Rottweilers, and Pit Bulls (which isn't really a breed, but a classification) on the basis that they are "dangerous" dogs.

The REAL reason for the ban, of course, is because black people like them.

Any dog can be trained to be vicious. No dog is inherently violent toward humans. NONE. Dogs have to be MADE mean.

A properly socialized dog will not attack humans or other dogs without provocation. Cats are another story, and squirrels are just furry chew toys that run away.

The only time I've seen a dog attack a child unprovoked is when the dog did not understand the child's place in the pack. If the dog came first, then there's going to have to be a period of time where the dog gets acclimated to the baby. After which, there will be no better protector of said baby.

Oh, and I'm relatively sure that if an unleashed dog invades your property you are within your rights to shoot it.

Most dogs can be sweet, loving pets, IF properly trained and socialized. I volunteered for years as an adoption counselor for a large animal shelter here in the DC area, and we lived by the old adage - "there are no bad dogs, only bad owners." Rarely did we receive a report about an ill-behaving dog (running loose, barking incessantly, biting) that wasn't directly related to owner negligence, apathy or willful shit-headedness.

But I do want to dispel the "Myth of the Pit Bull." A well-trained, properly socialized pit bull is no more likely to attack you than most other dogs. Responsibly-bred pit bulls are sweet, even somewhat timid, extremely loyal, and affectionate. They are not inherently dangerous. In fact, a breed with one of the worst reputations for surliness and biting problems is...the sweet-faced Cocker Spaniel. But, pit bulls need a lot of training to make them good pets (as is true of many breeds). They are not the best choice for a family that has small children (but neither are Jack Russells or Corgis), and they shouldn't share a house with other non-canine pets.

As momof3 noted, the problem is that there are a lot of morons out there who get pit bulls as a status symbol. They train the dogs to be mean, or they don't train the dogs at all, leaving them unsocialized and very prone to fear-agression (due to that tendency towards shyness). And as for jaws, the Rottweiler by far has the strongest jaws and most lethal bite of any canine, and German Shepherds are the equal of pit bulls when it comes to biting power.

Brian, I don't know where you live, but in most urban areas, you do not have the "right" to shoot an animal simply because it has entered your property off-lead. You'll face misdemeanor charges for discharging your firearm in a populated area and possibly charges for reckless endangerment of your neighbors. You may also end up having to reimburse the owner for the cost of the dog (in small claims court). However, if someone were to shoot a dog running loose which was behaving aggressively, they'd probably get off with a warning.

Oh radwaste, don't ever think I'd have a problem shooting something that was attacking me. Human or otherwise. I'm texan, and form a law enforcement/military family. I can shoot better than most marines. And ahve been informed by my local law enforcement that you can only shoot a dog acting aggressive-in other words, attacking, even on your property.

Pestering officials is fun, and I do it when I have time (I have a list of every animal control and sheriff's deputy I've talked to, to hand over to the family that needs that info for a lawsuit when someone gets killed). But shooting and pestering are one thing, and taking your kids out when you know there's probably a pit lose somewhere is another. That would be irresponsible of me.

Brian, in a little town not far from me a 70-something year old woman was mauled to death in her own front yard by pits who had torn their own fence down. She hadn't done a damn thing to provoke them, didn't even see them till they were on her. I'd google more examples if you need them. Pits ARE bred to be aggressive. Period. And why would you think the asshats (yes, mostly blacks) who own them even try to "properly socialize" them, given most of them can't even properly socialize their own kids?

Again, it's like saying a croc could be a great pet for the right person. Maybe, but do you have to be that person? Does the rest of society have to suffer if you've misjudged that dog?

Ok, some links to dispel the black/white myth, the aggression myth, and the owner's fault myth:

http://www.dogsbite.org/dangerous-dogs-pitbull-myths.htm

http://www.edba.org.au/courier.html

For reasons that I will not go into here (but that were, trust me, tragic), I had the occasion, back in my youth, to observe pit bull owners defending their "right" to own their pets without any restriction on movement, breeding, etc., at regular intervals over the period of several months. All of them were white rednecks. All of them. That's who I think of when I think of pit bulls, and my opinion of them isn't that much less negative than momof3's.

That having been said, you know those cute Dalmatians who look just like the adorable dogs in the Disney movies? Terrible family pets. TERRIBLE. Not in the sense that they'll attack the family that owns them, but in the sense that they tend to be hyper-protective to the point of attacking innnocent others. They're great firehouse dogs, but family dogs in suburban neighborhoods, not so much. But people keep getting them for their families. Why? Because of those damn movies. (Which I like too - at least the first one.) I'm not a Disney opponent, but I do wish our cultural attitudes toward certain animals (Dalmatians, deer, Siamese) weren't shaped by their movies.

I have to confess - I'm not crazy about dog shows either. Not because of the people involved - they're cool. (Neurotic? We're all neurotic. The people who cheerfully wear it on their sleeves are, in my opinion, preferable to those insisting that they're "normal.") But I think they do perpetuate an approach of selection of pets based on outer appearance rather than breed characteristics. Dalmatians are one example. Cocker spaniels are another. If you live in a small apartment in the city, you may be better off with a greyhound than with a much smaller dog. Etc. People see a cute dog, get one from a (relatively) cheap breeder or pet store, and then dump it at the pound (or on the streets, grrrr) when the "cute" pet starts behaving to form. A dog that needs to run all the time will not be happy in your tiny urban apartment, and he will let you know. That doesn't make him a "bad dog" - that makes you a bad owner.

Now, this practice has benefited me and mine - between my parents and me, we've adopted numerous purebred cats and a few purebred dogs from shelters because someone with more money than sense bought a breed without taking into accounts its characteristics. But it's terrible for the animals, poor babies.

Thanks, Marion. I agree with everything you said, too. Spay/neuter is so important. It is literally the fix for just about everything that is wrong in the animal world. It will end overpopulation which will eliminate the strays that plague momof3's neighborhood. It will also nearly eliminate dogfighting which is associated with gang activity, drugs, domestic violence, and other crimes against people.

Also, of all the dog breeds that I have dealt with, cocker spaniels are by far the worst in my opinion. I have worked with the dogs at the local humane society for several years, and the only 2 dogs that have bitten me were cockers. They are mean little buggers.

Cockers are mean. But you never hear of someone mauled to death by them, do you? See the difference in the capabilities of the breeds?

The dogs plaguing me aren't strays. They're owned by asshats. And of course aren't fixed.

Pits (or the several breeds included therein) were bred for bearbaiting. If that doesn't take aggression, and a strong bite, I don't know what would. You can say you trust a dog to only be aggressive against other animals (like that's so great) but come on, it's a dog. Sharks mistake people for seals with some regularity, it's reasonable to assume a dog might not differentiate between us and animals as well. And whether or not it's loyal to it's owner doens't matter. If your dog can break down a fence, it can yank itself off your leash when walking. And since my DH just saw a retriever mauled by our neighbors' pit, WHILE THE OWNER WAS there screaming and trying very unsuccessfully to get her dog off, I have NO belief that an owner can control a dog in a fight.

The police response was "is he attacking a human right now?". News stations only interested if we have video.

True, Pits were once bred for aggresion, DOG aggression. Back in the bad old days of dog fighting an owner had to be able to pick their dog up out of a fight without being bitten (getting bit meant that you automatically lost the match). Pits were bred to be very people friendly. They have to be taught to be people-aggressive.

It's your neighbor's fault the dogs are horrible. Punish the irresponsible people who are not training their dogs properly. Don't ban the breed.

No, Elle, you can not specify aggression. Breeding for aggression is breeding for aggression. And I'd LOVE to see someone go into a ring with some fighting pits and pull them apart. Really would love it. Got video? Pits were bred LONG before dog-fighting. That they dogfight well is a recent phenomenon that has little to do with the breed.

See again: bearbaiting, when no dog owner was caring to get into the ring and pull them apart, or get affection from them.

Please, someone, think about the poor misunderstood dooooogggiiieeesssss!!!!