Bad Habits

[Officially Retired]

Jack since this thread isn't about animal emotions per say, we will have to debate this on another thread.

Okay

But as far as a dog being driven because they destroy their hardware in pursuit of "freeing" themselves from a chain as you say is, well, kind of silly in my opinion.

Why is it silly? I have seen dogs lift their chain up off a nail that it was hooked on.

Is it silly to say the dog freed itself there too, or is it sillier to deny the obvious?

And I can't be convinced that an animal who relentlessly chews on hard metal chain links breaking all of their teeth which they need for survival is smart. That is the complete opposite as I see it. (I know dogs can survive without teeth) But in the wild, how many predators are toothless and thriving

Again, you blur so many things in your own thinking, it's hard to carry on a discussion.

I don't think dogs think that far into the future. I think dogs have basic, simple thoughts ... not complex ones.

Dogs have a basic want to be free ... or ... they have a basic want to be with their owner.

But I don't think dogs ever consider the long-term ramifications of repeated hole-digging, or root-tugging, on their teeth

I do have very spirited dogs who are very animated and demand my attention though, but without the self destructive behavior.

Most of mine are like that too.

I just see no point in keeping these self destructive dogs around, it's a waste of money and sanity for me personally. But take no issue with those who enjoy those types of dogs, different strokes for different folks.
S_B

Hold on, I never said I "enjoyed" that type of dog ... far from it.

I too prefer tractable, low-maintenance dogs.
Silverback, for example, was a great keeper: never chewed a damned thing.
Never shit or pissed in the house. Never ate out of the trash can. Never chewed up shoes or anything else.

BY FAR, I wish all of my dogs were like Silverback (in a lot of other ways besides being a great companion and house dog ) ... but what I am saying is I would not **kill** a dog who's destructive without first giving him a fair shake as an adult. Frosty said he did that, gave them a fair shake, which is the way it should be.

I don't know how this basic, simple premise got confounded into "I prefer hard-keepers," but that is far from what I said. One guy said he'd get rid of dogs with no teeth ... and I pointed out some incredibly bad-ass dogs with no teeth ... to AGAIN stress the point of NOT making decisions based on "teeth" ... or how hard they are to keep ... but on the merit of the dog.

This topic is about hard keepers.
My point is that hard keepers are sometimes GREAT dogs.
Everyone wants to come on here and say, "All their hard keepers weren't shit," well okay then, maybe so.
Or maybe they never really gave those dogs a truly fair shake ...

Regardless, bottom line is I've named some pretty badass dogs that WERE hard keepers and WERE freaking awesome dogs. Maybe my Icon dog was never matched, but Zukill and Robert T Jr. certainly were ... and the owner of Robert T Jr. called my Icon dog "Baby Robert T," so I assure you he was a helluva dog. Not sure how many of you have had 6xWinners that killed everything in under an hour, or 4xWs who beat four 4xWs (like Zuk and T Jr.), so these dogs were surely worth keeping in spite of not having teeth. That was my point.

IMO anyone who culls for anything other than performance is making questionable decisions.
At that point "an enjoyable yard" becomes a priority over unbiased analysis of the animals on that yard, which then opens-up a Pandora's Box of "what are we breeding for, then?"

Of course, as you pointed out, that is any man's prerogative on his own yard.
I have gladly sold some pretty annoying dogs myself. Sold, not killed.

MY point is, I would never shoot and kill a dog over its being annoying.
I would allow him to mature and give him a fair shake as an adult, before I ever made such a decision.

That is a far cry from saying I "prefer" annoying-ass dogs ... what I said was that some of my very best dogs were pretty fucking annoying

Jack

[FrostyPaws]

I will say that none of ours were ever intolerable in the house. There was the usual barking and hell-raising when they saw one of the house dogs, but short of that, nothing. If we crated the house dogs away from the visitors, the visitors would run the house with no issues and would act like they'd been inside forever.

When the chain dogs would come in at various times, they were always content just to be inside, even if in a crate. Not one of them ever chewed out of a crate to be free if we were gone.

[Nut]

Sure they want attention. I have one who always pies in his doghouse when i put straw in. So i put a blanket in there and now he pies outside. But, when i take one of the other dogs for a walk he would drag his blanket out of the doghouse. He won't for another reason, lol. 100% a form of protest.

[Officially Retired]

My little Amazon bitch is extremely loyal, and is a massive protester--vocally--fortunately without being physically destructive.

If I so much as touch my keys, Amazon runs to the door "looking at me" to see when WE are going for a ride

If I leave without her, she will bark continuously ... from the moment I close the door behind me ... to the moment I return (neighbors say that can be in excess of 3-4 hours ).

If I do take Amazon with me, she will be forever fighting me to "sit on my lap" ... and she is gamer about saying, "Yes," to that idea than I am to saying, "No."

And THE MOMENT my tires hit the entrance way of a store, and I slow down, she will start to go apeshit and will begin her yodel (wa-wa-wa-wa!), as if she sees a dog on the other side, and will really go apeshit once I pull to a stop.
It is almost a life-and-death fight for me to be able to get out of the car and NOT have her dive out of the car with me ...
And she screams so loud, once I'm out, that everyone within 200 feet looks our way, and all I can do is laugh and shake my head and say, "She wants to be with her daddy," to which most folks laugh back.

Now "The Diamond Girl Triplets" (Little D, Dirty Diamond, and Diamond Girl) would also experience a deep desire to be with me ... and, rather than just "yodel" when I left, they would ALL pretty much wreck stuff in the house, and couldn't really be kept inside. Of the 3 of them, Dirty Diamond was the most tolerable, but all of them would chew, dig, ruin dog houses ... eat, chew, or obsessively lick the inside of a crate ... yet all of them were quiet as church mice inside if I was home ... but they didn't handle "when I left" very well

Amazon is a pain in the ass, noise-wise, but she doesn't destroy anything.

Jack

[wrknapbt]

I can deal with a lot from a hound but I do not like a house killer or a chain fighter. I had this one dog who was very very well bred. He would kill a dog house with no problem. So to stop him I got some stuff from the feed store made for horses to spray on his house and I would spray it once a week. But this same dog would bark all the time, fight his chain and if he had a bone or food in his crate you could forget getting him out until he was ready or he would try and eat your arse up. I can't have that with my kids around so I had to see if he was worth the trouble. He turned out to be a screaming CUR.

[S_B]

Ok Jack, now we agree on this, but my decision to not perpetuate a yard full of hole digging, house chewing chain fighters still stands.

I just simply stead clear of lines with those traits, no matter how great they may be. And I never said one wouldn't be allowed to mature before culling. And also as you stated, culling can also mean removing from your yard by selling that problem child to someone else, who doesn't mind keeping a dog like that.

Just like I stay away from lines of turning dogs, cold dogs and those killer "hard mouthed" dogs.


S_B

[Officially Retired]

Ok Jack, now we agree on this, but my decision to not perpetuate a yard full of hole digging, house chewing chain fighters still stands.

Okay, your yard, your decisions have to stand

I just simply stead clear of lines with those traits, no matter how great they may be.

Mmm, that's what I have a problem with. Of course, again, your yard; your rules.
But when you steer away from a great dog, and aim your breedings toward "easy-keepers," you are no longer breeding based on performance but on some other criteria

That reminds me or Robert T Jr's owner ... he never bred to Robert T because he had "mangy feet" and didn't want pups with "mangy feet" ...
Yet in the same breath he said he would sell all 5 of his properties to get Robert T Jr (and another dog named Leroy) back ... because he could win all of that back, and more, with those two animals.

So I asked him why he didn't breed to Robert T and the above was the answer
It made no sense to me!
Here this old man would gladly sell 5 properties to get THE DOG Robert T Jr. back (mangy feet and all) ... and yet he didn't possess the sense to LINEBREED on Robert T to capture and harness his exceptional head-fighting genetics ... which it was clear he had, not just based on his own awesome record, but his sire (the Original Robert T) was the greatest head dog of all time!

Honestly, makes no freakin sense to me. Dude wanted "that ability" ... and yet he did not *hang onto* that ability by BREEDING FOR IT.
Okay, mangy feet is not something anyone wants, but I would gladly overlook mangy feet (or upgrade my feeding practices to prevent it) to HANG ONTO extra-ordinary pit ability.
This guy's belief system was WHY he always had to BUY his best dogs, and never was able to BREED them himself: he was not selecting for greatness, but for something that had nothing to do with greatness.

And I am making the exact same statement here: if you breed *away* from a truly superior animal ... over "yard habits" ... then you're no longer breeding for performance IMO.
Sure, get rid of an average palooka, if he digs or chain-fights, but if the dog is a great dog, only a person doomed to mediocrity will get rid of an ace over his yard habits.

And I never said one wouldn't be allowed to mature before culling. And also as you stated, culling can also mean removing from your yard by selling that problem child to someone else, who doesn't mind keeping a dog like that.

Agreed.

Just like I stay away from lines of turning dogs, cold dogs and those killer "hard mouthed" dogs.
S_B

Staying away from turning or cold dogs is not the same thing. Not by a longshot. Turning is very often the sign of shit in the tank, and cold is useless.
I would possibly try breeding to a cold dog (if it was truly cold and not a rank cur, and by truly cold I mean a dog that wags its tail to a killing, not one who's screaming and afraid of it), but I can't stand the sight of a turn and would never breed to a turning dog either. No way.

Hard mouth is a good trait, and as long as everything else was there, is an asset IMO.

In short, I try to breed for WINNING TRAITS not "chain habits" or anything else that has nothing to do with winning.

Jack

[CrazyRed]

That reminds me or Robert T Jr's owner ... he never bred to Robert T because he had "mangy feet" and didn't want pups with "mangy feet" ...
Yet in the same breath he said he would sell all 5 of his properties to get Robert T Jr (and another dog named Leroy) back ... because he could win all of that back, and more, with those two animals.

So I asked him why he didn't breed to Robert T and the above was the answer
It made no sense to me!
Here this old man would gladly sell 5 properties to get THE DOG Robert T Jr. back (mangy feet and all) ... and yet he didn't possess the sense to LINEBREED on Robert T to capture and harness his exceptional head-fighting genetics ... which it was clear he had, not just based on his own awesome record, but his sire (the Original Robert T) was the greatest head dog of all time!

Honestly, makes no freakin sense to me. Dude wanted "that ability" ... and yet he did not *hang onto* that ability by BREEDING FOR IT.
Okay, mangy feet is not something anyone wants, but I would gladly overlook mangy feet (or upgrade my feeding practices to prevent it) to HANG ONTO extra-ordinary pit ability.
This guy's belief system was WHY he always had to BUY his best dogs, and never was able to BREED them himself: he was not selecting for greatness, but for something that had nothing to do with greatness.


Jack

I know the gentleman was a private individual and kept what he bred and used what he bred, and for the life of me I never knew or understood why Robert T didn't have at least 100 offspring, hell I wonder still, why wasn't Tornado, her mother her offspring and more not bred to Robert T or T Jr... Man what a helluva accomplishment that father & son combo had...

[Officially Retired]

I know the gentleman was a private individual and kept what he bred and used what he bred, and for the life of me I never knew or understood why Robert T didn't have at least 100 offspring, hell I wonder still, why wasn't Tornado, her mother her offspring and more not bred to Robert T or T Jr... Man what a helluva accomplishment that father & son combo had...

Yeah, neither of them was really a breeder, especially The Old Man.

I believe K.A. actually did breed both Tornado and the original Robert T. Maybe even T. Jr. too.
I know Allen bought the Carver's Bob Tail dog who sired him.

Oh, and I wouldn't call The Old Man a gentleman

But, yeah, at one time The Old Man had the original Robert T, Tornado, and Robert T Jr. on his yard ... musta been a good feeling to look out there and see that ... 23 wins (and no telling how much $$ won) between 3 dogs

Jack

.

[Pit Bull Committed]

I too would stay clear of dogs with bad habits. Even though there are many great dogs with bad habits there are also many great dogs without the bad habits. I see no correlation between bad habits and great performance or intelligence.

I see no intelligence in a dog solely basing on s/he fighting his/her chain 24/7 for life. An intelligent dog would probably fight his/her chain for the first few hours when first put on a chain but would quickly realize that they can't escape and calm down.

I see no intelligence in a dog solely basing on them pissing in their own water or eating their own poop. An intelligent dog imo would not drink their own piss and avoid stepping on their own shit.