Bad Habits

[S_B]

Are you saying you can't tell when a dog is happy? Sad? Pissed off? Guilty? Nervous? Etc.?
Got news for ya: those are emotions

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

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.

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


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

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

[almonddust]

You kids should play nice or somebody is gonna start crying.

[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