“Re-homed” Dogs=+Biting?

In California, rescue groups are allowed to adopt out dogs that have
(1)  Failed Temperament Testing
(2)  Bitten People Numerous Times
(3)  Engaged in behavior that may be dangerous to people
Why?  Because California law allows rescues to take dogs which have a “reasonable” chance at rehabilitation. Dogs that do not display any signs of dangerous behavior are allowed to be adopted out.   The subjective nature of what is “reasonable” is apparently decided by the shelter. But do these rescues taking such dogs,  have the funding to hire appropriate certified animal behaviorists or other qualified professionals?  Is anything done which would track these dogs to ensure they are ACTUALLY rehabilitated?  The PLAIN answer in one word:  NO.
In California, and in other states,  we end up with tons of re-homed dogs which basically end up not being quite as good as they could be? We know of rescues that would adopt out dogs 4-5 times over and over, mostly because the dog had horrible behavior flaws or engaged in biting. And many rescue contracts MANDATE that you give the rescue back the dog. Before you turn it in and have it killed anyway.
  Instead of choosing the best dogs with good temperaments, we have extremist rescuers and shelter people who actually CHOOSE  (for adopting out ) the worst dogs on PURPOSE.  I don’t care if they feel “sorry” for such dogs, that is not a good reason to allow either marginal, biters, or actual aggressive dogs out.
Even the dogbiteattorney in CA, who has a lot of information, but doesn’t like certain dog breeds says that several groups or shelters and their rescues in the United States were adopting out dogs with known backgrounds amounting to vicious.
In shelters 20 years ago,  it was common to uniformly eliminate most dogs rather than adopting them out. However it has now come 360 degrees around, to where just the opposite is happening and we see dogs failing temperament testing going out, inordinate amounts of time and money spent on dogs that have bitten numerous times, and tons of volunteer hours spent on dogs that don’t warrant any time.  Nathan Winograd admits that some temperament testing will NOT uncover certain flaws in canines, and that other methods might be able to test but such methods are not always used.
The bottom line is that sheltering over the years has changed. In California, certainly considered a progressive state, the animal rights extremists have gained control of certain shelters, and in those areas, breeding of dogs is not only frowned upon, it’s considered blasphemy.  When MSN is promoted for an ENTIRE STATE—you know the ARs have gained control somewhere in order to FINANCE the movement.  And that movement is to eliminate pet ownership step by step right under our noses.
Example:  Biting dogs were eliminated and not rehomed
Now:  Let rescues take biting dogs, and not even follow up on proven “rehabilitation
Example:  Used to actually promote well tempered dogs from shelters
Now:  Allow rescues and re-homers to promote biters, dogs returned 4 times for cause, dogs that failed temperament testing, and no mandated disclosure that dog failed temperament testing is required!!!!!!
Example:  Fatal attacks for canines overall had maintained a low average per year
Now:       Fatal attacks have increased substantially where 50%+ of those attacks involved:
               (1) Re-homed dogs   (2) shelter  dogs     (3) Rescued dogs

Yet, RATHER than the public being made aware that re-homed, rescued, or shelter dogs were involved in 50%+ of these fatalities, (which is astronomically HIGH considering this group of canines only make up 15-18% of 70 million dogs in US)— people are encouraged to look at TETHERED dogs as a “CAUSE” for dog bites?

DO WE ALL NEED TO BE ROCKET SCIENTISTS TO FIGURE OUT WHAT IS GOING ON?
WHY DO WE IGNORE THE OBVIOUS AND PLAIN CIRCUMSTANCES?
The animal extremists have slowly but surely over the past 20 years–manipulated the laws, the shelters, and the PUBLIC…………with these insane statements, which are pushed by HSUS and Peta and plenty of other animal rights extremists:
(1)  Don’t BUY a dog
(2)  You MUST ADOPT
(3)  All pet stores are EVIL
(4)  All breeders are EVIL, grubsucking, greedy bastards
(5)  AKC is nothing but the PLAGUE OF PUREBREDS (that’s an ISAR saying)
(6)  Buying a dog causes a shelter animal to DIE
(7)  We would rather see all the shelter animals die (MSN) than let people have a choice in what animal is right for them as people are stupid and think animals are PROPERTY 
Their summary:   If we can’t win by misrepresentation, they we will use any other devious means possible, including but not limited to fraudulent advertising, misleading shelter directors, adopting out biting dogs so people will end up hating shelter animals and not adopt them, pretending that dog breeders are the scourge of the earth and that it’s all their fault with all those “puppymilled” dogs, while we go out and BUY “puppymilled” dogs from the millers and then claim we “rescued” them from the bastards and buy 300 of them a month and rake in over $525,000 per year doing it, advertise ourselves as the largest breed specific rescue in the United States and ALSO con about 800 volunteers into donating monthly, and fleecing the stupid public in general–to where they don’t even KNOW we are doing it to them and we are all laughing behind their backs while becoming famous, advancing the AR movement, and making $$ at the same time!!!!!
There is more than one way to skin a cat! Because the AR groups thrive on misrepresentation and underhanded trickery, they have thought of negative ways to bring about shelter change by REVERSING  what is normally done.
 When the bad results become evident (as they have now)–they try to use “MSN” as the step to say the “shelters” aren’t working right! *(Of course they don’t work right when you do everything you can to purposely pick things that don’t work!!) 
 Then, when someone like us, talks about their little game in releasing quasi-dangerous dogs, and with the bite incidents going upward— according to the statistics nationwide, who would think to suspect “re-homed” dogs?  We would!!
 (I am one of the very few non AR attorneys who has engaged in animal rescue, worked with rescuers, attended countless events, read just about everything they ever preach, researched most of what they like to claim, and have even attended dog shows, rescue events, fund raisers, workshops, etc. I think rescued animals are a good idea IF one doesn’t try and save the worst case animals AND you place them correctly.)
THEN the ARs will say SEE—you people are NOT treating dogs correctly, and you are negligent, and you are causing dogs to bite, blah blah blah.  Just watch Animal Planet to see all the BAD owners in action!!!   HEY!!!  I have news for everyone.
Bad owners used to proliferate even worse than they do now!  There have been bad owners for centuries. .
However, according to HSUS–nearly all owners must be bad, so HSUS says they NEED to make new LAWS against people OWNING animals!!!  Come on—you don’t really think PETA and HSUS will all that $$$ and trying like the dickens to keep making more of that $$$ want shelters to succeed and adopt out all the animals do you?????  Be serious!!!
 The shelters are nothing but a pawn to AR people!!!  Shelters are what keeps that money rolling in!! Shelters, bad people, and “puppymilled” dogs!!!! Nothing but PAWNS for AR agendas.
They love to blame breeders, so that can get the shelters off the hook, then they infiltrate the shelters and pretend they know what they are doing.  Then they end up adopting out bad dogs and killing all the cats.  Then it’s time to introduce the NEW LAW TO PUNISH ALL THOSE BREEDERS!!!   
I am afraid this is so obvious that maybe it has been overlooked???????? 

DOGS IN UNITED

STATES

 72,000,000

             82% are NOT “re-homed, shelter, rescued

18% are “re-homed”, shelter and rescued dogs

(Even HSUS says so)

Ask yourself WHY 50%+ of fatal attacks involve the

 18% category = “re-homed” dogs?

Why are dog bites supposedly increasing so much?
Why are the majority of ARs against NO KILL?
//  Below the line (re fatal attacks) is written by Fatal Dog Attacks author

// ———————————————-//

According to the author of the fatal attacks book,
For nearly two decades the NCRC has investigated and analyzed fatal dog attack injuries. The NCRC has previously stated that it is impossible to determine the breed of dog by reviewing an autopsy report or photo, as no breed of dog has a particular method of attack or inflicts an exclusive type of injury.Virtually all of the claims about the unique ‘damage’ that pit bulls allegedly inflict are made by individuals or special interest groups with no knowledge or experience in analyzing fatal dog bite injuries. For this reason, the NCRC feels compelled to address these tactics and claims.
 
  
Below is a list of 15 different victims of a dog attack along with the description of the fatal wounds as listed on the autopsy report. Each victim was attacked and killed by a single dog.  Each victim was killed by a different breed of dog (for a total of 15 different breeds*).  Only one victim was killed by a Pit bull (or any type of bully breed).
  • Victim 1: Multiple penetrating wounds to the abdomen
  • Victim 2: Collapsed lungs, multiple wounds to the chest, partial devourment
  • Victim 3: Massive head and neck injuries
  • Victim 4: Multiple bite wounds, dismemberment
  • Victim 5: Extensive scalp and neck injuries
  • Victim 6: Multiple lacerations of scalp and neck, depressed skull fracture
  • Victim 7: Exsanguination from multiple bite wounds
  • Victim 8: Skull fracture and severe bites to upper back and face
  • Victim 9: Multiple penetrating wounds to back and chest
  • Victim 10: Severe bite wounds to the head
  • Victim 11: Severe bites, massive bleeding, broken facial & neck bones
  • Victim 12: Massive head injuries
  • Victim 13: Severe, multiple penetrating injuries to head and neck
  • Victim 14: Massive bite injuries to lower extremities, dismemberment
  • Victim 15: Severe scalp, facial wounds, laceration of jugular
Fifteen different breeds inflicted the fatal wounds listed above. The breeds were:
  • Siberian husky
  • Coonhound
  • Dachshund
  • Chow chow
  • Pit bull
  • Sheepdog-type dog
  • Malamute
  • Labrador Retriever
  • Chesapeake Bay Retriever
  • St. Bernard
  • German Shepherd dog
  • Wolfdog
  • Golden Retriever
  • Mixed breed (no discernable breed visible)
  • Rottweiler
It is virtually impossible for anyone to match the breed of dog with the fatal injuries listed above – as such – claims that one breed of dog inflicts injuries unlike other breeds have no merit.  
(Fatal wounds / breed matches can be obtained upon request).
* Breeds were chosen for this sample only if the breed has been involved in more than one human fatality (i.e., Airedale Terrier, Pomeranian, Jack Russell Terrier, et.al,  were not used as only one human fatality has been attributed to each of these breeds in the United States).

* In the decade between 1966-1975, less than 2% of all dogs involved in fatal attacks in the United States were of the breeds which today are targeted so frequently as the solution to canine aggression, (Pit Bull or Rottweiler).
Advertisements

12 thoughts on ““Re-homed” Dogs=+Biting?

  1. Well- Dogs need to be crated when transported. I went to adopt a dog from a home-not a rescue group. The dog was a 6month old border Collie lab mix. It seemed nice enough. It got into the front-we passed cows and it got scared, jumped into my lap and bit my arms 17 times. I managed to pull over with the dog still biting me. I learned a lesson. No more uncrated dogs in my car.

  2. Wow. Not sure if getting scared is enough reason to bite 17 times. Did you keep the dog and fix it so it would never be scared, or is that why they got it another home?

  3. The police took the dog. It tried to attack the officer as well. I am not sure what happened-between me being a new person, the riding in the car, the cow smell- it went into a aggressive attack and then curled up in my lap-all while I was trying to pull over. Very Scary for me and the dog. They assesed it as a scared aggressive response?
    I am just trying to warn people to crate animals when doing animal rescues or transporting new pals. Luckliy I remained composed -until after I got out of the car. This was about 3 years ago.

  4. Yes the crating is a good idea. We do it. But when it would eventually get out of the crate, it would still have an issue most likely. But thanks for the advice, you are right.

  5. Why is this blog called petdefense? It’s apparent that your intent is not to defend pets, but rather to defend breeding. Wouldn’t it be less disingenuous and more accurate to call it breederdefense?

  6. You apparently don’t understand that there is even a need to defend pets or owners? “Defend” breeding is your choice of words. What exactly do YOU defend? What exactly does HSUS defend? It’s not pets, that’s for sure. HSUS Peta and the bunch defend ONLY their OWN lifestyle beliefs re animals and how one should interact with them, if at all. Thus a pet is not even RECOGNIZED, because they believe pets are NOT property. We suggest you look elsewhere for your free time and leave us alone. The truth is never embraced by people like you, HSUS and the rest.

  7. I’m interested in knowing more about your stance on shelters. I too have concluded they generally are inefficient and in my own experience are not interested in having qualified behavior experts. I believe you alluded to this problem. I’ve wondered if it was a matter of not wanting to pay someone who actually has that background, it may cut into what the directors pay themselves and/or other necessary staff.

    I recently recieved a newsletter from HSUS. They recently formed an “accredited institution of higher learning.” They are actually going to offer a B.S. in Animal Studies. I have some interest in the program and meet the initial requirements. I’m familiar with one of the professors Marc Bekoff.
    The newsletter said this about shelter directors “In the animal shelter community, a great percentage of executive directors
    are career changers. And the executive directors at the local animal
    shelter level, a great majority of them do not have a college degree or
    only have an associate degree.”
    This of course was surprising to read, but not really surprising if this explains why so many shelters/rescues are actually very ineffective and in my opinion do nothing to prevent the problem rather they seem to simply support it!

  8. How scary. H$U$ is a very non credible group aiming to snare the unwise by both sugar coating everything, and using subterfuge to gain $$$$. Unless the entire program is FREE (which we doubt) we wouldn’t touch it with a 10,000 ft pole. Training someone is one thing, but lying is another. Pacelle is one of the biggest obvious liars out there. Hiring Michael Vick and JP Goodwin shows extremely poor credibility. If you hired former felons, who would believe you. This is just all about the jack. ($$$$$)

  9. One thing that people don’t seem to pick up on about the attitude that the only ‘responsible’ way to acquire a pet is to get it from a shelter is that now that that has been accepted as a kind of universal truth, responsible, conscientious, knowledgeable hobby breeders now have no market for their well bred puppies and kittens. Every time someone accepts this premise and ‘rescues’ an animal from a shelter (all of which seem to be characterized as abuse victims), the puppy mills and irresponsible breeders are supported.

    As to the H$U$ setting up an accredited institute of higher learning – it was only a matter of time, but it will be staffed by those whose expertise is in manipulating people, not by people who are experts in animal husbandry. They have been ‘educating’ people about handling animals for years now, and the result is more animals which are neurotic, spoiled, illmannered and in some cases downright dangerous every year.

    Animal rights activists know nothing much about animals, and don’t want to learn. What they know about is manipulating people, and they are manipulating people right out of animal human relationships. I figure that in ten years or less, it will be impossible for an ordinary middle class person to own a dog, and horses and cats will follow very closely.

    They are not friends to animals, nor to the people who truly love them and understand how to handle them sensibly and safely.

  10. We really could care less what you think. That is for the idiot claiming to be at AZ .edu. How the hell did they hire YOU? As an AR undercover?

  11. BTW, you obviously know nothing about researching.
    You must believe everything you see on TV and everything that isn’t documented correctly. You have bought into the number one marketing trick by ARs. Publish misrepresentations and the IDIOTS like you will buy right into it. No surprise here. We don’t need misprep to tell the truth. But apparently you do. We dont proooooooooooooooooooooooofread everything, and frankly could give a flying f*** if you do, or don’t. In fact we don’t need to spell everything correctly either. It’s not our job to be credible. It’s your job to figure out which is the truth and guess what. you failed miserably. No surprise there either.

    Go to Peta’s blog and bother them. Get lost, you suck big time.

  12. In Florida, where I live, back in the late 1980s, a shelter in Fort Walton Beach adopted out a dog that was deemed a “great pet” and was even featured as “Pet of the Week” on a local TV station. Within a very short time after being adopted, the dog killed a child. Someone I know who knew the dog freak at the shelter who allowed the dog to be adopted told me she (the dog freak) said she had reservations about the dog, but if it had not been adopted, it would have been put down within the week. In 2007, a woman in Port St. Lucie adopted a shelter dog that had allegedly passed all the temperament tests and was also advertised as a “great pet.” A few days later, that “great pet” ripped off its new owner’s face. There were lawsuits filed in both these cases. In the first, the animal shelter had to pay in excess of $400,000 (not much for the life of a child) and I not certain what the settlement was in the second. Common sense should tell people these dog freaks who rescue dogs are interested in one thing and one thing only — DOGS! Dog freaks have no qualms about placing a child’s life in jeopardy or risking someone losing their face if the alternative is euthanizing a dog. People need to wake up and realize these second-hand dogs are trouble and even dogs offered for adoption by individual owners should be avoided by people with children in the home.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s