Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About gooeydog

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Contact Methods

  • AIM


  • Location
    umm... somewhere around here
  1. gooeydog

    Cesar Millan

    You can see the collars on some of his dogs in the show. The eps I saw were between 17 and 22, and I noticed the collars on several different dogs on different eps (even replayed it to be sure). The walking a dog aggressive dog thing, he knew that the dog he was working (I think a rotty?) with hated his GSD, and was walking the two of them together, both on short leads so that they were right next to each other. The dog aggro dog just turned around and snagged the other, nothing he could do to prevent it, and all it takes is one good bite and shake to cause serious tissue damage. It's different when you have one dog and someone else has another, but he was walking both himself. That'd be like me walking Haley and Casey together, and surely if Haley turned around and grabbed Casey, I'd be getting a good lecture about what an idiot I was for trying to walk two dogs that don't get along by myself. Dumb is dumb, no matter who you are.
  2. gooeydog

    Cesar Millan

    Just a few things I want to toss in here, then I'll be returning to my "under rock" home :) First, I've noticed that several of Cesar's dogs at his compound have on e-collars. Granted, they could be bark collars, but the fact that a dozen other dogs are also barking makes that seem unlikely. The issue I have isn't even with him using the collars for control if that's what he's doing, but that it's never mentioned, and if that is something he's doing, novice pet owners won't even notice. They'll be thinking that with enough assertivness, they can run packs of aggressive dogs, and we all know what that can lead to. Second, I haven't even seen many of the shows, but I've seen at least two occasions where one of his personal dogs got nailed by a dog he was training. During one, he was walking both dogs on lead... who walks a dog aggressive dog with another dog you know they don't like? And why would you risk your own dog being attacked to do so? One more thing... [quote]Ive done the same thing with a pit bull who was showing aggression towards Duke, the crazy boxer. I brought her to him put her in s it and corrected her with the choke chain when ever she showed signs of aggression.[/quote] The problem with doing this is that you're only correcting the signs of aggression, and with a smart dog, they'll just forego those next time and skip right into beating the snot out of the other dog. By the time the dog is showing aggression, you've already missed the best time to correct, and you'll have to correct twice as hard to get their attention, if you can get it at all.
  3. gooeydog

    How many?

    Like DrJeff, I'd have to go with no one for all 5 :-? not you guys, it's the dogs... Individually, and with the original "not ever having met the dogs in person" stipulations: Goo, pit bull-0 Haley, pit bull- 5 or so people Annie, Dachshund-0 Casey, Cocker Spaniel- probably 90% of the regular posters Joey, Chi- like Casey, but remove any men, since he can be more timid with them I'm absolutely neurotic about who I'd allow to take care of my dogs while I'm not present, mainly because of Goo's temperament problems (she's afraid of strangers, and extremely dog aggressive outside of our house as well), but the other dogs also have issues that would need special attention as well. Goo must be walked on leash and ONLY in our yard by someone strong enough to control her and get her safely back in the house if another dog approaches and causes problems, plus they'd have to know her well and have spent plenty of time with her beforehand for me to see them interacting and feel comfortable leaving her with them. She's also a collar slipper, so they have to use her no slip collar to take her out and remember to take it off when they bring her back in. She only eats once a day, but she gets a bunch of supplements, which I keep in a pill case for easy dispensal, but I still go over the instructions for each and give a printed copy just in case. Haley has diabetes, so she's got to eat 3 scheduled times a day, plus get two scheduled shots (one with the morning feeding, one with the evening), something not everyone can or will do. She's not much problem to walk, she is dog aggressive, but she's pretty easily controlled and redirected in most cases. Also, since they have gotten into a few scraps, I do not trust anyone outside of my immediate family to have them out together, so whoever comes must also rotate them to feed and take out, plus switch them up before leaving so each gets time loose in the house, checking all the gates/doors before they go. Annie is less trouble than the others, but she also gets supplements with her food, and can be an escape artist, so she absolutely cannot be left alone in one of the fenced areas outside (neither can Goo or Haley) for any amount of time. She's also dog aggressive and would likely bite someone coming into the house if she didn't know them, so she'd have to know the person beforehand. Casey and Joey are both pretty easy dogs, and would be fine with just about anyone. Even with all that, anyone watching them gets primed for about a week prior to us leaving (complete with calls at any point I remember some trivial thing I may have forgotten that I think they need to know), a list (last time it was like 3 pages :lol: ) of instructions just in case they forget anything, another list of phone numbers to reach us or nearby family members in case of emergency, and has to deal with my nearly hourly, "were you down to check the dogs, how did it go!? You didn't forget this or this or this...etc, did you!?!?!?" calls for the duration of the trip, which I hear is actually more difficult than actually taking care of the dogs. Because of this, we have exactly 1 (yeah, one :-? ) person outside of our family that we trust enough to have watch the dogs for us, and she recently moved out of the area.... good thing we don't take many group vacations :roll: :lol: .
  4. gooeydog

    Torn on pit bulls (again)

    [quote]but I do have to point out that I frequently see BSL being equated with a BAN, when all it is, in fact, is Breed Specific Legislation.[/quote] BUT, when one breed is singled out and labeled as "dangerous" or "vicious", that label has implications beyond those in the imposed legislation. For example, insurance companies aren't going to jump at the chance to insure a dog already labeled as "dangerous", it just isn't smart for them. And when BSL often includes special insurance clauses, and owners can't get the insurance because of the label, you may as well just ban them outright, since you can't get the insurance and can't legally own the dog without it. Or, spay/neuter laws, if you alter all existing dogs and forbid new ones from being brought in, they'll be just as extinct in a few years as if they had been banned outright. In either case, and in that of outright bans, the problem is still never actually solved, since the person who thinks their human aggressive dog is the best thing ever likely won't care to comply when that dog is illegal or put under restrictions, since after all, they could care less about the dog, so long as their image is intact. And even if they did, the problem would still exist since A. bad owners are a universal problem, and those currently owning pit bulls would simply find another breed to suit their needs, and B. any breed of dog can and will bite, and seriously, and none of these bites should be occurring. [quote]If it stopped all of the dog fighting and torture, baiting, unwanted pit bulls in shelters, took the breed entirely out of the hands of irresponsible, stupid, and/or cruel people, while still allowing responsible owners to have them as pets... then would you support it?[/quote] For their own good... the same argument was used in the past for many "lesser groups" of people (mentally challenged people, for example, many of whom function fine these days with certain accomodations made) to be warehoused or otherwise treated in ways that are considered unfair today. By this line of reasoning, we could also lock all children away in a room until they're 18, since child abduction, molestation, etc is a very real concern, it would be for their own good. Instead, we've chosen to address the real problems at hand (people who do these things to children), and educate children of the dangers involved. Considering that many other breeds are just as abused (look at all the small breeds used in puppymills, left to rot in cages all their lives, in sickness and malnutrition), I think that the "for their own good" argument is often (and not in this discussion, in general) just a handy excuse for trying to make a quick fix on a problem... bandaid on a broken arm if you will.
  5. gooeydog

    National news!?!?

    I did. And while I'll admit the thought did cross my mind that it was an understatement, it was the most simple term that came to mind when trying to label the event (actually, dog attack would be more fitting, but my point remains the same). The point I was trying to make is that someone being maimed in this event is somehow more newsworthy than say, the tales of the hundreds or even thousands of peoples who are maimed or killed in car accidents every day. There was a bad one near my house last week, several people seriously injured, but it didn't even make local news, nevermind national. Why? Surely their tale held some greater lesson, whether it was because their vehicle was defective, or they were not being sensible, or someone else caused it. What exactly makes this story worthy of National news over so many other events (even some in the past involving dog attacks) that have occurred? And further, why weren't the real issues, like maybe human aggressive dogs being improperly contained, or people breeding dogs without regard for temperament, addressed? These sort of concepts are pertinent to all dogs, and would be useful to far more of the audience than the implication that the only reason this incident occurred was because pit bulls were involved. You won't get any of the standard "couldn't have been pit bulls" responses from me (though I do think their labeling is completely useless and distracts from the more important issues), because it's possible that these dogs were pit bulls, you get bad dogs in every breed, and with pit bulls as common as they are, there are bound to be some out there. I just don't see the point of sensationalizing and dramaticizing the story to gain ratings rather than just giving the facts and if anything, ways to prevent history from repeating itself.
  6. gooeydog

    National news!?!?

    I don't know which is worse, that a "pit bull rampage" makes national news because it was pit bulls, or that the situation is such that a dog bite makes national news.... [url]http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051106/ap_on_re_us/pit_bull_rampage[/url]
  7. gooeydog

    Titan Bulldogges

    Of course it's entirely your choice as to what you want in a dog, however I think the idea of crossing four breeds know on various levels for having breathing/heart problems, bad hips, and bad elbows in order to get a "healthy" dog is not among the smartest. All of the breeds involved have high incidences of hip and elbow dysplasia, and the dogs shown as Titan Bulldogs have the same brachycephalic muzzle that causes breathing/cooling problems for other breeds with the same. Couple that with the fact that those developing the breed seemingly do no health clearances, and it makes it even more plausible that the whole "trying to make a bulldog type dog without the health problems" line sound like a bunch of BS.
  8. gooeydog

    Can I do this? (Food q)

    Thanks guys, this is helpful :D [quote]I take it you're switching from kibble to raw/cooked?[/quote] Well, she gets some fresh cooked meat in with some of her meals, though I haven't done it much lately because she'd been having some digestion issues due to food change, and it seemed the fresh meat on top of that was just not helping. I'd like to eventually get a bone/meat grinder and use that to grind fresh meat that I can feed, either raw (not likely to begin with that, as one of the dogs is senior and I worry about her adjusting- I know it shouldn't be an issue, but she's already prone to belly issues, and her age on top of that makes me like all of these put together :o :-? :drinking: ) or lightly cooked as I'm doing now, along with other fresh foods. The time before last that I added any substantial amount of fresh chicken (one of the meats she does well on in foods, and I've fed both with her normal meal and 12 hrs from, makes no difference), she had the runs for several days (and was reluctant to eat during that time, which led to her losing some weight when she's already pretty scrawny), the pumpkin usually helps, but it didn't work at all that time, I had to give her actual meds for it, which I hate to do. The most recent time we've done meat add-ins, I added less meat, and mixed some pumpkin in with her food as I added the meat, so as to stay ahead of the game, and we didn't have any problems, she was eating the food without pumpkin within a few days and had solid poop. I was only feeding that meat to get it used up so I can buy more, but I think that when/if we do make the switch to all fresh foods, it'll be a gradual one, as I worry about her being able to tolerate that sort of thing again, and the worst incident occurred when I gave more chicken than usual without gradually working up to it as I had before, so I can only imagine what it might be like switching cold turkey :o I do have another question though, [quote]many people i know use a mix of canned pumpkin and cultured yogurt as a filling for frozen kongs.[/quote] Doesn't freezing the yogurt kill of the bacteria? So would this be counterproductive since the reason for feeding cultured yogurt is for the probiotics? Just wondering, as I sometimes end up with the dogs' yogurt going bad (Goo doesn't like it, and will refuse her food if I put it in there for more than a day of two in a row, so I have to feed it on different days to fool her), and it'd make it a lot easier if I could just freeze some of it. One more, when I do start adding veggies and fruits, should I feed combos of different things every day, or only one type per day? I'm planning on blending and freezing the veggies/fruits, so either way would be no problem, just curious as to what's considered the norm. I'm thinking a variety, but not quite sure.
  9. gooeydog

    Can I do this? (Food q)

    I'm in the market for a meat grinder (have to get a better paying job first, as I'm poor at the moment), so I can make the dogs' food, but in the meantime, think I've found a way to switch them from kibble while keeping my nerves intact. They're currently getting soaked kibble with canned food mixed in, occasionally with some fresh, lightly cooked (small-ly cubed and poached) meat in place of some of the kibble. The canned food is Neura 95% meats (made by the people who make wellness), and I've recently upped the amount of that from 1/2 can to 1 can, decreasing their kibble amount. I realized last night that the amount of meat in the canned food isn't that far off from what Goo'd be getting on fresh food (she's right at 50 lbs, so going by the 2% rule, around 1 lb meat, she's already getting 12oz), and that I could probably manage (financially) to feed the Neura food only with fresh veggies, etc, cutting the kibble completely out of the picture. I just don't know if this is an acceptable way to feed, am I right in thinking that I could just substitute the Neura for real meat for now, at the same amount, or is there some other way to figure this out? And is there a concern with too many vitamins/minerals from the food already having "fake" ones in it, then adding real ones from fruits/veggies as well? I'm thinking that if I can pull this off, it would work out well anyway, as I can't see myself packing dead chickens to take on vacation :lol: nor my mom cooking for the dogs when I go away, so even after they're switched, I can keep a few cans around for emergencies when I can't feed them the "real" stuff.
  10. gooeydog

    Recall= nothing!!

    As others have said, improper use of a shock collar can easily cause more problems than a dog started with (how'd you feel if you were being corrected for something and didn't even know what it was you were doing or where the correction was coming from?), you need to have good timing and a good trainer to demonstrate when/how to best use it or you can really screw up your dog's head. I think your expectations are a bit unrealistic (out of 5 dogs, we have ONE that will only go out a door when invited, though the others are usually not door bolters, if they see what they perceive as an invitation, they'll go) with the way your grandfather is behaving. It's your responsibility to keep her safe and out of trouble, irregardless of how you must do it. As an example, I can't leave Goo loose in the house with any windows/doors open when I leave due to her animal aggression, so I either close everything up, or put her in my room, in which windows are opened only from the top, and not enough for her to get out, and the bottom panes are covered with grates in case she should decide to try to go through one again. There are times when she'd probably rather stay lounging on the couch, but if she got out and into trouble, she'd be in a 1000 times worse situation than snoozing in my room waiting for me to get home. This doubly applies to you, as not only is Sassy at risk of being hit by a car, but due to her aggression, other people and their pets are at risk too when she gets out. One of the responsibilities of owning a dog (or human for that matter) aggressive dog is making sure that they're always contained in a manner to keep them from being able to harm others, whether that be kennel, secure yard, room, crate, whatever. Unless you can make absolutely sure that she will not escape from the yard (grandfather?), I would keep her in the kennel, with locks both on it and the gates for the yard, to prevent her from getting out and others from getting in.
  11. gooeydog

    Dog Door or No?

    I'm one of those who doesn't let their dogs out when I'm not home, and several of them not alone outside at all, so I may be a bit biased, but here's my thoughts anyway. I think the idea of having the door for the room mate to open when he's home and close when he leaves sounds like a pretty good plan, so long as he remembers, and doesn't mind doing so. I too would be concerned about someone tossing something harmful over the fence (even unintentionally, ex: trying to make friends by giving chicken bones), so IMO, if they're going to be out all day long, I'd feel safer with them in an enclosed area out of reach of objects thrown over the fence, could you fence an area around where the door would be? Or even put up a kennel for them if you don't use the door frequently?
  12. gooeydog

    HELP! Hot spots!

    Is her crate wire, or one of those closed plastic types? If you decide to use it, I'd be very hesitant to just put her in and try dealing with the spot, as she'll more than likely try to turn back around on you. If the crate is wire, put a lead on her (make SURE her collar is tight enough she can't slip out!), thread it through the back, and then get her in, pulling the lead tight as she moves into the crate. Then you can have someone hold the lead and keep her head forward while someone else puts meds on the spot. You can do the same with a fence (thread the lead through and have someone hold it to keep her head secure), but that won't keep them from moving their back end away from the person and closer to their teeth :o You may want to take her out for a little walk before and after the "event" so that she'll not associate the leash with just getting the hot spot treated. To keep her from licking, either get a collar to keep her off it, or keep her on a lead and stop her everytime she starts. The more she soaks the spot, the worse its going to get.
  13. Sheesh, I can't begin to imagine how it'd feel to just get everyone out safe and then be told you have to be seperated anyway :( Shame on your father-in-law. Do the animals just need fosters until you can get back on your feet? Or permanent homes? I can crosspost to PBP and some other boards, don't know how much help it'd be, but I imagine your time online is limited, and with such a short time to figure things out, anything might help. Sorry you're being put through all this, and hope your family has no more hardships dumped on you. EDIT to add a thread with offers to help pet owners in LA, maybe this person can give you a hand? [url]http://www.pitbullforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=24915[/url]
  14. Goo goes in to get a dentistry tomorrow morning, and with her being old I'm worried out of my mind, so would appreciate any good thoughts you might want to offer up :)
  15. gooeydog

    PETA=pit bulls? News article

    Animal activists PETA raise corporate America's ire By Carey Gillam Tue Jul 12, 9:08 AM ET NORFOLK, Va., (Reuters) - With a cat snoozing on her desk and clad in a rumpled "Love Animals" T-shirt, Ingrid Newkirk hardly looks like a woman who could make corporate titans tremble. ADVERTISEMENT As the founder and the passionate force behind People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, Newkirk says her organization is made up simply of "kind people" who want only to end animal abuse and exploitation. But try telling that to the corporate retail and food giants who have seen -- and felt -- PETA's claws. Using tactics that sometime make even avid animal lovers squirm, and backed by nearly $30 million yearly in private contributions, PETA has become known worldwide as a radical but formidable foe of big retailers and food companies. At a May protest at a KFC restaurant, also known as Kentucky Fried Chicken, PETA protesters dressed as Grim Reapers and carried a coffin with a human-sized chicken in it while decrying the fast food giant for "live scalding and painful debeaking" of the chickens it serves. PETA has also run "McCruelty," "MurderKing" and "WickedWendy's" campaigns to assail fast food chains for the way animals used in their products are treated. The group has picketed the homes of executives, dispatched undercover investigators to videotape animal mistreatment at laboratories and on farms and run stomach-turning ad campaigns with bloody images of abuse and slaughter. "Sometimes sadly, you have to look quite scary and carry a big stick," Newkirk says of the tactics. Industry leaders say the campaigns are embarrassing but do little to deter customers. But few deny PETA campaigns were the catalysts behind a range of animal welfare reforms made in recent years by McDonald's Corp. (NYSE:MCD - news), privately held Burger King Corp. and Wendy's International Inc. (NYSE:WEN - news). "They've got $29 million a year, you can do a lot of massaging of public opinion with that kind of money," said Rick Berman, executive director of the Center for Consumer Freedom, whose membership includes restaurant and food companies. "PETA is very good at attacking." HOW TO KILL A CHICKEN This summer, as PETA celebrates 25 years of largely successful campaigns, the group has set its sights on one of its toughest challenges yet as it seeks sweeping change in the $29 billion U.S. poultry industry. PETA wants the estimated 9 billion chickens slaughtered each year in the United States to first receive a mixture of gas and oxygen to make them unconscious, a method used in Europe, but one that would require costly overhauls of U.S. poultry slaughterhouses. Current U.S. systems shackle live chickens, hang them upside down and run them through electrified baths to stun them before their throats are slit and they are put into scalding defeathering tanks. PETA cited USDA reports as evidence that millions of chickens annually are conscious through most if not all of the process. "I don't understand how anyone with a conscience can learn about the horrifically cruel conditions for chicken slaughter and not want to do anything about it," said PETA campaign director Bruce Friedrich. Under pressure from PETA, McDonald's issued a report on June 30 saying it was studying the matter. Restaurant operator Applebee's International Inc. (NYSE:APPB - news) is also confronting the issue, thanks to PETA. National Chicken Council spokesman Richard Lobb said the current slaughter system is both "effective and humane," and PETA's latest reform requests are efforts to drive up costs and put chicken companies out of business. "They're just trying to come up with things that will be costly for food companies as part of their overall desire to move to a strictly vegan world," Lobb said. Because of the issue, KFC, a subsidiary of YUM! Brands Inc., (NYSE:YUM - news) of Louisville, Kentucky, and one of the world's largest fast-food purveyors of chickens, is emerging as one of PETA's staunchest foes. Having seen PETA protesters smear fake blood on its restaurant walls and smear the company name with gory undercover videos of alleged abuse at its suppliers, KFC officials have dubbed PETA's actions "corporate terrorism" and have cut off communications with PETA representatives. KFC officials are loathe to discuss anything having to do with PETA publicly. But the Center for Consumer Freedom is backing KFC and its brethren and is running anti-PETA ads, including a billboard in New York's Times Square. "We are taking the fight to PETA," said Berman. "They've hit a roadblock with the chicken industry." Critics accuse PETA of lying and other misdeeds including a range of deceit and misbehavior, including financially aiding acts of violence and unfairly claiming tax-exempt status PIT BULLS PETA officials say they have no intention of letting up on KFC, after staging 8,000 protests against the company so far. Indeed, PETA's highly successful track record shows that some campaigns run for years, the longest, which put an animal trainer in Las Vegas out of business, lasted 16 years, according to Newkirk. Other notches in PETA's belt include persuading General Motors (NYSE:GM - news) to stop using animals in crash tests, convincing Abercrombie & Fitch (NYSE:ANF - news) and J. Crew Group Inc. clothing retailers to boycott Australian wool and pressuring Revlon (NYSE:REV - news), Avon Products Inc. (NYSE:AVP - news) and more than 500 other cosmetic companies to stop animal testing. Over the 25 years since PETA was founded in Newkirk's suburban Maryland home, the organization has grown to include more than 800,000 members and about 200 employees with offices in the United Kingdom, India, Germany, and the Netherlands. Wealthy benefactors help fund sophisticated multi-faceted marketing and secret investigations. Stray animals are given homes in PETA's headquarters, and cat-sized holes are cut into the bottoms of many office doors so the animals can move about freely. Newkirk says PETA's ultimate goal is a world where humans don't eat, wear or exploit animals. "We are the pit bulls of animal protection," Newkirk said in a recent interview. "Don't mess with us. We will win."