WANT TO BE HEARD? Make
a post it's very easy simply click on "Post Now" on the upper right hand
corner of the forum. This is a moderated forum meaning posts are screened
for personal attacks and or pornography, or abusive language. When a moderator
approves your post then it will show up in its entirety. Your posts will
show up instantly if you sign up for a free Network54 membership at this
address http://www.network54.com.
You will also be able to use our Chat room which is the the most popular
of its kind in the world.
I see written on the internet fairly often how “I want a Bandog but Mastiffs cant do this or that" or how “Johnson Bulldogs or Bull Mastiffs cant do anything that requires moving or endurance.” After owning and seeing many bigger dogs that can I began to wonder what is the most important thing that affects things like longevity, the way a dog works and the tasks it can perform?? Training?? Breed?? Nutrition?? Or is it just good old fashioned conditioning? By conditioning I mean fit and lean rather than the bulky muscled, heavy gutted monsters that for some seem to pass as athletes.
I am not disputing that everything else adds another piece in the puzzle, but for many years I have been trying to figure out why my dogs live and work so long and why I have never had bone problems in my giant breed dogs, especially when I seem to do all the wrong things as suggested by the experts, ie I don’t feed supplements or expensive dog food, I don’t purposely restrict exercise or carry dogs up stairs.(But by the same token I don’t work baby pups to the point of exhaustion either!)
A dog out of condition will give up early, he will overheat or just die, he will be screaming for breath when his fit brother still has his mouth closed. Nobody wants their dogs to be crippled from arthritis or hip problems or suffer from pancretitis. No one likes to think that their dog will give up protecting them and leave them in a dangerous situation just because he was too tired to keep going. Nobody likes to say goodbye to a best friend many years earlier than necessary. I have never seen a real working dog in work over weight. You would think we would all be leaning down our dogs until there were visible ribs, but there are a number of reasons we don’t.
The first is simply that working fit dogs are just not that impressive to look at. A Bandog or Bulldog at 140lb has a jaw dropping, head turning ability that he certainly doesn’t at 85lb.He is intimidating and a sight to behold. You do not see many pictures of dogs on the internet or in glossy magazines at working weight. Dogs in this condition are not as socially acceptable as ones who are overweight. As our own societies get fatter so we have pushed our own values onto our dogs. What was once considered light working condition is now considered unacceptably thin; the prevalence of dogs as pets rather than workers has reinforced this view.
Dogs who are overweight are easier to handle; they are not as busy or active, they are less destructive, require less time and exercise. It is easier to reward with a treat than a hunt. Many people who love their chosen breed haven’t the want or need for a busy active model. Problems that relate to boredom and lack of exercise are blamed on training and trainers are expected to fix problems that are probably easier cured by an hour of brisk activity every day. My brothers Collies and Kelpies used to travel 200 + km (125 miles) a day. I don’t know any body with a pet Border Collie who runs their dog 500 mile a week, yet there are tens of thousands of herders with so called behavioral problems. I wonder if the two are related?
Breed is not as important as being the right body shape and getting that body in shape. The first dog is a pure Johnson dog. He is kept in good condition and has been a hunting dog in Central Queensland and now the Northern Territory. He isn’t going to place in the next AB show but he sure can do the job his ancestors were bred to do. 84 pounds and 27 inches tall. He is not a freak. The next dog is from predominantly Johnson lines, MGK’s Krunch is his sire, he has been hunted more then most dogs and also runs at under 90lb working weight. The last dog is from an Am Bull X Neo based Bandog program and hunt in the northern tropics. All these dogs work as good as the next dog or would have been long culled.
So what is the solution? I have found the people who make the most noise about what a breed cannot do usually know the least about them. The naturally heavier the dog the leaner he must be to be working fit, one has to carefully balance that with being in good enough condition to still possess power and endurance. I believe that dogs that don’t have to work hard or pets can afford a little more weight, again balance between what the world views as ideal and what is really important to the dogs health. I don’t think its easy and I am sure there are many other ideas so it would be interesting to see what other people do and think.
"As our own societies get fatter so we have pushed our own values onto our dogs. What was once considered light working condition is now considered unacceptably thin; the prevalence of dogs as pets rather than workers has reinforced this view."
I like to see ribs and backbone on my dogs and others complain that I keep them way to skinny. But they are my dogs and I will keep them the way I see fit.
www.loyalguardkennel.com
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Has anyone ever heard of people getting their dogs taken away by the HSUS or such groups for "underfeeding" them? Whenever I see a picture of a dog being taken away for being "underfed", they don't look underfed, just at a healthy weight... I have a hermes bulldog who could probably eat a sack of food a day and you would be able to see her ribs. Now that I am getting a bandog I am a bit worried that a 100# pound dog with his ears cropped whose ribs you can see, would be a prime target for a dog to be taken away because he is "underfed"
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Eric,
You are making some very relevant points. I too wonder about all the wacko's out there getting laws passed that tell us how to live with our dogs and their concepts of dogs are cuddly little entrants in the Easter parade.
We have extremes like Vick and we have the other side like PETA & HSUS
Seems ther should be a place for normal folks that like their dogs?
Oh well, any one else? We migh start a political movement.
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Nice post Katrina,
Your old bandog is a classic example.I think personally genetics play a fair part.Well bred, healthy,structurally sound dogs especially larger breeds are going to stand a better chance as working dogs than those that are bred from non working stock with pre dispositions for health problems.We both know that hunting dogs in the outback that cant perform the task wont last long enough to be bred from one way or the other and so the gene pool narrows.Pure health will overcome most things.
Im not bagging show dogs as I am sure there are some dogs out there bred from this stock than can perform and I understand what you say about conditioning.As most owners of large breed dogs in this country anyway are pet owners they dont keep there dogs in good lean condition and quite obviously this will affect their long term health.A lot of people want a dog that looks imposing to the bad guy as a detterrent and they are impressed by size so they feed the dog up and dont give it enough exercise.Eventually it has joint and other problems and falls apart and they wonder why.My friend is a classic example.Currently he has 2 dogs.An American bulldog and a ABX Bandog.Both of these dogs are overweight.He continually tells me how much they weigh as if it matters.He leaves an esky (cooler for those of you in the US) full of dry biscuits out everyday for them to graze on as well as feeding them when he comes home.His dogs are at least 5 kilos overweight and they are big dogs anyway.I have tried to tell him but some people just wont listen.He has had other large dogs die on him around the age of 5 or 6 for the same reason.
I do think that good nutrition and conditioning add the other peices to the puzzle and I am a big proponent of diet.I have to admit I am a fan of Jami long and his feeding regime but thats not to say it is the be all and end all.I feed mostly a raw diet but I do feed biscuits occasionally but good quality ones.I do feed most of my dogs supplements but I am wary of what and how much and mainly natural based supplements but it also depends on how much you work your dog and what work you are doing.I dont profess to know the 'secret' and dont know why your dogs last so long but exercise plays a key part and one thing you forgot to mention I know you cull dogs which others find it hard to do.When you are breeding dogs for your self and not for the commercial market you tend to be a bit harder on what stays and what goes.
Like I said firstly I think well bred dogs last longer in the first place but all the other things matter in aiding the longevity of the dog.My American bulldog is coming up 8 years old and he isnt going grey yet,he is a lean 90 pounds and no signs of slowing down.I dont feed him supplements as there is not much need at his age.He hasnt seen a vet in half his life nor had a vaccination for just as long and he is no worse for it.Everytime I start to over analyze something about my dogs I think about dogs in the wild and what they eat,the work they do and how long they live and why.I also think about my grandfather who is 90 years old and never had any health problems and lived on a farm most of his life and the dogs that he owned and bred which were roo dogs and various herding crosses.They got fed roo,lamb,beef and whatever was available on the farm and they worked for it.They didnt know what the vet was or what dry biscuits looked and tasted like.If they didnt work they went to play ball with god.Thats my 2 cents anyway.
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
I hear so many talk about how much their American Bulldog weighs. Three years ago, my wife purchased me a "suprise" male pup out of very impressive show lines. He was a MONSTER! It was damn near impossible to keep him in any sembilance of working shape. The only shape he wanted was round. At sixteen months old, he died of heat stroke. I later found out that in the same summer, his Father and Brother died of heat stroke. Is that a working dog? I think that a dog that has three eyes and three tails is beautiful, if he does the job that I need him to do. I love to see ribs but I don't want to see the backbone on my dogs. I have found that when my American Bulldogs get much over 100 pounds, what little you gain in power, you lose ten times that in speed and endurance. I have yet to see PETA in the woods, on a hog hunt. I guess that is why I could care less about what they say. Do they have any good working dogs to show us?
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Fight Breed Specific Legislation under the precedent of property rights.
!!Please read the entire post and think about it before forming an opinion!!
Now wether we agree with certain things like cock fighting or dog fighting is irrelevant to what I am about to say. There is an associated press article at the bottom of my writings this spurred my post. The reason for this post is to remind everyone that to truly fight Breed Specific Legislation we have to realize that our dogs and animals are ‘our property’ and the government has no right to take our property, wether this is dogs, guns or roosters, unless we violate laws that affect another person’s right to life, liberty or property. If it is OK for the government to take someone’s dogs away because they fight them or do not feed them enough or do not give them good enough care then it is OK for the Government to take away our dogs, guns, cats, or whatever, for any other reason they feel is enough reason. I could sum it up as basically quit letting people legislate their opinion on others.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,"
— The Declaration of Independence of the United States of America ----------
"What seems simple is that happiness is so straightforward that we all have a right—a right!—to seek it; what seems complex is the idea that what we’re entitled to is, indeed, a pursuit, something strenuous and not necessarily successful. Some Marxists have thought that the right to pursue happiness was a last-minute substitution for a previously drafted right to property..."
While the author of the above comments goes on to argue that the ownership of property was not meant, many historians and not just Marxists believe that it actually does mean right to property. Indeed how can you be "free and self-sufficient" without owning property? How can you be beneficial to your country without owning and using your property to make a profit.
Indeed Leonard W. Levy who is Professor Emeritus at the Claremont Graduate School, in his book ‘Origins of the Bill of Rights’ goes on to say,
"From the premise that man was born free, the deduction followed that he came into the world with God-given or natural rights. Born without the restraint of human laws, he had a right to possess liberty and to work for his own property."
— Leonard W. Levy ----
William Pritt said in 1763 in a speech in Parliament,
"The poorest man may, in his cottage, bid defiance to all the forces of the Crown. It may be frail; it’s roof may shake; the wind may blow through it; the storm may enter; the rain may enter; but the King of England may not enter; all his force dares not cross the threshold of the ruined tenement."
----- William Pritt----
Our 4th amendment was based on this concept which had been preached since the 1500's. I could go on and on quoting some of the most brilliant minds in American and English history to support our right to own property, but a couple should have been enough. It seems that a lawyer has finally come to this realization and is taking the Animal rights activists and the law to court. I firmly believe that our only way to stop BSL is to stand on the "Right to Property precedent. But to do this we have to realize that our right to own property is over and above any concept of animal rights you could imagine. This is truly our only hope. If you stand on anything else it is simply modern opinion. the "Right to Property precedent" is over 500 years old indeed our laws and legislation are built upon it. The very fabric of free America was built upon this principle. Neither our government nor the humane society should be allowed to go on our property and confiscate parts of our property unless this property is taking away another person’s life, liberty or property.
So finally the article that spurred my thought. If you agree feel free to post this any and everywhere.
-------------------------------------------------
Humane Society sued by man charged in cockfighting case
Associated Press
NEWPORT, Tenn. — A man whose roosters were killed last year after a raid on a cockfighting pit is suing the Humane Society of the United States.
William Todd Webb of Sevierville is seeking $25,000 in compensatory damages and additional unspecified punitive damages, according to his lawsuit filed in Cocke County Circuit Court last month.
The FBI led a raid on Del Rio Cockfighting Pit on June 11, 2005, and seized more than 300 roosters that were later euthanized. Misdemeanor charges were brought against 143 people and about $40,000 in cash was seized.
"Whether cockfighting is right or wrong, and whether or not our client was involved in cockfighting, any person who has property in the United States is entitled to have that property protected and to have due process before the destruction of that property, especially by a private organization," said Joe Baker, one of Webb's attorneys.
John Goodwin, the Humane Society's deputy manager for animal fighting issues, was listed as a defendant in the lawsuit along with John Does one through 25, court records show. Goodwin, who works in Washington but took part in the task force that raided the Del Rio pit, declined to comment on the lawsuit.
Webb is one of at least six people who have chosen to fight misdemeanor charges in court and is scheduled to go to trial next month, Baker said.
Webb's lawsuit accuses Goodwin and others of conspiring to destroy his roosters and killing the birds by placing them in 55-gallon drums and piping in carbon monoxide.
"Despite the fact that the plaintiff had claimed his roosters and that the defendants and others had told the plaintiff that if he claimed his roosters, he could take possession of them, the defendants willfully and maliciously and intentionally destroyed the plaintiff's personal property over the plaintiff's objection," the lawsuit states.
Shortly after the raid took place, Goodwin said the birds found at the site were killed in the most painless way possible.
"I don't like the euthanasia," he said. "I don't like seeing those little guys die. The problem is that these people are breeding these gamecocks to be extremely aggressive to any other rooster they see. It's not like we can adopt them out to families."
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
[/img]
&mode=medium
