I've lived in a lot of cities and around a lot of dogs but never seen a feral dog pack.
Joel Send a noteboard - 28/03/2011 04:28:32 PM
I'm not saying they aren't out there, because I know they are, I just don't think they're as common as the phrases prevalence indicates. With truly wild dogs (e.g. dingoes) it would be a different story, which is one reason to sterilize strays, but even that story a while back out of Russia mentioned a lot more solitary strays than packs. If Moscow can sustain a large population of unvaccinated unsterilized strays it seems like America can sustain a large population of vaccinated sterile ones. Who knows? People like me might be a lot more inclined to report (or deliver) a stray to the humane society if we knew it wasn't a virtual death sentence, and that could help reduce the stray population without harming any of its members.
I don't consider those sufficient motives to kill animals en masse. In the city most strays subsist off the garbage, and in the countryside rotting carcasses are a periodic fact of life anyway, but the proverbial habit of dogs gorging themselves then regurgitating the excess elsewhere later to eat when hungry again will prevent a surplus of rotting carcasses.
My observations have been that most feral dogs avoid humans almost assiduously as wild animals do, probably in large part due to the fact that most animals who've simply been abandoned by their owners don't have pleasant memories of humans. Even this frankly alarmist site claims that "The vast majority of biting dogs (77%) belong to the victim's family or a friend", indicating that if there is an "epidemic" of dog bites, it has more to do with pet owners and parents failing to monitor their charges than with vicious strays, in packs or otherwise. I've heard plenty of horror stories of dogs raised to be vicious or attacking when they felt threatened, but not even a single case of any dog attacking a human adult or child for food. Fact is, there are plenty of far less dangerous food sources.
Granted, but a frightened and threatened dog is usually frightened and threatened for a reason; I'm reminded of the claim that 77% of dog bites are from animals owned by family or friends of the victim. An uncontrolled dog with no cause for fright or to feel threatened is no more dangerous than an uncontrolled owl or fox, and less so than an uncontrolled bear or deer, but no one's rounding them up and putting them in cages to wait a week for death. Dog bites hurt, yes, and can be damaging, but few dogs bite unprovoked, and even when they do I've never been comfortable with a non-serious dog bite prompting the dogs death (which is also regrettably common and often mandatory under law).
In a way, that's just my point: Yes, there are millions of people around the world, including many children, suffering from starvation, disease, lack of shelter, but we don't stick them in a five foot pen for a week, then execute them if no one's come to care for them and call it the least worst option. What we treat as a public service and moral positive for creatures far more capable of surviving on their own, and far less capable of understanding the need for their death, would be rightly prosecuted as reprehensible mass murder if perpetrated against starving kids. We all know the same harsh reality exists in both animal shelters and orphanages: Most people want infants to raise as their own, so the older a child or animal gets the more certain it is to never be adopted. The difference is that we don't give orphans a week to find a home and
Your plan of sterilising and vaccinating dogs then releasing them to run free is sweet, but impractical for many reasons.
- health in general: that's a lot more doggy do, a lot more opened rubbish/garbage bags, a lot more torn carcases left to rot when the dog's had his share.
- health in general: that's a lot more doggy do, a lot more opened rubbish/garbage bags, a lot more torn carcases left to rot when the dog's had his share.
I don't consider those sufficient motives to kill animals en masse. In the city most strays subsist off the garbage, and in the countryside rotting carcasses are a periodic fact of life anyway, but the proverbial habit of dogs gorging themselves then regurgitating the excess elsewhere later to eat when hungry again will prevent a surplus of rotting carcasses.
- pack mentality can make for a very dangerous situation. Imagine a pack of hungry strays and a little kid on its own. Not safe.
My observations have been that most feral dogs avoid humans almost assiduously as wild animals do, probably in large part due to the fact that most animals who've simply been abandoned by their owners don't have pleasant memories of humans. Even this frankly alarmist site claims that "The vast majority of biting dogs (77%) belong to the victim's family or a friend", indicating that if there is an "epidemic" of dog bites, it has more to do with pet owners and parents failing to monitor their charges than with vicious strays, in packs or otherwise. I've heard plenty of horror stories of dogs raised to be vicious or attacking when they felt threatened, but not even a single case of any dog attacking a human adult or child for food. Fact is, there are plenty of far less dangerous food sources.
- general menace - a dog bite hurts even without the danger of contracting rabies, and can cause a lot of damage to a person (or their pets, for that matter). A frightened, threatened, uncontrolled dog is dangerous.
Granted, but a frightened and threatened dog is usually frightened and threatened for a reason; I'm reminded of the claim that 77% of dog bites are from animals owned by family or friends of the victim. An uncontrolled dog with no cause for fright or to feel threatened is no more dangerous than an uncontrolled owl or fox, and less so than an uncontrolled bear or deer, but no one's rounding them up and putting them in cages to wait a week for death. Dog bites hurt, yes, and can be damaging, but few dogs bite unprovoked, and even when they do I've never been comfortable with a non-serious dog bite prompting the dogs death (which is also regrettably common and often mandatory under law).
Re no-kill shelters: they're great, but don't have unlimited resources. Until enough people donate enough to deal with all unwanted dogs, I'm afraid that euthanasing them is the best option. (Or the least worst option.)
And frankly, people don't even donate enough to look after the unwanted people in our countries let alone the unwanted animals. Where do priorities lie?
And frankly, people don't even donate enough to look after the unwanted people in our countries let alone the unwanted animals. Where do priorities lie?
In a way, that's just my point: Yes, there are millions of people around the world, including many children, suffering from starvation, disease, lack of shelter, but we don't stick them in a five foot pen for a week, then execute them if no one's come to care for them and call it the least worst option. What we treat as a public service and moral positive for creatures far more capable of surviving on their own, and far less capable of understanding the need for their death, would be rightly prosecuted as reprehensible mass murder if perpetrated against starving kids. We all know the same harsh reality exists in both animal shelters and orphanages: Most people want infants to raise as their own, so the older a child or animal gets the more certain it is to never be adopted. The difference is that we don't give orphans a week to find a home and
Honorbound and honored to be Bonded to Mahtaliel Sedai
Last First in wotmania Chat
Slightly better than chocolate.
Love still can't be coerced.
Please Don't Eat the Newbies!
LoL. Be well, RAFOlk.
Last First in wotmania Chat
Slightly better than chocolate.
Love still can't be coerced.
Please Don't Eat the Newbies!
LoL. Be well, RAFOlk.
This Is Why I Like Dogs So Much More Than I Like People (Animal Rescue Workers: I LOVE You!)
27/03/2011 03:20:40 PM
- 1559 Views
Louisiana has a bit more on its plate than adorable animals.
27/03/2011 06:14:01 PM
- 861 Views
No doubt, and I respect that; it's tightening the budget by killing animals that bothers me.
27/03/2011 06:37:17 PM
- 1043 Views
Feral dogs are dangerous and destructive. It's not really an option.
27/03/2011 06:48:06 PM
- 693 Views
I don't know that they are, at least, not any more so than feral cats or feral teens.
28/03/2011 04:27:44 PM
- 654 Views
how many people are mauled by house cats?
28/03/2011 04:57:32 PM
- 614 Views
Me, for one; I don't have complete stats on everyone though.
28/03/2011 05:06:57 PM
- 785 Views
How many stiches did it take to fix it?
28/03/2011 06:42:31 PM
- 781 Views
About as many as it would've taken from a Cocker Spaniel or a Chihuahua.
01/04/2011 12:25:22 AM
- 888 Views
It is animal control not planned parenthood for dogs
28/03/2011 03:13:02 AM
- 748 Views
Interesting how that comparison keeps being made....
28/03/2011 04:26:38 PM
- 734 Views
Yes, it is easier to kill animals than have them roaming the streets.
28/03/2011 09:36:31 PM
- 845 Views
I made myself a promise.
27/03/2011 11:28:02 PM
- 639 Views
I'm fairly upfront about my opinion of the value of human life vs. animal life, yes.
27/03/2011 11:51:07 PM
- 815 Views
Well, we differ on this, certainly.
28/03/2011 05:14:44 AM
- 843 Views
how very 1960 of you
28/03/2011 02:15:11 PM
- 698 Views
Ok... trying to do something about no longer being poor is a choice, though.
28/03/2011 02:37:15 PM
- 664 Views
a large percentage of poor are children
28/03/2011 03:14:16 PM
- 722 Views
I wasn't saying it was easy and uncomplicated, I was saying that if you do not make any effort
28/03/2011 04:13:27 PM
- 692 Views
The myth of poor people being lazy is largely exactly that. *NM*
28/03/2011 08:42:58 PM
- 336 Views
Are you saying that I'm saying poor people are lazy? To be sure, I'm not. *NM*
29/03/2011 11:04:17 AM
- 339 Views
You also have to consider pack animal behaviour.
27/03/2011 06:45:14 PM
- 825 Views
And stray dogs probably spend most of their lives starving. Hardly pleasant for them. *NM*
27/03/2011 06:58:16 PM
- 381 Views
"Probably" is a big word, given the alternative.
28/03/2011 05:12:07 PM
- 670 Views
As someone who had to put down her healthy dog: the injection they use is very peaceful.
28/03/2011 05:17:01 PM
- 709 Views
That sounded a lot more insensitive than I meant it to be, sorry.
31/03/2011 11:39:54 PM
- 754 Views
don't forget all the wildlife they kill *NM*
28/03/2011 03:17:02 AM
- 361 Views
Wildlife kills a lot of wildlife; "it's the ciiiiircle of life".
28/03/2011 04:59:27 PM
- 747 Views
and like a market economy that works great until you start subsidizing one side
28/03/2011 05:15:32 PM
- 764 Views
I've lived in a lot of cities and around a lot of dogs but never seen a feral dog pack.
28/03/2011 04:28:32 PM
- 742 Views
Are you serious?
28/03/2011 08:48:54 PM
- 605 Views
Re: Are you serious?
28/03/2011 08:53:50 PM
- 769 Views
Yeah, it's similar to arguing against antiterrorism by saying we haven't been recently attacked. *NM*
28/03/2011 10:06:29 PM
- 308 Views
Except that we don't have millions of stray terrorists on Americas streets.
31/03/2011 11:19:13 PM
- 731 Views
It's not even certain that's lowering the stray population, but there are still enough for packs.
31/03/2011 11:17:59 PM
- 829 Views
I'm planning on volunteering at a no-kill shelter in NJ when I go.
27/03/2011 11:31:02 PM
- 749 Views
Sweet, and the prospect of volunteers at no kill shelters changes the economics greatly. *hugs*
28/03/2011 04:26:29 PM
- 834 Views
It is sad but what can you do?
28/03/2011 03:05:40 AM
- 771 Views
Well, that's one good idea right there.
28/03/2011 04:44:25 PM
- 692 Views
a vasectomy would probably cost more than neutering but still be simpler than being spayed
28/03/2011 06:37:17 PM
- 647 Views
Sounds like the difference would be negligible either way, but the results far more positive.
31/03/2011 10:47:10 PM
- 612 Views
I'm not sure how this would be helpful?
28/03/2011 06:04:26 PM
- 660 Views
I don't think it is wrong to neuter a dog for behavior reasons
28/03/2011 06:35:16 PM
- 722 Views
I was with you until...
28/03/2011 09:09:14 PM
- 641 Views
I said it was the cynical side of me not the rational side
28/03/2011 09:31:22 PM
- 789 Views
Liberals are bigger fans of animal control than conservatives?
28/03/2011 09:49:35 PM
- 590 Views
If you could only choose one, it would be better to choose the female.
28/03/2011 10:03:44 PM
- 638 Views
WHY??? *NM*
28/03/2011 10:08:30 PM
- 310 Views
Wait, no, you're right.
28/03/2011 10:13:58 PM
- 665 Views
no no you were right
29/03/2011 02:18:44 AM
- 659 Views
Ah, yeah. I was assuming 100% sterilization, which is unfeasible. Never mind. *NM*
29/03/2011 03:16:22 AM
- 321 Views
Ghavrel, nooooooooo! Give reason and ethics a chance first!
29/03/2011 03:27:29 AM
- 872 Views
I already said it makes sense to do both. I definitely support neutering!
29/03/2011 04:01:09 AM
- 876 Views
I think you just made my point
29/03/2011 02:16:19 AM
- 704 Views
Eh forget it. Not worth my time. *NM*
29/03/2011 03:10:03 AM
- 715 Views
proably true. I should know better than to fight faith with reason
29/03/2011 03:15:49 AM
- 755 Views
I'm not here to debate doggie sex *NM*
29/03/2011 03:15:56 AM
- 623 Views
that is good because from what I can tell the subject escapes you
29/03/2011 02:34:37 PM
- 697 Views
Considering that it's much harder to fix females than males
28/03/2011 10:07:47 PM
- 704 Views
how hard it is makes zero differience
29/03/2011 02:25:17 AM
- 680 Views
For the uneducated of us (i.e. me)
28/03/2011 09:40:07 PM
- 709 Views
Vasectomy: sterile but will still want to mate. Neutered: no mating behavior at all. *NM*
28/03/2011 09:56:41 PM
- 324 Views