Continue with onX Maps
Sign in with Facebook
Dogs that bite
|
This whole thread is like 3 subreddits in one. 1) dogs don’t belong at crags. Idc how “well behaved” they are. Yes that means mine too. 2) little kids don’t belong at crags. Idc how “well behaved” they are. Crag kids make me not want kids sometimes 3) chocolate cake belongs at crags. It’s very well behaved. It is the goodest of good bois. It is infallible. |
|
Ah shit. Chocolate crag cake will deter the dog owners from approaching you with their dog, but it will attract the crag kids. I didn’t think this through well enough… although, crag kids on the ground around the crag cake means less crag kids on the walls. Maybe it does work. |
|
I'm reminded once again when I read some of the replies to this thread, how many people have very strong opinions about things they know nothing about, and have misunderstood information they have seen. As a retired molecular biologist, I find the misunderstanding of genetics, breeding and the meaning of breeds particularly amusing. The AKC description of a breed's temperament will give you a very precise idea of what your purebred dog will be like, although there will be variations with individuals. But then that temperament will be highly molded by training. Training is so important and unfortunately many dog owners have no idea how to do it. Here is a description of a breed I am very familiar with, having had 5 boxers in my family in my lifetime: Boxers are a bright, energetic, and playful breed and tend to be very good with children.[4] They are patient and spirited with children, but also protective, making them a popular choice for families.[4] They are active, strong dogs that require adequate exercise to prevent boredom-associated behaviors such as chewing, digging, or licking. Boxers have earned a slight reputation of being "headstrong", which can be related to inappropriate obedience training. Owing to their intelligence and working-breed characteristics, training based on corrections often has limited usefulness. The Boxer by nature is not an aggressive or vicious breed. It is an instinctive guardian and can become very attached to its family. Like all dogs, it requires proper socialization. Boxers are generally patient with smaller dogs and puppies, but difficulties with larger adult dogs, especially those of the same sex, may occur. Boxers are generally more comfortable with companionship, in either human or canine form. They are very patient and are great to adopt as family dogs because they are good with children and people of all kinds. This description is 100% accurate. Our boxers were all, without exception, extremely affectionate and loving with all family members and people they had been introduced to as friends. They were especially good with the babies and small children and would sit and gaze at the adult humans beseechingly when the toddlers were sitting on them and pulling at their faces and ears. However, boxers are extremely protective of their family. Strangers to the house or territory, the environment they were guarding, would be met with great ferocity. It took careful "introductions" of new people as "friend" before they would stand down from their desire to attack. Outside the house, my boxers were always leashed. If no one was nearby they would explore within an allowed range of the leash, but at the command "time to work" they would fall into heel position and do as instructed. If unleashed they were trained to "stay" and "come" and "sit" by voice command, so they would never run up to strange people or animals. Almost never - squirrels were going to be chased into the nearest tree no matter what. When out walking with my boxers I would always cross to the other side of the street or go out into the road when another person or dog was passing, so that person was not entering my personal space. I would never in a million years have taken my boxers with me to a social engagement, a crowded environment of strangers, and particularly a climbing crag, where other people-strangers and dog-strangers would be coming and going. Even though they were all very well trained. It's generally not the right breed for those environments. I have "met" a few boxers out and about that have been trained to accept all strangers as "friend" but that is unusual. Our's were always trained to be guard dogs. I'm not sure how any owner of a mixed breed dog thinks they understand that dogs temperament and whether it will bite, until they have observed it in a large variety of situations over a significant period of time. I have zero problem in theory with dogs at any crag. I've personally never had any serious problem with any dogs I've encountered there, but I'm careful not to go into people's space until the dog is under control of their human. And I've met plenty of crag dogs who are not well trained and do not respond to voice commands. Fortunately for me, those dogs have not been aggressive. I'm sorry for people who have met poorly trained, poorly controlled dogs, that are also aggressive, guarding, protective, and territorial. |
Glowering wrote:
Who the hell gets bit by an English Bulldog?! |
Cheiftan Mews wrote:  |
|
Can you imagine what it was like back in the ice age, at some wooly mammoth kill? "I was there at the kill yesterday, cutting off some meat with my stone tool, when this ignorant and selfish savage in coyote fur, let his dire wolves run loose. They were getting in my pack, and one of them tried to steal my cuts! So I killed it, on the spot. " |
J E wrote: Bloodthirst? If you properly expose your dog as a puppy there will be little to zero issues, and any issues that come up will be easily addressed. Properly exposing your dog at a young age is the owner’s responsibility, not the dogs. Any owner who decides to take on a rescue or dog without prior exposure or training should be aware there may be reactivity issues when they take the dog home. Do you really think that every pitbull and rotty is just inherently violent to everyone and everything from a puppy through the day they die?!
I’m not ignoring facts, but those facts are irrelevant to my argument. The stats you posted are comparing different dog breeds. I am not arguing that pit bulls, Rottweilers, and German shepherds are the most “dangerous” breeds. That’s not my point. Nothing you posted, nor have I seen any stats so far, addresses my point; which is that humans are responsible for their dogs behavior and actions. I would venture a guess that a large percentage of the human fatalities by dog came from feral dogs. Providing statistics regarding feral dog attacks vs. dog attacks in the presence of owners would be relevant data I am looking for from you. A dog on a leash or with tremendous recall will likely never cause issue unless approached by the “victim”. The leash and recall training being the human influence negating any inherent tendencies by the dog (herding, pointing, biting according to you, etc.). There is a reason many states (such as Colorado) that charges the owner of the dog for bites/attacks. Humans are the issue, not the dog. God forbid you travel out of this country and encounter regions where the majority of dogs you encounter are 100% feral and you understand the difference between feral dogs and dogs with shitty owners. Either way @john wood nailed it |
Go Back to Super Topo wrote: https://people.com/florida-boy-mauled-death-pit-bull-mix-7560578
I don’t remember asking you to put words in my mouth |
J E wrote: So now you’ve transitioned from trying to argue with stats and data to arguing with two articles? One of which was from Florida, which, by all accounts isn’t even a real place. By the way, you’re still missing my point. But I guess I’m not surprised at this point lol
So asking you a question is now putting words in your mouth? Shit; did I just put words in your mouth again? *eye roll* Calm down big guy |
|
@J E have you ever owned a dog or just hate them, perceivably, due to a bad experience? |
Go Back to Super Topo wrote: Hurr durr florida. https://dogbitelaw.com/vicious-dogs/pit-bulls-facts-and-figures Wow, you like kicking babies, GBtST? Oh, I’m not putting words in your mouth, I’m jUsT aSkInG qUeStIoNs. Tucker Carlson shit. Finished engaging with you @prince
|
|
The entire dog breed argument seems like a red herring. Why isn't the discussion on the expectation of tethering / physically restraining your dog at the crag? Seems like there's some middle ground here where we could agree that dogs are fine at the crag IF they are leashed or tethered at a distance that restricts them from people outside the owner's party. I'd prefer no dogs at the crag. My wife loves dogs at the crag. When we do bring any of our dogs, we compromise and tether them to a ground anchor. People have to make an active choice to interact with them, and almost always ask permission first. If there's no room to do this, we just don't bring them. To this day, they haven't stolen a single chocolate crag cake! @Mark Pilate - Hilarious! Perfect response!
|
|
Pro dog: Bad dogs are a product of bad ownership, thus blame the human Anti dog: Bad dogs are a product of selective breeding, thus blame the dog Either way, when others are belaying, an unleashed dog is a risk factor. They have reduced mobility and their climber's life on the line. Please don't assume that everyone else is automatically ok with your dog. I was not until my in-laws got a dog. Others in my extended family are deathly afraid. It seems non-sensical to cater the world around someone's fear of a dog, so that's a fair argument, but to that end, a fair compromise would be to keep the dog on a lead while at the crag. It's a win-win, your dog gets to come with you, but is within your direct physical control if need be. On a semi-related note, which is a better crag snack for maintaining energy, a salami stick, or a chocolate cupcake? |
J E wrote: Done engaging with me? I literally just asked you if you own a dog or if you have trauma related to dogs (neither of which you answered, mind you). Rage quit much |
J L wrote: Why limit yourself? Have both |
J E wrote: What are you on about? lmao Additionally, for the 5th time, I don’t disagree with any of the statistics showing pit bulls are the leading dog breed in attacks and fatalities. However, that’s still not my point and you haven’t really been engaging in conversation this entire time as you continually ignore my point so I’m not sure this will change the dynamics the conversation and/or forum And for the record, I was genuinely curious if you perceive “bloodthirsty” breeds as being overly aggressive for the duration of their life’s or if you only perceive them as being bloodthirsty in specific situations…in which case could have hopefully lead to some healthy talking points regarding prevention of the situations causing attacks. I’m also somewhat perplexed as to how any of that correlates to my treatment of babies. I am an opponent of babies at the crag if that’s what you’re implying. |
|
Todd. I get that you are a vet and that you have clients with pitties but reality really doesn't care about official lines that bad behavior in dogs is always the fault of the owner and never the breed. I absolutely love Heelers and they rarely break the skin when they nip heels but every one I ever knew did it sooner or later. Show me a border Collie that doesn't naturally herd. Pit bulls have been bred to kill and they have a fabulous record of doing exactly that. On top of breed there's also personality. Our pets absolutely have it and some of them are just naturally jerks. I bought a Bengal cat once that was a stone cold killer and a real handful. I bought the book on training it. I got it as a little kitten and tried to be the best influence possible but Beastie was a jerk. I suspect that he was one or two generations too close to the actual wild cat. I don't think he was a straight up first generation hybrid but no way was he the 4 generations removed from the wild cat that is required to be an official Bengal. He had lots of moments of affection and cuddling etc but at least several times a week he would get weird and stalk and attack me full tilt. I would toss him out in his enclosure and when he came in 20 minutes later he was fine and affectionate. Somehow I put up with that situation for 9 years... talk about an abusive relationship. Pet owners are blind. |
|
I think this thread needs a picture of Luna. This is why I don't bring her to the crag anymore. NOT because of fearfull or angry or entitled humans, but because she get's scared in big open spaces with her loved ones high off the ground. The last time she did come to the crag, she hid in my haul bag.  |
Bruno Schull wrote: Most dogs like this have a negative impact on other climbers because the second their loved on leaves the ground all the do is whine and yelp. Not all bad interactions with dogs are bites. I've fallen on two dogs at different crags bouldering, which I guess in your eyes is my fault for some reason. Look at the broader scope of how dogs create a bad experience for others. Luna looks like a sweet dog, but she obviously doesn't want to be there in this picture, and I would guess was vocal about it which if it was a busy crag would be annoying. As you have self-discovered its best just to leave her home. Again, I'm not anti-dog. Just advocating that 90% of dogs at a crags would be best left at home. |
 |
