The Kisielewskis want dogs off chains, behind fences

Getting dogs off chains and into fences has turned into a passion for a local couple who want all animals to be comfortable and pet owners to be better educated about their animals' care.

[Hannah Long]

Good for you and your hubby and Lowe's. Also, good for the two dog owners who used your fencing svc. to give their dogs some freedom at last. You are doing a good thing. Especially to spend your Christmas Eve doing good work. What a gift for those dogs!! If memory serves me, we were knee deep in snow then.

[Bruce C]

Props for this. Very good job.

[Mary]

Two fences?

[reanna]

Mary wrote:

Two fences?

I am so glad that people are volunteering and seeing the
need for this service!

[lauren]

Mary wrote:

Two fences?

I

I Think for starters two fences is Great!!! wish more people would do the same. Two fences is amazing!!! its only the beginning!!!

[Mary]

What happens when one of those dogs busts out of its fence and bites somebody? Who is liable?

[dawgone]

Mary wrote:

What happens when one of those dogs busts out of its fence and bites somebody? Who is liable?

Good question. Remember the law of unintended consequence.

[caroline]

If a dog "busts out" of it's fence and bites someone, the owner is responsible. Same is true if your own dog got out and bit someone, or broke away from his chain and bit someone. BTW CHAINED dogs are 3.8 times more likely to bite because of the frustration of being chained.If an innocent child aproaches an aggressive dog, I would hope that there was a barrier(fence)

[Tater Tot]

What about all them cats?

[dawgone]

caroline wrote:

If a dog "busts out" of it's fence and bites someone, the owner is responsible. Same is true if your own dog got out and bit someone, or broke away from his chain and bit someone. BTW CHAINED dogs are 3.8 times more likely to bite because of the frustration of being chained.If an innocent child aproaches an aggressive dog, I would hope that there was a barrier(fence)

Propaganda. Any dog can become territorial. Never approach a dog in its vehicle, or you might get your hand chomped. An innocent child who approaches any dog has not been taught well. Such a child is going to get hurt in some other way because he is incapable of assessing risk or he is not properly supervised.

--biting dogs were 16.4 times more likely to be German Shepherd
or 4 times more likely to be Chow
--biting dogs were 6.2 times more likely to be male
--biting dogs were 2.6 times more likely to be un-neutered
--biting dogs were 3.5 times more likely to reside in a house with children

Should a tethering ban be put in place, and bites still occur, what next? I guess we can work our way down the list until we outlaw dogs living in homes with children.

Try reading this for a balanced overview. The number always cited is 2.8. not 3.8.

http://www.thedogpress.com/Columns/Jade/07_Do...

"Most of the studies and references that I found gave a list of resources, but no footnotes as to which source any given statistic came from and many were significantly out of date. This makes it difficult to guarantee the accuracy of many of the statistics I read. However, the motivation of the source must be taken into consideration as well as the fact that many sources derive their data from news reports instead of county health records. My personal experience has shown that only about half of the dog bites reported as “pit bulls”, actually are, as many mixed breed dogs are called “pit bulls” unless proven other wise. Also, many studies quoted each other’s data as a premise for their own. Since there does seem to be a consensus of opinion on some of it, I will repeat only what I believe to be credible.

“Fatal Dog Attacks in the US, from 1965-2001”, analyzed 431 cases over 35 years and:

10% involved leashed dogs or misc. circumstances
17% resulted from attacks by dogs roaming off their owners’ property
73% involved dogs within the boundaries of the owners’ property
(25% chained dogs, 25% dogs in yard, and 23% dogs inside the home)

Surprisingly, it made no difference whether or not the dogs were chained as 75% involved in fatalities were not chained, and yet this has been frequently cited by animal rights proponents to cause aggression.(At least a chained dog can’t chase you!) Currently, the AVMA has no official position on tethering and a 2001 study conducted at Cornell University comparing tethered dogs to those in pens stated “the behavior of the dogs in this study did not indicate an improvement in welfare in pens”. No other controlled study has ever been conducted on this subject.

The oft quoted statistic that chained dogs are 2.8 times more likely to bite is, based on my research, a specious assumption. Derived from “Which dogs bite? A case-control study of risk factors”(Pediatrics 1994) which uses only 178 hand picked cases out of 991 reported bites, and there are no statistics as to how many dogs within Denver Metro Animal Services jurisdiction were tethered full time, part time or not at all in the total dog population. In regards to contributing factors, especially tethering, I would have to say that this study has no scientific merit whatsoever ...."

[lauren]

dawgone wrote:

<quoted text>
Propaganda. Any dog can become territorial. Never approach a dog in its vehicle, or you might get your hand chomped. An innocent child who approaches any dog has not been taught well. Such a child is going to get hurt in some other way because he is incapable of assessing risk or he is not properly supervised.
--biting dogs were 16.4 times more likely to be German Shepherd
or 4 times more likely to be Chow
--biting dogs were 6.2 times more likely to be male
--biting dogs were 2.6 times more likely to be un-neutered
--biting dogs were 3.5 times more likely to reside in a house with children
Should a tethering ban be put in place, and bites still occur, what next? I guess we can work our way down the list until we outlaw dogs living in homes with children.
Try reading this for a balanced overview. The number always cited is 2.8. not 3.8.
http://www.thedogpress.com/Columns/Jade/07_Do...
"Most of the studies and references that I found gave a list of resources, but no footnotes as to which source any given statistic came from and many were significantly out of date. This makes it difficult to guarantee the accuracy of many of the statistics I read. However, the motivation of the source must be taken into consideration as well as the fact that many sources derive their data from news reports instead of county health records. My personal experience has shown that only about half of the dog bites reported as “pit bulls”, actually are, as many mixed breed dogs are called “pit bulls” unless proven other wise. Also, many studies quoted each other’s data as a premise for their own. Since there does seem to be a consensus of opinion on some of it, I will repeat only what I believe to be credible.
“Fatal Dog Attacks in the US, from 1965-2001”, analyzed 431 cases over 35 years and:
10% involved leashed dogs or misc. circumstances
17% resulted from attacks by dogs roaming off their owners’ property
73% involved dogs within the boundaries of the owners’ property
(25% chained dogs, 25% dogs in yard, and 23% dogs inside the home)
Surprisingly, it made no difference whether or not the dogs were chained as 75% involved in fatalities were not chained, and yet this has been frequently cited by animal rights proponents to cause aggression.(At least a chained dog can’t chase you!) Currently, the AVMA has no official position on tethering and a 2001 study conducted at Cornell University comparing tethered dogs to those in pens stated “the behavior of the dogs in this study did not indicate an improvement in welfare in pens”. No other controlled study has ever been conducted on this subject.
The oft quoted statistic that chained dogs are 2.8 times more likely to bite is, based on my research, a specious assumption. Derived from “Which dogs bite? A case-control study of risk factors”(Pediatrics 1994) which uses only 178 hand picked cases out of 991 reported bites, and there are no statistics as to how many dogs within Denver Metro Animal Services jurisdiction were tethered full time, part time or not at all in the total dog population. In regards to contributing factors, especially tethering, I would have to say that this study has no scientific merit whatsoever ...."

All of you can go on and debate your statistics. The important thing is that most of the dogs I've seen in fences were built for dogs that are harmless and friendly in our area. They are better off
because they dont sit in their own feces and muddy areas that they can't move away from. So it's a win win situation. The dog is happy and the owners is happy and the people walking around seeing the dog happy is fine. Results!!!

[lauren]

you can debate your statistics, but a dog behind a fence, like the ones I've seen
are well adjusted , don't get tangled, don't sit in their own feces. Why don't
you try chaining yourself, and then try being in a fenced area. Which would you choose? Dogs are not lawn ornaments.

[tatiana]

I know that most states are changing their laws and more humane.
It's only a matter of time that chaining will be illegal as it is in many
states and counties.

[caroline]

"Ms. Jade" does not sound to me like a respected researcher..unless of course yu read the "dog press" which is an AKC mag that has taken many shots at the HSUS and does not believe in animal rights of ANY kind...talk about propaganda...but keep breeding your dogs "Dawgone" and filling our shelters...we the tax payers will take care of it!

[Rover]

lauren wrote:

you can debate your statistics, but a dog behind a fence, like the ones I've seen
are well adjusted , don't get tangled, don't sit in their own feces. Why don't
you try chaining yourself, and then try being in a fenced area. Which would you choose? Dogs are not lawn ornaments.

Exactly! Your posts are spot on.

Keep dogs off chains. It's a horrible life for them.

[dawgone]

caroline wrote:

"Ms. Jade" does not sound to me like a respected researcher..unless of course yu read the "dog press" which is an AKC mag that has taken many shots at the HSUS and does not believe in animal rights of ANY kind...talk about propaganda...but keep breeding your dogs "Dawgone" and filling our shelters...we the tax payers will take care of it!

H$U$ is not your friend. They do not do a damn thing for dogs in your local shelter.
I am not a breeder, and I have no use for AKC. Ms. Jade is not the researcher; the statistics were taken from the same study the animal rights extremists cite. You wouldn't know that, because you swallow any extremist pablum they feed you. They appeal to your emotions, like inding a picture of one abused dog and plastering it all over the internet.

That's your way, though. Anyone who doesn't agree with you must be a dirty breeder filling the shelters with dogs.
That's another myth. Overpopulation is a myth. The vast majority of dogs in shelters had an owner who either couldn't keep them, or no longer wanted them.

Oh, none of you answered Mary's question. One phone call and I found out about the dog in bite quarantine. Too bad none of you had the guts to tell the truth.

[Fido]

dawgone wrote:

<quoted text>
H$U$ is not your friend. They do not do a damn thing for dogs in your local shelter.
I am not a breeder, and I have no use for AKC. Ms. Jade is not the researcher; the statistics were taken from the same study the animal rights extremists cite. You wouldn't know that, because you swallow any extremist pablum they feed you. They appeal to your emotions, like inding a picture of one abused dog and plastering it all over the internet.
That's your way, though. Anyone who doesn't agree with you must be a dirty breeder filling the shelters with dogs.
That's another myth. Overpopulation is a myth. The vast majority of dogs in shelters had an owner who either couldn't keep them, or no longer wanted them.
Oh, none of you answered Mary's question. One phone call and I found out about the dog in bite quarantine. Too bad none of you had the guts to tell the truth.

You can't handle the truth dirty breeder. Wooof.