Spin-off: Responsible Pet Ownership

Remove all ads!

To separate the matter over in the feral cat discussion, what do you think makes for responsible pet ownership? How should a responsible pet owner react when informed (politely) about trouble his/her pet is causing? What about when measures are ineffective and the trouble escalates?

Discuss.

 

I'm not sure what can be added that wasn't covered in the other thread. I think trouble making pets only fall into two categories: dogs and cats. With the rare exception of a tiger or kangaroo getting loose in Florida or Beverly Hills, that's about it.

As a pet (dog) owner, its up to me to keep him out of other people's yards, etc. I think its pretty commonly assumed that dog owners don't let their animals roam freely, even if they will return home to eat and sleep.

If my dog goes anywhere that is not inside the boundaries of my backyard, he's on a leash, controlled, and curb-side, so that when he needs to, "go" he's not doing it on someone's front lawn. I bring plastic bags to clean up after him. Unpleasant, yes, but thats the price I have to pay for owning the dog.

That being said, I assume if I didn't control my dog, and it was affecting my neighbors, animal control would get involved and take the dog. I think for most dog owners its pretty much the same.

I do not understand at all why the vast majority of owners of outdoor cats feel no responsibility for what their cat does on other people's property.

 

Like Art, I'm a dog owner. I am not a cat hater, but I am allergic to cats, and so for that reason alone, I do not think I will ever own a cat. I agree in principle though to what Art is saying, as I care for my dog in a very similar manner to the way he cares for his.

To me there definitely seems to be a double standard for how people treat dogs and how people treat cats. While most people feel that common sense dictates that dogs should be kept on a leash, cats do not have to be. I understand that the guiding principle here is that dogs bite and cats generally don't, but I know many dogs (mine included) that have never bitten anyone.

The other double standard is that if a dog poops somewhere other than your yard, you better have a plastic bag, pooper-scooper, etc., to clean up after them, but again because cats can run free, no one makes a big deal out of it.

I think that a pet-owner should know almost as much about their pets as they would their children - effectively where they are at all times. When our dog goes outside without us, we put it on a 30 foot-long leash. That way it can get to nearly everywhere in the backyard, but can't leave the property.

 

As I stated in the other thread, it is every pet owner’s responsibility to provide his or her pet with everything that the pet needs to live a happy and healthy life. Just keeping your pet enclosed in not enough. My wife had a cat when me married. It was an indoor cat (front claws removed so it wasn't safe outdoors, it couldn't defend itself). To make up for the stimulus that it missed by not being outside, she would buy it toys, and had an extensive, play set for lack of a better word, that was carpeted, had lots of places to explore and hide. My wife would hide toys in the play set for the cat to discover. It was also taken to the vet regularly, and was fed quality food. I believe that these are examples of proper care of a cat. Now, if you live on a farm, with hundreds of acres around, you can keep outdoor cats, as long as you fix them so there is no chance of creating feral cats (same thing for dogs or ferrets)

I have had quite a bit of experience in dealing with neighbors, and their beloved little pets. It usually goes like this: the first thing the do is ask if I was sure it was their pet, then they ask me how they are supposed to keep their pet from exhibiting such unwanted behavior (to which I reply that I don't know, and that if they don't come up with something I will make it so that they don't have to worry about it), after they get past their indignation about me threatening their pet that they love like a family member (so much that they just let it wild ) they usually again ask me how I expect them to be responsible for what their pet does, at that point I realize that I am dealing with someone who definitely went to public schools (see note in edit bellow)., and I attempt to explain to them, using single syllable words, that it is their pet, so it is their responsibility. As they have no concept of personal responsibility, they don't get it and start telling me how unreasonable I am being, at which point I drop the ultimatum on them and walk away. I have had to talk to the police a couple of times after that, and when I explain the issue to them, they usually laugh and tell me just to make sure I don't get caught.

The only pets we have are tropical fish, and there is a reason for that, namely, I cannot provide a responsible home for a dog or cat. That is not to say I couldn't provide a better home than most people do for their pets. What is average out there isn't sufficient IMO.

I sure like what Aldeth and ArtE say about the responsibility they take for their dogs. They have very lucky pets!

Edit:
As my statement regarding public schools offended Aldeth, let me clarify it here. The statement does not state or imply anything about everyone who went to public schools. It speaks to a subset of people who refuse to accept personal responsibility, and the fact that public schools are adverse to the failure of students based upon sub-standard demonstration of what they are there to learn. The fact is the government runs public schools. As it is in the best interest of the Government to have the populace be dependant upon it, critical thinking, especially in regards to personal responsibility is not a high priority. Additionally, while there are exceptions, it has been shown that private schools provide a better education than public. I am thankfully that Aldeth, as well as many others on this board who were educated in public schools are proof that there are exceptions to this. Finally, yes I also went to public schools.

[ April 15, 2005, 21:13: Message edited by: Darkwolf ]

 

That is rather an inflammatory statement DW. I went to public schools, just like I'm sure many people on this board have, and I think of myself as fairly well-read, well-spoken and well-educated person. Your statement definitely implies that anyone educated in public schools is lacking in one or more of these qualities.

 

Yes, a large part of what I wanted to explore here is the double standard re feline/canine behavior and care, and if there's any difference between European (as evidenced by Tal's statement in the other thread, which I can't quote because I'm about to walk out the door) and American sensibilities on the matter.

I'm a public-school educated, former indoor-only cat-owner who had to deal with messes instigated by outdoor-only 'pets' with 'owners' who refused to do anything to keep the animals off my property.

 

I for one think that pets should not be let free unless carefully superviced, that is I consider people who have their cats wandering around town irresponsible in their way of taking care of their pets. This of course people who let their pets roam free disagree with but it's just my opinion.

 

Perhaps I shouldn't speak here -- but the attitude of "if it comes near my house, I have the right to kill it" is certainly not a prevalent one here in Oklahoma. I don't know of anyone in this area who acts in such a manner, and one could say that I live in just about the most rural, redneck part of the country there is. They say that toothpaste was invented here -- because most people only have one tooth. Yet people here respect ownership of animals -- cattle, sheep, horses, goats and cats/dogs. The attitude is if one is on your land, it COULD be SOMEBODY ELSES animal(i.e. PROPERTY) and therefore off limits. But as I said...this is cattle country -- and just about everyone has MANY animals of some sort. That attitude you describe is simply untrue for this place or any other place I've lived, for that matter.

[ April 16, 2005, 02:20: Message edited by: Spellbound ]

 

Most government officials are elected. So, it can reasonably be argued that the public "runs" them. I believe the reverse: Many parents want their kids to get great grades. Thusly, the schools are pressured into passing kids with grades that satisfy the egos of the parents.

If the government would crack down on students, parents would be the first to create a firestorm of protest, and, of course, blame the schools for the failures of their kids, who are busy with other "endeavers" and could really care less about really learning anything. Kids do spend most of their time learning how to be great consumers, and that's the best education that corporate America can hope for.

 

This is a difficult post for me, since we have lost two pets by violence; one by malice, one probably inadvertent. Both equally dead. I'm not sure if I can, or should, express my feelings about Darkworf's paper target view of trespassing animals. Here in Ohio, Taluntain--and it's probably the same in
Wisconsin--it's perfectly legal to shoot anything-- in some circumstances, anyone-- that comes onto your property without permission. It's not normally done, but it's quite legal, for those who choose to stand on this particular rock.

One of our dogs is a purebred Brittany that we purchased from a man who has a small farm down on the Ohio River. He happened to mention to us that he has to keep his dogs chained up because his neighbor shoots them if they wander onto his property. There was nothing he could do about it, although his dogs were registered hunters worth hundreds of dollars each. The dog shooter is lucky to have such a law-abiding neighbor.

[ April 18, 2005, 01:04: Message edited by: Cernak ]

 

I just checked what the Finnish law says about pet ownership and I found out that pet cats on the street are outlaws, shooting them is forbidden because shooting in cities is forbidden and there are regulations about "animal torture" which prevents shooting. The owner however will get no compensation if the neighbour kills their cats in his own property he will probably get a small fine though. So basically if you kill the cat with certain types of poison even if it happened to be your neighbour's cat you're acting within the law. The same goes for dogs and other pet animals too.

I was not sure if this should go to the cat shooting thread or here but since it basically confirms that the Finnish law agrees with me on what is responsible pet control, so I posted it here.

EDIT: There is one thing perhaps that I haven't made quite clear enough. If you have a big enough yard and your dog and cat stays on that yard (you have a secure enough fence to make sure that they don't run off) you are by all means entiteled to keep them free on your yard, but if they have the ability to cross it and do so frequently you are irresponsible with your pet and quite simply begging for trouble.

 

My point was to show that the Finnish law considers it irresponsible have cats roam free in the neighbourhood which I perfectly agree. I mentioned dogs too so that no one would assume that this just applied for cats.

In most cases I do not think that cats or pets can cause that much trouble but one relative of my had approximately 50 cats, because they had not been sterilized (which I atleast think people should do if they insist to have their cats roam free) they reproduced fast. These cats became violent predators and behaved aggressively near humans and destroyed a large part of the bird and squirrel population of the area. All of these cats were practically his pets. Unfortunately this is perfectly legal in Finland. After he moved from there and a new owner got the house there was no way my relative could have taken all those cats away so the new owner killed them all with poison. This might be considered to be an extreme example but there are quite a few of people like this in Finland especially on the countryside. The winter kills off plenty of these but unfortunately the relative of mine kept his cats inside during the winter.

 

There are no organisations that hunt domesticated cats, and I ain't saying it's illegal to have your cat roam free what I am saying is that others have the right to kill a cat (if they use the correct methods) domesticated or not if it is on the streets. There are some organisations in Finland that catches feral cats and I'm fairly sure they have taken domesticated cats too allthough I'm certain they'll not kill immidiately it if it has a collar in which case they would probably wait for awhile for someone to come and seek it before they kill it. There organsations do work on voulentary work because as you probably know the government is never exactly eager to support this kind of work.

And yes it was for the most part my interprention of the law the law does not clearly state that it's irresponsible, but what the law does state is that if your neighbour poisoned your cat and you find out about it will be your problem and you are the one responsible because you had your cat roam free. And I personally consider you to be an irresponsible owner if you let this happen. The same goes if your cat is run over by a car or carelessly reproduces (this one is worst since the cats born become very likely feral).

 

Responsible pet owner:

1.) Choose a pet to suit your lifestyle. If you live in a small flat, don't get a St. Bernard (Unlike the idiots that live above the bakers in my home town who have two). If you're going to be out all day get a pet that doesn't need lots of attention. There are plenty of websites dedicated to breed requirements. You can generally fit Cross/Heinz 57's into a likely category.

2.) Have your pet neutered/speyed. There's obviously a problem with strays and feral animals in most countrys. (Except Guernsey - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/guernsey/3856241.stm) Obviously DW's thread about cats, but I believe the current figures for the US show dog numbers at about 7 times the human population. In England/Scotland/Wales there are about 120,000 stray dogs taken in every year, of which about a third are put down. Unless you're a particular breed expert, there is no need what-so-ever to breed your animal, and speying significantly decreases the chances of the animal getting ovarian cancer in later life.

3.) Microchip - so your pet can be brought home should it go missing. Also a good deterent against dog thieves, a growing problem in Britain.

4.) Insurance. Good sense to have Health insurance, Vet bills can be astronomical. Would recommend accident insurance on dogs as they can cause major accidents. (Running out in front of cars for instance)

5.) Control & Training. All dogs can be unpredicatable, don't let them get in a situation where there's a chance they can injure themselves or others. Recall is a priority if you intend letting them off lead. Socialisation with other dogs is also very important to prevent aggresion.
Cat's predomiantly kill at night so keep them in overnight. I don't agree with "house cats", when I've had cats I've been living in the country. I didn't consider having either a cat or dog when living in London.

6.) Thanks for the reminder Jesper, Scoop your Dogs Poop!

A few more thoughts:

7.) Diet - make sure your animal gets all the nutrition it requires. (Not all dog and cat foods are "complete", you need to suplement them). Ensure they always have fresh water available.

8.) Medicine - Keep up to date on vaccinations, worming medication, flea stuff etc. It will make for a much happier life.

[ April 20, 2005, 13:07: Message edited by: Carcaroth ]