Keeping dogs out of the yard

[G Henslee]

Right f****it. Do us all a favor and have some bacon grease soaked sponges for your din-din tonite.

[G Henslee]

Wrong fucktard. Learn to read headers.

[G Henslee]

Amen. Typical Kanter, joined at the hip with [e-mail]

[Jim Yanik]

"Doug Kanter" wrote in news:ey6Fe.2616$ [e-mail]:

Only in your opinion.

I get the impression you would like to live in a lawless society. There are laws in just about every state about harming domestic pets,but you would rather act on your own and leave lethal traps for them(except that the law doesn't see it that way.),in "defense of your property",rather than talk to the owner,or get the authorities involved.

[Jim Yanik]

Jim Yanik wrote in news:Xns969EBF0963E8jyanikkuanet@129.250.170.86:

As I said before,many Usenet posters give out bad or unwise advice. You seem to be one of those.

[G Henslee]

What's it costin' you these days to have your shot out or otherwise broken windows replaced, kicked and trampled sprinkler heads fixed, and

24 hour security to guard you against the 25 years worth of vengeful people who must hate your sorry ass?

Save your phoney keyboard flexing for the gai-boi groups you hang in.

[G Henslee]

Yes, I could. But I don't, dickweed. You shouldn't speak of that which you don't know. As with everything else you post you're as full of shit as a xmas goose.

[Doug Kanter]

Naturally, you know what's best IN THEORY, but I've dealt with irresponsible dog owners for the past 25 years. There are two types and ONLY two types:

Type 1: Knows that what they're doing is wrong, but doesn't give a damn. Type 2: Doesn't realize that they're f***ed up. Too stupid to own a dog, in other words.

My preference is to use the existing laws in my favor. Here, it's 3 strikes and your doggy is taken away forever. That usually takes weeks. I've learned to compress the process into as little as a week in one case. This usually involves retraining the dog catcher. Many believe the dog owner should have a little time in between visits, to "think about their mistake". Nope.

As far as eliminating the animal, I'd prefer to use a bullet, but this is not possible in my neighborhood. However, make no mistake about this, Jimmy boy: All day long, farmers cause nuisance animals to vanish, and it's perfectly legal. If I had the opportunity, I'd do the same. You can claim that a dog is different from an insect because people are emotionally attached to dogs, but that matters little to anyone but the dog owner.

[Doug Kanter]

The header proves nothing. You could have more than one ISP, and use any of a wide assortment of news access methods. Fucktard.

[Doug Kanter]

What's your alternative? Be a sap and let dogs crap all over your yard? Are you also OK with spending money to have your carpets cleaned because of something your neighbor did?

What's with the sudden gay-bashing? Is your son dating a nice boy?

[Doug Kanter]

Really? Explain where I'm wrong, in the paragraph beginning with "The header proves nothing...."

[Jim Yanik]

"Doug Kanter" wrote in news:JFpFe.2290$ [e-mail]:

FARMERS,in agriculture-zoned areas,sure. But most if not all of the queries HERE are from URBAN homeowners,where it is is NOT legal.

And the law authorities.

I live in an apartment,and I have about 30 years of experience with dog owners and poop where it shouldn't be. There are a minority of owners who either curb their dog in the proper places or clean up after them without instruction,then there are the ones who were just unaware or clueless(who straighten up after a talk.),and then the ones who just don't care(even after you talk with them).

So,that's THREE types.

[Doug Kanter]

Actually, in NY, you can end any animal that damages ANY food crop. Not dependent on zoning. Call the NYS DEC for clarification. This obviously does not address methods.

They need to find a dead animal first. The key word is "find". Otherwise, all they have is a missing pet report.

Well, even many of the owners who clean up fall into one of the other two categories, because they won't obey a polite request from a property owner to do it elsewhere. Or, perhaps that puts them into yet another category: Criminal, since trespassing is illegal.

[Jim Yanik]

"Doug Kanter" wrote in news:r7sFe.2713$ [e-mail]:

And WHERE do people grow food crops? Farms. Most people posting here have not mentioned any gardens being devastated. You're reaching again.AND trying to use an exemption as the general rule.

Ah,so you advocate an illegal act,then compound it by hiding evidence,a second illegal act. You must be a wonderful law-abiding citizen.(not)

Well,as I said;APARTMENT(and "curb their dog in the *proper* places"),so there are "common areas".The first type,those that clean up afterwards without any prompting,are the sort that would not use another person's yard anyways. "curb their dog in the *proper* places" should have been a clue to you.

[meirman]

In alt.home.repair on Mon, 25 Jul 2005 12:24:01 GMT "Doug Kanter" posted:

I think they talked to the owner. I should have said that they, or at least the sone, walked him with a leash a couple times that I saw after that. But they still leave him out when they are out with no leash, and I think only the son puts a leash on him at all.

Meirman

-- If emailing, please let me know whether or not you are posting the same letter. Change domain to erols.com, if necessary.

[Doug Kanter]

The law allows for protection of food growing plots of any size. I believe it's a holdover from the victory garden days, during WWII. Haven't you ever seen 1 acre food gardens? Some people do that for the food, not just for enjoyment as I do. But, those plots are not considered "farms". A 40x40 plot in a typical suburban neighborhood may be protected in the same way as a farm.

As far as "devastated", in my previous home, a couple of dogs were doing exactly that: Digging in the easiest soil they could find, which happened to be my garden. A one week old lettuce seedling does not respond well to being pissed on and then dug out of the soil. The solution involved a conference with the town justice, a series of warnings (one of which was rather horrific), and the sudden "retraining" of the animal control person. It worked nicely.

I'm glad you haven't had to deal with something like this. It was NOT enjoyable.

If an animal was destroying your handiwork and you could get little or no help from the authorities, I'm sure you'd handle it any way you saw fit. Or, if you had to shell out cash to have your carpets cleaned because of some asshole's pet, again, I'm sure you'd be over the top. You will say otherwise, however.

I don't know what fantasy world you live in, but people who clean up after their dogs STILL walk them, and let the dogs do their thing on other peoples' property. And, in some cases, they refuse to obey requests to take their dogs elsewhere.

[Jim Yanik]

"Doug Kanter" wrote in news:6gMFe.2375$ [e-mail]:

Most urban dwellers do not have such garden plots. And NONE of the posters here mentioned any gardens being damaged. You're reaching again.AND trying to use an exemption as the general rule.

You keep on bringing up -exceptions- that are not common in urbania,and not mentioned in any of the posts on this newsgroup,and then believe that's justification for cruelty to animals in other circumstances.

It's happened to me,tracked the crap right thru the living room and into the kitchen,and I had to clean it myself.It's NOT any major carpet cleaning deal.And I did go "over the top",and let the manager know about it. The woman moved out shortly after that.(sad,she was VERY hot!)

No,people who clean up after their dogs on their own are NOT the sort that walk their dogs and leave crap where it's improper.

Thus the problem is with the dog's walker and not the dog itself. So no "justification" for being cruel to the animal.

[Doug Kanter]

Doesn't matter what anyone else mentioned. You're challenging my beliefs about dogs, and I'm explaining them by using examples which are NOT exceptions, at least not based on my experience. In order to determine who owned 3 stray dogs many years ago, I followed those dogs through the neighborhood and watched as they dug their way through various properties. That's what dogs do sometimes.

Let's dissect this. You used the word "cruelty". Although I have no problem with someone slowly killing a dog (the sponge trick, for instance), it's not something I'd do myself. That's not because I give a damn about the dog. Rather, I'd want to be sure it was dead. If I lived in a place where it was safe to do so, I'd opt for a bullet. It would satisfy my desire to be thorough.

As far as "exceptions", you can only make that statement if you realize it's limited by your awareness of what dog catchers deal with all day. Do you work for your local government, and have access to those statistics? Or, do you go from door to door asking people about their experiences with dogs?

My one experience with carpet involved professional cleaning. Some people have more sensitive noses than others, just as some people can hear higher frequencies. I was not able to identify the dog criminal responsible for the gift on my lawn, or we would've met in small claims court.

Dogs are attracted to the scent where other dogs have created a bathroom. It doesn't matter if it's cleaned up. Nobody carries a bucket of water with them when walking their dog. So, the spot is attractive to stray dogs later, and the situation gets out of hand. This is why I tell dog owners to go elsewhere, even if they intend to clean it up.

Actually, this isn't quite true. Behavioral psychology suggests that in a way, the owners are trained by the dogs. Why do they walk their dogs? Not just for the exercise. The dogs become accustomed to crapping only if they're walked. Sometimes they crap in the house if they're not walked. So, the human walks the dog, which leads to the antisocial behavior and disrespect for property rights. Therefore, the dog is at least equally responsible. We think we've domesticated them, but this is based on religious nonsense which says that a higher power made us as his crowning achievment. Bullshit.

On a vaguely related subject, there is a body of evidence suggesting that the domestication of plants is not a one-way street either. If you find this interesting, you might pick up a book called "The Botany of Desire". It's a fascinating exploration of who's zoomin' who.

[Jim Yanik]

"Doug Kanter" wrote in news:KvNFe.2405$ [e-mail]:

Sure they are exceptions;the majority of the US population lives in URBAN areas,and few of them have food-producing gardens.

SOMETIMES. Another exception put forth as common occurrence.

But it IS cruelty to animals,both legally and morally.

And,you recommend illegal things you would not do yourself. There's that bad Usenet advice I mentioned.

and in most urban areas,discharging a firearm for that purpose is illegal. More of your bad Usenet advice.

As I said;Sure they are exceptions;the majority of the US population lives in URBAN areas,and few of them have food-producing gardens.

Or are just too finicky or lazy to clean it themselves.

It's not that they use your yard and then clean it up,it's that they tend to NOT USE such places in the first place(the 1st category,not the other

2). They curb their dogs in the proper places-not on others property.

No,it takes the dog -outdoors- to do their toilet,much preferable to the alternative.Dogs don't take to litterboxes like cats.

Well,indoors WOULD be the only place they could crap,if not walked(outdoors).DUH... Now,walking off one's own property means either exercise or an intent to deposit the dog's wastes on someone else's property.Also that they do not have a fenced in yard to allow the dog to relieve itself without being in a person's control.

No,some humans allow the dog to select the place for their deposits,instead of being in command and control themselves.No "psychology" about it,just laziness and no consideration for others.

Only in your mind.

I don't believe in that religious nonsense either.

There was something along that line on a recent PBS program;Guns,Germs and Steel.(how primitive people domesticated food crops that gave the highest outputs,thus increasing their outputs thru selection)

[Doug Kanter]

I've already informed you that a dog is no different than a mosquito. When you apply the same rules about cruelty to a mosquito, then we can talk. If you don't agree that the two animals have equal value, explain yourself.

Yes. I stated that fact about firearms in the paragraph you just responded to. No need to repeat what I've already said. I'm already well versed about what constitutes safe shooting.

If these are exceptions, then every municipality in this country is wasting a whole lot of cash keeping dog catchers on the payroll, don't you think?

Nah...not at all. I do most things myself. But, it doesn't matter. Even if you do it yourself, the owner of the dog has stolen something more precious than money from you: Your time.

They tend to NOT USE what? Other peoples' property? That's nonsense. If that were the case, their owners would not be walking around with plastic bags and paper towels.

Conclusion: Dogs are not appropriate as pets, unless they are owned by exceptionally considerate humans, which we know is not the case. Therefore, dogs are no better than mosquitoes (like their owners).

Unless the humans are told otherwise, they stop wherever the dogs tell them to. You've seen this, but you do not trust what you see.

Nope. Ask your veterinarian. The dogs follows its nose. It marks territory, and returns to the same place repeatedly.