Dog growled at the conductor!

[amamba]

While I wasn't there to see it happen, I understand that the dog that scratched the little kid wasn't particularly big or hostile. It was in unfamiliar territory, with constant unfamiliar motion. The kid walked past in the coach, and I think the dog just saw the kid as something strange and unexpected. True service dogs are trained to accept strange circumstances without reacting in this way. Most pets aren't. That doesn't mean most pet owners are irresponsible. It just means service dogs are very, very special, and that's why they are permitted on the trains and ordinary pets are not.

Excellent post.

I will refrain from more commenting because I don't want to get smacked by the moderators, but I will just add that many animal groups, including the ASPCA, are against breed-specific legislation. I also believe that most dog bites are preventable with proper education and supervision of children of animals. Young children should never be left unsupervised with pets. Even my dog who wouldn't hurt a fly shouldn't be left with a child, unsupervised, because he doesn't like his ears or feet being touched.

And yes, overbreeding does lead to problems. My poor pug definitely struggles to breathe and the heat is a serious issue for him. I adopted him when he was six years old and blind from a breed specific rescue. He was born in a puppy mill and has many expensive health issues.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

I will refrain from more commenting because I don't want to get smacked by the moderators, but I will just add that many animal groups, including the ASPCA, are against breed-specific legislation. I also believe that most dog bites are preventable with proper education and supervision of children of animals. Young children should never be left unsupervised with pets.

I'd like to know what you think you would do if your pet pit bull suddenly started attacking someone while you supervised. Then I'd like you to explain how your experience would be different from other owners. Presumably you have a plan for how to preemptively control a muscular dog that other owners never would have thought of so lets hear it.

 

[Green Maned Lion]

You would tell it to stop, likely long before it even started. They listen. If it is not a dog that would listen, it should be kept away from children at minimum, put down in all likelihood. I don't object to putting down bad dogs. I object to specifying a breed as bad unfairly.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

You would tell it to stop, likely long before it even started. They listen. If it is not a dog that would listen, it should be kept away from children at minimum, put down in all likelihood. I don't object to putting down bad dogs. I object to specifying a breed as bad unfairly.

It should be clear to any responsible pet owner that pets are not something that can be controlled through affinity or willpower alone. The difference between safe and unsafe breeds isn't just the general demeanor of the dog but the size and ability as well. If a small dog (or cat) decides to attack unexpectedly you have the power to physically pick them up and immobilize them long before anyone is injured in a life threatening/altering manner. You simply cannot do that with large muscular dogs. By the time you've subdued them irreparable and life threatening/altering harm will have already been done. Anyone who thinks they can physically control a pet that is faster and stronger than they are is just plain nuts. If you cannot physically control a pet then in reality it's the pet that's in control of you. Maybe they'll do what you want and maybe they won't. You'll never know for certain and you'll always be at the mercy of their demeanor, which is precisely what a responsible pet owner would never want to depend upon.

 

[EB_OBS]

The problem with pit bulls is that they are large, very very strong and have such strong jaw muscles that they cannot be forced to release. Once it's jaws are clamped onto something you can smack the crap out of it and it will not let go. Professionals and/or trainers use a jaw stick or break stick. Basically a pry bar to open their jaws.

This biggest concern for me though about pit bulls is that they will attack unprovoked. This has been recognized in study after study of fatal and non-fatal dog attacks. Pit bulls as well are implicated in almost half, 42-44% of all fatal dog attacks.

You can argue all you want that it's bad owners and bad training but pit bulls as well as other bull dog breeds are unpredictable. I've known several well behaved and lovable pit bulls in my life and I've seen them snap. Bull dogs and pit bulls specifically were bred to be aggressive. Generation after generation, the most aggressive animals are allowed to breed while the more timid, less aggressive ones are spayed, neutered or destroyed. What you end up with is a dog that is genetically inclined to be aggressive. Add in the size and strength and you can see why pit bulls are involved in so many fatalities and attacks on children.

I don't believe pit bulls should be service animals for anything other than for protection. Of course in that case they aren't covered under the ADA and shouldn't be taken into situations where they end up in small, confined areas surrounded by strangers.

I love dogs. I've had dogs all my life. I have two nine year old boxers now. However I would never ever leave my young children around a pit bull anywhere. I don't care whose it is or how well behaved it seemed, nor would I ever own one since I do have children.

 

[amamba]

At the end of the day, pets are animals and you are right. Even well trained animals can do things that we don't expect - like when Mantacore the white tiger mauled Roy on stage (of Siegfried and Roy).

But like GML said, if I had an aggressive dog I wouldn't allow it near children - at all - and secondly, when dogs growl it is generally a warning to back up or get away. Many dogs bite out of fear when they are backed into a corner by children. Dogs generally don't like to be hugged and kissed, so that is another classic example of children not understanding animal behavior and getting their faces bitten.

Obviously a dog that is growling at people is NOT a service dog and thus should not be allowed on amtrak per current policy.

I'm not going to engage with statements that I think are full of hyperbole and ridicule. You do your research on the internet, and I'll do mine, and we can respectfully agree to disagree.

However, I will add that I believe that its a common myth/urban legend that pit bulls have locking jaws. The ASPCA agrees with me under this section, scroll down to "pit bull myths." Perhaps you have a different source with a difference bias. I've already mentioned that the ASPCA is against breed-specific legislation so I will freely admit their position and what side of the debate they are on.

http://www.aspca.org/pet-care/virtual-pet-behaviorist/dog-behavior/truth-about-pit-bulls

 

[George Harris]

Why do we hear the same tired, hackneyed rhetoric from both pit bull and gun proponents? Both guns and pit bills are extraordinarily dangerous in the wrong hands, both should be highly regulated, neither belong on trains.

Vicious dog = gun is a completely erroneous and uncalled for connection. The gun does nothing of its own volition. It is simply a piece of metal and wood or plastic. So far as I know there is no Constitutional issues involved with dog ownership, either.

George, I thought the same thing, although I certainly agree with the highlighted part of FFL's statement. However, I have many AU friends, some of whom I suspect may not be gun rights proponents, so I was going to keep my thought to myself for the sake of smooth feathers and staying OT. But you're one of those AU friends, too, so I'm going to have to agree, and cringe. I don't know what guns have to do with dogs or growling at the conductor. (Not that Annie plans to wear six-shooters, a gun belt, and chaps on any train trips. LOL)

I am constantly surprised at how frequently train threads become political podiums.

To avoid further political ranting is why I have not responded further on this subject, and also why I will not, much as I might want to I will say no more on it.

 

[TinCan782]

I am constantly surprised at how frequently train threads become political podiums.

To avoid further political ranting is why I have not responded further on this subject, and also why I will not, much as I might want to I will say no more on it.

I'm the original poster and I'm just sitting back watching this thread "evolve"!

Didn't occur to me I'd "start something". :hi:

 

[fillyjonk]

It seems to me the real problem is a person who decided the rules should be bent for them, and they claimed a dog that was not a trained service dog was. (As numerous others have pointed out, service dogs deal fine with unfamiliar situations and do not growl at people).

People who think they are "special" and the rules don't apply to them make it harder for the rest of us.

I've known pit bulls and Dobermans and all other kinds of "attack" breeds that were well-behaved, well-trained dogs. However, there are also people who don't take the responsibility to properly socialize their dog. (There is a pit bull a couple streets north of me that frequently runs loose. I don't know the dog and don't trust it. I don't walk in those neighborhoods out of concern that the dog might be loose and it might be unfriendly. And I had a bad experience with a German shepherd as a child.)

 

[BCL]

It seems to me the real problem is a person who decided the rules should be bent for them, and they claimed a dog that was not a trained service dog was. (As numerous others have pointed out, service dogs deal fine with unfamiliar situations and do not growl at people).

People who think they are "special" and the rules don't apply to them make it harder for the rest of us.

While interpretation of the ADA is that a person can't be asked about their disability when they have a service dog, they can be asked what it's trained to do. Kind of roundabout, but the DoJ says that's legal.

http://www.ada.gov/service_animals_2010.htm

When it is not obvious what service an animal provides, only limited inquiries are allowed. Staff may ask two questions: (1) is the dog a service animal required because of a disability, and (2) what work or task has the dog been trained to perform. Staff cannot ask about the person’s disability, require medical documentation, require a special identification card or training documentation for the dog, or ask that the dog demonstrate its ability to perform the work or task.

 

[George Harris]

You would tell it to stop, likely long before it even started. They listen. If it is not a dog that would listen, it should be kept away from children at minimum, put down in all likelihood. I don't object to putting down bad dogs. I object to specifying a breed as bad unfairly.

It should be clear to any responsible pet owner that pets are not something that can be controlled through affinity or willpower alone. The difference between safe and unsafe breeds isn't just the general demeanor of the dog but the size and ability as well. If a small dog (or cat) decides to attack unexpectedly you have the power to physically pick them up and immobilize them before the victim is injured in a life threatening/altering manner. You simply cannot do that with large muscular dogs. By the time you've subdued them irreparable and life threatening/altering harm will have already been done. Anyone who thinks they can physically control a pet that is faster and stronger than they are is just plain nuts. If you cannot physically control a pet then in reality it's the pet that's in control of you. Maybe they'll do what you want and maybe they won't. You'll never know for certain and you'll always be at the mercy of their demeanor, which is precisely what a responsible pet owner would never want to depend upon.

Sorry, no tolerance for a "pet" that needs physical control or to be kept away from children in my house. Our general rule was have big dogs with small kids. The kids are less likely to injure the dog and we have always found bigger dogs tended to be better natured than small dogs, the best being a good "Heinz". (For those that have never heard of it Heinz used to advertize 57 varieties, so a Heinz was a miscellaneous mutt in breed.)

 

[Bob Dylan]

George is spot on with the Heinz analogy, Mutts are mans best friend!

Pure bred anythings are neurotic, expensive and unpredictable!

 

[Devil's Advocate]

You would tell it to stop, likely long before it even started. They listen. If it is not a dog that would listen, it should be kept away from children at minimum, put down in all likelihood. I don't object to putting down bad dogs. I object to specifying a breed as bad unfairly.

It should be clear to any responsible pet owner that pets are not something that can be controlled through affinity or willpower alone. The difference between safe and unsafe breeds isn't just the general demeanor of the dog but the size and ability as well. If a small dog (or cat) decides to attack unexpectedly you have the power to physically pick them up and immobilize them before the victim is injured in a life threatening/altering manner. You simply cannot do that with large muscular dogs. By the time you've subdued them irreparable and life threatening/altering harm will have already been done. Anyone who thinks they can physically control a pet that is faster and stronger than they are is just plain nuts. If you cannot physically control a pet then in reality it's the pet that's in control of you. Maybe they'll do what you want and maybe they won't. You'll never know for certain and you'll always be at the mercy of their demeanor, which is precisely what a responsible pet owner would never want to depend upon.

Sorry, no tolerance for a "pet" that needs physical control or to be kept away from children in my house. Our general rule was have big dogs with small kids. The kids are less likely to injure the dog and we have always found bigger dogs tended to be better natured than small dogs, the best being a good "Heinz". (For those that have never heard of it Heinz used to advertize 57 varieties, so a Heinz was a miscellaneous mutt in breed.)

It's a balancing act between what is safe for one and what is safe for the other. It's very unfortunate how some parents use small pets as a sort of sadistic teaching aide for their children to learn the value of responsibility versus indifference and kindness versus cruelty. In my view a pet is what an older child earns when they've already proven they're responsible and compassionate in other ways. In my view using a pet to "teach" responsibility to a child is itself a form of irresponsible parenting.

 

[EB_OBS]

Best dog I ever had was a mutt. I don't even know what he was a mix-up of. It's funny we almost named him Heinz.

I had him for 13 years after he followed me home from school one day.

 

[NAVYBLUE]

To me it is relatively simple. It's about "rules" that I learned from my father, a superior hunter and dog trainer. Rules #1. NEVER buy a dog from a store as they procur mostly from puppy mills. Rule # 2. Obtain your dog from a professional breeder because they maintain meticulous breeding records to obtain maximum price OR from a non breeder friend whose sire/***** you have seen and observed. Rule # 3. Never get a dog from a pound.You never know what you are getting. Rule #4. Train your dog or don't get one. If not, hope you have excellent liabilty insurance. Rule # 4. When out in public, the dog is ALWAYS on a leash. You can not train out all the natural instincts out of a dog no matter how smart you think you are or how smart a trainer thinks they are. My dad trained other people's huntings dogs he was that good, but even he had his dogs on leashes except when actually hunting. Rules # 5. To adults. NO, you can not approach or pet my dog. Rule # 6. No, your child can not approach or pet my dog.

Rules # 5/Rule # 6. Research shows dogs can smell their owners and immedicate family members. They are incredibly smart animals. You've all read the stories of dogs finding their owners years after being seperated. You're also heard "My Pooky Koo has never bitten anyone. Yeah, until now. I have been called nasty names because of #5 and #6, A dog is not a toy. Because of these two rules in (50) years my dogs have never growled at or bitten anyone. Want to pet a dog, get your own.

Rule #3. For every "nice" dog gotten from a pound, there are 5-10 that have caused problems for the owner due to the dog and/or the owner. You're just asking for trouble.

Rule #4. No leash, bite/attack me, I am looking at a new Corvette. I will sue you for irresponsible ownership.

I also have great disdain for parents who buy their kids chicks or bunnies during Easter

All that being said, a dog is a wonderful companion if trained correctly, shown affection and properly taken care of.

NAVYBLUE

PS: Google "puppy miils in Pennsylvania". It may suprise you where some "chain" pet stores get their dogs.

 

[Green Maned Lion]

Pound dogs are actually a good type, IF you can read dog behavior. Especially in this economy causing trouble for owners can be "causing us the trouble of having to be walked, fed, and vaccinated." Also a lot of 'bad' dogs because their owner has no idea how to train and control dogs.

Pit bills are terriers, they are NOT bull dogs.

 

[EB_OBS]

Pit bills are terriers, they are NOT bull dogs.

Sorry, GML, but yes they are. Pit bulls are a cross-breed of English Terriers and English Bulldogs.

 

[amamba]

Personally for me I will only adopt a dog from a rescue that fosters the dogs in home. If no one adopted all those animals they would be euthanized.

If you want to ugly cry - I sure did when I saw it - watch the documentary "one nation under dog". There is a scene showing shelter dogs being euthanized and it was really hard for me to watch. And the sad thing is that happens every day to hundreds of cats and dogs because people a) buy dogs from pet stores & puppy mills b) don't understand the commitment of being a pet owner and c) buy dogs from backyard breeders and d) don't spay/neuter their pets (and it's fine to keep them intact if they are working/hunting or being shown, but there is no reason for little fluffy to be intact).

 

[tonys96]

Back to the OP.......It is my belief that the conductor was right for removing the dog from the train. Anyone disagree?

 

[D.P. Roberts]

Back to the original topic...

I recently saw a woman on the CS with a "service dog" that was not a service dog. I know that service dogs can be trained to perform all kinds of services that you might not expect, so at first I gave her the benefit of the doubt. However, her own story (she got the dog free from a shelter and then paid $5 for an obedience class) and the dog's behavior (among other things, it climbed up on a chair in the PPC to stick its head in my spouse's face) convinced me that this was NOT a service dog, despite its harness.

This annoyed me as a passenger, knowing that I might be sleeping on a mattress that a pet dog had slept on. But I also began to feel sorry for the dog - it just wasn't trained to be on a train for several days.

For example, she detrained in Sacramento to walk the dog, but couldn't find any grass. She tried to get the dog to go on the pavement, but it wouldn't (which would have left a mess on the platform for someone's shoes or luggage to pick up). Service animals are not pets, but people with service animals still need to act like responsible pet owners. Part of that responsibility, at least on a train, involves knowing when and where you'll be able to walk your dog, and planning for your pet's needs just like any other passenger.

 

[amamba]

Back to the OP.......It is my belief that the conductor was right for removing the dog from the train. Anyone disagree?

i agree with you.

 

[EB_OBS]

Back to the OP.......It is my belief that the conductor was right for removing the dog from the train. Anyone disagree?

I completely agree.

In the last few years I've removed two barking dogs, one dog that attacked another service animal, two puppies, two kittens and one dog that pooed all over a deluxe bedroom.

I actually kept and still have one of the kittens.

Both puppies and both kittens the owner just gave'em up. They didn't get off the train with them and they chose not to make any arrangements for them when they were removed. Nice huh?

 

[fillyjonk]

I also agree. Doesn't the conductor have the safety of the other folks on the train as one of his/her concerns? If a dog growls at a conductor, they might do similar or worse to someone else.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

There is nothing in the ADA that prevents other passengers from pointing out the gig is up when the inherently useless "don't ask don't tell" verification system fails to prevent abuse. Luckily I've never had to deal with this sort of thing so far, but if I saw someone who looked to be faking a service animal I'd have no problem keeping an eye on things or even striking up a conversation in order to blow their cover once they or the pet had provided me with enough ammunition to do so. Ideally Amtrak will eventually have the ability to transport pets in a manner that is both safe and comfortable for everyone involved, but until that day comes I have no qualms about setting the record straight.

 

[neroden]

Failing to have a system for transporting pets legally is what leads to the rampant abuse. It's important to have rules which people *can* respect, or *lots* of people will break the rules.

Pet prohibition must end. And I don't even like pets, but the principle is the same as drug prohibition. Legalize, tax, and regulate.