Do you like this story?
Army bans some breeds on base housing
By Kim Campbell Thornton
February 20, 2009
We’ve been having quite the lively discussion on a dogwriters list about a new edict issued by the Department of the Army banning “pit bulls” (defined as American Staffordshire Terriers and English Staffordshire Bull Terriers), Rottweilers, Doberman Pinschers, Chow Chows and wolf hybrids from base housing. The Pet Policy for Privatized Housing went into effect last month on January 23. It also prohibits dogs that “exhibit a propensity for dominant or aggressive behavior” through unprovoked barking, growling or snarling at people approaching the animal, aggressively running along fence lines when people are present, biting or scratching people, and escaping confinement to chase people.
Some people involved in rescue, even if they own dogs of those breeds themselves, would like to see all dogs banned from base housing because they say the dogs are often abandoned when the family moves or are not well cared for.
People with military backgrounds who have dogs say there are lots of responsible dog owners in the military. Not everyone should be punished for the actions of a few. They shared stories of people who made major sacrifices and changes in their lives so that they could always keep their dogs with them.
The rescue people argue that back that there are lots more irresponsible than responsible dog owners in the military.
It’s one of those never-ending arguments. But here’s what would happen if I were dictator (and it wouldn’t be limited to the military):
Enforce existing pet rules instead of waiting until there’s a problem and then banning whatever breed was involved.
Ban inappropriate canine behavior, not specific breeds.
Require military families who acquire a dog–any dog–to attend training classes and put a CGC on it if they want to live on base housing. Cats, too, while I’m at it. Kitten kindergarten for all! Lessons on litter box behavior!
But enough of life in Kimland. What do you think?
Share & Enjoy
|
Facebook
|
Twitter
|
Google Buzz
|
Digg
|
|
Technorati
|
StumbleUpon
|
Delicious
|
Email
|
Home
My husband is military, and sadly, there really are a lot of problems with pet abandonment. It’s almost as if the idea of being able to take your animal with you to your next assignment and base housing just doesn’t occur to some people. The last base I lived on was out in the country and had lots of birdlife—except that the birds were constantly attacked by the feral cats left behind when families moved. Sadly, base housing itself often doesn’t help; when my husband was calling ahead to his next base to make certain we met pet policy, we were informed that they don’t deal with birds as pets, and our birds + two cats put us over the limit of just two animals. Their advice was that we should just get rid of the birds, or all of the animals, since it was such a hassle to move with animals and we could always get more when we got there. I was so proud of my husband for standing up and saying that this advice was unacceptable and getting a special waiver for the birds as well as the cats. We eventually ended up renting a house in town rather than staying on base after about a year. But with advice like that given to stressed servicemembers, I can see why pet abandonment continues to be a major issue on military bases.
Comment by Selasphorus — February 20, 2009 @ 1:42 pm
There needs to be some way to make it more accessible for military families to take their pets with them, and be better informed about how to do so. Or, if more access, education and more opportunity doesn’t help, then some kind of incentive program to either wait to get a pet until the family is more stable, or take their pets with them when they would otherwise dump them. The rate of dumped pets by military famillies really IS incredibly high. (I grew up a military kid.)
Comment by Vince — February 20, 2009 @ 5:15 pm
There are a lot of abandonment issues on the bases. Deployment and relocation add to the mess. It would be nice to live in Kimland but I think the changes have to be implemented on the higher levels not just the pet owning levels…which I believe is a nationwide problem not just one found in the military.
Comment by Ark Lady — February 21, 2009 @ 9:33 am
“pit bulls” (defined as American Staffordshire Terriers and English Staffordshire Bull Terriers)
And what a startling can of worms that definition opens.
Comment by rosemary — February 22, 2009 @ 11:40 am
Gee, are military folks abandoning their kids too?
I like Kimland!
Comment by hornblower — February 25, 2009 @ 11:55 am
I am an Army wife, we are currently stationed on Fort Bragg. I am offended that someone would make a blanket statement that military people are bad dog owners. Not all of us are bad to our pets, our dogs have gone through our moves, and have been my, and my kids companions while Dad was fighting for our country. Now we are being asked to give up our Doberman who is not aggressive in any way, simply because she’s on the stupid list? We’re going to move off base. shes a family member and a rescue, and I wont simply re-home her where she could possibly end up back out on the street, used for a bait dog, or worse. Do we not give up enough??
Comment by ClanWright — March 12, 2009 @ 12:03 pm
This is absolutely ridiculous.. I am a proud owner of a pit bull terrier and she is the sweetest thing on the planet. I learned of this new “law” that has been passed while watching “Pit Boss” on Animal Planet where a family had to give up their family pet “Mila” because of this policy change. How dare you (our government) tell us what kind of pet we are or not aloud to own… How dare you take away our rights just because of the lack of education and knowledge that you have about these “certain” breeds of dogs that you are banning. I can remember a time in history when everyone was terrified of German Shephards and now they are the #1 police dog in the world. I will have you know that the first service dog used in Alaska was a Pit Bull… Also pit bulls are well known for being very smart, loyal, and can be used for the physically handicapped persons. Our government, who is supposed to protect, and serve, and respect the ones who live here are doing a great disservice to the ones who has VOTED them in to the office in which they hold.. I will write who I have to and protest where I have to, to get rid of this ridiculous “law” in which they have imposed on those who have sworn to protect and die for the country who is being punished for the pets they choose to have..
Comment by Tracy Stewart — August 1, 2010 @ 6:12 pm
@Tracy, a pitbull when it bites down, its jaw locks. You cannot save the victim from this bite, it is deadly. There’s a reason they’re on that list. Shame on you.
Comment by Jenna Gutman — September 12, 2011 @ 6:36 pm
@Jenna, you’re an idiot. Shame on YOU.
Gee, I’m feeling very liberated here in the land of the blogging dead, LOL.
Comment by Christie Keith — September 12, 2011 @ 7:36 pm
Jenna, pit bull jaws do not lock. They are no different than the jaws of any other dog, and there is simply no mechanism by which they could lock. Moreover, pit bulls have a jaw strength entirely typical for dogs of their size and weight, and there are several breeds of dog with greater bite force.
Really, you ought to be embarrassed, reciting such fanciful nonsense.
Comment by Lis — September 13, 2011 @ 3:54 am
I will revoke my statement of the locking jaw, as I spoke with a specialist. HOWEVER, they as well as many other reputual organizations (ex. ASPCA) have stated that with a pitbull there is far more likely to inflict serious injuries than most other breeds, simply because of his size and strength. For every animal of every breed there are the good and bad. But I have someone very close to me who lost their child because a neighborhood pitbull who prior to the incident never acted aggressive, got loose and attacked a child that was playing in their own yard, back turned away from the dog. The child passed away. I’m sorry but I will never find it okay in my eyes to say hey bring on the pitbulls. Living on base is something that you choose to do, and within that choice are certain restrictions. The dog list they have banned is what they have banned. If it upsets you choose to live off base. I know how a dog behaves is based on how they are treated in the home they live, but sometimes even that isn’t enough to keep them from behaving in a way that is destructive and deadly.
Comment by Jenna Gutman — September 13, 2011 @ 2:10 pm
Show me where the ASPCA said that.
Comment by Christie Keith — September 13, 2011 @ 4:18 pm
Jenna, the dog that bit me when I was child was some variety of Lab/hound mix.
The number of people who die each year due to dog attacks is too tiny to be subjected to any useful statistical analysis—but a majority of the dogs involved are not pit bulls.
Like Christie, I’d love a link to where the ASPCA said that.
You haven’t, actually, told us anything about the circumstances of the attack, other than that the dog wasn’t supposed to be, and wasn’t usually, loose, and that he’d never been aggressive before. What happened right before the attack matters—and what really matters is, how did it seem to the dog? Children often do things that are alarming to dogs or seem aggressive to them—and if the dog was not accustomed to roaming the neighborhood, he may have already been scared.
Dogs are mostly confined now, but when I was a kid, it was a lot more common to allow them to roam. This was a lot less safe for the dogs, and had the potential to be dangerous for humans, too—but every single kid in the three neighborhoods I did most of my growing up in knew how to behave around unfamiliar dogs, and how to recognize the signs that a dog was nervous, alarmed, not feeling social, aggressive, etc. Kids today don’t have that experience, and not only do they think nothing of running up to an unfamiliar dog, or reaching out pat it on the head, grab its ears, grab its tail—even many of their parents don’t see the problem, they too being a generation younger than when meeting strange dogs in the neighborhood was a common experience.
That unfortunate child could easily have innocently done something that seemed threatening to a dog who may have already been scared.
Breed is about the least relevant factor in dog attacks, and it’s the only one the media want to focus on.
Comment by Lis — September 13, 2011 @ 4:35 pm
Link: http://www.aspcabehavior.org/a.....Bulls.aspx that states the line “If a pit bull does bite, he’s far more likely to inflict serious injuries than most other breeds, simply because of his size and strength.” They also weigh out both pros and cons but it is important to know both. And the child that was attacked was on home video sitting in his yard with his mother, they were blowing bubbles and laughing. What provoked it? I haven’t a clue. It’s a horrible tragedy I will not dig deep into my emotions regarding that event. I will say this, I agree that generation now is very different regarding safety amongst animals. How children are taught. I’m more angry by the people who DO live on base and have the dogs on the banned list (yes there are people who do that, and get away with it)and yet do not bother to abide by the leash law on top of that when out with their dog. It’s just not safe, no matter the breed. Not just as a threat to others but to the animal itself.
Comment by Jenna Gutman — September 13, 2011 @ 5:32 pm
ROFL, Jenna… don’t try to tell me you’d read that article before you came here spewing your unevidenced assertions. If you had, you’d know better. Ergo, you didn’t. Proof-texting the A. Who knew?
Comment by Christie Keith — September 13, 2011 @ 5:53 pm
No I did not, follow my threads, upon my inital post I retracted my statement of the jaw locking. Please go back up and read, you’ll see what I’ve been speaking about.
Comment by Jenna Gutman — September 13, 2011 @ 6:39 pm
After calling a local vet (upon the comments I first recieved here) and speaking with them I also took to the internet to read up more to educate myself. Go back through and read. I’m never too full of myself to admit when I am wrong but I won’t back down on my opinion based on what I’ve seen.
Comment by Jenna Gutman — September 13, 2011 @ 6:43 pm
The point I was getting at is that we all have experiences and opinions, Jenna. But you were wildly extrapolating from your tiny experience to make huge, massive generalizations that are not based on evidence, and that’s what I’m objecting to.
Comment by Christie Keith — September 13, 2011 @ 7:35 pm