Woman's Dog Reposessed by Save-A-Pet

[Madcrawdad]

Here's a link to a story about a woman whose dog was reposessed by Save-
A-Pet. She brought her recently adopted dog in to be looked at, as it wasn't eating. Folks at the shelter saw her boyfriend's dog wearing an 'anti-bark' collar, and basically refused to give the woman her dog back.

Crazy, I say....she's filed a complaint with the Illinois Dept. of Agriculture (the agency who regulates pet adoption outfits)...I sure hope she gets her dog back.

http://www.dailyherald.com/story.asp?id=322716

[mee-mee]

Yeah, so do I...just because the husky had on the anti-bark collar, doesn't mean she was going to do that to her puppy....

[bkw1982]

Makes sense to me why they took it away and why they won't give it back. Dogs bark sometimes, if you don't like it get a cat. Choke chains, shock collars, and other devices that use physical distress to stop an animal from performing a behavior are cruel IMO. If they use the collar with success the first time i see no reason why they wouldn't use it a 2nd.

[Cheech]

It's silly for the place to keep the dog... imo ...

If someone walks into a petshop, they can easily purchase a choke chain, shock collar, etc etc etc.

Just like anyone can walk into a petshop and purchase a betta bowl that holds 4 ounces of water, or a 1 gallon "goldfish" bowl.

if the petshop workers are telling you that these products are fine to use, then why would the regular general consumer have to assume otherwise?

Unfortunately, most of us know otherwise, but not everyone who owns a pet goes on websites looking for ideal ways to make sure their pets are happy. They're fine with what recommendations the petshop workers give them.

What the place should have done was talk to the owners of that dog, explain why these collars are inhumane, and help point them in the right direction on keeping their pet happy...

[mee-mee]

It's silly for the place to keep the dog... imo ...

If someone walks into a petshop, they can easily purchase a choke chain, shock collar, etc etc etc.

Just like anyone can walk into a petshop and purchase a betta bowl that holds 4 ounces of water, or a 1 gallon "goldfish" bowl.

if the petshop workers are telling you that these products are fine to use, then why would the regular general consumer have to assume otherwise?

Unfortunately, most of us know otherwise, but not everyone who owns a pet goes on websites looking for ideal ways to make sure their pets are happy. They're fine with what recommendations the petshop workers give them.

What the place should have done was talk to the owners of that dog, explain why these collars are inhumane, and help point them in the right direction on keeping their pet happy...


:iagree: :iagree: :iagree:

[Cory Lover]

I can't really say if Save-A-Pet made the right choice, or the wrong choice. All I can say is, IMO, it is in-humane to have a bark collar. If you actually take good care of your dog, you can teach 99.9% to not bark, with out using a bark collar.

I have a Australian Shepherd puppy, and she sometimes barks her head of, but after saying no a talking to her in a soothing voice it calms her down. It just takes effort, and if you got a dog you have to be prepared to take on a lot of effort, and not just go the 'easy' way by using a bark collar.

I think the pet store should be blamed, but I think the boy friend should be blamed more. Would he like, everytime he talks, to get a shock around his neck? I don't think so.

CL

[Cheech]

I can't really say if Save-A-Pet made the right choice, or the wrong choice. All I can say is, IMO, it is in-humane to have a bark collar. If you actually take good care of your dog, you can teach 99.9% to not bark, with out using a bark collar.

I have a Australian Shepherd puppy, and she sometimes barks her head of, but after saying no a talking to her in a soothing voice it calms her down. It just takes effort, and if you got a dog you have to be prepared to take on a lot of effort, and not just go the 'easy' way by using a bark collar.

I think the pet store should be blamed, but I think the boy friend should be blamed more. Would he like, everytime he talks, to get a shock around his neck? I don't think so.

CL

I agree, to an extent.

Say someone gets a dog, and the dog barks. . . A lot.

Without knowing any better, and guessing that the petshop would know best, he asks for their advice, and they tell him to use a bark collar, explaining how it doesn't hurt the animal, it's sold commercially , it's safe, and it'll stop the barking by a classic case of conditioning the animal. If the pet owner would purchase the collar, why would he have any reason to be at fault?

I'm not saying this is the case in the following article, but it very well could be.



just to make sure we're on the same page... I wouldn't use a bark collar either.

[bkw1982]

If it's the shelter's policy to deny animals to someone they see unfit then i see no reason to give it back. they regulate their own rules and the owner signed the contract agreeing to them.

It's not the responsiblity of the stores or manufactures to tell the public to buy their item, it's up the buyer to understand what they are buying. They bought the collar knowing it delivered a small sprayto the dog, and they saw nothing wrong with that, as long as it fixed their problem. To the shelter that showed irresponsibilty on the pet owner side, so they took back their animal. Now the owner knows to read a contract before she signs it, but she'll prob still use the shock collar.

I do agree they shoulda talked to her and possible have some type of educational program to adopt a pet

[severum mama]

I dunno, CL. Training a dog not to bark is supposedly one of the most difficult things you can teach it. I'd have to question the 99.9% thing... it largely depends on the breed or mix IMO. My pomeranian/eskie barks at EVERYTHING. It doesn't matter what I try to get him to stop barking. It simply doesn't work. Pomeranians are known for being "yippy", so I just deal with it. That said, I wouldn't personally use a shock collar for barking. 2 of my dogs are awfully small for it, plus I just don't like them. We had some friends that bought one for their dog, and I had them shock my hand with it just to see what it was like. It hurt. Even though dogs have fur that would presumably lessen the shock, I just don't like the idea of physical punishment for dogs.

[Cheech]

The particular collar that was on the dog in fact didn't spark an electric charge every time it barked.


On the article it says:

"

Albarran said the pet store where her boyfriend bought the husky recommended the anti-bark collar, which is made by Multivet. According to the company's Web site, when the dog barks, a citronella spray is ejected from a device into the dog's face. "

I also checked the website, and alas, it only had good things to say about this "citronella spray" stuff, and it explains in detail why it is a humane way in conditioning your dog to refrain from barking, with no pain involved whatsoever..

Again, I'd be hesitant to use the product, but I also would fully understand if someone purchased and used it thinking that there was nothing inhumane about it.

[Linariel]

I personally think the citronella collars are as bad, or worse than shock collars. The spray really irritates the eyes, nose, and mouth. That lasts for several minutes, where as a shock is a quick zap and it's done.

I don't like either one though....and it was her boyfriend's dog, not her own. I know my boyfriend does some things with his dog I wouldn't do with mine, and I wouldn't want to be held responsible for any of it. It's nothing terrible, but I don't want someone judging the way I care for my pets because his dog is overweight, eats cheap food, etc.

I just think it's unfair to judge one person based on the actions of someone they are associated with.

[bkw1982]

yeah i had to edit my post and reread the article. This Collar reminds me of that guy on tv who trains pets for people....he uses a spray bottle to spray the dog in the face when they do something wrong.


I
I just think it's unfair to judge one person based on the actions of someone they are associated with.

Very good point

[Madcrawdad]

I personally think the citronella collars are as bad, or worse than shock collars. The spray really irritates the eyes, nose, and mouth.

I don't know....probably pretty effective at repelling mosquitoes from the facial area :)

[J double R]

I personally think the citronella collars are as bad, or worse than shock collars. The spray really irritates the eyes, nose, and mouth. That lasts for several minutes, where as a shock is a quick zap and it's done.

I don't like either one though....and it was her boyfriend's dog, not her own. I know my boyfriend does some things with his dog I wouldn't do with mine, and I wouldn't want to be held responsible for any of it. It's nothing terrible, but I don't want someone judging the way I care for my pets because his dog is overweight, eats cheap food, etc.

I just think it's unfair to judge one person based on the actions of someone they are associated with.


and that is where a LOT of people go wrong.. ive seen the zap collars before, and i've seen one put a large full-sized dog TO the GROUND, in an instant. the zap might be 'over', but it can cause disorientation and certainly frightens the dog.

[Linariel]

No, I never said I'm okay with shock collars. I'm just saying because something *seems* humane, it isn't necessarily so.

[KnaveTO]

From the article...

We believe that negative reinforcement is not humane

So... by that admission... admonishing your dog with a raised and firm voice when correcting the animal about something is inhumae. GET REAL! I am sorry you cannot train a dog with a coochi coo voice and a light no.

[J double R]

you can't please everyone.. there is always going to be someone who dislikes or disagrees with your points of view, some people (such as this place who feels they have the right to confiscate your pets as they see fit) are going to take it to more extreme levels.

[Dwarf Puffers]

I say the citronella is fine. It's like having OJ sprayed in your face, except it tastes sour. It rarely gets past the mouth, and I can't imagine it getting into their eyes.

IMO, if a dog gets an annoying spray and a yucky taste in their mouth every time they bark until they learn not to, it's not inhumane, though I'm not crazy over it... My dog barks when someone is at the door, big deal, I just tell her to shut her mouth and usually she just has muffled growls after that, until she can go over and sniff them.

[Jessu]

I hate bark collars. I would never use one on my dog. I played with one once. It really did hurt. But that lady should have her dog. If it was me. I would have never left with out it. Even if I wound up getting locked up for aggravated assault.