Can anyone explain how crating dogs isn't cruel?

[DalaHorse]

I am not trying to be controversial. I am genuinely shocked by the crating "trend". I am aware that lots of people do this. But I cannot understand how locking the dog in a crate is at all fair or beneficial to the dog. I can however see how locking the dog in a crate is very beneficial to the owner. Is there any justification in terms of it being beneficial to dogs that I really can't see?

If a crate is used by a cruel or neglectful owner, it will be cruel - but then if the owner is cruel and neglectful, then probably most of what they do with the dog is cruel and/or neglectful.

They are one useful training device amongst many - they aren't compulsory, so if you don't like them, don't use them - there are plenty of other options available. Frankly, if you are the sort of owner who is giving serious consideration to training methods and whether you think they are cruel or not, then you are going to be a good owner, imo, because you clearly care about the dog and its welfare and happiness.

It would be nice if the OP and others on this thread accepted that those of us who have, in the same loving and caring way, chosen to use crates with our dogs, are equally likely to be good, caring owners who will put their dogs' welfare first. I am sure that any of us who use crates would say that, if the dog had been unhappy in the crate, we would have looked for other methods. We certainly wouldn't be leaving an unhappy dog in a crate.

Regarding dogproofing a room - as I have said, ddog1 is a labrador, and they chew absolutely everything. I would have had to empty a room completely, in order to dog-proof it, and there isn't a single room in the house going spare in that way. Plus, I know of two labradors who ate their way through the wall of the room they were left in, so even bare walls is not entirely dogproof!

Ok whopping post coming up, but I have been musing on this point overnight and have come back and read the posts after I posted last night and would like to contribute again if I may?

Two of HoneyDragon's points hit the right note for me:

"Its not a case that dogs shouldn't have crates. It's that some PEOPLE shouldn't have dogs."

and

"And as long as dogs generate profit, company's will spin any old shit to get cash out of new owners, hence what used to be referred to training aids are now marketed as magic solutions to stop barking, pulling, chewing etc."

In my early days of having dogs (late 80s, early 90s) crates were around, but only available from specialist suppliers, the ones that supplied to breeders etc, usually by mail order, so most pet dog owners weren't aware of them and if they were, were less likely to be able to get hold of one, unless they were the type of owner who was doing tonnes of research and giving lots of consideration to taking on a pup/dog and how they were going to take care of and train it etc.

I was very keen to learn as much as I could and do things right for my dog, so was registered on some of the early online dog forums, which in the main, back then were mostly dominated by Amercian posters. I left after getting into a fight with an American breeder, who bred small breeds and was apparently regarded as top of her breed. The fight was because she was not only keeping her dogs in stacked cages for the lion's share of the day, she was also advocating and in fact instructing new pup owners (of any breed) that it was fine to get a pup, cage it and then go to work all day every day. In one spectacularly memorable fight, I was rounded on and attacked by large numbers of posters because I had the audacity to suggest to an owner that it wasn't ok for him to crate his young dog for 8 hours a day while he went to work and then never let if off the lead during the only walk it got every evening. Apparently I was clearly bonkers, knew nothing about dogs and was suggesting he should endanger his dog by leaving it loose in the house (I wasn't actually, I said that I had no clue why he had a dog, as he crated it for 8 hours a day, then gave it a short lead walk and frequently crated it again while he went out for the evening. ) and that I was stupid if I thought dogs should be allowed off the lead for exercise, as they could get lost or hit by a car. No matter what I said, I was repeatedly and nastily attacked (no moderation on that forum) and it was clear that my words had hit a nerve with a large number of dog owners. There were, iirc, only two people who attempted to agree with me and they were soon shot down in flames.

By the mid 90s, crates were available on the internet, again from specialist shops and you probably wouldn't know about them, unless you were heavily involved in dogs in some way, iyswim.

In 1998, when we got our first (and only) pedigree/non-rescue dog, they were becoming more common and I think some of the larger pet superstores that were springing up had started to stock them. (I know we saw some when we were buying everything we needed for our pup, but we didn't even consider them at the time, having never had or needed one with any of our previous dogs.) The problem with that was that they didn't come with any advice or instructions on how to use them and as they were readily available, anyone could buy one - although they were £££s.

Since then, their availability and use has increased dramatically - they are sold, as HoneyDragon's quote above explains, not as dog beds or training aids, but as solutions, to stop chewing, soiling, 'anti-social behaviour' etc and people tend not to think about it any further than that.

When I was younger I used to keep pet rats. They had huge great big cages with lots of things to do, they were healthy and seemed happy. I thought I was doing right by them and as long as I did everything the books recommended for their care all was well. These days, I wouldn't contemplate keeping a caged animal of any sort. I now don't think we have the right to restrict any animal's freedom to that extent. I have grown up, thought about, contemplated and researched things and I no longer think the way I used to about animals.

As with other matters of ethics etc, I am still not quite there and probably never will be, as I hope to continue to grow and develop for the whole of my life. As a result, not everything I believe to be right/wrong is all sewn up in a nice neat logical package. So I don't keep small furries, but I do keep dogs and I sometimes find myself wriggling uncomfortably, when I hear/use the words 'dog owner' because, although technically true, I am not quite at peace with the idea of 'owning' another living creature - it doesn't sit well, yet I really can't bear the thought of not having a dog in my life. For me, my dogs are part of the family - but if I'm honest and stop fooling myself for a minute - I own them ... and don't get me started on how confused I am with regard to my right to 'train' and 'modify' behaviours to suit myself/society, rather than the needs of the dog. I clearly still have a great deal work to do on this, but in the meantime, I can't contemplate my having a life without dogs in it, so all I can do is my best.

My point is, we could extend the argument against crating onwards and upwards until we reach the point where we question keeping dogs at all. Pet ownership is controversial, some would argue that no animal, humans included, has the right to own and dominate another (by controlling their freedoms etc).

I know I've waffled on a bit there, but what I am trying to say is that we are all treading our own paths, all at different levels of learning and understanding etc and I'm pretty sure most of the dog people on here adore their dogs and only want the best for them. What they do comes from a place of love and they probably wouldn't be posting on here for advice if they didn't truly love their dogs.

Debate is good. I think it's important to have these discussions to help people - like me - to think more deeply about their choices in relation to keeping, caring for and training dogs. We need people to question what we do, to help us think about things we might not have considered and confront things we generally prefer to push to the back of our minds.

Yes, there are people who use training aids/tools without considering the whys/hows/wherefores and there are others who will never care enough about the animals in their life to even consider treating them with the care and respect they deserve - and the commercial dog training market feeds off those people. Their interest is not in the dogs, but in their profits and unfortunately, that is never going to change.

Whoa - that post is big enough to win some sort of enormous post of the year award! Sorry!

Hi moosemama - your post shares a lot of the feelings I have about pets, "ownership", ethics and the rights of animals who share our space.

Earlier up the thread a pro-crater said "I don't consider that dogs have a fundamental right to walk about whenever they want tbh". (this was referring to crating not simply commanding a dog to sit on the spot).

My response: "You don't think a dog has a fundamental right to walk about?

We are not talking about walking wherever they want - some areas will be off limits and that's fine - but dogs should not be seen as such a nuisance on a regular basis that they are denied the right to walk whenever the owner deems it necessary, even denied the space to take a few steps -

Seriously that is bad".

Obviously any responsible dog owner has to train their dogs for their own and everyone else's safety, as we know, dogs are pack animals and the results of untrained dogs who believe they rule the house are well documented, often in the news, but that is different to locking a dog up and physically denying it the freedom to take a few steps if it wanted. If you ask a dog to stay or sit, as necessary, that's different because it is still acting out of choice. That is different to physically restraining it.

If you have read the thread I have come under a lot of fire for not changing my opinion that I don't like dog crates and only in certain or extreme circumstances, when beneficial to the dog, could the use be ethically applied. Even typing that sentence is going to bring about another heap of coals from people saying they are deeply offended , but hey I think discussion about this topic is good rather than more people automatically getting a dog = cage = put dog in cage with no real training in how or when.

Dogs are not pack animals btw.

Crates and crating dogs is not cruel. Misusing a crate is cruel. It can create a lot of issues in dogs. I myself, have dealt with two dogs who were crated for much of their puppyhood. They were bonkers. Utterly untrained and as bouncy as a kangeroo on acid but the kinds of people who misuse crates are the kind of people who without a crate would keep the dog locked in the futility room/bathroom for hours on end or chained in the yard, or kenneled outside permantly and then wonder why the dog cracks up when it's eventually given access to people. The crates are not the problem. People are. As usual.

When used properly a crate can be a valuable training aide, a place of comfort and safety for the dog and can make life with a dog easier.

Yes, to reiterate, dogs are NOT pack animals www.apbc.org.uk/articles/why-wont-dominance-die

Sorry, forgot the brackets www.apbc.org.uk/articles/why-wont-dominance-die

DalaHorse - I misread your earlier post as stating that dogs have a fundamental right to walk about wherever they want - I now see you said whenever, not wherever. Is it possible that the person who responded to you misread it the same way?

Ddog1's cage was big enough for her to move around in, and she was happy when she was in there - demonstrated by the fact that she would go in there voluntarily for a nap. We replaced her first cage with a bigger one when she grew bigger, and then replaced that with a bed when she was mature enough and had stopped chewing.

I was genuinely worried about the stuff she chewed, and the damage she could do to herself if she swallowed something, and as I said in my earlier post, we simply did not have a spare room that could be emptied completely to be her safe space (and given the amount of chewing she did, and the huge range of things she chewed, I believe that only by emptying a room could we have Coco-proofed it sufficiently) - hence the cage seemed like the sensible option.

Caging is clearly cruel when it is used in the way MooseMama describes - multistory cages, and young dogs being put in them for hours on end, with no exercise or training. But I look at my dog now, and do not see a neglected or mistreated dog - I see a happy, well-adjusted dog, who trusts us completely - and I do not believe she would be that way if we had used her cage in a cruel or neglectful manner.

Dogs are not pack animals. They are social but not pack animals. They are evolutions freeloaders. They like a happy life and will do just enough to maintain it.

Sadly what makes dogs so easy to live with is also what makes them so easily abused.

stdg yes to Labradors eating/chewing anything. When my lab was younger he demolished a skirting board, half a door frame, a real wood floor, and stripped a plain painted wall down to the bricks. he also liked chewing on his plastic bed, despite having multiple chewy toys.

There would have been no way he or my house would have been safe left out of his crate at night when he was at this stage.
He's not in his crate at night anymore, but he certainly doesn't have free range of the house when he's not supervised.

Hully has eaten the sofa.

2 dogs. One has never been in a crate and would hate it. Dog 2 hated it at night. 6 months of struggling and little sleep we tried a crate. He loves it.

I too would have thought it cruel but he does feel secure in there.

Dog1 was a stray. Dog2 was bought from a breeder and crated at night. So it's easy to see why each dog has a preference.

I don't feel I chose crating at all just accommodating dog2's needs.

I refer to one of my earlier comments :

"I take puppies out of the equation here because puppies have different needs and we have discussed the safety elements of a crate for a puppy who is vulnerable. There may be times where a puppy is safer in a crate on a very short term temporary basis. I accept that"

I really do see the benefit for (some not all) puppies.

What you did STDG which pleases me is stop using the crate when the danger period (to the dog) was over and when she was mature enough for a bed. That is all fantastic. The chewy puppy was protected for its own safety and eventuallygraduated to a bed.

Re: the point of whenever versus wherever - it was the other poster who said dogs shouldn't be able to walk whenever they wanted (to paraphrase) not wherever. I was responding to what was written which was "whenever". Perhaps they meant wherever, IDK, that's not what they said (and TBH I do think they meant whenever.

I am NOT blanket anti-crate however I still don't and can't agree to adult dogs, with no behavioural issues, being put in a crate and the door being shut behind them.

And on a final note, and I know this will enrage some people but hey. What is the different between a crate and a cage? In my eyes, the only difference is that crate sounds more palatable than cage. If the word crate was replaced with cage all though this thread, it would all sound much more unpleasant. But if people are "crating" their dogs, that's nicer than "caging", isn't it.

If anyone can tell me the difference between a crate and a cage please do so. I will happily stand down on that point. HAPPILY.

honeydragon I think I'd cry if frus-dog ate my sofa.

dala is a crate and a cage not the same thing?

Is it not on the same lines of calling a choke-chain a check-chain? It's still the exact same thing not to be confused with a half-check

It is the same thing frustrated but then why is it called a crate?

Cage definition: A structure of bars or wires in which birds or other animals are confined.

Crate definition: A slatted wooden case used for transporting or storing goods.

So why are they called crates when clearly they are cages? Does anyone know?

Let's hope the same will happen to cages crates, MrsDeVere, or at least, using them only as a last resort not a first resort, as in the case of impty, who let her dogs show her which they preferred and respected their individual choices, which I think was great, or just for puppies as a carefully used safety measure, not for adult dogs.

That's my hope anyway.

MrsDeVere - no chance, I am the queen of mega posts!

Dala, I use the word crate and cage interchangeably. I don't think there is a physical difference between the two. Thinking about it though, I suppose some people would/could say, if you use it responsibly it's a crate, is you misuse/abuse it it then becomes a cage - as in crates are essentially dog beds with doors that are never closed, whereas cages are exactly what people think of when they hear the word.

Waaaay back, when my Boxer x GSD was a youngster, he ate the kitchen skirting boards (as in actually pulled them off and chewed them up) almost a whole kitchen base unit and went in the fridge and freezer (usually consuming large quantities of butter and/or cheese) so frequently that we ended up tying it shut with rope when we weren't actively using it. On each occasion he was only left for less than an hour! He also had a penchant for jumping up and turning on all the rings on the gas cooker - which of course were then not lit and filled the kitchen with gas. We used to have to remove the cooker knobs if we were going out without him! He did however grow out of his spectacularly destructive phase and went on to become the nicest calmest boy who never destroyed a thing once he was mature. Which is good, because he was a really big boy and he could probably have eaten most of the house if he'd put his mind to it.

Oh - and I've just remembered that when I popped to the corner shop once, the kitchen door must have sprung open. He let himself into our lodger's bedroom and swung off the curtains until they ripped in half. I know how he did it, because I saw him as I walked (then ran) back from the shop.

(He was never crated. This was the very early 90s.)

I think they also call them indoor kennels in the US. I suppose a crate looks more like a cage than something snoopy would sleep on. However kennels are generally used to confine dogs. Dogs have been confined to kennels by their owners outside long before domestic rates became popular.

Do people regularly shut dogs in crates for no reason? I haven't seen anybody suggesting that a crate should be used unnecessarily. For one thing it would be a bit of a waste of money, they take up space and aren't very attractive.

I have to say, I think my dog is far more comfy sleeping on his crate than snoopy is on his kennel. You'd think he'd fall off.

Domestic crates I mean.

Dala. ... believe me when I tell you dog2 is tried out of his crate/ cage once in a while and he crys, whines pees and poos everywhere. He is 5.
He prefers his crate. It's NOT my first choice. It's his preference. If that makes me cruel in your eyes I am stunned.

On the internet I am seeing crates for sale which show a dog in them for demonstration purposes. The cage is not high enough for the dog to stand up in or even sit up in, and not long enough for the dog to lie flat in.

The picture is being used as an example of the right size of cage for that size of dog.

How many numpties future crate owners will see that picture and think it's acceptable, because the manufacturers have illustrated it that way?

This is all part of the problem.

I'm sure lots of responsible crate owners have crates that fit better than what I have seen as described above, but it makes my heart sink that there will be a massive number of dogs out there like the dog in the picture.