On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 17:50:52 +0000 (UTC), FragileWarrior
wrote:

I take excellent care of my animals and we work together to give back to
the community. I really dislike to be mass-lumped into a dipshit owner
catagory for no good reason.

You know and I know not all dog owners are dipshits. I don't really
relate to people who make sweeping statements like that. I have a
therapy parrot. She's my therapist! She's helped me through almost
two years of chemo, not in a row, but one year three years ago, and I
just ended a year a few weeks ago. We always had dogs and cats, but I
couldn't take the funerals every 14 years or so.


Did you see my horse in my Neon? He's a mini horse. Rides for long
periods of time in the backseat of my car -- even going down the I-70 and
into Indy for horse demos and such.

I want a mule! I love them.

Go to: http://community.webshots.com/user/deerhnd
and look in the HORSES folder. There's a photo of him taken through the
back window of the car. FoxNews out of Indy once took footage of me
loading him into the car and driving away from one of the museums where
we had spent the day but I don't know if they ever aired it. We
certainly get interesting looks driving in the city. When I pull to a
stop light, I count to three and then look to either side of me to see
who noticed there's a horse in the car next to them. hee

Every animal in that album is beautiful. What is the life span of a
miniature horse? I love the draft. We've discussed this before.
Then one night I was watching the RFD channel (I'm a hillbilly at
heart!) and I fell in love with mules. I'd settle for a donkey, but
would never ride anything that small.

I adore animals,
insects, worms, all living things. I would love to have room for a
few mules. They are so much more interesting to me than many humans.

Yes, Buddha was right about many things.

I always felt this way, even before I met the Dharma. My mother had
to carry me out of the theater when I was a kid and we saw Bambi. I
was un consolable. To this day I don't watch Disney. They are
sadists.

On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 17:58:24 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:


This example has nothing to do with dog ordinances. And, there's no reason
(or easy way) to photograph plants covered in ****. The issue is this: If a
property owner asks you not to do something on their property, you do not
ask why. You obey. If you disagree with what I've just said, then I have the
right to urinate on your dog, in your mail box, or anything on that
property, and there's nothing you can do about it.

With me so far?


I'm with you, but not with the level of anger you have about it. Then
again, I let rats live on my property and wouldn't think of killing
them.

FragileWarrior wrote:

Derryl Wrote:

Rent a sod cutter, strip all of the sod then rototill the bed.
Otherwise spray the lawn with roundup and then till it.




I have a large area between our front walkway and the stockade fence that
I'm tired of mowing. Since it is almost entirely in shade, I think I'd
like to turn it into a mint garden this year. I don't care about spreading
because if the mint goes under the fence and into the yard it just makes
the dogs smell nice. I also have no objection to just mowing it like lawn
if it crops up where I don't want it.

What's the best way to make sure that I get garden there and not mint
sprinkled with regrown grass? I was going to rent a tiller and turn up the
sod but then what? Do I remove the sod chunks or do I just chop it, turn
it under and hope it becomes green manure and not more grass? Is it better
to remove all the sod and then replace the missing dirt with top soil? If
some grass sprouts up down the line, will the mature mint plants smother it
out?

All opinions and experiences welcome.

Thx.

"Jangchub" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 17:21:38 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:


Move to the country on huge property where people don't walk dogs.
Let it go.


You are illustrating the multifaceted problem for me. Thank you.

Facet 1: Some dog owners think everyone is supposed to love their dog.
That
is incorrect.
Facet 2: Some dog owners don't understand the concept of private property.
If I tell you not to do something on my land, you have no legal leg to
stand
on by refusing to obey.


I fully understand. Kill a cow, not problem. If they did that to
poodles and wore their fur the entire earth would freak out!

I am not telling you to be okay with this problem, but unfortunately
the only way around it is to do one of the two things I suggested. We
have cat and dog ordinances here and my neighbor still continues to
let his cats out. Nobody likes him, but his entire life is full of
horrible strife. Nobody gets out of here alive, if you get my drift.


I don't have strife. I'm training dog owners. It's easy to do. It's hard to
explain, though. Everybody creates their own belief systems. Some people
believe their kids are perfect. Some believe their dogs are deities.

"Jangchub" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 17:58:24 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:


This example has nothing to do with dog ordinances. And, there's no reason
(or easy way) to photograph plants covered in ****. The issue is this: If
a
property owner asks you not to do something on their property, you do not
ask why. You obey. If you disagree with what I've just said, then I have
the
right to urinate on your dog, in your mail box, or anything on that
property, and there's nothing you can do about it.

With me so far?


I'm with you, but not with the level of anger you have about it. Then
again, I let rats live on my property and wouldn't think of killing
them.


It's not anger. Frankly, it's an interesting legal debate, but for some
people, that involves some heavy lifting. They don't realize that in Supreme
Court hearings, the justices use hypothetical ideas that seem outrageous,
but they're important for purposes of pushing peoples' legal thinking to
extremes. The same thing goes on with dog owners. Was it you who asked
earlier why someone didn't deserve an explanation about why I wanted no dogs
on the property? A judge might ask you this: If you're hiking, and see lots
of signs saying "No Trespassing", do you disobey the signs because they
don't contain a reason why?

I find the discussion very peaceful.

In article ,
says...
On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 17:21:38 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:


Move to the country on huge property where people don't walk dogs.
Let it go.


You are illustrating the multifaceted problem for me. Thank you.

Facet 1: Some dog owners think everyone is supposed to love their dog. That
is incorrect.
Facet 2: Some dog owners don't understand the concept of private property.
If I tell you not to do something on my land, you have no legal leg to stand
on by refusing to obey.


I fully understand. Kill a cow, not problem. If they did that to
poodles and wore their fur the entire earth would freak out!

I am not telling you to be okay with this problem, but unfortunately
the only way around it is to do one of the two things I suggested. We
have cat and dog ordinances here and my neighbor still continues to
let his cats out. Nobody likes him, but his entire life is full of
horrible strife. Nobody gets out of here alive, if you get my drift.


I just got another TWO copies of a flier that relates to previous
fliers in my mailbox.

Somebody pleading about a male cat going around the area, marking
his territory. And asking his unidentified owner (servant) to
have him neutered. Which will apparently also "fix" either the
urinating habit, or the smell.

I dunno... I've only seen one cat in my garden, and haven't seen
or smelled any spraying. S/he's not mine. But s/he whines
really loud, and extorts me for little bowls of milk, frequently.


--
Get Credit Where Credit Is Due
http://www.cardreport.com/
Credit Tools, Reference, and Forum

"JoeSpareBedroom" expounded:

"FragileWarrior" wrote in message
.. .


Why are you asking me? What does your local dog ordinance say? If
the law is on your side, then talk to the law. A photograph of the
deed being done is good proof of who the culprit is, too.

One dipshit owner does not make all dogs and all owners scoundrels.

This example has nothing to do with dog ordinances.

Of course it does. If there is a law against it, then evoke the law.

Our dog ordinances say dog owners must clean up after their animals. Not
likely with dog ****.



And, there's no
reason (or easy way) to photograph plants covered in ****.

Get the dog lifting it's leg. Let the police extroplate from there.

Yeah. I'll stand outside all day with a camera. :-)



The issue
is this: If a property owner asks you not to do something on their
property, you do not ask why.


Is there a law against asking why?

Of course not. But, the laws against trespassing do not require that the
landowner explain anything. You know that.




You obey. If you disagree with what I've
just said, then I have the right to urinate on your dog, in your mail
box, or anything on that property, and there's nothing you can do
about it.


No, I believe that is classified as assault AND indecent exposure. Do so
and you'd be in much, much, MUCH more trouble than the dog owner. But,
hey, don't let me stop you from trying it. Get back to us on how that
works out for you.


Assault? Not really. Got a car you love? What if I walk onto your property
and start spray painting it a new color? Why would I do this? Because it was
a convenient place to stop and paint a car! No different than doing what's
convenient for your dog. Now, you'll say the car is damaged, but it's not.
It'll still do what a car needs to do. The ****ed-on plants may not, or they
might, so let's choose the latter and call the two situations equal.


See what you're doing here? You're trying to twist your interpretation of
law (and common decency) to suit a particular type of pet. You're doing this
because the dog needs to walk, and it needs to crap & **** while being
walked. Therefore, you have made behavioral adjustments because of the dog.
Another way to describe this is training. You have been trained by your pet.


Got a hose? Water the damned plant and get over it. Ordinances
regarding dog waste are for feces, and you know that. Spend your life
being superior, complaining and judging, or water your garden and get
over it.
--
Ann, gardening in Zone 6a
South of Boston, Massachusetts
e-mail address is not checked
******************************

"Ann" wrote in message
...
"JoeSpareBedroom" expounded:

"FragileWarrior" wrote in message
. ..


Why are you asking me? What does your local dog ordinance say? If
the law is on your side, then talk to the law. A photograph of the
deed being done is good proof of who the culprit is, too.

One dipshit owner does not make all dogs and all owners scoundrels.

This example has nothing to do with dog ordinances.

Of course it does. If there is a law against it, then evoke the law.

Our dog ordinances say dog owners must clean up after their animals. Not
likely with dog ****.



And, there's no
reason (or easy way) to photograph plants covered in ****.

Get the dog lifting it's leg. Let the police extroplate from there.

Yeah. I'll stand outside all day with a camera. :-)



The issue
is this: If a property owner asks you not to do something on their
property, you do not ask why.


Is there a law against asking why?

Of course not. But, the laws against trespassing do not require that the
landowner explain anything. You know that.




You obey. If you disagree with what I've
just said, then I have the right to urinate on your dog, in your mail
box, or anything on that property, and there's nothing you can do
about it.


No, I believe that is classified as assault AND indecent exposure. Do
so
and you'd be in much, much, MUCH more trouble than the dog owner. But,
hey, don't let me stop you from trying it. Get back to us on how that
works out for you.


Assault? Not really. Got a car you love? What if I walk onto your property
and start spray painting it a new color? Why would I do this? Because it
was
a convenient place to stop and paint a car! No different than doing what's
convenient for your dog. Now, you'll say the car is damaged, but it's not.
It'll still do what a car needs to do. The ****ed-on plants may not, or
they
might, so let's choose the latter and call the two situations equal.


See what you're doing here? You're trying to twist your interpretation of
law (and common decency) to suit a particular type of pet. You're doing
this
because the dog needs to walk, and it needs to crap & **** while being
walked. Therefore, you have made behavioral adjustments because of the
dog.
Another way to describe this is training. You have been trained by your
pet.


Got a hose? Water the damned plant and get over it. Ordinances
regarding dog waste are for feces, and you know that. Spend your life
being superior, complaining and judging, or water your garden and get
over it.
--
Ann, gardening in Zone 6a


If I wanted to garden in mud, I'd be out there during rain storms. Also, one
dog's scent attracts the strays to the same spot.

Mind if I stop by and remove your windows, just because I feel like it?

On Wed, 28 Feb 2007 02:51:57 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:


It's not anger. Frankly, it's an interesting legal debate, but for some
people, that involves some heavy lifting. They don't realize that in Supreme
Court hearings, the justices use hypothetical ideas that seem outrageous,
but they're important for purposes of pushing peoples' legal thinking to
extremes. The same thing goes on with dog owners. Was it you who asked
earlier why someone didn't deserve an explanation about why I wanted no dogs
on the property? A judge might ask you this: If you're hiking, and see lots
of signs saying "No Trespassing", do you disobey the signs because they
don't contain a reason why?

I find the discussion very peaceful.


I don't believe I said someone didn't deserve and explanation...

I do know if I was really annoyed by something and I needed to sit
with a camera around the usual time this person walks their dog, I'd
do it.

There are laws which protect you as well as me, but the downside of
making reports on people is that their animals usually wind up in the
pound and euthanized.

It's never the fault of the animal. This discussion comes up now and
then in rec.gardens. Nothing is ever resolved. Have you actually
asked this person not to allow their dog to pee on your plants? If
so, what did that person say? On the other hand, you can hose the
plants off and be on with life.

When these little inconveniences prop up for me I think about the
thousand people who just died all over the world from either
starvation, not a drop of water, or HIV AIDS. I think of the child in
Africa who dies alone at the age of five and a huge vulture now has
some food. There are so many more important things in the world and
locally to put energy into.

I know you really hate when the dog pees, but either do the waiting
with the camera and report that person, or do something else to take
your mind off it. Nobody is in disagreement that you have rights.

This discussion has been peaceful. By now most of these type
discussions end in total idiocy. Get the camera out, OR put a video
camera up where it can see the dog doing this. You should be able to
get several hours out of the tape. Eventually you'll capture it.

On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 19:54:19 -0800,
wrote:


I just got another TWO copies of a flier that relates to previous
fliers in my mailbox.

Somebody pleading about a male cat going around the area, marking
his territory. And asking his unidentified owner (servant) to
have him neutered. Which will apparently also "fix" either the
urinating habit, or the smell.

I dunno... I've only seen one cat in my garden, and haven't seen
or smelled any spraying. S/he's not mine. But s/he whines
really loud, and extorts me for little bowls of milk, frequently.

Even castrated male cats can still spray. It would be better for the
cat to have plain water and not milk. They do not have that digestion
enzyme for dairy after they are weaned and it gives them the runs.

We do have a visiting cat. Stalks the birds. So, we built a huge
brushpile in a circle so by the time the cat gets there, it will make
noise to alert the birds and they can take cover in the brush.

I have two pair of Cardinal's this year. They are cheeping their
brains out right now. I look forward to the babies.

"Jangchub" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 28 Feb 2007 02:51:57 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:


It's not anger. Frankly, it's an interesting legal debate, but for some
people, that involves some heavy lifting. They don't realize that in
Supreme
Court hearings, the justices use hypothetical ideas that seem outrageous,
but they're important for purposes of pushing peoples' legal thinking to
extremes. The same thing goes on with dog owners. Was it you who asked
earlier why someone didn't deserve an explanation about why I wanted no
dogs
on the property? A judge might ask you this: If you're hiking, and see
lots
of signs saying "No Trespassing", do you disobey the signs because they
don't contain a reason why?

I find the discussion very peaceful.


I don't believe I said someone didn't deserve and explanation...

I do know if I was really annoyed by something and I needed to sit
with a camera around the usual time this person walks their dog, I'd
do it.

There are laws which protect you as well as me, but the downside of
making reports on people is that their animals usually wind up in the
pound and euthanized.

It's never the fault of the animal.

When babies start walking and investigating everything in the house, most
people put safety locks on cabinets containing anything that could hurt a
baby. Assuming the home did NOT have these safety locks in place before the
baby, would you agree that their appearance is related to the presence of
the new baby?



This discussion comes up now and
then in rec.gardens. Nothing is ever resolved. Have you actually
asked this person not to allow their dog to pee on your plants? If
so, what did that person say?

One obeyed, and remained friendly. Two said that the first X feet of
property belongs to the public, which is not true (according to our town
justice), and continued to argue. All three were asked politely, in the
exact same way.



When these little inconveniences prop up for me I think about the
thousand people who just died all over the world from either
starvation, not a drop of water, or HIV AIDS. I think of the child in
Africa who dies alone at the age of five and a huge vulture now has
some food. There are so many more important things in the world and
locally to put energy into.


You could use this logic to justify looking the other way for almost any
kind of crime. I've got a friend who could remove a picture window from your
house, intact and undamaged, in under 1/2 hour. Would that be OK with you?
After all, it's not assault or indecent exposure, and it's certainly not a
bad as a child starving in Africa. I just like your window and I feel like
having it, purely on a whim. You wouldn't call the police, right?


I know you really hate when the dog pees, but either do the waiting
with the camera and report that person, or do something else to take
your mind off it. Nobody is in disagreement that you have rights.

This discussion has been peaceful. By now most of these type
discussions end in total idiocy. Get the camera out, OR put a video
camera up where it can see the dog doing this. You should be able to
get several hours out of the tape. Eventually you'll capture it.

That would only help if I wanted to waste time at our town court. I'm
considerate of my neighbors. I expect the same, without having to spend
money or take time off from work in order to make it happen. Some of us
understand that when you work hard to have a nice home, you have the right
to peace and harmony.

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
That would only help if I wanted to waste time at our town court. I'm
considerate of my neighbors. I expect the same, without having to spend
money or take time off from work in order to make it happen. Some of us
understand that when you work hard to have a nice home, you have the right
to peace and harmony.




So why have you hijacked this discussion? The original question wasn't
about you. It's not always about you.

Start another thread; call it "Dogs should be shot on sight" or something.

Bob

"zxcvbob" wrote in message
...
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
That would only help if I wanted to waste time at our town court. I'm
considerate of my neighbors. I expect the same, without having to spend
money or take time off from work in order to make it happen. Some of us
understand that when you work hard to have a nice home, you have the
right to peace and harmony.


So why have you hijacked this discussion? The original question wasn't
about you. It's not always about you.

Start another thread; call it "Dogs should be shot on sight" or something.


Threads with that subject line NEVER go well. :-)

On 2007-02-27 13:48:09 -0500, "JoeSpareBedroom" said:

I understand that YOUR animals stay on your property. The point here is when
some say "I'm a good dog owner - my dogs don't roam the neighborhood without
me", they're not quite correct. Even on a leash, many "good dog owners"
still don't get it.

Then get some of those little signs that stake in the ground that say
"NO PETS" or "PLEASE DON'T PEE HERE" (they exist, I've seen them). Put
them at the edge of your flower bed to help educate all those dog
owners who don't know that people like you get really upset about this.
The signs are non-confrontational and require no active participation
from you.

--
Tara

Jangchub wrote in
:

On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 17:50:52 +0000 (UTC), FragileWarrior
wrote:

I take excellent care of my animals and we work together to give back
to the community. I really dislike to be mass-lumped into a dipshit
owner catagory for no good reason.

You know and I know not all dog owners are dipshits. I don't really
relate to people who make sweeping statements like that. I have a
therapy parrot. She's my therapist! She's helped me through almost
two years of chemo, not in a row, but one year three years ago, and I
just ended a year a few weeks ago.

Hope you're feeling better now. Parrots are great. I used to have a
macaw that was one of the smartest creatures I've ever know. PLUS they
talk. That's pretty fun.

We always had dogs and cats, but I
couldn't take the funerals every 14 years or so.

Never own an Irish Wolfhound. They don't call them The Heartbreak Dogs
for nothing.


Did you see my horse in my Neon? He's a mini horse. Rides for long
periods of time in the backseat of my car -- even going down the I-70
and into Indy for horse demos and such.

I want a mule! I love them.

They have miniature donkeys.


Go to: http://community.webshots.com/user/deerhnd
and look in the HORSES folder. There's a photo of him taken through
the back window of the car. FoxNews out of Indy once took footage
of me loading him into the car and driving away from one of the
museums where we had spent the day but I don't know if they ever aired
it. We certainly get interesting looks driving in the city. When I
pull to a stop light, I count to three and then look to either side of
me to see who noticed there's a horse in the car next to them. hee

Every animal in that album is beautiful. What is the life span of a
miniature horse?

Same as a big horse, 25+ years.

I love the draft.

Me, too. I wanted one since I was eight years old.

We've discussed this before.
Then one night I was watching the RFD channel (I'm a hillbilly at
heart!) and I fell in love with mules. I'd settle for a donkey, but
would never ride anything that small.


They pull carts.


I adore animals,
insects, worms, all living things. I would love to have room for a
few mules. They are so much more interesting to me than many
humans.

Yes, Buddha was right about many things.

I always felt this way, even before I met the Dharma. My mother had
to carry me out of the theater when I was a kid and we saw Bambi. I
was un consolable. To this day I don't watch Disney. They are
sadists.

I don't remember the movie but I won't watch it *now* just knowing what's
in it.