Crate Training for Dogs and Puppies
For years the crate debate has lingered; is it 'humane', is it necessary, what is the principal under which it is used?
The use of crates for confining dogs or puppies has been practiced for years. Crating a dog for transport has probably been in use for centuries. Within the last half century, there has been an increase in the use of dog crates as management tools in the potty training of puppies and as confinement for dogs in the absence of the owner. The increased use of a dog crate makes practical sense. Relevant to the social argument of humans moving out of rural communities into urban and suburban areas (with most households now requiring two incomes); the reliance on the crate as a management tool has increased. Whether it is good or bad is less a question regarding dogs and more a question regarding the social impact of the new human dynamic. With mothers leaving the home to supplement income, single parent homes almost equivalent in numbers to two-parent homes, the dog remains alone for the better part of any given day.
Gone are the days of the stay-at-home mom who was raising the toddlers and managing the household where the dog had constant supervision. Gone are the days of sand-lot baseball games and exploration where children were accompanied by their K9 companions and gone are the days where neighbors were as equally involved in the affairs of the neighborhood as they were with their own homes.
The inclusion of crates in contemporary society is the by-product of an evolutionary process driven by the vacancy of adults from the home. As people began to forsake their farms, they were reluctant to abandon their love for dogs and many of them brought their dogs along to the cities and the ever expanding suburbs of post-World War America. As these communities grew, so did the need for appropriately confining the house-hold pet in the absence of the owners. How was this accomplished?
Up until quite recently, most dogs were tethered or housed outdoors while their owners were absent either in fenced in yards or in kennel runs. A few were permitted liberty on the owners property and not confined at all. As communities grew, the lack of tolerance for the neighbors' barking or roaming dog required an owner to A) 'get rid' of the dog, B) confine the dog in such a way that he was less of a problem for the community. If the owner chose to 'get rid' of the dog, he was taken to and abandoned on the farmlands where he would either predate on livestock or otherwise make a nuisance of himself and summarily poisoned or shot. If the owner actively chose to keep his dog, obviously other arrangements needed to be made.
It is my belief that the need for crates as training tools occurred after they were already employed as management tools. It stands to reason that the use of a crate for housebreaking a pup or confining a dog was a logical progression from the experiences of those early crate users who came home the very first time their dog or pup was left at large in the house. Some deeply committed people made the decision to keep their pet regardless of the damage and employed the use of confinement as a management tool.
Some lessons were learned from not only these folks, but from wild dogs as well. All of us have seen the Nature shows on TV that have secreted cameras into the dens of wildlife for an unobstructed view of how they 'live'. Think about those dens for a moment. Not the Taj Mahal are they? Pretty tiny for a mom and a litter of cubs. Just enough room for the litter to snuggle near their dam until they get so large that they spill out into the world. Even then, they only burrow more as they grow to accommodate their increase in size. The den is never larger than they need to curl up, lie down and crawl about. Mom is usually booted first, keeping vigil at the mouth of the den. It is abandoned only after the young are large enough to move with the adults through their respective territories.
There were some valuable lessons here. The den remained clean because the mother made it so. She stimulates the young to relieve themselves while their ears and eyes are still shut, and maintains cleanliness by consuming the waste. An excellent survival tactic as well since this practice also cuts down on the invasion of larger predators or rivals for territory. As the young mature, they relieve themselves outside and away from the den area to satisfy a natural inclination to stay "clean".
This can be exploited in the domestic dog who by nature is a clean animal. It is unfortunate that some dogs by virtue of how they are raised or housed learn to accept uncleanliness and are difficult to break of the habit. As explained on this website, house breaking and potty training is more easily accomplished with the use of a crate.
Much of the crate debate stems from its use as a management tool for prolonged periods of time in the absence of an owner. The question of it being humane during protracted absences is hotly debated and the argument persists regarding it's uses for confinement.
The principal argument seems to come from the "fairness" of the act of crating a dog as well as what constitutes a reasonable time-frame for crating. It is hardly a question that interring a dog for indefinite periods of time is cruel. They are extremely social animals and require companionship in some form. But just how long constitutes cruelty? Many argue that no more than 3 or 4 hours at a stretch is the maximum that a dog should have to endure without a respite from confinement. I would argue that this is reasonable with the caveat that most owners are absent from the home for a minimum of 6 hours or more. While training a dog to control his impulses to chew or void in the owners home, would it not be more reasonable to condition the dog for longer periods of time? Since scientific observation of dogs at rest are geared for the study or R.E.M. sleep and sleep apnea, there is little in the way of research determining the length of time dogs spend sleeping or why they sleep as much as they do.
A valid argument again rests with the observation of the dog in the wild state. Wild canids are great conservators of energy. With the physiological requirements for adequate rest to seek and bring down game, it is no wonder that they sleep the vast majority of the day. Adequate rest is critical to a predator animal whose survival depends on it. Is this a strategic survival tactic? Assuredly the argument has merit. A wild animal that is 'restless' will ultimately succumb to fatigue. As it relates to domestic dogs, since we have supplanted the need for the dog to hunt and pursue game as his sole provider, we are faced with supplying him with sufficient stimulation to require adequate rest.
Current trends in owner-absent homes make that hard. The likelihood that this trend will abate is almost nil. So for the dog, our choices are confine him adequately as he learns to respect his owners home, or be dogless.
Through boredom or need, dogs sleep a lot. It is suggested that they sleep 12 hours or more a day. If we can successfully manipulate when they take rest, it is easily possible for the average domestic dog to learn alternate rhythms to mirror his owners'. This also conveniently coincides with the owners desire to control his dogs' elimination habits and ability to access prohibited objects in the owners absence.
The vast majority of inappropriate dog behavior is easily resolvable with the proper use of a crate. As a management and training tool, it is unparallelled in it's ability to safely house a dog from harm as well as protect the owners home from being fouled by the dog who would use it as a toilet or the dog who chooses the priceless heirloom furniture handed down from generation to generation as a chew toy.
When the hue and cry of "humane" is raised, I ask myself, "What is more humane, the dog safely in his crate in a concerned and loving home, or the dog abandoned at a shelter because of his inability to control his impulses to chew or relieve himself in his owners house"?
Considering the minimal investment in time or expenses, crate training a dog or puppy is always an excellent alternative.
