Outside Dog

[KKDD]

I would no sooner leave a puppy outside on its own for long stretches, than I would a toddler. Babies are not designed for independent living.

Some breeds are better suited than others for an outside, only dog life. Dachshund is not among the breeds I would ever consider suitable as 'outside only' dogs. Apart from the physical and temperamental reasons, this is a breed with a big voice that likes to use it. A lonely, bored dachshund is very likely to become a problem barker.

ETA. I am also a landlord and always encourage pet owners as I think they get a hard deal. I allow them to have their pets inside and have never had a problem with lasting damage to the property. Maybe I have just been lucky, but I suspect not. In my experience, (including as a pet owner and a mother), kids are much more destructive than dogs, but you rarely see a 'no kids' caveat on rental properties.

Edited November 30, 2010 by KKDD

[Starkehre]

ETA. I am also a landlord and always encourage pet owners as I think they get a hard deal. I allow them to have their pets inside and have never had a problem with lasting damage to the property. Maybe I have just been lucky, but I suspect not. In my experience, (including as a pet owner and a mother), kids are much more destructive than dogs, but you rarely see a 'no kids' caveat on rental properties.

Couldn't agree more KKDD. I would much prefer pets in my rental than kids.

The last time I had a family with youngish kids renting my property there was a ridiculous amount of damage done. Tiles smashed with something that looked like a hammer, plants damaged and so on.

Being a landlord can be a mugs game.

[shelby-001]

Unless the landlord is planning on doing surprise inspections (which I'm pretty sure aren't allowed) there is nothing stopping her from letting the dog inside in the evenings.

As a landlord with tenants that have a dog that's allowed outside only comments like that make me VERY cranky. You have been given leeway to have them in the first place. Why abuse the trust?

If we had carpets that were close to needing replacement maybe I would have said yes to inside but they're not and if they move out in 6 months I dint want to advertise my house with a 'please don't apply if allergic to dogs' coz they've lived in it. There's a much bigger picture.

I don't see any problem with them letting the dog in the house when they are home as long as they make sure there's no damage.

That 'allergic to dogs' stuff is a crock, floors are steam cleaned when the tenant leaves as per the rental agreement and the house is cleaned. We moved in to our place with new carpet and haven't treated it like it's glass but we know that if it's damaged in any way other than normal wear that we'd need to replace it when we left.

It comes down to picking tenants that will respect your property. We have flighted birds, dogs and wear shoes inside but when we leave this house will look as it was when we moved in.

Clearly you haven't dealt with a severe allergy, a few hairs get missed somewhere and there's trouble.

Could you give me an idea of the percentage of the population that do have such a severe allergy that even a few hairs would cause a major health problem?

Seems to me that if that were the case, the new tenant would be upfront about the allergy, ask the question, and do their own cleaning before moving in.

I'm sorry but I'm not concerned with the percentage at all and frankly it means nothing. You only have to get one for their to be a problem.

If the whole world treated their animals and cared for them as well as those in the DOL community I wouldn't hesitate in allowing dogs inside, but unfortunately it's not the case. Unfortunate not only for owners of houses but for those dogs that don't get treated as well as they could be either.

[shelby-001]

I would no sooner leave a puppy outside on its own for long stretches, than I would a toddler. Babies are not designed for independent living.

Some breeds are better suited than others for an outside, only dog life. Dachshund is not among the breeds I would ever consider suitable as 'outside only' dogs. Apart from the physical and temperamental reasons, this is a breed with a big voice that likes to use it. A lonely, bored dachshund is very likely to become a problem barker.

ETA. I am also a landlord and always encourage pet owners as I think they get a hard deal. I allow them to have their pets inside and have never had a problem with lasting damage to the property. Maybe I have just been lucky, but I suspect not. In my experience, (including as a pet owner and a mother), kids are much more destructive than dogs, but you rarely see a 'no kids' caveat on rental properties.

We have new houses in our area that are rented to people with no kids on purpose. The real estate agents advertised them as 'executive' living and then the owner gets last say and anyone with kids wasn't considered by the owners. If the real estate agent advertised no kids, that would be discrimination but the owner has the ultimate say and can choose on what ever basis they like, it is the agent that has to put forward the suitable applicants without discrimination. Their reasoning, they didn't want a new house wrecked by kids! So it can happen.

Now before you shoot me down in flames I'm not saying it's ok or not ok.... just pointing out that it does happen, right or wrong! Please also remember I am in QLD so I'm not sure how our rules differ to other states as far as rentals go.

Edited December 1, 2010 by shelby-001

[KKDD]

Unless the landlord is planning on doing surprise inspections (which I'm pretty sure aren't allowed) there is nothing stopping her from letting the dog inside in the evenings.

As a landlord with tenants that have a dog that's allowed outside only comments like that make me VERY cranky. You have been given leeway to have them in the first place. Why abuse the trust?

If we had carpets that were close to needing replacement maybe I would have said yes to inside but they're not and if they move out in 6 months I dint want to advertise my house with a 'please don't apply if allergic to dogs' coz they've lived in it. There's a much bigger picture.

I don't see any problem with them letting the dog in the house when they are home as long as they make sure there's no damage.

That 'allergic to dogs' stuff is a crock, floors are steam cleaned when the tenant leaves as per the rental agreement and the house is cleaned. We moved in to our place with new carpet and haven't treated it like it's glass but we know that if it's damaged in any way other than normal wear that we'd need to replace it when we left.

It comes down to picking tenants that will respect your property. We have flighted birds, dogs and wear shoes inside but when we leave this house will look as it was when we moved in.

Clearly you haven't dealt with a severe allergy, a few hairs get missed somewhere and there's trouble.

Geez, if you manage a rental property in order to provide for potential future renters who might be devestatingly affected by a few hairs, youre a real specialist. I would imagine that there are a lot more responsible pet owners around, who will treat your properly well, than there are people who will have a severe allergic reaction to a 'few hairs left behind', and while its thoughtful of you to factor into your rental arrangements the specific needs of the catastrophically allergic, youre probably shutting a whole lot more people out of access to your property, than you are facilitating. This of course is your perogative, but its a stretch to infer that the needs of potential renters who may be severely affected by a few hairs left behind, is the justification used by the majority of landlords who do prohibit pets.

Seems to me a lot of property managers arbitrarily discrimminate against pet owners on the flimsiest of reasons. In some states now bodies corporate are not allowed to have a blanket ban on pets, but must rather consider each case seperately. The result is the same in many cases but at least its a step in the right direction.

Edited December 1, 2010 by KKDD

[aussielover]

It is sad that renting with a dog is so difficult

Having said that i don't think a dachshund would be the most suitable breed for outdoor-only living. You might be hard pressed finding a reputable, ethical breeder willing to sell a pup as an outdoor-only dog in most breeds. You might have better luck with an older puppy/dog though who is used to kennel/outdoor living.

Puppies really should have some time indoors even if it is only for a few hours.

Although plenty of dogs do adapt to being outside only, I think a lot of breeders feel it is more desirable for them to be allowed at least some time inside with the family. Even the most "outdoorsy" family is probably not going to spend a lot of time out with the dog in inclement weather.

Some breeds do cope better in outdoor conditions and being by themselves for longer periods, however, the Dachshund is not one that comes to mind in this situation.

[*Bones*]

Miniature dacshund is unsuitable as an outside dog. They need inside all the time. He would be howling, barking, digging, trashing the place, escaping, and they would be very sorry they bought him. Hounds are very determined. Few dogs are happy outside.

Wait until there is a pet friendly rental which allows the dog inside before getting any dog.

[alpha bet]

One thing to consider is that perhaps the breeder was not keen selling a pup to someone who is renting.

This might seem harsh but the reality is that renting with dogs is very difficult. I recently had an 18 month old dog dog I bred who came back to me as the owners have spent the last six months trying to find someone to rent them a house with the dog, even prepared to pay a higher bond. In the end they had no choice but to bring the dog back to me for rehousing.

In future I will be even more cautious about selling to someone who has a dog because of the difficulty. These were lovely people who have raised the dog beautifully and they are heartbroken.

I have had two houses that I rent out for quite a few years and have always been relaxed about people who have dogs - I have a no dog inside policy - but I don't really police it but if I felt the tennants were not keeping the property neat and tidy then I feel I have the right to complain. Renting should be of benefit to both the Landlord and the Tennent. Respect should be given both ways.

My advise is to consider delaying getting a pet until you have your own home, thus you can make your own rules or until either this landlord or another is more flexible.

[Lja1302]

We had to wait until we bought our first house to get Oliver, trust me I tried and tried to find somewhere that would let us have a dog (inside or out).

I am really glad we waited but, i now know that I don't have to worry about finding another place that would let us have him. It would break my heart if I had to give him away.

On the other hand Ollie would spend all day outside, rain or shine. He has mats at all the doors, not that either of us mind him in the house but he seems to like outside.

He doesn't even like his toys inside lol, he keeps picking them up and taking them out again. (Granted he is a BC not a dachshund)