nawnim

I thought it was wonderful that so many people tried to help Ned. I know this is a purebred forum but I am just a little concerned that if he had been a young healthy mutt in a similar situation he may not have been given so many options.

As a cat owner I love my cat as much as my dogs. My cat is only kept in at nighttime. Because he is elderly it would be difficult to change his routine. If I was to get a younger cat in the future I would be looking into a cat enclosure. If my cat was to go into a dog's backyard and be attacked I would accept that it would be my cat's fault, but if my cat were to be sitting on his own front doorstep and he was attacked by a loose dog that wouod be a different matter and this has happened. I think owners of dogs with high prey drives do have a special responsibility to keep their dogs contained, and I have major issues with the way some dog owners think cats are fair game.

Some people want to be educated, others don't. Some people will do want they want irrespective of what the law is. They're generally called criminal. The proposal does not address this. Puppoochi, I agree some people do want to be educated. Some owners of dogs that have attacked have been remorseful. The guy who was caring for the dog that attacked Ayen Chol was remorseful. Many people don't realise what their dog is capable of and what the consequences (I don't just mean the legal ones) might be for them and for their dog. In hindsight they probably wish they had acted differently if only they had known. Of course there is always the criminal element (and they are products of our society too but that is another issue) and it's not useful to just focus on them and throw up our hands in despair. We do need laws to protect the vulnerable in our society. We need effective legislation to minimise the number of people and dogs being killed or attacked in the future.

Love his cute face. I see kelpie and a little bit of shepherd in the longer coat and the colour. I would say more kelpie than anything else though. Good luck with him.

A great article I like the way this article recommends that if a dog is declared potentially dangerous the label can be reviewed and revised if the dog can show it has reformed. Being declared potentially dangerous is just warning the owner that his dog needs help. I like this. It is about educating the owners.

In what way? The AVA have released their paper on Dangerous dog policy and legislative framework just this week based on intensive research on effective animal management. It is science-based and the outcomes proposed are proven to be effective. You can read it here if you wish: http://www.ava.com.au/newsarticle/dangerous-dogs-%E2%80%93-sensible-solution We will never know of course, hence why I used the word 'may', but if legislation and education like this had been in place in VIC, maybe these dogs would have been adequately socialised, or adequately contained, or adequately trained. Maybe they wouldn't have become dangerous in the first place or maybe they would have but legislation would have picked it up early and prevented this from happening. At the end of the day, legislation such as described in this paper DOES reduce dog attacks, whereas BSL doesn't. This case is a prime example of that. Melzawelza I just want to thank you for drawing my attention to this article (link quoted in post above). It wasn't really the 48 pages you mentioned - more like 26 and it was fairly easy to read. I recommend it to others who are interested in this topic. The more I think about it the more sense it all makes.

This is beginning to sound personal. Personal? Yeah I guess I am prejudice against people like this http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/dog-breaks-collar-attacks-woman/story-e6frea83-1226422663719 This incident has already been discussed on this forum "Dog mauled and pts and owner bitten". It is the first time I have seen a photo of the dog though. It looks very skinny to me.

You can't just say this. For the sake of the vulnerable in our society a solution must be found. I agree, and also will stress that is has been found. Our Governments just ignore it as it won't be popular and will take work to implement. An absolute crime. I have just read the article you recommended and I have problems with some of it Quote Effective identification and registration of all dogs A national reporting system to track dog bite incidents consistently with mandatory reporting of dog bite incidents to the national database Temperament testing encouraged by reduced registration costs, and able to be mandated by animal control authorities Education of the whole community including pet owners, breeders, parents and children Adequate enforcement and resourcing to ensure compliance. Number 2 - Is a playful nip a reportable incident Number 3 - Temperament testing is still in its developmental stage and I would hate to see a dog's life hanging on the outcome I'm assuming you just read the briefing? If you can take the time to read the actual report (it's 47 pages, I know) then it elaborates hugely on this and your concerns are addressed. Thankyou for your answer. I have just read this report and my concerns have not been fully addressed. A playful nip is reportable if it breaks the skin. I am okay with this but I do have concern about the classification of a dog as potentially dangerous, and I would like to know who the authorised person is making the judgements. Some people will interpret a friendly lick from a dog as an attempt to bite. The behaviour of friendly boisterous dogs can also be misinterpreted. My concern about the temperament testing still stands. The report says there is still no standardised reliable test available. Quote Temperament testing Temperament testing is a tool to assign risk categories to dogs (and their owners) and to reduce community risk by enforcing controls or rehabilitation. This tool could also reduce risk within the household and family by making owners more aware of their dog’s potential to bite. Temperament testing could be useful if: • Encouraged by a reduction in registration fees for dogs which pass the test • Mandated by animal control authorities, or • Required by owners’ public liability insurance. Temperament and behaviour tests have been used since the 1980s by those responsible for selecting working and assistance dogs, by pounds and shelters to assess suitability for rehoming, and by animal management authorities to determine potentially dangerous dogs. There are a number of tests available and in use in Australia, but there remains a critical need for a standardised and reliable test that can be applied on-site at shelters, pet shops, veterinary practices and training venues. There is currently no formal approval or accreditation in place for either the tests or the testers, and this is a significant gap in the ability to respond effectively to dog bites. P 24

You can't just say this. For the sake of the vulnerable in our society a solution must be found. I agree, and also will stress that is has been found. Our Governments just ignore it as it won't be popular and will take work to implement. An absolute crime. I have just read the article you recommended and I have problems with some of it Quote Effective identification and registration of all dogs A national reporting system to track dog bite incidents consistently with mandatory reporting of dog bite incidents to the national database Temperament testing encouraged by reduced registration costs, and able to be mandated by animal control authorities Education of the whole community including pet owners, breeders, parents and children Adequate enforcement and resourcing to ensure compliance. Number 2 - Is a playful nip a reportable incident Number 3 - Temperament testing is still in its developmental stage and I would hate to see a dog's life hanging on the outcome I'm assuming you just read the briefing? If you can take the time to read the actual report (it's 47 pages, I know) then it elaborates hugely on this and your concerns are addressed. Sorry I don't have time at the moment. A summary might be useful if you want the article discussed on this thread

You can't just say this. For the sake of the vulnerable in our society a solution must be found. I agree, and also will stress that is has been found. Our Governments just ignore it as it won't be popular and will take work to implement. An absolute crime. I have just read the article you recommended and I have problems with some of it Quote Effective identification and registration of all dogs A national reporting system to track dog bite incidents consistently with mandatory reporting of dog bite incidents to the national database Temperament testing encouraged by reduced registration costs, and able to be mandated by animal control authorities Education of the whole community including pet owners, breeders, parents and children Adequate enforcement and resourcing to ensure compliance. Number 2 - Is a playful nip a reportable incident Number 3 - Temperament testing is still in its developmental stage and I would hate to see a dog's life hanging on the outcome

You can't just say this. For the sake of the vulnerable in our society a solution must be found. I agree with others that BSL is ridiculous.

I agree with this. I think the reported breed of the dog is another issue. When I had purebred boxers and I was walking them, more than once I was asked if my dogs were pit bulls. Jo Public has no idea what a pit bull looks like. They believe that anything with bull in its name should look like a bulldog and have a squashed in face. I myself didn't know until a few years ago what a pit bull looked like. Perhaps pit bull fanciers should be educating the public about what a pit bull actually looks like. In this reported instance a guide dog who would have been trained to be pretty unflappable ran on to the road out of fear. Fortunately it was not working with a blind person holding its harness. A sad situation ETA Perhaps it's time pit bull terrier fanciers thought about a different name for their breed who sometimes are even referred to as pitties. The word 'pit' or 'pitty' makes people think of aggressive fighting dogs.

MUP particularly. The thread is quite scathing. http://www.dolforums.com.au/topic/239729-rip-ned/page__st__15 Not necessarily. I dont know what the answers are, but it seems many assumptions made about Ned and his actuality, and making more now about the original owner will be to no avail also. As someone else wrote, it was a train wreck. And now it's finished. I was not really trying to blame the original owner (I probably did not express myself very well) because I know nothing about him/her, it's more a general statement that owners are responsible for their dogs from the moment they come into their homes, often as cute little pups, until the very end.

Very graciously put. Glad to know you are okay

I feel sorry for so many here. First of all I am sorry for the dog. RIP Ned. I am also sorry for all the casualties along the way - Mixeduppup, Kermac, and efowler, and for the people who did the temperament test at the pound, and for the rangers at the pound, and everybody else who has tried to help Ned. I believe all these people have done their best by this dog. Instead of trying to rehome a dog with aggression issues (and I believe they must have been obvious from the beginning) the original owner should have done the right thing by the dog and taken responsibility for the situation.

I agree with you. I think part of the problem is also how dogs are socialised. We have so many restrictions on dogs these days that there isn't enough opportunity to give them a lot of exposure. Assuming that there is no serious genetic predisposition to aggression, a puppy that has grown up with lots of kids, animals will be less likely to react than a dog who has never been with a kid before. Also, while I do agree that all dogs can bite, few dogs will show the kind of aggression that led to this girl's death. Most dogs will react if pushed, scared or startled. But that, at the most, would result in a quick nip, not a full on attack. Odin-Genie, I agree with you that today there are limited opportunities to socialise your dogs especially if you don't have resident children. It is illegal here to have dogs on school grounds or near playgrounds while children are playing. I remember taking my last boxer up to the local primary school around 3pm and just waiting out the front so that he could at least see some children. I also think that while some people like to sneer at the swf, often their owners have chosen them responsibly because of their smaller backyards. Of course they often fail to realise that even a swf needs socialisation and training but that is another story. I am also not so sure that all dogs will bite, or how people can even be so certain of this. Some would need a lot of pushing. If being ill-treated IMO some would cower and urinate and some others would try to run away.

+1

Thankyou for sharing this with us and I'm very sorry for your loss. Take care. You must be going through a difficult time.

A wonderful outcome for Ned. I am not so sure about mixeduppup though. I think she meant well. I do have concern about how easy it is for someone to see a cute photo of a dog at a pound or on Facebook who is on death row, feel sorry for it, and then rush off and rescue it without having thought it through. Just my thoughts. I don't have any answers.

I said in my post that a view on the situation can be made that has nothing to do with blame. But everything to do with awareness of how this case ticks every box for the statistical profile on who is most vulnerable to dog bites and how. Explanation of the dynamics in a situation is not blame. Amazing that this information has been available for some time, but it doesn't seem to have filtered into the public discourse. Yet it's the key to prevention, as far as humanly possible, via education and management. In reporting cases like this one, reference should be made to key criteria about children and dogs....not from a viewpoint of blaming, but of informing about vulnerabilities and management of them. I am also wondering if anyone has followed up on my link about education, and if so did they find it interesting and possibly useful?

I think that the only useful thing that can come out of this shocking incident is that parents, and the government need to recognise that the best way to prevent dog attacks on children is education. Living with dogs should be part of the pre-school and primary school curriculum. This is a useful link http://dogscouts.org/Bite_Prev_-Ways_to_keep.html

We don't know why the dog bit the boy and whether he was teasing it or not. We don't know why the parents do not wish to pursue the matter. Perhaps they just want privacy both for themselves and the child. It's hard to imagine how anyone could cope with the horror of their child losing his nose, let alone how the child will cope without a nose. We also don't know why the owners of the dog chose to have it pts. Maybe the dog had attacked before. We just don't know. It's a terrible situation. That poor kid.

This is an interesing question and I don't really know the answer. I would like to think that nobody ever has the opportunity to kick my dogs and if they did they would have me to answer to. I do expect my dogs not to bite the vet when they get things stuck up their bottoms and they are jabbed with needles though.

The difference eludes me. In my book a dog that bites an 8 year old boy is HA whatever the reason. Territorial dogs bark and threaten. They don't necessarily carry through with it. The answer is probably with education. Children need to be taught how to treat dogs. Even when they have dogs of their own often this doesn't happen because the parents don't even know. How many times have children, even with their parents, bowled up to you when you are with your dogs and reached out to pat your dogs without asking. Human aggressive means aggressive towards humans. Territorial dogs protect their territory - often against dogs, other animals or humans. If someone broke into your house and your dog defended it, would you say the dog was human aggressive? That is the difference. I feel terribly sorry for the boy, but I wonder when did society expect that dogs should allow anything to happen to them (including being teased and hurt, have strangers rush up to them, bark in their faces etc) and they should just sit there and take it? It would depend on how my dog defended my property. I would expect my dog to make a lot of noise, but I am not sure I would want them to actually bite someone.