mace

The victim may have walked out of the way to the extent of the leash. They have stated they walked on to the nature strip. The dog may however have lunged at the person, dragging the owner and so decreasing the distance. The fact that the victim did move any distance around the people suggests that they attempted not to get chomped. Or do you think the victim should have crossed the road? They stated that the footpath was blocked with the offenders and their dogs and walked onto the nature strip for that reason, not to be clear of the dog's leash range, which at the time probably didn't enter the victim's head to do so? The leash range of a strange dog to me is their personal space which I prefer to keep out of to prevent what happened in this case. So if you want to be a thrillseeker by entering a strange dog's personal space, the bottom line is, be aware that getting bitten may be the result........the choice is yours :D

The breeder in this case is restricting your rights of owning a pedigree papered dog. If that situation for you is unacceptable, buy from a non restrictive breeder and give this one a miss :)

At least you acknowledge the person who was bitten is the victim, though like the others, I'm not sure why you blame the victim for being bitten. It makes me wonder if you also blame victims of crimes for being victims. it makes me wonder if mace owns a dog who bites and blames it on other people who accidently stay within it's trigger zone. No, I don't own dogs who bite people and I manange mine responsibly, this scenario wouldn't happen walking past my dogs I can guarantee that, but as we have found out in this thread alone, you can't trust every dog owner to have the same level of responsible management and with that fact, I choose to take my own action to avoid this situation happening to me is my point. The victim could have done the same in this case is what I am pointing out? If you want to nurse a dog bite and tell yourself what morons the dog owners were and how right you were to walk past in close proximity, great what ever floats your boat, but if you want to avoid a bite when encounting morons as in this case, get out of the dog's leash range and you will avoid the bite is my whole point here?

How is trying to blame the victim a solution. It has already been said that the victim tried to avoid the dogs by going onto the naturestrip. If what I read from you is correct it would be more ideal to walk on the road and possibly cause a car accident which could result in greater injuries or even the lose of a life? As others have already said the owners should be found and charged and their dog PTS. And the victim may have been able to avoid it is my point. Nothing in this case suggests that there was not room for the victim to avoid the dog's leash range, for all we know, she may have brushed past the dog when there was 20 feet of nature strip to use if required? The bottom line is, do as she did and get bitten or do as I have suggested and avoid it, take your pick I guess?

How can you not buy the argument when the thread is about someone getting bitten within leash range of a dog? The only reasoning is whether to run the risk of getting bitten or avoiding the possiblity as best you can?

So I need to crawl into a hole for providing a solution to avoid getting bitten by a leashed dog

People can do the bolt in panic when faced with a situation that their dog has just bitten someone, it doesn't mean an aggressive and mismanaged dog doesn't mean the world to the owner with the thought of their dog potentially being euthansed over the incident, their instinct is to shoot through and avoid apprehension. Then there are others with a cool head who do provide assistance with deep apology offer to pay medical expenses calmly providing a false name and contact details to the injured party and disappear that way? Some people are only concerned about an incident not effecting them directly and although they know it was wrong to leave an injured person laying on the nature strip, they live with it on the pride of saving themselves and their dog.

Px The definition of "effective control" is that the dog is leashed and secured to a person, it was and therefore doesn't breach requirement of effective control. I know what the law states, and it is also a matter of how you read the law. That is why they have lawyers and learned judges. You cannot interpret the law as: " on a leash but running around as if not on a leash" The phrase: "effective control of some competent person by means of an adequate ... leash" is to be understood that the leash provides control of the dog and is not just an adornment or piece of bling. However, while most dog people would have walked past the dog defensively, a child or disabled or invalid person may not. You do not have a law that supports the view that the injured person was at fault and therefore committed an offense. That kind of argument is just rubbish. Px The facts of the incident are that the dog was leashed and to be bitten by a leashed dog the person bitten was within leash range of the dog whether it was 2 inches or 3 feet from the dog is arguable. The dog owner could present an array of defences thruth or not and claim provoctaion, all could be possible. The lady tripped into the dog whilst passing, the lady accidently hit the dog in the face with her bag, the lady trod on the dog's foot, the lady bumped shoulders with the dog's owner etc etc, in this case especially there is two against one, a couple with the dogs and a lady on her own and if the dog owners present a good story under provocation, they won't be convicted of any wrong doing is what I am saying. Unlike attacks resulting from dogs roaming at large and not under effective control where the owner is 100% in the wrong and accountable, leashed dogs present a different set of circumstances with defences available. Leashed dog incidents are not clear cut cases if a dog bites, the owner is in trouble.

What's wrong with taking the intitative and keeping out of a strange dog's leash space to avoid these situations when this thread in it's self confirms that you can't trust people to control their dogs properly. Situations aren't always black and white like that though. Could have been cars passing, a busy road, a narrow strip of walkway, trees lining one side. It's easy to say you would give a wide berth to avoid passing dogs (which i'm sure most do!), however not every situation is as easy as this, and sometimes you are forced to share a narrow pathway or get hit by a car. Think outside the box for just a minute here. Is that what happened in this case, were they forced to share a narrow pathway or not?

Hi Pawprints. I am sorry to hear that your friend has been attacked by a dog. There are a couple of issues that I think might help. Firstly, your friend should not have had to walk around the couple and their dogs as a footpath is a public thoroughfare. It is an offense to obstruct a public thoroughfare. I like to keep my dogs on the opposite side of oncoming pedestrians. Dogs can become territorial, and one of my dogs will react if it determines that someone out walking is trying to pass between me and the dog. My point being that the person walking the dog needs to be fully conversant with the dogs behaviour before effective control by a competent person can be enacted. I hope this adds to the information you requested. Px The definition of "effective control" is that the dog is leashed and secured to a person, it was and therefore doesn't breach requirement of effective control.

What's wrong with taking the intitative and keeping out of a strange dog's leash space to avoid these situations when this thread in it's self confirms that you can't trust people to control their dogs properly.

Are you for real! I'm sorry that my friend didn't have the capacity in a split instance to calcualte the angle and extension of a dogs lead, taking into consideration the length of the owners arm and elasticity of the lead. That's what I do and have had my fair share of dogs lunge at me over the years in that type of situation. The point I am making is that you can't trust people will handle their dogs accordingly and take the initiative myself. It's too late to argue who is right or wrong if perhaps you had a child with you and half his/her face missing? wow, where on earth do you walk that you have been lunged at multiple times while just trying to walk past on lead dogs without a dog yourself. Certainly sounds like a dangerous neighbourhood and one to be avoided at all costs. Nice one, put all the blame on the victim, who did try and avoid the dogs :rolleyes: She may have moved off the footpath but how far from the dog 6 inches? 4 or 5 feet away from a leashed dog and you are pretty safe. I would prefer not to take the chance and give the dog some room is all I am saying, IMHO if you get bitten by a dog on leash you are too close? I have walked out onto the side of the road to avoid small dogs on retractor leads with owners who's dog is all over the place, works for me :D I don't care how far she moved she had every right to walk where she did why should she have to move 4 or 5 feet away, The damn owners of the dog should have had more controll over there dogs and if they damn well knew there dog bites it should have been muzzled. What gives people with dogs the right to hog all the pathway and not move over and leave room for others to walk by. The dog owners should be the ones to move and have there dogs in a sit/stay and show some courtesy to other people. This lady that was bitten showed courtesy by moving so why couldn't the damn owners of that dog do the same. Of course dogs owners "should" have adequate control of their dogs and they shouldn't be biting people but they don't always as confirmed by this example. I don't care what my rights are, I just don't want to nurse a dog bite and I take my own action by giving the dog room when passing.

It's not the dogs fault for being involved in a situation displaying aggression as the owners have mismanaged an aggressive dog, that is true, but the reason the dog is aggressive can be genetic and nothing the owners have created

Are you for real! I'm sorry that my friend didn't have the capacity in a split instance to calcualte the angle and extension of a dogs lead, taking into consideration the length of the owners arm and elasticity of the lead. That's what I do and have had my fair share of dogs lunge at me over the years in that type of situation. The point I am making is that you can't trust people will handle their dogs accordingly and take the initiative myself. It's too late to argue who is right or wrong if perhaps you had a child with you and half his/her face missing? wow, where on earth do you walk that you have been lunged at multiple times while just trying to walk past on lead dogs without a dog yourself. Certainly sounds like a dangerous neighbourhood and one to be avoided at all costs. Nice one, put all the blame on the victim, who did try and avoid the dogs :rolleyes: She may have moved off the footpath but how far from the dog 6 inches? 4 or 5 feet away from a leashed dog and you are pretty safe. I would prefer not to take the chance and give the dog some room is all I am saying, IMHO if you get bitten by a dog on leash you are too close? I have walked out onto the side of the road to avoid small dogs on retractor leads with owners who's dog is all over the place, works for me :D

Are you for real! I'm sorry that my friend didn't have the capacity in a split instance to calcualte the angle and extension of a dogs lead, taking into consideration the length of the owners arm and elasticity of the lead. That's what I do and have had my fair share of dogs lunge at me over the years in that type of situation. The point I am making is that you can't trust people will handle their dogs accordingly and take the initiative myself. It's too late to argue who is right or wrong if perhaps you had a child with you and half his/her face missing?

Dog's can be unpredictable and when passing dogs that I don't know or know of their behavioual history, I personally take a wide enough berth out of leash range so they can't get to me and bite which to me is just common sense? Why pass so close that a leashed dog can make contact. IMHO the lady who got bitten could have avoided that herself

It's amazing how they rarely accept that some dogs have a genetic predisposition for aggression, it's always the owners fault turning an otherwise lovely dog into a land shark?. A few years ago now, a friend had a dog aggressive Labrador who just hated strange dogs otherwise he was a great dog, good with people, kids, friendly and affectionate but hated other dogs. We traced it back to find the sire of the litter was also DA, but was said to be caused by a bad experience and he was bred on that basis. Not all his progeny over three litters were DA, but four were that we found out about, one in every litter, two in one litter all males, the females were ok? Our friend had 6 Labs over an 18 year period and never had a DA problem to address ever, except this boy which was clearly in the dog's genetics, nothing to do with raising and training, he was just aggressive towards other dogs by default?

Being less than ecstatic with the potential outcome should never turn people off reporting. There are always varying opinions on what the outcome should be, but the most important thing is that there is now a record and there is an outcome, even if the victim is not totally happy. If there are no reports of even harassing or threatening behaviour, how does the council know they have a problem on their hands? If the behaviour escalates and someone/somedog is seriously hurt, but the council have no record of all the behaviour leading up to it because noone has bothered to report it, in the eyes of the council it is a first time offence and that in itself can lead to a 'lighter' penalty than would befit a serial offender. You have a good point I agree, but I don't know how seriously the council view such reports like being harrassed by a dog that is difficult to formally identify without names, addresses, car rego numbers etc attached to the report. A black and tan GSD for example accounts for nearly all of them visually, it's a difficult one for the council to isolate is what I mean? If a dog rushed out of number 20 Xyz street and caused a problem, the council have an address to investigate, but public areas like beaches and parks etc with offenders unidentified for a potential prosecution, I don't know the man hours that would be put into such cases from council perspective?. Even when similar reports have been filed where it appears that a dog and owner is a serial offender, unless they have been previously prosecuted, it's still a first offence?

Reporting an incident and getting justice is two different things though? Most irresponsible owners when caught up with by council usually deny the allegations anyway, don't know what the ranger is talking about, they weren't there that the time of the incident, it's wasn't their dog etc etc, I guess a close shave from being prosecuted may encourage them to mend their ways and manange their dog appropriately in the future?

Aidan, there is one I can tell you about I'm sure we could find thousands like this. How does it relate to the study in question? There were plenty of people who had success with confrontational methods in the study cited also. I am sorry Aidan, I took it as though no confronational methods worked according to the study, my apology :)

If you don't understand how what I said relates to loose leash walking thats ok. Hey can we see a video of you working with your dog? Or any dog for that matter :D Bullshit? Ok :laugh: Scissors can kill someone, yet we sell them in supermarkets... Ive seen a dog injure himself with a harness, rubbed him to the point of raw bleeding under front legs, should they be taken off the market? :laugh: Its not the tool, its how its used. I will never again have a flat collar and leash only on a high drive puppy (I used one of my lab and thats all hes ever worn, no issue). I ignored the warnings against it, and got to enjoy the vet bills. Hes a working line GSD, he would run and hit the end of the leash at full throttle (this is at 8 weeks old), spin through the air by his neck, and then do the same thing again. This ended in him having highly irritated tonsils. Talked to your vet did you? Wow you called them just for me :D Im so special! What part of "I use corrections" don't you understand? I have no issue with them, so not sure what you mean by "alternative training methods"? Unless you mean using whatever method works for the individual dog. Seriously ... oh wait whats your name this time? Oh right, "Mace" ;)... Edit: Nevermind about the video, just seen some and wow. Confirms everything. Not a bad looking GSD, shame about the training. Lack of drive too. :laugh: What the hell are you on about LMSW, do you think because you have gone from a Lab to GSD pup you are now a full bottle on everything What would I want videos for, this is a discussion isn't it? You are talking about abuse caused by trainer/handler error, it's not an across the board result of using particular methods and tools that all these terrible consequences happen, when you know how to use them properly, it doesn't happen and if you hurt your poor little pup with a flat collar, blame yourself not the damn collar :rolleyes:

Aidan, there is one I can tell you about was a tail chaser who used to spin up and bite his tail hard and flick blood all over the walls making the owners house look like murder scene. The dog had behaviourists, trainers and a vet behaviourst to deal with what was diagnosed as compulsive disorder. The dog had all the vet work, put on drugs etc etc, in the end the vet behaviourist recommended a tail amputation. The owner told another trainer about this situation and asked if he could try something and the owner agreed. In exactly an hour and a half, he fixed the tail chasing with an Ecollar on that day. The dog did do it again in the proceeding couple of days, was fitted up with an Ecollar and closely monitored, in less than a week the behaviour was rectified. The dog was too scared to bite it's tail, because of the Ecollar stimulation, but the point is, so what, it hasn't chased it's tail for 2 years, true story. :D

I didn't mention attaining recall from corrections on a long line, what's recall got to do with loose leash walking Oh also, just asked my vet about how many neck injuries she gets from collar abuse and she has had one in 15 years with a dog that fell off the back of a ute on too long a line to keep him inside the tray, other than that, your neck/throat injuries sound like bullshit to me given that every pet outlet sells choke chains in large supply, they would have been taken off the market years ago along with flat puppy collars in that case What you are repeating is typical propoganda from the training faction who use alternative training methods, we have heard all them before by the truckload, what's new :rolleyes:

So some idiot is breeding floppy eared Malinois, excellent, I guess long as they don't breed one with no teeth it's all good ;)

I'll explain his technique too you. You need a check chain or prong, and a long line. Let the dog go, wait till they are walking away from you and not paying attention, and correct as hard as you can when they get to the end of the line. Walk the other way, wait till dog isn't paying attention and gets to the end of the line, turn and correct again. Dog learns very quickly to pay attention to the line or they get a correction. Gradually shorten the line. Correct them enough times, you will have a panting slinking dog who will follow your every move for fear of a correction. Drop the line. The reason you have a long line is so that when the dog tries to venture off you can quickly pick up the line and hit them with another correction. Thats basically it. Its very fast and effective, but mentally its damaging for your dog, and long term it isn't the greatest. That's not how you train on the long line though LMSW? When you start off with a pup, you use a flat collar and the long line attached is to get the pups attention when it becomes distracted from the game of follow me which is reinforced with rewards when the pup is in position. There is a corrective action on the line on change of direction and you correct the pup as hard as need be to get attention and tell the pup, "hey you are going the wrong way", you DON'T rip it's head off and shut the pup down, if that happens it's a trainer error not a fault of the method, only an idiot would do what you described. The same with an adolecent dog, you correct as hard as need be, if the dog is shutting down you are doing it wrong, but what I can tell you, if you train a pup properly in this method, you don't need prong collars or any of that crap down the track to uphold a loose leash walk, in fact you don't even need a leash which is what the method was designed to achieve, off leash reliability. The method as written by Koehler has a harshness about it I agree, but you use some common sense, a bit like treat trainers jamming so many treats down a dogs throat it throws up is just as stupid as shutting a dog down with massive corrections, every method can be abused and the skill is to apply it accordingly.