Pet Dogs To Be Put Down After Killing

[persephone]

silverblue- I have seen dogs of several breeds kill /critically injure other dogs . Labrador adolescents, for one example.

Whilst there are some which may have NO prey drive/pack instinct ..I think, dogs in general do have the propensity to act in this manner.

Not saying it is common, or usual- but it is there in the dogs' make-up, I believe. It is the way I look at dogs always... that they have the potential to revert to instinctual behaviours

[dancinbcs]

If I had a dog that got out due to me not having secure fencing, and then it killed something i would be mortified at what had happened.

As would I.

But, devils advocate ............. why are people not so horrified when cats roam and kill our birds and other of our wildlife - animals that may well have been encouraged to other people's gardens through the (eg) bird specific friendly trees, flowers and shrubs and so on that we might plant?

I do not condone dogs killing swf's, cats and so forth, so please do not think that is what I am about.

But I am puzzled that it never hits the news nor even here on DOL do I not here the voices of alarm and horror when it is about a cat's doing.

To the contrary, I'm inclined to hear more the "it's what cat's do", yet when it is a dog to (say) a swf or cat (or other animal that might be seen as prey) it is exclamations of . Why is it seen as so much worse/dramatic/shocking? Why aren't people calling for those offending cats to be pts?

Cats usually don't kill other cats. They kill animals that are prey to them. If a dog kills rats or rabbits, that is a normal prey drive. They should never kill their own species. Any dog that kills another dog should be pts. It is not normal dog behaviour for a dog to kill a smaller one. Most dogs are incredibly tolerant of dogs smaller than them. They know they are dogs, same species, not prey. They also know that smaller dogs, even aggressive ones, pose no threat and as such have no reason to kill them.

[WoofnHoof]

Cats don't have the huge variation in morphology that exists in dogs, a large dog in prey drive is hardly going to stop and check that the little fluffy animal it is chasing is the same species. Many toy breeds look different, act different, they can even smell different and a dog that hasn't had a lot of contact with toy breeds is far less likely to identify it as 'the same species'.

I wouldn't consider it abberant behaviour unless the dogs were similar shape and size, even then a normal dogfight can result in deaths dogs aren't necessarily always benevolent they are just as prone to arguments and leadership challenges as many other species.

[Red Fox]

I understand your peception of this SK but at the end of the day such dogs are "dog aggressive" and given that they have more than proven this goes to say that there will be more victims. I thought I would watch the story on ACA online and the pain that is so etched on the face of the owner of the victims tells me that such dogs simply have to go. I know that such pain, no matter how much time passes, never goes away. You feel so helpless, what is one to do? leave one's dog's in the house just in case? man, I am still trying to come to terms with the past.

I do keep my dog inside just in case, though no-one should have to do that. I'm sorry that you lost your dog, it shouldn't happen. But I dont necessarily agree that these are killer dogs.. Perhaps I should watch the story, but I dont find much that ACA does to be very credible or give a full acount of the circumstances. Plus I think I would find it very upsetting I am by no means saying that I think that what the dogs did was okay - but I wouldn't say that they are DA and deserve what they get either. It sounds like more of a case of an irresponsible owner than bad dogs.

Sadly I dont think that having these dogs PTS is really punishing the owner either. He will just get another dog.

I don't know these dogs nor do I know whether they are dog aggressive or whether they were triggered to prey drive.

Prey drive is not aggression. It is an instinct that drives the dog, just the same as the instinct for cats to chase and kill other animals. Do we regard cats who kill other animals such as rodents "aggressive"? I don't think so.

I am really sad for the owners of the dogs who were killed and of course for the fear and trauma those other dogs would have gone through and who have now lost their lives. I also feel for the owner of the 'offending dogs', even though secure fencing could have prevented this tragedy (and yes, couldn't you just kick the owner for not having ensured this so the event didn't happen at the expense of his dogs lives?). I feel mostly for the dogs, especially (but not only) if they are to be killed for an instinct that doesn't necessarily render them DA.

I'll not ever judge a dog to be PTS without knowing the dogs or more details of the incident.

Erny said it better than me

ETA- as did WoofnHoof

Edited April 29, 2010 by SecretKei

[Swiss Girl]

There are so many staffy crosses available for rehoming & I would hate to see one of these dogs get PTS so these 3 dogs get another home.

Obviously, the owner is a jerk that is not aware that there is consequences to our actions (or lack of).

Many dogs show dog aggression amd 3 dogs running loose is a pack, many larger dogs get excited when around scared dogs and this can escalate from rough play into attack, in fact many packs of loose running dogs show human aggression and have been known to attack us. This was such a horrible thing to have happened, and the owner of the chi's must be so devastated, but I do wonder how good his fences are, part of having fences is to keep our animals protected while we are not there.

[Her Majesty Dogmad]

Swiss Girl - staffies are fantastic climbers, I would not be surprised if they hadn't scaled a fence. It could happen to me - I've got 6ft high wooden paling fencing, looking at it you would think it would be secure. But no, my neighbour has an Aussie SHepherd, she scaled the 6ft high fence for 2 years and spent many days in my house with my little dogs. Luckily she's friendly although far too bouncy for my old dogs who were always traumatised by her visits.

The fence has now been heightened to 8ft. I don't see many 8ft high fences around - it isn't practical, nor should it be necessary.

For those who didn't see the moronic owner of the 3 offending dogs - he has already gotten himself another dog, another staffy cross. No collar. Hole in the fence so the dog still gets out. Hence my point about the negligent authorities and an owner who has no empathy or remorse for anyone. Selfish, moronic p---k. I'm still very angry about it all.

[Jed]

Swissgirl, I disagree with you. We should not have to take responsibility for the actions of animals which trespass on our property.

The fences on the property were sufficient to contain the dogs that lived there.

The attacking dogs' owner had a responsibility to contain his dogs within his property.

Most dogs have prey drive. I do think that some owners encourage that drive towards smaller animals. It is possible to train dogs away from that behaviour - to some extent.

Bottom line is that all dogs should be contained within their own properties.

Dogs attacks, on dogs and humans would be reduced 80% if dogs did not leave their own yard unless on a leash.

Councils couldn't be bothered, it's all too hard, and too expensive. From a council's point of view, the occasional attack is acceptable, and a lot cheaper than enforcing by laws. When a dog has attacked and done some damage, it is called a pitbull or pitbull cross, no matter what it is, which partly negates councils' responsbility in these matters.

Without BSL, councils would be a lot quicker off the mark with badly kept and contained dogs. Because they would then bear some responsibility.

And all dogs should be socialised as pups and juveniles.

[Erny]

And IMO if a dog attacks once it should be automatically pts no if's butts or next times, if it does it once it will do it again!.

Wow! That's a blanket statement.

So, you'd agree with the owners' decision to destroy their beautiful Golden Retriever because it bit one of their children? Different story, in case you're wondering. Even though, as it turns out, the GR was found with half of the child's pencil stuffed down its ear canal?

And you'd destroy your own dog if it bit someone in the course of protecting you against a threat?

Edited April 29, 2010 by Erny

[Erny]

Re wildlife and birds, Erny. I think it is because wildlife and birlds are not owned and our perceptions are different.

That doesn't make the principal point any different to what it is. A cat took one of the birds who frequented my parents' property. We were fond of that bird. Going by the consensus of opinion on how to deal with these issues of an animal encroaching on another's property and killing something that someone is fond of/attached to, that cat should die. It seems.

I'm not saying that the dog-owner in this situation should not be heavily penalised. Although I guess it goes to follow then that cat-owners whose cats offend other people likewise should also be heavily penalised (and fair enough, if it makes them keep their cat and the other of my preferred animals safe). I'm not even saying that these dogs should be returned to their owner if the owner is moronic enough to not be responsible and do the right thing. And I agree ..... the dogs wouldn't stand much chance of rehoming so their outcome would likely be a sad one even if they were given that chance.

But I am saying that the views that are being expressed here have such general blanket statements behind them and in that respect I very strongly disagree and sometimes think they are no better than the sensationalism that is often created by the newspaper reports that so many criticise them for (myself included). Not to mention the assumption that is also being generalised to support those general blanket statements being that the dogs were DA. They might not have been - it might have been prey drive no different to that of cats.

Whilst we are talking about cats killing wildlife, the carnage of wildlife on the roads would equal, or exceed those killed by cats.

Motor vehicle injury and fatalities exceeds that which is caused by dogs.

I don't understand or see your point or relevancy on this, Jed.

Edited April 29, 2010 by Erny

[Skitch]

I haven't watched the clip.. but even if these dogs were somehow saved from euthanasia, who would be willing to adopt them? I certainly wouldn't - I would think it too risky. If they've done it before I think their chances of doing it again are so much higher. It's very true that all dogs have a prey drive to an extent.. but ones that have been given the opportunity to exercise it with 'success' are surely going to strike again. I'm not saying that these dogs couldn't be rehabilitated.. but there are so many staffy mixes out there looking for homes and getting PTS due to a lack of homes every day.. neither dog is more deserving but I dont think it's hard to see what choice should and will be made.

It's unfortunate that all three get the blame though.. how are they to know that all three participated in the kill? It could have just been the one.. but I guess no one will ever know.

Staffies are not a hard dog to train.. it's a shame that their owner did not invest more time in getting them used to small animals and dogs. I have a staffy mix who originally had a very high prey drive.. but with a bit of reinforcement training she was very easily taught to be 'gentle' and has been placid and kind to many small animals and dogs there on out. It's even more of a shame that the staffies owner didn't bother to have proper fencing erected on his property.. if these dogs are so much "one of the family" why did he not do them the justice of keeping them safe with secure fencing? Some people just shouldn't be allowed to own dogs.

[iltby]

In an ideal world, the dogs would be separated and rehomed with people who demonstrated capacity to contain and manage them responsibly while the owner was banned from owning any more dogs.

But in reality, they will be PTS, and the owner will go on further feats of stupidity with new ones.

RIP little dogs. Their poor owner.

That's my thinking too, but I couldn't word it properly. In a perfect world, every dog would have a second chance, or a good owner.

The fault is entirely with the owner and the dogs are the ones being punished.

[Jed]

Re wildlife and birds, Erny. I think it is because wildlife and birlds are not owned and our perceptions are different.

That doesn't make the principal point any different to what it is. A cat took one of the birds who frequented my parents' property. We were fond of that bird. Going by the consensus of opinion on how to deal with these issues of an animal encroaching on another's property and killing something that someone is fond of/attached to, that cat should die. It seems.

I'm not saying that the dog-owner in this situation should not be heavily penalised. Although I guess it goes to follow then that cat-owners whose cats offend other people likewise should also be heavily penalised (and fair enough, if it makes them keep their cat and the other of my preferred animals safe). I'm not even saying that these dogs should be returned to their owner if the owner is moronic enough to not be responsible and do the right thing. And I agree ..... the dogs wouldn't stand much chance of rehoming so their outcome would likely be a sad one even if they were given that chance.

But I am saying that the views that are being expressed here have such general blanket statements behind them and in that respect I very strongly disagree and sometimes think they are no better than the sensationalism that is often created by the newspaper reports that so many criticise them for (myself included). Not to mention the assumption that is also being generalised to support those general blanket statements being that the dogs were DA. They might not have been - it might have been prey drive no different to that of cats.

Whilst we are talking about cats killing wildlife, the carnage of wildlife on the roads would equal, or exceed those killed by cats.

Motor vehicle injury and fatalities exceeds that which is caused by dogs.

I don't understand or see your point or relevancy on this, Jed.

Probably wasn't one, Erny!! I have a thing about people blithely driving over native animals on the road, when simply slowing down would have avoided a death, and people driving into birds, when the same action would have meant they flew away. How hard is it? I was reminded when the local koala group published stats on injured koalas - more injuries and deaths by cars than anything else. *sigh*

Sorry about your wild bird, it's enver nice.

[Dame Aussie]

These dogs will be put to sleep, I would rather, however, that they were rehomed and managed by someone experienced enough to keep them safe.

They are staff x's - dozens of these are put down every day, and they haven't attacked and killed other dogs. It is all very well to say that these dogs don't deserve to die, but what can realistically happen to them? No rescue group would ever take them on - the liability would be too much. The owner is a moron and couldn't be trusted to look after them.

I know, that's why I started the sentence with "These dogs will be put to sleep". What I want to happen to ALL dogs is not what happens in reality. I am well aware of the amount of animals put down each day, trust me, I would rather it wasn't so, that's all.

[Dame Aussie]

And IMO if a dog attacks once it should be automatically pts no if's butts or next times, if it does it once it will do it again!.

Wow! That's a blanket statement.

So, you'd agree with the owners' decision to destroy their beautiful Golden Retriever because it bit one of their children? Different story, in case you're wondering. Even though, as it turns out, the GR was found with half of the child's pencil stuffed down its ear canal?

And you'd destroy your own dog if it bit someone in the course of protecting you against a threat?

Agan I agree, how can we just decide that a dog will definitely attack again//?

We like the idea that our dogs would protect us if it came down to it, but we judge them too harshly when they act in the SAME way just because it doesn't suit us in that situation.

[WoofnHoof]

Ideally the dogs would remain with the current owner and be effectively contained and enforced as such, in addition to educating the owner. Currently there are no compulsory courses for people who are found guilty of ineffective control of their animals, perhaps there needs to be.

[kelpiekaye]

The owner should grow up, take responsibility and have his dogs pts. As poodlefan said the dog will be pts and the man will get some more dogs to cause havoc with.

RIP little dogs

[furballs]

I've only just read this, it's shocking, especially that the owner has gotten a new dog

It's my belief that if a dog has savagely killed another dog, without provocation, it will do it again and should be PTS.

I caught my own dog almost scaling my 6ft fence on the weekend and she has been locked inside since until I install my new electric perimeter dog fence and train her appropriately.

I love my dogs to death and would do anything for them, but if they escaped and killed or seriously injured someone elses dog in their property I would offer to have them PTS. My main fear would be, what if it was a small child rather than a dog.

These things can happen, but I think the decision to put the dogs to sleep should lie with the owner of the dead dogs.

[LouiseBrooks]

so true Jed I agree 100% the fences were right for that dogs owners.

I hate to say it but unfortunately there is no option for these dogs except the green dream.

All because the owner did not see the signs of dog agression.

[conztruct]

I have heard on the news the story about three english staffies x pitbull who got out from their property and wandered a fair way from their place (over 500 metres) into the backyard of another pet owner and killed his 4 prized chihuahuas along with his maltese cross pet dog. I was horrified; imagine the anguish that this poor man has had to endure after arriving home and discovering the horror that had taken place. I heard the story in passing therefore am not sure of all the details.

Basically, the dogs responsible for the killings are now at the Lost Dogs Home on a ""stay of execution". The owner of these dogs is fighting against having his beloved dogs put down. Footage was shown of the dogs and they look so affectionate and friendly that I hate the notion that they may end up being destroyed but then when I think of what they have done I feel that they brought it on themselves and that they are too big a risk to be given another chance. What do you think? should they or should they not be put down?

It's THUMBS DOWN FOR ME.

Agree with your thumbs down Abigail......while it may be hard for the owner of the offenders and I hate the thought of the dogs being PTS, if his dogs are dog aggressive it's his responsibility to keep them properly contained so there's no chance of them getting out - no excuses.

It's a shame that there isn't some regulation over who is allowed to own certain breeds, this is a tragic event given that it would have been prevented if a responsible owner was looking after the offending dogs.

As well as the dogs being PTS there needs to be some hefty consequences for the owner as well. IMO the owner of chis, etc should be suing this man for his negligence......

[shel]

There's not one 'right' answer in situations like this. The dogs don't 'deserve' to die. That's a very human way to assess the situation.

If the dogs have dog aggression, then they can be assessed for dog aggression.

Prey or pack behaviour is a management issue, not a reason for euthanasia.

This owner just got a new dog and the cycle gets to start again. There has to be an enforceable ban on people who have shown they can't keep their pets safe.

Unfortunately, the whole discussion is mute. These dogs will be killed is because they are at the Lost Dogs Home and will be deemed a 'pit bull' crosses. Dr Smith made it quite clear that his opinion was that these guys were pit bulls.