experiencedfun Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 sit back and watch how your own dogs and cats for that matter play. Many times I have found that my animals will grab each other around the head when playing. So the poor pup may have been doing that and the the child screaming has just got the dog more excited. Bad news no matter what way you look at it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inevitablue Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 See in the news report for the NSW incident, I thought it was a balanced report, especially when they said multiple reports had been made to council in the past 6 months about the dog to council. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brightonrock Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 We have brought up our family in both city & country locations, and the kids are adults now. As parents we always read of any news that involved kids' safety and I am positive there are more serious dog attacks now than in the last twenty years. I think people are often buying or getting dogs for the wrong reasons, maybe as protection or for the look of it with no idea how to train it. Breeders of powerful breeds have got to start taking a lot more notice of where their pups go, or those breeds will be in a lot of trouble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inevitablue Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 See what Martin McKenna said on The Project. That guarding and hunting dogs were never designed to be family pets for inexperienced owners. He described them as being quicker to bite and subject to idiopathic aggression that once started is like a rage. Much like Steve Austin calling to ban APBT's. The behaviourists are sending unclear messages to society, although they are each entitled to their opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HugUrPup Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 It's true though.. some breeds are more suited in family environments and some are better suited to no child homes. Kelpies are better suited to acreage rather than city living for example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tralee Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 (edited) See in the news report for the NSW incident ... when they said multiple reports had been made to council in the past 6 months about the dog to council. I think people are often buying or getting dogs for the wrong reasons, maybe as protection or for the look of it with no idea how to train it. Breeders of powerful breeds have got to start taking a lot more notice of where their pups go, or those breeds will be in a lot of trouble. See what Martin McKenna said on The Project. That guarding and hunting dogs were never designed to be family pets for inexperienced owners. He described them as being quicker to bite and subject to idiopathic aggression that once started is like a rage. Much like Steve Austin calling to ban APBT's. The behaviourists are sending unclear messages to society, although they are each entitled to their opinion. It's true though.. Some breeds are more suited in family environments and some are better suited to no child homes. Kelpies are better suited to acreage rather than city living for example. Dog attacks will always bring out the major issues. They also expose the ignorance and fallacies that misrepresent responsible dog ownership. The reports in NSW should have been investigated but I wouldn't want my dogs removed based on the complaints of some neighbour who has a malicious agenda. I think everybody knows of those meddling and interfering neighborours from hell. It can't be easy for the authorities having to decide what is a valid concern and what is just harassment. It is not easy telling someone they can't have the dog they want. I had a lot of that when I was investigating the Maremma. Some people do get a particular breed for all the wrong reasons, and other don't put the work into the dogs they are suited to either. The mantra has to be Deed not Breed because it applies to all dogs. I know Martin McKenna and I taught his daughter. I found his seminars quizzical to say the least. The Nimbin Dog Wisperer could have been talking about any dog that begins an aggressive attack. And, I noticed they plugged his book immediately afterwards. Its true that each pure bred dog breed was bred for specific conditions. So my stipulation for a triple criterion applies. Which dog, in which conditions, with which management practices will be the most efficacious. We have to always keep in mind that laws and regulations are about the management of people, more than they are about what our dogs might do. Regards Px Edited January 25, 2012 by Tralee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aussie Boxer Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 had seen a few other posts over the years in here re attacks and the breed vs the "population", I found this somtime ago, (NSW) First line inder the breed is; Number of attacks Registered No's breed Percentage of Attack vs Number of Breed registered Purebreeds Breed Number of attacks breed was involved in Number of breed on the Register % of breed reported as having attacked*** 1. German Shepherd Dog 63 35,711 0.2% 2. Australian Cattle Dog* 59 28,850 0.1% 3. Rottweiler 58 23,735 0.2% 4. Bull Terrier (Staffordshire) 41 40,776 0.1% 5. American Pitbull Terrier and Pitbull Terrier 33 3,244 1.0% 6. Bull Mastiff and Mastiff 24 5,602 0.4% 7. Bull Terrier 23 4145 0.6% 8. Australian Kelpie 16 16,532 0.09% 9. Labrador 15 43,325 0.03% 10. Border Collie 15 32,647 0.04% 11. Maltese 15 42,829 0.03% 12. Siberian Husky 14 6,683 0.2% 13. American Staffordshire Bull Terrier 13 5,137 0.3% 14. Terrier (unknown what type of Terrier)** 13 8,983 0.1% 15. Jack Russell Terrier 11 40,178 0.03% 16. Boxer 8 14,561 0.05% 17. Alaskan Malamute 7 5,814 0.1% 18. Rhodesian Ridgeback 6 5,511 0.1% 19. Doberman 5 5,311 0.09% 20. Chihuahua 6 10,290 0.06% 21. Greyhound 4 519 0.8% 22. Dalmatian 3 6,030 0.05% 23. German Shorthaired Pointer 3 2,452 0.1% 24. Australian Silky Terrier 2 11,816 0.02% 25. Australian Dingo 1 376 0.3% 26. Collie 1 4,448 0.02% 27. Fox Terrier 1 23,092 < 0.01% 28. Maremma Sheepdog 1 1,456 0.07% 29. Great Dane 1 3,068 0.03 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
megan_ Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 It's true though.. some breeds are more suited in family environments and some are better suited to no child homes. Kelpies are better suited to acreage rather than city living for example. There are massive variations within breeds. People need to ensure they get the right dog - not just breed. Case in point, two family members have standard schnauzers that deal with 4-30 children every day. It is organized chaos and they don't flinch. They are calm and confident in the mayhem and yet many people (breeders included say that standards arent suited to homes with small children, a combination of breeding, correct selection and socialization mean that these dogs are well suited to their homes. That is why sourcing a dog from a reputable breeder or recur is imperative. I know people who wanted to get a "soft"'dog because they had little kids, but a fog with "nerves of steel" would have been much better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cosmolo Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 Its true that some dogs are better suited to certain environments. The crux of the matter is that people are selecting dogs based on the wrong factors, not training or socialising them appropriately given their genetic predispositions, failing to understand dog behaviour, failing to contain their dogs appropriately and in some cases failling to directly supervise. Councils are failing to enforce our existing registration and containment laws- if this was done we would solve alot of issues. And the government is failing to do anything that might actually really help the situation. And i don't see how some 'behaviourist' coming out and saying that no one should own bull arabs or any mastiff or guarding types is going to solve ANY of the real problems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dancinbcs Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 See in the news report for the NSW incident, I thought it was a balanced report, especially when they said multiple reports had been made to council in the past 6 months about the dog to council. I saw a later news report about the NSW case with sound not just the voice over, showing them catching the dog and putting it in the ranger's van. That was one very nasty and dangerous dog and there is no doubt it needed to be pts. The father of the little girl in Melbourne said the dog grabbed her by the hair and that was what ripped her skull so it may not have been a really serious attack just one with dire consequences. They were minding the dog and had it loose in the yard were the 4 year old was playing. That is just asking for a disaster. So many little kids are attacked by dogs that belong to friends and family. If a dog is not raised with small children, you can never really be sure how it will react to them. I can confidently take my dog into schools and walk through the playground at lunchtime or have him in a class of 5 year olds but would never dream of leaving him loose with toddlers playing in a yard. He has never been exposed to that sort of situation and while I think he would be ok I could never be sure and the risk is just not worth it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nic.B Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 Its true that some dogs are better suited to certain environments. The crux of the matter is that people are selecting dogs based on the wrong factors, not training or socialising them appropriately given their genetic predispositions, failing to understand dog behaviour, failing to contain their dogs appropriately and in some cases failling to directly supervise. Councils are failing to enforce our existing registration and containment laws- if this was done we would solve alot of issues. And the government is failing to do anything that might actually really help the situation. And i don't see how some 'behaviourist' coming out and saying that no one should own bull arabs or any mastiff or guarding types is going to solve ANY of the real problems. Our bull arab Fern has a fantastic temp and nature, a true gentle giant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nic.B Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 See in the news report for the NSW incident, I thought it was a balanced report, especially when they said multiple reports had been made to council in the past 6 months about the dog to council. I saw a later news report about the NSW case with sound not just the voice over, showing them catching the dog and putting it in the ranger's van. That was one very nasty and dangerous dog and there is no doubt it needed to be pts. The father of the little girl in Melbourne said the dog grabbed her by the hair and that was what ripped her skull so it may not have been a really serious attack just one with dire consequences. They were minding the dog and had it loose in the yard were the 4 year old was playing. That is just asking for a disaster. So many little kids are attacked by dogs that belong to friends and family. If a dog is not raised with small children, you can never really be sure how it will react to them. I can confidently take my dog into schools and walk through the playground at lunchtime or have him in a class of 5 year olds but would never dream of leaving him loose with toddlers playing in a yard. He has never been exposed to that sort of situation and while I think he would be ok I could never be sure and the risk is just not worth it. I agree, he was a very angry, dangerous dog and he had no place in society. The ranger who handled him is very experienced and fantastic with dogs. I cant imagine how terrified the little boy must have felt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juice Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 The interview with the stepfather said the dog was in a run and it jumped out, you could see they were just mesh with kennels in, there was a rottie in one, and the rear end of what looked like a cattle in another. It was a shame at the end they posted footage of an amstaffy, even though they said it was a RRX in the attack, and said the dog was similar to it, more bad exposure for bull breeds when they don't need it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clyde Posted January 26, 2012 Share Posted January 26, 2012 . Kelpies are better suited to acreage rather than city living for example. I disagree. Kelpies are better suited to owners who will provide them with mental stimulation and plenty of exercise. Just because a dog lives on land it doesn't mean it will be provided with all it needs. These dogs are rehomed from land all the time due to being bored and wandering off their property. I do agree though, that certain breeds are better off with more experienced owners, it's common sense really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Souff Posted January 26, 2012 Share Posted January 26, 2012 I can't understand how a 6 month old puppy could be so aggressive and cause so much damage. That poor child Do you know what RR's were bred to do? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
experiencedfun Posted January 26, 2012 Share Posted January 26, 2012 Hunt lions I think Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumabaar Posted January 26, 2012 Share Posted January 26, 2012 . Kelpies are better suited to acreage rather than city living for example. I disagree. Kelpies are better suited to owners who will provide them with mental stimulation and plenty of exercise. Just because a dog lives on land it doesn't mean it will be provided with all it needs. These dogs are rehomed from land all the time due to being bored and wandering off their property. I do agree though, that certain breeds are better off with more experienced owners, it's common sense really. Couldn't agree more with Clyde. Please do not try and tell my Princess Saf Saf that she belongs on acreage- she belongs on a bed, preferably with a boomerang pillow and a human slave to rub her tummy!! Outside is for going to the loo only!! She has Kelpie on her papers but that doesn't automatically mean she has a desire to run all day. She would much prefer cuddles. Each dog needs to be assessed as an individual. We can generalise as much as we want but there are soooo many variations on personality its not funny. How do people get matched up with dogs that don't suit them?? That might be a better place to look than generalise about a breed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandra777 Posted January 26, 2012 Share Posted January 26, 2012 Hunt lions I think Bail lions. RR were never intended to enter into hand-to-hand combat with lions, just trail and bail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murve Posted January 26, 2012 Share Posted January 26, 2012 Hunt lions I think thats right, the RR was originaly bred in Africa to hunt lions & other wild game :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peace_Of_Mind Posted January 26, 2012 Share Posted January 26, 2012 Poor little kids Shocking news - poor children, I hope for a quick recovery and that they heal physically and mentally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now